HomeMy WebLinkAbout02 - Exec SummaryGenentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-1
2
Executive Summary
Project Overview
This Draft Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIR) has been prepared by the City of South San Francisco
(as lead agency) to describe the potential environmental consequences of the proposed Genentech
Master Plan Update for the Genentech Campus in the East of 101 Area of South San Francisco. The
Genentech Camps (Project Site) is approximately 207 acres in size, and currently contains approximately
4.7 million square feet of building space. Genentech’s Master Plan Update proposes a Campus-wide
buildout at a floor-area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 times the total area of the Campus, resulting in a buildout
potential of just over 9 million square feet of building space, or an approximately 4.3 million square-foot
increase in net new building space.
The Master Plan Update is intentionally flexible, enabling Genentech to adapt its Campus to
accommodate future innovation in medicine and science, and to enable creative new urban design
strategies to influence future building plans. To maximize flexibility, the Master Plan Update allows the
land use mix within the Campus to evolve over time, depending upon Genentech’s future needs. To
provide detail and specificity for this EIR, the EIR Project Description provides one potential detailed
buildout scenario that meets the goals of the Master Plan Update, and is used for quantitative analytical
purposes for this EIR. This Project Description includes a forecast growth of approximately 2.4 million
square feet of net new office space, approximately 1.6 million square feet of new lab space and
approximately 0.3 million square feet of various types of new employee amenity spaces. The EIR Project
Description also assumes a net retention of the nearly 1.3 million square feet of manufacturing,
warehouse and distribution building space that is on Campus today.
This Draft EIR is intended to serve as an informational document for use by public agency decision
makers and the public in their consideration of the proposed Master Plan Update.
Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The following Table 2-1 provides a summary of potential environmental impacts, the regulatory
requirements applicable to new development within the Campus, recommended mitigation measures (as
necessary), and the resulting level of significance after implementation of all regulatory requirements
and mitigation measures. For a more complete discussion of potential environmental impacts and
mitigation measures, please refer to individual topic area chapters of this Draft EIR.
Significant and Unavoidable Impacts
Based on the analysis presented in this EIR, the Project would result in the following environmental
impacts that would be considered significant and unavoidable:
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Page 2-2 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
Air Quality
Operational Criteria Pollutants
During operations, the Project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria
pollutants for which the region is non-attainment, including emissions that exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors. Specifically, the Project’s average daily operational emissions are
projected to exceed 54 pound per day of reactive organic gas (ROG) and nitrogen oxides. Regulatory
Requirement AQ 4 - New Source Review Offset requires Genentech to purchase offset credits pursuant
to BAAQMD Regulation 2-2: New Source Review, Section 302 Offset Requirements for each new
permitted stationary source of NOx and/or ROG emissions, and for any modifications to existing
stationary emission sources that result in increased NOx and/or ROG emissions. Although TDM, energy
efficiency features and regulatory requirements are incorporated into the Project, total emissions of
criteria pollutants from mobile sources and other sources not requiring separate permits from BAAQMD
would exceed the thresholds of significance. The health impacts associated with criteria pollutant
emissions from the Project are conservatively estimated and the analysis indicates that anticipated
health impacts are vanishingly small and that the actual health impacts may be zero.
Noise
Construction Noise
Construction activities pursuant to the Project could generate noise levels that exceed the noise
standards established in SSFMC Section 8.32.030. Construction projects pursuant to the Project will be
required to implement
● Mitigation Measure Noise 1A - Construction Period BMPs for construction that is within 50 feet
of an adjacent off-site property and where construction noise may exceed the 90-dBA limit of
the SSF Municipal Code
● Mitigation Measure Noise 1B - Truck Routes (requiring that heavily loaded trucks be routed away
from noise-sensitive and vibration-sensitive uses, and
With implementation of Genentech Noise Attenuation and Logistics Plans, construction-period noise
effects on Genentech’s own on-Campus buildings would meet applicable OSHA requirements for safe
workspaces and other private Genentech-based noise standards for healthy workplaces. Construction
noise is typically not considered significant if its duration is for a period of less than one year,
construction noise is temporary and episodic in nature and mitigation measures presented include all
reasonable and feasible methods to reduce construction noise effects. However, since the details of
construction activity cannot be known in advance, this impact is conservatively considered significant and
unavoidable.
Transportation
Local Intersection Level of Service – Existing plus Project
The Project would contribute traffic to intersections in the Project vicinity that would result in conflicts
with applicable plans, ordinances or policies that establish measures of effectiveness for intersection
levels of service (LOS) or queuing at twenty (20) of the 27 traffic study intersections. Regulatory
requirements and/or mitigation measures have been identified that are capable of reducing these
impacts at 13 of the 20 affected intersections, but no feasible or certain improvements have been
identified as capable of reducing impacts to a less than significant level at 7 affected study intersections.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-3
Payment of fair-share contributions toward signal timing improvements and intersection improvements
as included in the City’s current East of 101 Transportation Impact Fee Program (Regulatory
Requirements Transp 1A and Transp 1B) would reduce Project impacts at 9 intersections. Either fully
funding certain improvements subject to fee credits, or paying City Transportation Impact Fees if the
City’s then-current CIP includes improvements at the time of issuance of building permits (pursuant to
Mitigation Measure Transp-1), the Project’s impacts would be reduced to less than significant at 4
intersections. However, either there are no feasible improvements capable of reducing the Project’s
impacts, or implementation of mitigation improvements are within the jurisdiction of a separate agency
(Caltrans) at seven (7) intersections, and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable at the
following locations:
● 101 NB/Oyster Pt. Boulevard off Ramp (Caltrans jurisdiction)
● 101 SB/Gateway Boulevard/Oyster Pt. Boulevard Off Ramp (Caltrans jurisdiction)
● Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard (limited right-of-way)
● Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/ US-101 SB Off-Ramp (Caltrans jurisdiction)
● Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue (unavailable capacity for southbound left turn queue)
● South Airport Boulevard/US-101 On- and Off-Ramps/ Wondercolor Drive (constrained right-of-
way)
● South Airport Boulevard / I-380 Westbound ramp (constrained right-of-way and downstream
queuing on the I-380 westbound ramp)
Freeway Segments – Existing plus Project
The Project would generate more than 100 peak hour trips onto the Congestion Management Program
roadway network, resulting in conflicts with applicable plans, ordinances or policies that establish
measures for effective levels of service along two freeway segments.
● Southbound US-101 north of Oyster Point Boulevard during the AM peak hour (with a 5.1%
increase in traffic volume)
● Northbound US-101 south of Produce Avenue during the AM peak hour (with a 5% increase in
traffic volume)
Consistent with C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is consistent with and
exceeds City requirements. That TDM program will serve to reduce its otherwise greater contribution of
trips on the CMP network, including increased traffic on US-101 freeway segments. However, there are
no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts to freeway segments due to constrained right-of-way
and a corresponding inability to add traffic capacity or reduce vehicular delays.
Local Intersection Level of Service – Cumulative
The Project would contribute to cumulative traffic levels that would result in conflicts with applicable
plans, ordinances or policies that establish measures of effectiveness for intersection levels of service
(LOS) at 22 intersections. Mitigation measures identify improvements that could be made at 7 of the 22
affected intersections, but 4 of these improvements do not currently have an identified funding source.
No feasible improvements have been identified as being capable of reducing impacts to less than
significant levels under the Cumulative plus Project scenario at 15 affected study intersections.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Page 2-4 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
Regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified under Existing plus Project conditions
(Mitigation Measure Transportation 6A) would reduce Cumulative plus Project impacts to less than
significant levels at 3 intersections.
Improvements identified in Mitigation Measure Transportation-6B could effectively reduce impacts at 4
of intersections, but these improvements are not currently included under the City’s East of 101
Transportation Impact Fee Program or in the City’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and there is no
fair-share funding mechanism is established by the City to provide for fair-share payments toward the
improvements.
Even with improvements identified in MM Transportation-6B, there are 15 intersections that would be
adversely affected by Cumulative plus Project-generated traffic for which there are no feasible
improvements capable of reducing cumulative impacts to below threshold levels, and these impacts
would remain significant and unavoidable at the following locations:
● Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard (constrained roadway right-of-
way)
● Dubuque Avenue/Oyster Point Boulevard (no space available to add additional queuing)
● Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (constrained roadway right-of-way)
● Oyster Point Boulevard/Veterans Boulevard (constrained street right-of-way)
● Oyster Point Boulevard/Eccles Avenue (constrained street right-of-way)
● Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard (constrained street right-of-way)
● Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue (adding vehicle capacity would be inconsistent with the
Pedestrian Priority Zone identified in the South San Francisco Station Area Specific Plan)
● East Grand Avenue/Gateway Boulevard (roadway widening would conflict with the City of South
San Francisco’s Complete Streets Policy)
● East Grand Avenue/Harbor Way/Forbes Boulevard (constrained roadway right-of-way)
● Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue (constrained roadway right-of-way)
● South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (constrained roadway right-of-way)
● South Airport Boulevard/US-101 On- and Off-Ramps (constrained roadway right-of-way)
● South Airport Boulevard/Utah Avenue (no feasible mitigations at this intersection)
● I-380 Westbound Ramp/South Airport Boulevard (unavailable capacity for queue lengths on the
southbound right turn movement)
Freeway Ramps - Cumulative
The Project would generate more than 100 peak hour trips onto the Congestion Management Program
roadway network, contributing to cumulative traffic levels that would conflict with applicable plans,
ordinances or policies that establish measures for effective levels of service at two nearby freeway
interchanges under Cumulative plus Project conditions (US-101/Oyster Point Boulevard interchange in
the PM peak hour, and US-101/Produce Avenue interchange in the AM peak hour). Consistent with
C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is consistent with and exceeds City
requirements. That TDM program will serve to reduce its otherwise greater contribution of trips on the
CMP network, including its contributions of traffic to freeway ramps, but impacts will remain significant
and unavoidable.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-5
Freeway Segments – Cumulative
The Project would generate more than 100 peak hour trips onto the Congestion Management Program
roadway network, contributing to cumulative traffic levels that would conflict with applicable plans,
ordinances or policies that establish measures for effective levels of service on the following freeway
segments:
● Northbound US-101 north of Oyster Point Boulevard (the Project would contribute 1.2 and 3
percent of the cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during both peak hours, respectively)
● Southbound US-101 north of Oyster Point Boulevard (the Project would contribute 5 percent of
the cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during the AM peak hour)
● Northbound US-101 between Oyster Point Boulevard and Grand Avenue (the Project would
contribute 2 percent of the cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during the PM peak hour)
● Southbound US-101 between Oyster Point Boulevard and Grand Avenue (the Project would
contribute 1.1 percent of the cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during the PM peak
hour)
● Northbound US-101 between Grand Avenue and Produce Avenue (the Project would contribute
5 percent of the cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during the AM peak hour)
● Southbound US-101 between Grand Avenue and Produce Avenue (the Project would contribute
4 percent of the cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during the PM peak hour)
● Northbound US-101 south of Produce Avenue (the Project would contribute 5 percent of the
cumulative traffic on this freeway segment during the AM peak hour)
Consistent with C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is consistent with and
exceeds City requirements. That TDM program will serve to reduce its otherwise greater contribution of
trips on the CMP network, including increased traffic on US-101 freeway segments.There are no feasible
mitigation measures for these impacts to freeway segment due to constrained right of way on US-101,
and these cumulative impacts remain significant and unavoidable.
Summary of Alternatives
Two alternatives were considered in preparation of this EIR, but rejected. A “No New Development
Alternative” was rejected because the Project is a revision of the existing 2007 Genentech Campus
Master Plan, and the “no project” alternative will be rejection of the Project but continuation of the
existing Master Plan and existing zoning regulations into the future. This EIR does not analyze nor does it
foresee any “no build” scenario under which there is no new development beyond what exists at the
Campus under the current baseline condition. CEQA Guidelines state that an alternative site location
should be considered when, “feasible alternative locations are available, and the significant effects of the
project would be avoided or substantially lessened by putting the project in another location.” Although
Genentech's corporate headquarters and main laboratory facilities are located in the East of 101 Area of
South San Francisco, Genentech does have additional manufacturing facilities in Vacaville and Oceanside,
California and in Hillsboro, Oregon. Genentech also has a manufacturing facility in Singapore. It is
possible that Genentech could consider an alternative of developing additional office, laboratory and
associated building space as envisioned under the Project at one of these other locations. However,
development of the Project at one of these other locations would not enable Genentech to achieve its
basic Project objectives. There is no information to suggest that development of up to approximately 4.3
million square feet of Genentech operational facilities at any of these other locations would avoid or
substantially lessen any significant effects of the Project, but instead would likely transfer those effects
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Page 2-6 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
from one place to another. For these reasons, an alternative site location was eliminated from further
consideration in this EIR.
Alternatives Analyzed
Three alternatives are analyzed in this EIR. These alternatives are intended to meet the CEQA
requirements for the EIR to describe the no project alternative as well as a range of reasonable
alternatives to the Project that would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the Project, but
would avoid or substantially lessen significant effects.
Alternative #1: No Project
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3)(A) states that, if the project is the revision of an existing land use
or regulatory plan, policy or operation, the “no project” alternative will be the continuation of the
existing plan, policy or operation into the future. Alternative #1 (or the No Project) is defined as the
current 2007 Master Plan and the existing Genentech Master Plan Zoning District remaining in place.
Consistent with growth projections as analyzed in the prior 2007 Master EIR and 2012 Supplemental
Master EIR, new development within the Campus would remain limited to a maximum buildout of up to
6 million square feet of building space, plus the 821,000 square feet added as the South Campus
(originally the Britannia East Grand project) in 2013.
Alternative 2: Reduced Project
Alternative 2 (the Reduced Project) would establish an overall growth limit within the Campus
boundaries of up to 7.9 million square feet, or an overall floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.88 times the total
area of the approximately 208-acre Campus. A 7.9 million square-foot buildout potential represents a
mid-point between the 6.8 million square-foot buildout of the currently effective 2007 Master Plan, and
the 9 million square-foot buildout potential of the proposed Project. The Reduced Project Alternative
assumes that the Genentech Campus would meet a 28% trip reduction rate, consistent with current City
requirements.
Alternative 3: Alternative Mix of Land Uses
Under Alternative #3, the overall net new development within the Campus would be approximately 4.3
million square feet (same as the EIR Project Description) to a buildout of 9 million square feet. However,
the mix of land uses within the Campus would have a substantially different shift from the higher trip-
generating office land use assumed in the EIR Project Description, to the lower trip-generating lab and
manufacturing space uses. One of the purposes of having an Alternative that mixes the land use
composition of the future Campus buildout is to demonstrate the flexibility of the Master Plan Update
and its proposed Trip Cap to respond to potentially changing building space demands at the Campus over
time.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
None of the alternatives is capable of changing a significant impact of the Project to less than significant
impact, or is capable of fully avoiding an environmental effect of the Project. Rather, the differences
between the Project and the alternatives are measured in relative magnitude.
Generally, the lower development potential of Alternative #1 (the No Project) would generate less
overall construction-period and operational emissions of air quality pollutants, toxic air contaminants,
GHG emissions, less vehicle trips and lower demands on utilities, as compared to the Project. Alternative
#1 has a reduced development footprint, fewer identified Opportunity Sites where new development
may occur, and does not include Opportunity Sites on steeper hillsides where mitigation measures would
otherwise be required to address potential slope failure. Based on order of magnitude effects,
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-7
Alternative #1 (the No Project Alternative) is environmentally superior to the Project and to all other
alternatives. CEQA requires this EIR to identify another alternative that would be considered
environmentally superior in the absence of the No Project Alternative. Like the No Project Alternative,
the lower development potential of Alternative #2 would generate less overall construction-period and
operational emissions of air quality pollutants, toxic air contaminants and GHGs, and would lower
demands on utilities as compared to the Project. Based on order of magnitude effects, Alternative #2
(the Reduced Project Alternative) is the environmentally superior alternative, but Alternative #2 (like the
No Project Alternative) does not substantially lessen or avoid any significant environmental effects of the
Project that cannot otherwise be substantially lessened or avoided with implementation of all feasible
mitigation measures identified in this EIR.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-8
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Aesthetics
Aesthetics 1: New development pursuant to the
Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect
on a scenic vista.
None needed Less than Significant
Aesthetics 2: New development pursuant to the
Project would not substantially damage scenic
resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock
outcroppings or historic buildings within a state scenic
highway.
None needed Less than Significant
Aesthetics 3: New development pursuant to the
Project would not substantially degrade the visual
character or quality of the Project Area.
Regulatory Requirement Aesthetics 3, Design Review: Pursuant to the City of South
San Francisco’s Zoning Code (Chapter 20.480: Design Review) the City will continue
to review the design of new buildings on Campus. The City’s Design review criteria
will be used to ensure that new buildings promote high-quality design, are well crafted
and maintained, use high-quality building materials and are attentive to the design and
execution of building details and amenities.
Less than Significant
Aesthetics 4: New development pursuant to the
Project could result in new sources of increased
daytime glare and nighttime illumination.
Regulatory Requirement Aesthetics 4, Design Review for Light and Glare: Consistent
with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.480.006, new development
pursuant to the Master Plan Update will be required to comply with the following
design considerations relative to light and glare:
1. Open space, pedestrian walks, signs, illumination, and landscaping (including
irrigation) shall be designed and developed to enhance the environmental quality
of the site, achieve a safe, efficient, and harmonious development, and accomplish
the objectives set forth in the precise plan of design and design criteria (Municipal
Code section 20.480.006.6)
2. Electrical and mechanical equipment or works, and fixtures and trash storage
areas, shall be designed and constructed so as not to detract from the
environmental quality of the site. Electrical and mechanical equipment or works
and fixtures and trash storage areas shall be concealed by an appropriate
architectural structure that uses colors and materials harmonious with the principal
structure, unless a reasonable alternative is identified (Municipal Code section
20.480.006.7)
3. Components considered in design review shall include but not be limited to
exterior design, materials, textures, colors, means of illumination, landscaping,
irrigation, height, shadow patterns, parking, access, security, safety, and other
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-9
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
usual on-site development elements (Municipal Code section 20.480.006.8)
Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 4A, Night Lighting: Maintain appropriate levels of
night lighting at building entries, walkways, courtyards, parking lots and private roads,
consistent with minimum levels detailed in Genentech’s Security Plan and City
building codes.
Mitigation Measure Aesthetics 4B, Non-Reflective Glass and Surfaces: Design for new
structures within the Project Area shall include the use of textured or other non-
reflective exterior surfaces and non-reflective glass types, including double-glazed and
non-reflective vision glass, while achieving the requisite performance for energy
conservation, internal comfort and glare control. All exterior glass must meet the
specifications of all applicable building codes
Air Quality
AQ 1: Implementation of the Project would not
conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan
None needed Less than Significant
AQ 2: Throughout buildout of the Project,
construction activities would result in emissions of
criteria pollutants for which the region is non-
attainment, including releasing emissions of ozone
precursors and particulates. However, with
implementation of Basic BMPs for all construction
projects, and Additional BMPs for those construction
projects that exceed screening criteria, construction
emissions would be unlikely to exceed applicable
thresholds.
Best Management Practices AQ 2A, Basic Construction Measures: Consistent with
BAAQMD recommendations, the following BMPs shall be implemented by all
construction projects, regardless of itemized construction emission levels:
a) All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas,
and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
b) All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be
covered.
c) All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using
wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power
sweeping is prohibited.
d) All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
e) All roadways, driveways and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as
possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless
seeding or soil binders are used.
f) Idling times shall be minimized either by shutting equipment off when not in use
or reducing the maximum idling time to 5 minutes (as required by the California
airborne toxics control measure Title 13, Section 2485 of California Code of
Regulations [CCR]). Clear signage shall be provided for construction workers at all
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-10
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
access points.
g) All construction equipment shall be maintained and properly tuned in accordance
with manufacturer’s specifications. All equipment shall be checked by a certified
mechanic and determined to be running in proper condition prior to operation.
h) Post a publicly visible sign with the telephone number and person to contact at
the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take
corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be
visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
It is possible that variations in construction schedules will occur, resulting in
construction of individual buildings exceeding the assumed annual average, or that
multiple buildings may be constructed across the Campus at the same time. Therefore,
the following requirement is recommended as a Condition of Approval for the Project,
to address subsequent development-specific circumstances:
Recommendation AQ 2: Project-Specific Construction Emission Analysis: A project-
specific construction emissions analysis is required for all projects that exceed the
assumptions of this analysis, including:
a) Annual construction exceeding 215,000 square feet a year.
b) Construction projects that individually exceed 227,000 square feet in size (the
lower of BAAQMD screening sizes for either office parks or industrial parks)
c) When two or more simultaneously occurring construction projects would exceed
this screening size, or construction projects include more than two simultaneously
occurring construction phases
d) Construction projects that would include demolition, that would involve extensive
site preparation (i.e., greater than default assumptions used by the URBEMIS
model), or that involve extensive material transport (in amounts greater than
10,000 cubic yards of soil import/export)
e) If a project-specific emission analysis exceeds the per-day construction emissions
thresholds presented in Table 6-2, then a demonstration of consistency with the
results in AQ-3 would also be required.
AQ 3: During construction activities, the Project could
expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations from construction-related emissions.
Specifically, the Project’s construction emissions could
cause an excess cancer risk level exceeding 10 in 1
million at the maximally exposed sensitive receptor.
None needed for construction activities on each of those Opportunity Sites as
indicated on Figure 6-3 as not contributing to construction-period health risks (i.e.,
impacts would be less than significant).
All construction activities pursuant to buildout of the Project may proceed on all
Opportunity Sites without further site-specific or project-specific analysis if Mitigation
measure AQ 3: Diesel Particulate Filters, are installed on all diesel construction
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-11
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
equipment (i.e., where health risk impacts would be mitigated to less than significant
levels).
Mitigation Measure AQ 3, Diesel Particulate Filters: Construction activity that occurs
in proximity to the Genentech daycare center or the Early Years preschool on Allerton
Avenue shall use off-road construction equipment installed with diesel particulate
filters capable of reducing PM10 and PM2.5 emissions by as much as 85%.
AQ 4: During operations, the Project would result in a
cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria
pollutants for which the region is non-attainment,
including emissions that exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone precursors. Specifically, the
Project’s average daily operational emissions are
projected to exceed 54 pound per day of reactive
organic gas (ROG) and nitrogen oxides.
Regulatory Requirement AQ 4, New Source Review Offset: Genentech shall purchase
offset credits pursuant to BAAQMD Regulation 2-2: New Source Review; Section 302,
Offset Requirements for each new permitted stationary source of NOx and/or ROG
emissions, and for any modifications to existing stationary emission sources that result
in increased NOx and/or ROG emissions.
Significant and
Unavoidable
Although TDM,
energy efficiency
features and
regulatory
requirements are
incorporated into
the Project, total
emissions of criteria
pollutants from
mobile sources and
other sources not
requiring separate
permits form
BAAQMD would
exceed the
thresholds of
significance -
AQ 5: During operational activities, the Project could
expose sensitive receptors to substantial health risk
from operational-related emissions if operational
sources of TAC emissions are not limited in location
and operational parameters.
None needed for operational source of TAC emission that operate within the emission
parameters used in this analysis and located on any of those Opportunity Sites shown
on Figures 6-5 and 6-6 as not contributing to operational-period health risks – (i.e., less
than significant). Individual projects that include new sources of operational TAC
emissions that would operate outside of the operational parameters used in this EIR are
subject to the following mitigation measure:
Mitigation Measure AQ 5A, Parameters for Operational Emissions: New operational
sources of TAC emissions (i.e., emergency generators, laboratories with emissions
stacks, or natural gas combustion at the Miura boilers or potential CHP) shall operate
within the operational parameters as used in this analysis (as shown in Table 6-9). For
any operational source of TAC emissions that does not operate within these
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-12
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
parameters, a subsequent, project-specific health risk analysis shall be performed. Any
such subsequent, project-specific health risk analysis must be able to demonstrate that
the proposed operational source of TAC emissions would not contribute to new or
substantially more significant health risks to sensitive receptors than those health risks
presented in this EIR. This conclusion may account for any additional project-specific
measures to reduce TAC emissions included as part of such an emission source.
Individual projects that include new operational sources of TAC emissions and that are
sited at locations not shown on Figure 6-5 (for laboratories) or Figure 6-6 (for
emergency generators) are subject to the following mitigation measure:
Mitigation Measure AQ 5B, Locational Restrictions on Future Operational Emission
Sources: Emergency generators and laboratories with emissions stacks shall be limited
to those locations as shown on Figure 6-5 (for laboratories) or Figure 6-6 (for
emergency generators), where their operations have been demonstrated to not exceed
health risk thresholds. For any operational source of TAC emissions that are located
outside of these locations, a subsequent project-specific health risk analysis shall be
performed. Any such subsequent, project-specific health risk analysis must be able to
demonstrate that the proposed location would not contribute to new or substantially
more significant health risks to sensitive receptors than those health risks presented in
this EIR. This conclusion may account for any additional project-specific measures to
reduce TAC emissions included as part of such an emission source.
Biological Resources
Bio 1: The Project could potentially have an indirect
adverse effect on Central California Coast steelhead,
green sturgeon, longfin smelt and their tidal aquatic
habitat within the Bay.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit and Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan: All qualifying construction projects pursuant to the Master
Plan Update shall comply with Provision C.6 of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP),
including filing a Notice of Intent for permit coverage under the Construction General
Permit
1) To obtain Construction General Permit coverage, construction projects must
include a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that demonstrates
compliance with the City’s Grading Ordinances and other local requirements.
2) The SWPPP must demonstrate implementation of seasonally appropriate and
effective best management practices (BMPs) to prevent construction site discharges
of pollutants into the storm drains, before approval and issuance of local grading
permits.
3) Such construction projects are required to implement the stormwater BMPs
identified by the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-13
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Program, including plans to address materials and waste management, equipment
management and spill control, grading and earthmoving to prevent erosion,
paving and asphalt work, concrete and mortar applications, painting and paint
removal, landscaping and dewatering.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B, Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Management Plan: All new Regulated Projects pursuant to the Master Plan Update will
be required to comply with Provision C.3 of the MRP, including requirements to
incorporate post-construction stormwater control and low-impact development (LID)
measures. Each individual development project must meet Provision C.3 requirements
capable of reducing long-term impacts of development on stormwater quality. Some
combination of the following post-construction stormwater controls will be required to
demonstrate compliance with the hydraulic design criteria of the MRP:
1) Site design may include minimizing impervious surfaces minimizing impervious
surfaces that are directly connected to the storm drain system, or using
landscaping as a drainage feature.
2) Source control measures may include roofed trash enclosures, berms that control
runoff from a pollutant source, use of indoor mats/equipment wash racks that are
connected to the sanitary sewer (where allowed under separate sewer discharge
permits), and regular inspection and cleaning of storm drain inlets.
3) Stormwater treatments may be met by a combination of measures that may
include but are not limited to bioretention areas, flow-through planter boxes,
infiltration trenches, extended detention basins, green roofs, pervious paving and
grid pavements, rainwater harvesting and subsurface infiltration systems.
Bio-2: The Project may cause a substantial adverse
effect, both directly and through habitat modification,
on California Ridgway’s rail (federally and state listed
as endangered and designated as a state fully
protected species).
Mitigation Measure Bio 2A, Seasonal Avoidance: To avoid causing the abandonment
of an active California Ridgway’s rail nest, construction activities within 750 feet of the
coastal salt marsh habitat in the southeastern corner of the site (see Figure 7-9) shall be
avoided during the rail breeding season (from February 1 through August 31). If
avoidance is not possible, protocol-level surveys (see Mitigation Measure Bio 2, below)
shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine rail locations and territories.
Mitigation Measure Bio 2B, Protocol-Level Surveys and Buffers around Calling
Centers: Prior to any construction activity near the coastal salt marsh along the
southeastern edge of the biological Study Area, a protocol-level survey, which involves
a series of site visits between mid-January (beginning no later than January 31) and late
March, shall be conducted by a qualified biologist. The survey needs to be approved
by the USFWS and CDFW in advance. If breeding rails are determined to be present,
construction activities shall not occur within 750 feet of an identified calling center
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-14
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
during the breeding season.
Mitigation Measure Bio 2C, Initiate Work during the Non-Breeding Season: Regular,
ongoing disturbance within a work area that begins prior to the start of the nesting
season or nest establishment in an area may deter California Ridgway’s rails from
nesting near construction activities. If construction activities need to occur within 750
feet of suitable California Ridgway’s rail nesting habitat, such activities shall be
initiated and shall reach peak levels of disturbance prior to the onset of the nesting
season. Peak levels of disturbance is defined as construction noise in the vicinity of the
suitable habitat reaching maximum levels, and construction activities that occur as
near to the suitable habitat as required for the project. If an active nest is identified
subsequent to construction activities reaching a peak level of disturbance, a buffer of
750 feet shall be established between Project activities and the nest.
Bio 3: The Project would not cause a substantial
adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modification, on burrowing owls. Burrowing owls are
a migratory species protected under the federal MBTA
and California Fish and Game Code, and designated
as a state species of special concern.
None required Less than Significant
Bio 4: The Project may cause a substantial adverse
effect, either directly or through habitat modification,
on Alameda song sparrow, San Francisco common
yellowthroat (both California species of special
concern) and other native bird species protected by
the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code.
Mitigation Measure Bio 4A, Seasonal Avoidance: To the extent feasible, construction
activities should be scheduled to avoid the nesting season. If construction activities are
scheduled to take place outside the nesting season, all impacts on nesting birds
protected under the MBTA and California Fish and Game Code will be avoided. The
nesting season for most birds in San Mateo County extends from February 1 through
August 31.
Mitigation Measure Bio 4B, Pre-construction/Pre-disturbance Surveys: If it is not
possible to schedule construction activities between September 1 and January 31, then
a pre-construction survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified
ornithologist to ensure that no nests will be disturbed during Project implementation.
These surveys should be conducted no more than seven days prior to the initiation of
any construction activities. During this survey, the ornithologist shall inspect all trees
and other potential nesting habitats (e.g., trees, shrubs, ruderal grasslands, buildings) in
and immediately adjacent to the impact area, as well as a construction zone of up to
300 feet from the edge of the construction zone into the southerly coastal salt marsh
habitat (if applicable), for nests.
Mitigation Measure Bio 4C, Buffers: If an active nest is found sufficiently close to
work areas such that it would be disturbed by construction activities, the ornithologist
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-15
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
shall determine the extent of a construction-free buffer zone to be established around
the nest (typically 300 feet for raptors and 100 feet for other species). Any active nests
shall be monitored by the ornithologists to determine when the young fledge, and
construction within the buffer zone can resume.
Bio 5: The Project could potentially have an indirect
adverse effect on harbor seal and California sea lion
(both protected species under the Marine Mammal
Protection Act), and their tidal aquatic habitat within
the Bay.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit/Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan: (see additional details under Bio 1, above).
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B, Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Management Plan: (see additional details under Bio 1, above).
Less than Significant
Bio 6: The Project would not interfere substantially
with migratory bird corridors due to bird strikes with
buildings.
None required Less than Significant
Bio 7: The Project could potentially result in adverse
effects on coastal salt marsh and other sensitive habitat
due to the spread of invasive and non-native plant
species.
Mitigation Measure Bio 7, Invasive Weed Control: Prior to ground disturbing
activities, the Project work areas shall be surveyed by a qualified biologist/botanist for
the presence of pampas grass, fennel and other highly invasive plant species from the
California Invasive Plant Council list.
a) Any invasive plants found within the area that is to be disturbed by development
shall be removed and disposed of in a sanitary landfill. Alternatively, invasive
plants may be disposed of in a high-temperature composting facility that can
compost using methods known to kill weed seeds, taking care to prevent any seed
dispersal during the process by bagging material or covering trucks transporting
such material from the site.
b) Cut soils from areas infested by weeds such as pampas grass and fennel that will
be reused as fill elsewhere in the Project Area will be buried under hardscape or
placed in areas to be managed with landscaping.
c) During construction activities, all seeds and straw materials used on site shall be
weed-free, and all gravel and fill material shall be certified weed-free.
d) Construction vehicles and all equipment will be washed (including wheels,
undercarriages and bumpers) before entering the Project Area. Vehicles will be
cleaned at existing construction yards or car washes. Genentech will document
that all vehicles have been washed prior to commencing work.
Less than Significant
Bio 8: The Project will not have a substantial adverse
effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional plans,
policies, regulations, or by the California Department
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit/Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan: (see additional details under Bio 1, above).
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B, Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-16
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Management Plan: (see additional details under Bio 1, above).
Bio 9: The Project will not have a substantial adverse
effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not
limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.), waters of
the U.S., and waters of the state through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption or other
means.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit/Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan: (see additional details under Bio 1, above).
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B, Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Management Plan: (see additional details under Bio 1, above).
Mitigation Measure Bio 9, Drainage Channel Wetland Delineation: Although
drainage channels within the site lack many of the habitat features usually present in
jurisdictional waters of the State, there is some possibility these drainage ditches may
be claimed as jurisdictional by the RWQCB. Prior to any proposed fill or material
alteration of on-site drainage ditches (those indicated on prior Figure 7-8), a wetlands
delineation based on the criteria of most current Corps of Engineers Wetlands
Delineation Manual and any regional supplements shall be conducted.
a) Presuming this wetland delineation finds the on-site drainage ditches are not
Waters of the US and that these delineations are accepted by the Corps, then no
further federal wetlands permitting is required.
b) If the RWQCB claims jurisdiction of these features, any alteration of the drainage
ditches would require a permit from the RWQCB and compliance with all
standards and requirements of such permit.
c) The RWQCB is likely to consider these drainage ditches as required parts of the
overall Campus’ Stormwater Management Plan, and pursuant to subsequent
Statewide General Construction Permits will likely require that the storm drainage
functions of these features be replaced if they are affected.
Less than Significant
Bio 10: The Project will not interfere substantially with
the movement of any native resident or migratory fish
or wildlife species, or with established native resident
or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites.
None required Less than Significant
Bio 11: The Project would not conflict with any local
policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.
Regulatory Requirement Bio 11A, Tree Removal Permit: All new development
pursuant to the Project will be required to comply with City of South San Francisco
Municipal Code 13.30, which prohibits the removal or pruning of protected trees
without a permit. Pursuant to this regulatory requirement, Genentech will be required
to retain a certified arborist to conduct pre-construction surveys of trees within the
Project Area, and provide a map to the applicant and the City. Each identified
protected tree that will be directly impacted by removal or pruning will require a Tree
Pruning/Removal Permit pursuant to the South San Francisco Municipal Code. This
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-17
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
permit will be submitted to the City and must be approved before building permits are
issued.
Regulatory Requirement Bio 11B, Tree Replacement Planting: Replacement trees will
be determined as set forth in Municipal Code Section 13.30.080, which provides that
any protected trees that are removed shall be replaced as follows:
1) Replacement will be three 15-gallon size or two 24-inch box minimum size
landscape trees for each tree removed as determined below. However, the
director maintains the right to dictate size and species of trees in new
developments.
2) Any protected tree removed without a valid permit will be replaced by three 24-
inch box minimum size landscape trees of a species approved by the director for
each tree so removed as determined below.
3) Replacement of a protected tree can be waived by the director if a sufficient
number of trees exist on the property to meet all other requirements of the tree
preservation ordinance.
4) If replacement trees cannot be planted on the property, payment of the
replacement value of the tree, as determined by the International Society of
Arboriculture Standards, plus the costs to the city to plant an equivalent tree
elsewhere in the city, will be made to the city.
Bio 12: The Project will not conflict with the
provisions of an adopted habitat conservation plan,
natural community conservation plan or other habitat
conservation plan approved by local, regional or state
agencies.
None required Less than Significant
Cultural Resources
Cultural 1: Future development pursuant to the
Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial
adverse change in the significance of any known
historical resources.
None needed Less than Significant
Cultural 2: Future development pursuant to the
Project is not anticipated to uncover or disturb a
known paleontological resource.
None needed Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-18
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Cultural 3: During ground disturbing activities
associated within the Project Area, it is possible that
currently unidentified historic-period archaeological
resources could be discovered and disturbed.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 3A, Cultural Resources Worker Environmental
Awareness Program: A qualified archaeologist should conduct training for all
construction personnel prior to Project-related construction and ground-disturbing
activities. The training should include basic information about the types of artifacts that
might be encountered during construction activities, and procedures to follow in the
event of a discovery.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 3B, Halt Construction Activity, Evaluate Find and
Implement Mitigation: In the event of discovery of paleontological or historical
archaeological resources during site preparation, excavation or other construction
activity, all such activity within 25 feet of the discovery shall cease until the resources
have been evaluated by a qualified professional. Historic-period archaeological
resources may include stone or adobe foundations or walls, structures and remains
with square nails, and refuse deposits or bottle dumps.
a) If the qualified archaeologist determines the find is not significant and that there is
no potential for the find to be a tribal cultural resource, then proper recordation
and identification will ensue, and the project construction activity may continue
without further delay.
b) If the qualified archaeologist determines the find may potentially be a tribal
cultural resource, a tribal representative shall be consulted to determine whether it
is in fact a tribal cultural resource (see MM Cultural #D, below).
c) If the qualified archaeologist determines an archaeological find is significant, then
the archaeologist will excavate the find in compliance with state law and keeping
project delays to a minimum, and shall implement specific mitigation measures to
protect these resources in accordance with sections 21083.2 and 21084.1 of the
California Public Resources Code.
d) If it is determined that avoidance of the resource is not feasible, then a mitigation
plan (including monitoring and data recovery) shall be prepared, with specific
steps and timeframe identified. Work near the find may only resume upon
completion of a mitigation plan or recovery of the resource.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 3C, In the Event of Discovery of Human Remains: In the
event of a discovery of buried human remains or suspected human remains, all
construction activity within 50 feet shall cease until the remains have been evaluated
by the County Coroner.
a) If the County Coroner determines that an investigation into the cause of death is
required, or that the remains are Native American, all work shall cease within 50
feet of the remains until appropriate arrangements are made.
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-19
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
b) In the event that the remains are Native American, the City shall contact the
California Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), pursuant to
subdivision (c) of section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code to
identify the Most Likely Descendant. The Most Likely Descendant shall be
consulted as to means for treating or re-interring the human remains and any
associated grave goods, with appropriate dignity.
Cultural 4: During ground disturbing activities
associated within the Project Area, it is possible that
currently unidentified or non-located tribal cultural
resources could be discovered and disturbed.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 3A, Cultural Resources Worker Environmental
Awareness Program (WEAP): see above
Mitigation Measure Cultural 3B, Halt Construction Activity, Evaluate Find and
Implement Mitigation: see above
Mitigation Measure Cultural 3C, In the Event of Discovery of Human Remains: see
above
Mitigation Measure Cultural 4A, Cultural Resources Monitoring: A qualified
archaeologist shall monitor all construction-related activity expected to involve
excavating, drilling or trenching at depths that may reach native sediment in those
areas where tribal cultural resources are likely present (i.e., along the Project’s
shoreline areas within the South and Lower Campus). Monitoring will continue for the
duration of such activity or until culturally sterile sediments are reached (e.g.,
bedrock). The qualified archaeologist may determine to decrease or increase the
monitoring efforts based on sediments observed, findings or the number of large
ground-disturbing machines in operation.
Mitigation Measure Cultural 4B, In the Event of Discovery of a Tribal Resource: If a
Tribal cultural resource is uncovered during construction, work should be halted
within 25 feet of the discovered materials and workers shall avoid altering the
materials and their context until a qualified professional archaeologist has evaluated
the situation and provided appropriate recommendations. Project personnel should not
collect cultural resources. Native American resources include chert or obsidian flakes,
projectile points, mortars, and pestles; and dark friable soil containing shell and bone
dietary debris, heat-affected rock, or human burials. A tribal representative shall be
consulted to determine an appropriate mitigation plan (including monitoring and data
recovery), with specific steps and timeframe to be stipulated. Work near the found
tribal cultural resource may only resume upon completion of a mitigation plan and/or
recovery of the tribal cultural resource.
Less than Significant
Geology and Soils
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-20
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Geology 1: With implementation of all applicable
regulatory requirements, future development pursuant
to the Project would not expose people and/or
structures to potentially substantial adverse effects
resulting from strong seismic ground-shaking and
seismic-related ground failure.
Regulatory Requirement Geology 1, Seismic Hazards: Pursuant to regulatory
requirements, Genentech will be required to retain a certified licensed geotechnical
engineer to prepare site-specific geotechnical studies for each new development
project pursuant to the Project.
1. Required geotechnical studies shall include site-specific geotechnical
recommendations demonstrating compliance with all applicable seismic-related
geotechnical engineering standards.
2. Recommendations shall be incorporated into individual development project
designs and construction, providing an acceptable level of protection against
seismic-related hazards.
All new development pursuant to the Project will be required to comply with all
applicable regulatory requirements for seismic hazards, including but not limited to
the following:
California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, which enables the City of South San
Francisco to 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
California Building Code, which provides minimum standards for building design
including but not limited to regulations governing seismically resistant construction
(Chapter 16, Section 1613)
City of South San Francisco Municipal Code - Chapter 15.08, which includes CBC
standards as further modified by amendments, additions, and deletions adopted as the
building code of the City of South San Francisco
East of 101 Area Plan, Chapter 10, which sets forth policies and specific guidelines
pertaining to site development and building design applicable to the unique geological
hazards in the East of 101 Area, including the Project Area
Less than Significant
Geology 2: With implementation of all applicable
regulatory requirements, most future development
pursuant to the Project would not expose people and
structures to potentially substantial adverse effects
resulting from landslides. Future development on
steep hillside sites could pose increased risks of slope
instability and landslide potential.
Regulatory Requirement Geology 2, Landslide Hazards: Pursuant to regulatory
requirements, Genentech will be required to retain a certified licensed geotechnical
engineer to prepare site-specific geotechnical studies for each new development
project pursuant to the Project.
1. Required geotechnical studies shall include site-specific geotechnical
recommendations demonstrating compliance with all applicable excavation
design and slope stability standards. The East of 101 Area Plan Geotechnical
Safety Element policies (specifically Policy Geo-7 through Geo-9) are designed
specifically to mitigate impacts associated with landsliding and unstable slope
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-21
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
conditions.
2. Recommendations shall be incorporated into individual development project
designs and construction, providing an acceptable level of protection against
landslide hazards.
Mitigation Measure Geology 2, Geotechnical Requirements for Hillside Opportunity
Sites: Site-specific geotechnical studies required for each new development at hillside
Opportunity Sites (sites with slopes of 30 percent or greater) shall including site-
specific geotechnical recommendations to address the stability of existing and
proposed slopes, as well as the stability of all proposed excavations. These
investigations and recommendations may include, but are not limited to the following:
a) A geologic evaluation of the bedding properties of the underlying bedrock to
determine if joints or fractures may project out of the proposed excavation during
construction
b) Recommendations for appropriate shoring systems to be used when making
vertical cuts, including evaluation of the stability of the excavation as well as job-
site safety considerations
c) Evaluation of the drainage and infiltration properties of the existing slope bank
d) Installation of horizontal drains to remove seepage
e) Construction of a buttress wall at the base of the slope to reduce the risk of
damage in the case of an accidental slope failure
Geology 3: With implementation of all applicable
regulatory requirements, future development pursuant
to the Project that may be located on a geologic unit
or soil that is unstable or that could become unstable
because of development, and future development that
may be on expansive soil, will not create a substantial
risk to life or property.
Regulatory Requirement Geology 3, Soils Hazards: Pursuant to regulatory
requirements, Genentech will be required to retain a certified licensed geotechnical
engineer to prepare site-specific geotechnical studies for each new development
project pursuant to the Project.
1. Geotechnical studies shall include site-specific geotechnical recommendations
demonstrating compliance with all applicable soils-related building design
requirements.
2. Site-specific recommendations may include design features (such as expansion
joints, mounting foundations on concrete piles), or replacing existing soils on a
project site with stable fill material such that structures can withstand soils
expansion. Building pad substrates may also be applicable on soils subject to
expansive potential, and weak soils may require re-engineering specifically for
stability. Soil treatment programs (replacement, grouting, compaction, drainage
control, etc.) may be included in excavation and construction plans, and/or piling
supports that conform to implementation criteria described in the CBC, Chapters
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-22
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
16, 18, and A33 may need to be designed and implemented.
3. All recommendations shall be incorporated into individual development project
designs and construction, providing an acceptable level of protection against soils-
related hazards.
All new development pursuant to the Project will be required to comply with all
applicable regulatory requirements to address soils constraints, including but not
limited to the following:
California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, which enables the City of South San
Francisco to 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 seismically unstable soils
California Building Code, Chapters 18A and 23 (or Uniform Building Code for Zone
4), which addresses building foundations and structural support requirements, subject
to structural peer review
City of South San Francisco Municipal Code - Chapter 15.08, which includes CBC
standards as further modified by amendments, additions and deletions adopted as the
Building Code of the City of South San Francisco
East of 101 Area Plan, Chapter 10: Geotechnical Safety Element, which sets forth
policies and specific guidelines pertaining to site development and building design
applicable to soils conditions that exist in the East of 101 Area
Geology 4: With implementation of all applicable
regulatory requirements, future development pursuant
to the Project would not result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of topsoil.
Regulatory Requirement Geology 4, Grading Regulations: Pursuant to regulatory
requirements, Genentech will be required to retain a certified licensed geotechnical
engineer to prepare site-specific geotechnical studies for each new development
project pursuant to the Project. Geotechnical studies shall include site-specific
geotechnical recommendations demonstrating compliance with all applicable erosion
control requirements, including but not limited to the following:
1. California Building Code, Chapter 18 (which regulates excavation activities and
the construction of foundations and retaining walls) and Chapter 33 (which
regulates grading activities, including drainage and erosion control)
2. Bay Area Air Quality Management District Rules regarding fugitive dust, which
would stabilize soils and prevent erosion through the reduction of dust generation
by up to 85 percent
3. All new qualifying construction projects pursuant to the Master Plan Update will
be required to comply with Provision C.6 of the Municipal Regional Permit (MRP),
including filing a Notice of Intent for permit coverage under the Construction
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-23
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
General Permit, and preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) that demonstrates compliance with the City’s Grading Ordinances and
other local requirements (see further details in Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A
in the Hydrology chapter of this EIR)
4. The evaluation of potential erosion of steeper slopes is also required as part of
new development design in accordance with East of 101 Area Plan Geotechnical
Safety Element policies. These policy requirements specify that slopes be graded
and compacted during construction to reduce the likelihood of surface slumping
or erosion, and that vegetative cover be applied to protect the slope from soil
erosion.
Geology 5: Future development pursuant to the
Project would be served by the existing municipal
sewer system. No septic tanks or alternate waste
disposal systems are proposed for development.
None needed No Impact
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
GHG 1: The Project’s stationary source emissions will
not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purposes of reducing the
emissions of GHGs. Specifically, the Project will
comply with the CARB Cap-and-Trade program, which
is a method to achieve statewide reduction goals as set
forth in AB 32.
Regulatory Requirement GHG 1, Cap and Trade: Genentech is committed to
minimizing emissions from stationary sources and continuing participation in the Cap-
and-Trade program. Pursuant to this program, Genentech must meet the requirements
by ensuring permits (through increased cap or trade) are obtained for incremental
growth in these types of stationary source emissions. The Cap-and-Trade allowances
must meet or exceed stationary source emission levels as reported to CARB pursuant to
mandatory GHG reporting requirements. Compliance with the Cap-and-Trade program
can be verified through publicly accessible data maintained by the California Air
Resources Board, which includes statewide and facility-specific information on
emissions reporting, offsets and allocations, and facility compliance with the Cap and
Trade Program
Less than Significant
GHG 2: The Project’s stationary source emissions that
are not otherwise addressed under the Cap-and-Trade
program will not exceed 10,000 MT of CO2e per
year, and thus will not contribute to global climate
change at a level that is considered cumulatively
considerable.
None needed. Less than Significant
GHG 3: The Project’s operational emissions will not
conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation
None needed. The Project’s indirect, operational GHG emissions attributable to
mobile sources, water use, wastewater treatment and waste disposal are fully
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-24
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
adopted for the purposes of reducing the emissions of
GHGs. Specifically, the Project is consistent with the
City’s Qualified GHG Reduction Strategy (i.e., the SSF
Climate Action Program, or CAP). Those operational-
related GHG emissions that are fully covered under
the SSF CAP do not represent a cumulatively
considerable contribution to global climate change,
and emissions that comply with the CAP are excluded
from analysis of GHG emissions against the numerical
land use-based threshold.
addressed in the City of South San Francisco’s Climate Action Plan (a Qualified GHG
Reduction Strategy). The CAP allows the City to determine that future development
projects will have a less than significant impact on CAP-related GHG emissions if they
comply with CAP GHG reduction measures.
GHG 4: The Project will not generate land use-based
GHG emissions, other than those emissions addressed
pursuant to the City CAP, that exceed the efficiency
threshold of 4.6 MT of CO2e per year per service
population (Project jobs) at year 2020. The Project’s
land use-based GHG emissions would not contribute
significantly to global climate change, and this impact
is considered less than cumulatively considerable.
No mitigation is required. The Project would not exceed the service-based efficiency
threshold for land use-based GHG emissions by year 2020.
Less than Significant
GHG 5: The Project will not generate land use-based
GHG emissions, other than those emissions addressed
pursuant to the City CAP, that exceed the efficiency
threshold of 2.7 MT of CO2e per year per service
population at year 2030. The Project’s land use-based
GHG emissions would not contribute significantly to
global climate change, and this impact is considered
less than cumulatively considerable.
No mitigation is required. The Project would not exceed the service-based efficiency
threshold for land use-based GHG emissions by year 2030.
Less than Significant
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hazards 1: Implementation of the Project would not
expose Genentech employees or the nearby public to
significant hazards due to the routine transport, use,
disposal or storage of hazardous materials (including
chemical, radioactive and biohazardous waste).
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 1A, Use of Chemical Materials: Genentech shall
comply with all State, federal and local regulations, and Genentech programs,
practices and procedures that ensure that the potential for worker and/or public
exposure to hazardous chemicals from improper or unsafe activities or from accidents
is less than significant.
1) To reduce the potential for exposure to airborne chemicals, workers shall take
standard precautions such as working under fume hoods when using chemicals
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-25
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
that could present exposure hazards. The chemical fume hood is a critical health
and safety control in the laboratory setting, ensuring an adequate level of
protection from possible harmful effects of chemicals. Proper use of fume hoods
keeps toxic air contaminant levels within indoor laboratories below levels
identified in guidelines of the American Conference of Governmental Industrial
Hygienists (Threshold Limit Values) and OSHA legal limits (Permissible Exposure
Levels).
2) To prevent exposure through skin contact, Genentech shall require that protective
clothing such as laboratory coats, gloves and safety glasses, be worn while
handling hazardous materials. Proper washing after handling chemicals is
required. Eating, drinking and smoking are prohibited in laboratories and other
areas where hazardous materials are used. These procedures are disclosed to all
staff that work with hazardous materials, and this training increases the safety
awareness of Genentech employees and further reduces the risks of exposure to
hazardous chemicals through inhalation, absorption, ingestion and injection.
Should an accident occur that could cause exposure of an individual to hazardous
materials, required emergency equipment (e.g., fire extinguishers, eyewashes and
safety showers) are also available.
3) Cal/OSHA requires all institutions that use hazardous materials to implement a
Hazard Communication Program and to train employees that use hazardous
chemicals in the safe use of those materials. Genentech implements all safety
procedures and conducts safety programs to ensure that these OSHA safety
procedures are consistently followed. Genentech will continue to implement these
(or equivalent) programs, practices and procedures, and will expand these
programs as needed. Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 3203 of
the General Industry Safety Orders) also requires every California employer to
have a written Injury and Illness Prevention Program to provide a safe and
healthful workplace. OSHA mandates methods of documenting, investigating and
controlling accidents that result in skin penetration. Evidence presented during
OSHA rule-making procedures indicates that these programs and methods are
effective in reducing the number and severity of injuries and illness in the
workplace.
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 1B, Use of Radioactive Materials: The use of
radioactive material at the Genentech site is specifically subject to the conditions of a
radioactive materials license issued and administered by the Radiologic Health Branch
of the DHS. Genentech administers and monitors facility compliance with license
requirements. Radioactive materials licensing requirements include routine inspection
and monitoring of areas where radioactive materials are used, to ensure that surfaces
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-26
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
are not contaminated with radioactivity above background levels. Under the
radioactive materials license, renovation or demolition of facilities using radioactive
material requires decommissioning of the facilities. This involves radiation testing and
conducting decontamination and waste handling activities in accordance with
applicable regulations.
1) Use of radioactive materials at Genentech is monitored to ensure consistency with
requirements of Genentech’s radioactive materials license as issued and
administered by the Radiologic Health Branch of the DHS. These licensing
requirements articulate standards to maintain radiation exposure levels below
applicable legal standards, thereby protecting users of radioactive materials.
2) Like all hazardous materials, the effects of the routine use of radioactive materials
are limited to areas where exposure may occur and decreases substantially with
distance. For this reason, the individuals most at risk would be those specially
trained in the use of radioactive materials, thereby reducing the likelihood for
accidental exposure through improper handling techniques. All individuals who
handle radioactive waste are required to wear a personal monitor that determines
their cumulative exposure to radiation. If the monitor indicates that established
safety levels might be exceeded, the individual is prevented from being exposed
to potential sources of radiation until the monitor indicates that safety levels can
be maintained.
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 1C, Use of Biohazardous Materials: Genentech
complies with guidelines promulgated by the United States Department of Health and
Human Services (USDHHS), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and National
Institutes of Health that determine the level of safety precautions that must be used for
four tiers of relative hazards. Biosafety Level 1 is for the least hazardous biological
agents, and Biosafety Level 4 is for the most hazardous biological agents. Biosafety
Levels for infectious agents are based on the characteristics of the agent (virulence,
ability to cause disease, routes of exposure, biological stability and communicability),
the quantity and concentration of the agent, the procedures to be followed in the
laboratory, and the availability of therapeutic measures and vaccines. Biosafety Level 1
agents pose minimal or no known potential hazards to individuals and the
environment. Biosafety Level 2 agents are considered to be of ordinary potential
hazard and may produce varying degrees of disease through accidental inoculation,
but may be effectively contained by ordinary laboratory techniques and specific
laboratory equipment. Biosafety Level 3 agents pose a more substantial risk, and work
with these agents must be conducted in contained facilities for which airflow is
directed into the laboratory and access is controlled separately from public areas.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-27
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
1. Occupational and public safety is protected by selecting the appropriate biological
and physical containment levels for each biological material handled. Standard
microbiological practices, such as limiting facility access, washing hands after
handling, de-contaminating work surfaces, wearing gloves and other safety
equipment, using biosafety cabinets, and proper disposal reduce risks resulting
from exposure to biohazardous materials.
2. Current state testing, monitoring and disposal regulations, and Genentech’s own
programs pertaining to the management of biohazardous materials (including
infectious agents), further ensure that risks associated with use of biohazardous
substances remain less than significant.
3. Medical wastes are managed by Genentech as a biohazardous material, in
accordance with Section 117635 of the California Health and Safety Code and
with USDHHS guidelines and DHS regulations. Biohazardous medical waste is
generally regulated in the same manner as hazardous waste, except that special
provisions apply to storage, disinfection, containment, transportation and disposal.
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 1D, Disposal of Hazardous Materials: Genentech
disposes of hazardous wastes in compliance with Titles 8, 14, 17 and 22 of the
California Code of Regulations.
1. Spent hazardous materials generated on a daily basis in research, production and
maintenance facilities are placed in special containers and are kept in specially
designated and ventilated accumulation areas. These hazardous wastes are
collected and accumulated in designated and secured areas designed to prevent
accidental release to the environment. Wastes are transported off- site by licensed
hazardous waste transporters to permitted hazardous waste disposal facilities, and
emergency response procedures for all on-site storage sites are included in the
Genentech Hazardous Waste Contingency Plan. Biohazardous wastes are
managed in the same way, though separately.
2. In accordance with strict regulatory guidelines of the Department of Energy, the
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, the US EPA and the California Radiation Control
Law (California Health & Safety Code Sections 114960-114985), Genentech
collects, prepares and packages its radioactive waste. Radioactive waste is then
transported by a radioactive waste broker to a licensed radioactive waste disposal
facility.
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 1E, Hazardous Materials Transport: The CHP and
US DOT strictly regulate the transportation of hazardous materials to and from the site.
Procedures mandated by federal and state laws and regulations including driver
training and licensing, standardized hazard warning placards for vehicles, shipping
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-28
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
manifest requirements and standards for classifying, handling and packaging hazardous
materials, as well as continuation of existing (or equivalent) Genentech programs,
practices and procedures, will ensure that the use, transport or disposal of hazardous
materials does not expose employees, visitors or the nearby public to significant health
or safety risks.
Hazards 2: Implementation of the Project would not
create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment.
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 2A, Off-Site Transportation of Hazardous
Materials: The USDOT Office of Hazardous Materials Safety prescribes strict
regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials, as described in Title 49
of the Code of Federal Regulations, and implemented by Title 13 of the California
Code of Regulations. Transportation of hazardous materials along any City or state
roadways within or near Genentech is also subject to all hazardous materials
transportation regulations established by the California Highway Patrol pursuant to the
California Vehicle Code and the South San Francisco Fire Department (SSFFD).
1. In compliance with these regulations, Genentech’s programs, practices and
procedures specifically govern receipt of hazardous materials. Licensed vendors
bring hazardous materials to and from the facility, and manifests are completed
and maintained by Genentech for all hazardous waste that is transported. The
DTSC maintains copies of Genentech's waste manifests. In conformance with
additional legal requirements, incoming radioactive material is monitored and
recorded for each acquisition. Genentech processes and delivers all incoming
radioactive materials to end users.
2. Section 31303 of the California Code of Regulations requires that when hazardous
materials are transported on state or interstate highways, the highways that offer
the shortest overall transit time possible shall be used. As required by federal and
state laws, all other hazardous materials transportation regulations must be
followed, including USDOT regulations for packaging and handling hazardous
materials to prevent accidental spills of hazardous materials during transit.
Compliance with all applicable federal and state laws, as well as all Genentech
programs, practices and procedures related to the transportation of hazardous materials
will continue to reduce the likelihood and severity of accidents during transit.
Regulatory Requirements Hazards 2B, Hazardous Materials Use, Storage and On-Site
Transportation: Management of risk and minimizing the potential for upset and
accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials is regulated by
numerous federal, State and local laws and regulations.
1. The Cal EPA’s regulations pursuant to the Unified Hazardous Waste and
Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program addresses (among other
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-29
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
matters) a number of programs specifically designed to minimize such risks. These
programs require all businesses that handle hazardous materials to prepare a
Hazardous Materials Release Response Plan and inventory, a Risk Management
and Prevention program, and compliance with Unified Fire Code requirements.
These programs are implemented at the local level, and in South San Francisco,
the San Mateo County Department of Environmental Health (SMCDEH) is the
designated Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) responsible for
implementation of these programs.
2. The California Hazardous Materials Release Response Plans and Inventory Law of
1985 (Business Plan Act) requires that any business that handles hazardous
materials prepare a Business Plan. That Business Plan must include details of the
facility and business conducted at the site, an inventory of hazardous materials
that are handled or stored on site, an emergency response plan and a training
program for safety and emergency response for new employees, with annual
refresher courses.
3. The USDHHS, CDC, NIH and DHS all prescribe containment and handling
practices for use in microbiological, biomedical and animal laboratories. Medical
wastes must be managed as a biohazardous material, in accordance with Section
117635 of the California Health and Safety Code, and the management of
biohazardous materials must comply with USDHHS guidelines and DHS
regulations.
4. The Atomic Energy Act ensures the proper management of source, special nuclear,
and by-product material. The California Radiation Control Law California Health &
Safety Code Sections 114960-114985) is a regulatory program designed to provide
for compatibility with the standards and regulatory programs of the federal
government and integrate an effective system of regulation within the state. These
laws and regulations govern the receipt, storage, use, transportation and disposal
of sources of ionizing radiation (radioactive material), and protect the users of
these materials and the public from radiation hazards.
Hazards 3: Although some Project area facilities are
included on the list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5, implementation of the Project would not
create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment due to the presence of these listed
facilities.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 3, DTSC Deed Restrictions and Enforcement Plan:
The O’Brien site is still subject to deed restrictions and the Agreement for Operations
and Maintenance (which includes a requirement to comply with the Land Use
Covenant Implementation Enforcement Plan). As a result, the following regulatory
controls remain applicable to this site:
1. Activities that may disturb existing groundwater monitoring wells shall not be
permitted without prior review and approval by DTSC.
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-30
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
2. The capped portion of the site may be variously occupied by buildings, paved
with either concrete or asphalt or covered with landscaping or other vegetative
cover, clean soil imported from an off-site location, or with other suitable cover to
mitigate direct exposure.
3. Engineering controls such as wind erosion control and dust suppression must be
implemented during construction activities to minimize or mitigate potential
exposure of contaminated soil.
4. Any contaminated soils that may be brought to the surface by future grading,
excavation, trenching, backfilling or other activity shall be managed in accordance
with all applicable provisions of state and federal laws and regulations, including
the DTSC-approved Site Management Plan and Health and Safety Plan.
5. The Site Management Plan includes administrative controls for construction
workers (including designation of regulated areas, employee training and personal
hygiene practices). Controls include personal protective respiratory equipment for
construction workers, air monitoring to verify the effectiveness of hazard controls
and to document emissions, training of construction employees or persons who
may handle or come in contact with potentially hazardous materials and
collection and analysis of surface soil samples from areas not covered with
structures or a paved surface to verify the integrity of a clean soil cap.
Hazards 4: New construction activities pursuant to the
Project could expose construction workers or
Genentech employees to a significant hazard through
the renovation or demolition of buildings, or
relocation of underground utilities that contain
hazardous materials.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 4A, Discovery of Underground Storage Tanks: All
known on-site storage tanks are above ground and conform to applicable federal, state
and local regulations and are registered and permitted by the South San Francisco Fire
Department. In the event that previously unknown USTs are uncovered or disturbed,
they will be properly closed in place or removed. While removal could pose health
and safety risks, such as the exposure of workers and the public to tank contents or
vapors, these potential risks will be reduced by managing the tank closure process
according to established regulatory guidelines for investigation and closure of USTs,
and for cleanup of sites contaminated by leaking USTs. These regulatory guidelines are
established pursuant to the California EPA’s adopted Unified Hazardous Waste and
Hazardous Materials Management Regulatory Program, as implemented at the local
level by the San Mateo County Department of Environmental Health.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 4B, Asbestos: Asbestos-containing materials are
regulated both as a hazardous air pollutant under the Clean Air Act and as a potential
worker safety hazard under the authority of Cal-OSHA. Any asbestos-containing
materials in structures slated for demolition must be abated in accordance with State
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-31
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
and federal regulations, prior to the start of demolition or renovation activities.
1. Section 19827.5 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that local
agencies not issue demolition or alteration permits until an applicant has
demonstrated compliance with notification requirements under applicable federal
regulations regarding hazardous air pollutants, including asbestos.
2. The BAAQMD is vested by the California legislature with authority to regulate
airborne pollutants, including asbestos, through both inspection and law
enforcement, and is to be notified 10 days in advance of any proposed demolition
or abatement work.
3. State regulations contained in 8 CCR 1529 and 8 CCR 341.6 through 341.14 must
be followed where there is asbestos-related work involving 100 square feet or
more of asbestos-containing material. Asbestos removal contractors must be
certified as such by the Contractors Licensing Board of the State of California.
4. The owner of the property where abatement is to occur must have a hazardous
waste generator number assigned by and registered with the DTSC. The site owner
or responsible party and the transporter of the waste are required to file a
hazardous waste manifest that details the transportation of the material from the
site and its disposal.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 4C, Lead-Based Paint: Both the federal OSHA and
Cal-OSHA regulate worker exposure during construction activities that may disturb
lead-based paint. The Interim Final Rule found in 29 CFR 1926.62 covers construction
work in which employees may be exposed to lead during such activities as demolition,
removal, surface preparation for repainting, renovation, cleanup and routine
maintenance. The OSHA-specified compliance includes respiratory protection,
protective clothing, housekeeping, special high-efficiency filtered vacuums, hygiene
facilities, medical surveillance and training. No minimum level of lead is specified to
activate the provisions of this regulation.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 4D, PCBs: Fluorescent lighting ballasts
manufactured prior to 1978, and electrical transformers, capacitors and generators
manufactured prior to 1977 may contain PCBs. In accordance with the Toxic
Substances Control Act and other federal and state regulations, construction or
demolition activities that may involve such materials must properly handle and dispose
of electrical equipment and lighting ballasts that contain PCBs.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 4E, Construction Dewatering: Pursuant to Section
13263 of the California Water Code, the Regional Water Quality Control Board issues
Waste Discharge Requirements to control discharges (including dewatering during
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-32
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
construction) to land or water. Pursuant to these requirements, permits require
contractors to implement best management practices during construction dewatering
to avoid exposure of employees or construction workers to potentially contaminated
groundwater. These BMPs may include, but are not limited to groundwater testing,
containment of contaminated groundwater in storage tanks for subsequent treatment
and/or disposal, and the provision of release response information. In the unlikely
event that contaminated groundwater is discovered during construction activities,
Genentech’s contractors will follow specific procedures to reduce the risk of exposure.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 4F, Building Demolition: Buildings demolished
during construction activities could have contained biohazardous materials, including
medical wastes, prior to demolition. Genentech's programs, practices and procedures,
and current state testing, monitoring and disposal regulations pertaining to the
management of biohazardous materials (including medical waste) will eliminate or
reduce the potential for biohazardous substances to be present in fixtures or building
materials removed during demolition. Genentech’s radioactive materials license
requires testing and implementation of decontamination and waste handling activities
in accordance with applicable regulations when facilities using radioactive materials
are decommissioned for purposes of renovation or demolition.
Mitigation Measure Hazards 4, Site Assessment: If previously unknown
contamination, underground tanks, containers or stained or odorous soils are
discovered during construction activities, the construction contractor(s) shall stop work
and appropriate investigation, sampling and comparison of data collected with health-
based screening levels and/or consultation with a regulatory oversight agency shall be
conducted to determine if the discovered materials pose a significant risk to the public
or construction workers.
a) If any such materials are discovered that exceed human health screening levels as
noted in DTSC’s HERO HHRA Note 3 criteria for California Human Health
Screening Levels (CHHSLs) and/or Environmental Screening Levels (ESLs), a
remediation plan shall be prepared and submitted to the appropriate regulatory
agency in compliance with all applicable legal requirements, and to ensure the
proper handling and management.
b) Soil remediation methods may include, but are not limited to excavation and on-
site treatment, excavation and off-site treatment, or disposal and/or treatment
without excavation.
c) Remediation alternatives for cleanup of contaminated groundwater could include,
but are not limited to on-site treatment, extraction and off-site treatment, and/or
disposal.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-33
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
d) Construction schedules may need to be modified or delayed to ensure that
construction will not inhibit remediation activities and will not expose the public
or construction workers to significant risks associated with hazardous conditions.
Hazards 5: The Project will not emit hazardous
emissions nor handle hazardous or acutely hazardous
materials, substances or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school, but may handle
such substances within one-quarter mile of a childcare
facility.
See all regulatory requirements and mitigation measures listed pursuant to the routine
transport, use, disposal or storage of hazardous materials (Hazards 1), reasonably
foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials
into the environment (Hazards 2), known hazardous materials sites (Hazards 3), and
construction activities (Hazards 4), above
Less than Significant
Hazards 6: The Project is located within the Airport
Land Use Plan boundaries of San Francisco
International Airport (SFO), but the Project would not
result in a safety hazard for people residing or working
in the Project area. The Project is not located near a
private airstrip.
Regulatory Requirement Hazards 6, FAA Building Height Criteria: Pursuant to the
Project, the maximum heights of new buildings within the Project Area shall comply
with the height regulations and restrictions as established by FAA criteria.
1) Pursuant to these height regulations, new buildings exceeding the FAA Part 77
“imaginary surface” height limits will be subject to FAA review and may be
required to provide marking and/or lighting, or may not be found acceptable to
the FAA if determined to have impacts to the safety or efficiency of operations at
SFO.
2) No new structures will exceed heights that penetrate “critical aeronautical
surfaces”.
Less than Significant
Hazards 7: Implementation of the Project could
impair implementation of, or physically interfere with
an adopted emergency response or emergency
evacuation plan. Implementation of mitigation
measures will ensure this impact remains less than
significant.
Mitigation Measure Hazards 7A, Adequate Roadway Access: To the extent feasible,
the Project applicant shall maintain at least one unobstructed lane in both directions
on the site's roadways. At any time only a single lane is available, Genentech shall
provide a temporary flag-person or other appropriate traffic control to allow travel in
both directions. If construction activities require the complete closure of a roadway
segment, Genentech shall provide appropriate signage indicating alternative routes.
Mitigation Measure Hazards 7B, Lane Closure Request: To ensure adequate access for
emergency vehicles when construction projects may result in temporary lane or
roadway closures, Genentech shall consult with the South San Francisco Police and
Fire Departments to disclose any such temporary lane or roadway closures and to
identify appropriate alternative travel routes.
Less than Significant
Hazard-8: The Project would not expose people or
structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires.
None needed Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-34
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Hydrology and Water Quality
Hydro 1: Future development pursuant to the Project
could result in a violation of water quality standards or
waste discharge requirements or otherwise
substantially degrade water quality.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit and Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan: All new qualifying construction projects pursuant to the
Master Plan Update shall comply with Provision C.6 of the Municipal Regional Permit
(MRP) including filing a Notice of Intent for permit coverage under the Construction
General Permit:
1) To obtain Construction General Permit coverage, construction projects must
include a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that demonstrates
compliance with the City’s Grading Ordinances and other local requirements.
2) The SWPPP must demonstrate implementation of seasonally appropriate and
effective best management practices (BMPs) to prevent construction site discharges
of pollutants into the storm drains, before approval and issuance of local grading
permits.
3) Such construction projects are required to implement the stormwater BMPs
identified by the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention
Program, including plans to address materials and waste management, equipment
management and spill control, grading and earthmoving to prevent erosion,
paving and asphalt work, concrete and mortar applications, painting and paint
removal, landscaping and dewatering.
Regulatory Requirement Hydrology 1B, Permitting Requirements for Dewatering
Discharges: Depending on volume and pollutants of non-stormwater discharges
associated with an individual construction dewatering activity, and the dewatering
methodology to be applied, different regulatory requirements apply. For non-
stormwater dewatering discharges, each individual construction project shall obtain
coverage either under the Construction General Permit, Statewide Low-Threat
Discharge Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) or a site-specific NPDES permit.
Typical dewatering methods permitted pursuant to these regulatory requirements
include:
1) Discharge to a Stormdrain: Authorized non-stormwater may be discharged to a
storm drain under the Construction General Permit. A permit from the local sewer
agency must be obtained prior to such discharge. This approach is generally
appropriate for water that contains some sediment and/or pollutants, but sediment
may require pre-treatment and acceptable pollutants and pollutant levels are
defined by the sewerage agency. Such permits typically include provisions for
fees, requirements for pre-discharge testing and reporting, and establishment of
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-35
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
acceptable discharge limitations/prohibitions typically pertaining to the chemical
quality of the water, discharge flow rates and quantities.
2) Managing Water within the Project Site: Accumulated non-stormwater may be
retained and managed on the construction site, general pursuant to statewide low-
threat discharge Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs). Retained water is
evaporated, infiltrated into the soil, or is used onsite for dust control, irrigation or
other construction-related purposes. This approach is generally appropriate for
water that is free of pollutants, other than sediment.
3) Off-Site Treatment: This option is typically appropriate for water with toxic
pollutants that cannot be discharged elsewhere. Under this approach, water is
hauled off-site for treatment, typically involving a licensed commercial contractor
who can remove, transport and dispose (or treat and recycle) polluted water.
General requirements of this approach include acceptance of a NOI for coverage
under the Construction General Permit, plus chemical testing of water quality and
management of the water as hazardous waste, with applicable regulatory agency
(typically RWQCB) oversight (see also Mitigation Measure Hazards-4: Site
Assessment in the Hazards and Hazardous Waste chapter of this EIR).
4) Site-Specific NPDES Dewatering Permits: For those dewatering activities that
cannot obtain permission to discharge to the local sanitary sewer and where the
discharge cannot be regulated under the Construction General Permit or the
statewide low-threat discharge WDRs, site-specific NPDES Dewatering Permits
may be sought. General requirements for site-specific NPDES dewatering permits
include monitoring and reporting as required by the Regional Board, and
discharge and receiving water requirements (including water quality objectives,
discharge prohibitions and TMDLs) as defined in the Basin Plan and specific
NPDES permit obligations.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1C, Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Management Plan: All new Regulated Projects pursuant to the Master Plan Update will
be required to comply with Provision C.3 of the MRP, including requirements to
incorporate post-construction stormwater control and low-impact development (LID)
measures. Each individual development project must meet Provision C.3 requirements
capable of reducing long-term impacts of development on stormwater quality. Some
combination of the following post-construction stormwater controls will be required to
demonstrate compliance with the hydraulic design criteria of the MRP:
1) Site design may include minimizing impervious surfaces that are directly
connected to the storm drain system, or using landscaping as a drainage feature.
2) Source control measures may include roofed trash enclosures, berms that control
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-36
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
runoff from a pollutant source, use of indoor mats/equipment wash racks that are
connected to the sanitary sewer (where allowed under separate sewer discharge
permits), and regular inspection and cleaning of storm drain inlets.
3) Stormwater treatments may be met by a combination of measures that may
include, but are not limited to bioretention areas, flow-through planter boxes,
infiltration trenches, extended detention basins, green roofs, pervious paving and
grid pavements, rainwater harvesting and subsurface infiltration systems.
Hydro 2: Future development pursuant to the Project
will not substantially decrease groundwater supplies
or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that the project may impeded sustainable
groundwater management of the basin.
None needed Less than Significant
Hydro 3: Future development pursuant to the Project
would not substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river, or through
the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner that
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site, substantially increase the rate or amount of
surface runoff in a manner that would result in
flooding on- or off-site, or create or contribute runoff
water that would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A - Construction General Permit/Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (see above)
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B - Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Management Plan (see above)
Less than Significant
Hydro 4: Future development pursuant to the Project
would not risk release of pollutants due to project
inundation as a result of a flood hazard, tsunami or
seiche.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 4A, National Flood Insurance Program: Executive
Order 11988 is a federal regulation that requires the prevention of uneconomic,
hazardous or incompatible use of floodplains; protection and preservation of the
natural and beneficial floodplain values; and consistency with the standards and
criteria of the National Flood Insurance Program.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 4B, South San Francisco Municipal Code: Chapter
15.56, Section 15.56.140 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code identifies
standards specific to construction in coastal high hazard areas. Developments shall be
elevated above the flood level, anchored and constructed of materials resistant to flood
damage.
Less than Significant
Sea Level Rise: Most of adverse effects of mid-century None required. The effects that potential future sea level rise may have on the Project Not a CEQA Impact
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-37
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
sea level rise at the Genentech Campus will likely be
confined to the 100-foot shoreline setback along the
Bay. This setback restricts Campus development
adjacent to sensitive natural areas such as tidal
wetlands, which also provide for storm surge and
wave dissipation. In the longer term (or under
accelerated and/or more severe weather conditions)
adaptation to sea level rise at the Campus may prove
to be more critical.
is not a CEQA matter. Therefore, analysis of potential sea level rise effects is provided
for informational purposes only, but may also provide context for future City
consideration of appropriate sea level rise adaptation strategies.
Land Use
Land Use 1: The Project would not physically divide
an established community
None needed No Impact
Land Use 2: Implementation of the Project would
modify or change certain land use regulations
applicable to the Project Area, but would not cause a
significant environmental impacts due to a conflict
with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect.
None required. However, to clarify the City’s position regarding consistency with
ALUCP criteria, the following mitigation measure is recommended:
MM Land Use 2, Building Height Limits: Any proposed building within the Project
Area that would exceed FAA notification heights shall file a Notice of Proposed
Construction or Alteration with the FAA.
a) Any structure that exceeds the Horizontal Surface Plane of 163.2 feet above mean
sea level, that otherwise exceeds applicable FAA Part 77 criteria, or which exceed
200 feet above the ground level of its site shall be required to comply with the
findings of an FAA aeronautical study. Structures subject to such FAA review shall
comply with any FAA-recommended alterations in the building design and/or
height, and any recommended marking and lighting of the structure as may be
necessary to be found by the FAA as not posing a hazard to air navigation.
b) The maximum height of new buildings within the Project area shall be the lower
of the height shown on the SFO Critical Aeronautical Surfaces Map, or the
maximum height determined by the FAA as being “not a hazard to air navigation”
based on an aeronautical study.
c) The Project proponent shall provide documentation to the City Planning Division
demonstrating that the FAA has issued a ‘Determination of No Hazard to Air
Navigation” when such determination is applicable.
Mitigation Measure Geology 2 - Geotechnical Requirements for Hillside Opportunity
Sites (see above): This MM specifically requires site-specific geotechnical studies to be
conducted for each new development at hillside Opportunity Sites, with
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-38
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
implementation of site-specific recommendations as part of detailed plans for
subsequent development.
Land Use 3: The Project would not conflict with any
applicable habitat conservation plan or natural
community conservation plan.
None needed No Impact
Noise
Noise 1: Construction activities pursuant to the Project
could generate a substantial temporary increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in
excess of noise levels that exceed the noise standards
established in SSFMC Section 8.32.030.
Mitigation Measure Noise 1A, Construction Period BMPs: The following mitigation
measures are recommended for construction activity within the Project Area that is
within 50 feet of an adjacent off-site property (i.e., where construction noise may
exceed the 90dBA limit of the SSF Municipal Code). The Project applicant shall
require, by contract specifications, that best management practices (BMPs) for
construction activity be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise
levels:
a) Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction, notification must be
provided to surrounding land uses disclosing the construction schedule, including
the various types of activities that would be occurring throughout the duration of
the construction period.
b) Maintain all construction equipment to minimize noise emissions. All construction
equipment shall be equipped with mufflers and sound control devices (e.g., intake
silencers and noise shrouds) that are in good condition and appropriate for the
equipment.
c) Place stationary noise- and vibration-generating construction equipment away
from sensitive uses where feasible.
d) Construction staging areas and operation of earthmoving and or other noise-
generating or vibration-generating equipment should be located as far away from
noise sensitive sites as possible.
e) Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines should be strictly prohibited.
f) Schedule high noise-producing activities during times when they would be least
likely to interfere with the noise-sensitive activities of the adjacent land uses, when
possible.
g) For any new development pursuant to the Project that may require deep
foundations, consider the use of augured-cast-in-place piles or drilled shafts, rather
than use of impact or vibratory pile drivers.
h) Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which many include,
Significant and
Unavoidable
Construction noise
is typically not
considered
significant if its
duration is for a
period of less than
one year,
construction noise is
temporary and
episodic in nature,
and mitigation
measures presented
include all
reasonable and
feasible methods to
reduce construction
noise effects.
However, since the
details of
construction activity
cannot be known in
advance, this impact
is conservatively
considered
significant and
unavoidable
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-39
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
but are not limited to, noise barriers or noise blankets
i) The construction contractor shall provide the name and telephone number of an
on-site construction liaison. If construction noise is found to be intrusive to
surrounding properties (i.e., if complaints are received), the construction liaison
shall investigate the source of the noise and require that reasonable measures be
implemented to correct the problem.
Mitigation Measure Noise 1B, Truck Routes: The Project applicant shall require, by
contract specifications, that heavily loaded trucks used during construction be routed
away from noise-sensitive and vibration-sensitive uses to the extent possible.
Genentech will also continue to prepare and implement a Noise Attenuation and
Logistics Plan for any new development that is within 50 feet of an existing Genentech
building, demonstrating consistency with all applicable OSHA requirements for safe
workspaces, and any other private Genentech-based noise standards for a healthy
workplace.
Noise 2: Operational activities associated with the
Project would not generate a substantial permanent
increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
Project in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies.
Mitigation Measure Noise 2, Mechanical and Industrial Equipment Noise Reduction
Requirements: The project applicant shall analyze or provide documentation of future
exterior mechanical or industrial equipment to determine if the equipment would
exceed applicable operational noise standards. If so, noise control measures must be
provided to meet the City’s requirements. Typical noise control measures include
barriers, enclosures, silencers and acoustical louvers at vent openings. Prior to
issuance of any building permits, the project applicant shall submit a report verifying
that noise levels generated by project mechanical equipment are no greater than
applicable noise standards at receiving properties.
Less than Significant
Noise 3: C Construction activities pursuant to the
Project would not generate excessive ground-borne
vibration, but could adversely affect vibration-sensitive
equipment and persons within the Project Area.
Mitigation Measure Noise 3A, Pre-Construction Survey: Prior to the commencement
of ground clearing activities, the project applicant shall verify that:
a) no heavy construction activity that may generate a PPV of more than 0.10
inches/second at 25 feet would occur within 10 feet of an adjacent, non-
Genentech building, and that
b) no heavy construction activity that may generate a PPV of more than 0.20
inches/second at 25 feet would occur within 20 feet of an adjacent, non-
Genentech building
c) If no such construction activity would occur within these specified distances from
an adjacent, off-site building, then construction activities would not exceed the
building damage threshold, and construction may begin with no further action
required for vibration effects.
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-40
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Mitigation Measure 3B, Changes to Construction Plans: If heavy construction activity
is proposed at distances closer to an adjacent, non-Genentech building than those
distances prescribed in Mitigation Measure Noise 3A, such that vibration impacts may
result in damage to and adjacent building, the project applicant shall adjust the
construction plan such that it would not generate vibration levels at the adjacent
building that exceed the building damage threshold of 0.50 inches per second PPV.
Genentech will also continue to prepare and implement a Noise Attenuation and
Logistics Plan for any new development that is within 20 feet of an existing Genentech
building, demonstrating consistency with all applicable OSHA requirements for safe
workspaces, and any other private Genentech-based noise standards for a healthy
workplace.
Mitigation Measure Noise 1A, Construction Period BMPs (see above)
Mitigation Measure Noise 1B, Truck Routes (see above)
Noise 4: Operational activities pursuant to the Project
would not generate excessive ground-borne vibration,
and would not adversely affect vibration-sensitive
equipment or persons within the Project Area.
None required Less than Significant
Noise 5: Traffic generated by the Project would result
in increased traffic volumes that would increase local
ambient traffic noise levels by greater than 3 dBA
CNEL at locations that would also meet or exceed 65
dBA CNEL, but the Project’s increased traffic noise
would not adversely affect existing noise-sensitive
receptors.
None needed. Less than Significant
Noise 6: The Project would not expose people
working in the Project Area to excessive noise levels
due to proximity to airport-related noise sources.
None needed. Less than Significant
Population, Housing and Employment
Pop/Emp. 1: The Project will result in a substantial
increase in local South San Francisco employment,
but will not result in employment growth beyond that
contemplated in the City, and will not induce
population growth beyond that contemplated in the
Regulatory Requirement Pop. /Emp. 1: Affordable Housing Commercial Linkage Fees:
Each new development project within the Genentech Campus will be required to pay
the City’s established commercial linkage fee to mitigate impacts on affordable
housing in the City.
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-41
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
county or the region.
Pop/Emp. 2: Implementation of the Project would not
displace any existing housing that would necessitate
construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
None required Less than Significant
Pop/Emp. 3: Implementation of the Project would not
displace substantial numbers of people.
None required Less than Significant
Public Services
Public Services 1: The Project would increase the
number of employees in the Project Area over time,
gradually increasing the demand for police within the
Project Area. However, the Project is and will
continue to be adequately served with police service
from existing facilities or new facilities to be
constructed per citywide efforts, and impacts related
to police services would be less than significant.
Regulatory Requirement Services 1, Public Safety Impact Fees: Genentech will be
required to pay the City of South San Francisco’s Public Safety Impact Fees as
applicable at the time of new construction.
Less than Significant
Public Services 2: The Project would increase the
number of employees in the Project Area over time,
gradually increasing the demand for fire and
emergency medical services within the Project Area.
However, the Project is and will continue to be
adequately served with fire and emergency medical
service from existing facilities or new facilities to be
constructed per citywide efforts, and impacts related
to fire and emergency medical services would be less
than significant.
Regulatory Requirement Services 2A, Compliance with Fire Code: Individual projects
pursuant to the Master Plan Update will 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.
Regulatory Requirement Services 1, Public Safety Impact Fees: Genentech will be
required to pay the City of South San Francisco’s Public Safety Impact Fees as
applicable at the time of new construction.
Less than Significant
Public Services 3: The Project would increase the
number of employees in the Project Area over time,
gradually increasing the demand for recreational space
within or near the Project Area. However, the existing
Campus contains substantial public and private open
space areas, and the Project includes plans for
increasing open spaces with plazas, pathways, and
Regulatory Requirement Services 3, Parkland Acquisition and Construction Fees:
Genentech will be required to pay Parkland Acquisition and Construction fees
pursuant to Chapter 8.67 of the SSF Municipal Code.
Any changes or additions to the Bay Trail improvements within the Genentech
Campus will be subject to BCDC consideration and approval of amended permit
conditions. Through on-site provision of recreational opportunities, payment of in-lieu
fees to support off-site recreational opportunities as required by SSF Municipal Code,
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-42
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
common open space to serve new employees. Impacts
related to recreational open space would be less than
significant.
and required BCDC jurisdictional permit approval processes, the Project will not result
in significant environmental impacts related to parks or recreation facilities.
Traffic and Circulation
Transp 1: The Project would contribute traffic to
intersections in the Project vicinity that would result in
conflicts with applicable plans, ordinances or policies
that establish measures of effectiveness for intersection
levels of service (LOS) or queuing at twenty (20) of the
27 traffic study intersections.
Regulatory Requirement Transportation 1A - Assumed Signal Timing Adjustments:
The Project Sponsor shall pay South San Francisco’s East of 101 Transportation Impact
Fees, representing their fair-share contribution toward the following traffic signal
timing adjustments already included in the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee Program:
a) Airport Boulevard/Sister Cities Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard (#1). Adjust the
signal timing at the intersection to allow the southbound right-turn movement to
overlap with the eastbound left turn movement. This timing adjustment would
improve intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D. (LTS)
b) Dubuque Avenue/101 NB off-ramp/Oyster Pt. Boulevard (#2). Adjust the signal
timing at the intersection to provide additional green time for the eastbound
movement in the AM, and to provide additional green time for the westbound
movement in the PM. This signal timing would reduce the queue compared to the
existing conditions. The queue would still exceed available storage space, but the
Project would not further extend queues beyond existing conditions. However,
this intersection is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City cannot ensure
this mitigation is implemented. (conservatively SU)
c) Gateway Boulevard/East Grand Avenue (#15). Adjust the signal timing at this
intersection to convert the eastbound left turn phase from a lagging phase to a
leading phase. This timing adjustment would reduce delay to an acceptable LOS
D. (LTS)
d) East Grand Avenue/Littlefield Avenue (#23): Optimize the signal timing, allowing
the northbound right-turn movement to overlap with the westbound left-turn
movement, and change the existing northbound through/left-turn lane to allow
northbound through/left/right turn movements. These measures would improve
intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D in the AM peak hour. (LTS)
Regulatory Requirement Transportation 1B - East of 101 Transportation Impact Fee
Improvements: The Project Sponsor shall pay South San Francisco’s East of 101
Transportation Impact Fees, representing their fair-share contribution toward the
following intersection improvements already included in the East of 101 Traffic Impact
Fee Program:
Significant and
Unavoidable
Regulatory
requirements and/or
mitigation measures
have been identified
that are capable of
reducing impacts at
13 of the 20 affected
intersections, but no
feasible or certain
improvements have
been identified as
capable of reducing
impacts to a less
than significant level
at 7 affected study
intersections.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-43
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
a) Oyster Point Boulevard/Eccles Avenue (#6). Add an eastbound right-turn lane and
provide a northbound configuration that includes a northbound right-turn lane, a
northbound left-turn lane and a 100-foot northbound left-turn pocket, in
conjunction with optimized signal timing. Because the addition of an eastbound
right-turn lane would lengthen pedestrian crossing distances and overlap with an
existing bike lane, a pedestrian refuge in the median and expanded green bike
lane (conflict zone) markings should also be included. This measure would result
in an acceptable LOS B in the AM peak hour. (LTS)
b) Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive (#7). Extend the double northbound left-turn
lanes to approximately 200 feet, add an eastbound right-turn pocket, add a second
northbound left-turn lane, and adjust the signal timing to allow the eastbound right
and northbound left movements to overlap. This measure would improve
intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D in both the AM and PM peak
hours. (LTS)
c) Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue (#12): Add a second southbound left-turn lane
and convert the southbound right-turn lane to a through/right lane. This measure
would reduce delay and improve intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D
in the AM peak hour. However, the improvements would not reduce the length of
the southbound left turn queue, and as such the queuing impact would be
significant and unavoidable. (SU)
d) East Grand Avenue/Harbor Way/Forbes Boulevard (#16): Add a westbound
through lane, an eastbound right-turn lane, an eastbound through lane, and time-
of-day geometry changes for northbound and southbound approaches. Because
these improvements would lengthen crosswalk distances and exacerbate conflicts
with bicyclists along East Grand Avenue and Forbes Boulevard, the mitigation
should incorporate pedestrian refuge islands, bicycle conflict zone markings and
consider the removal of slip lanes. This measure would decrease delay to an
acceptable LOS D in both AM and PM peak hours. (LTS)
e) East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue (#17): Install a traffic signal, including a
protected southbound left-turn movement. This measure would improve
intersection operations to acceptable LOS B in the PM peak hour. (LTS)
f) East Grand Avenue/DNA Way (#18): Install a traffic signal and add an additional
eastbound left turn lane. This measure would improve intersection operations to
an acceptable LOS B in the AM peak hour and LOS C in the PM peak hour. (LTS)
g) Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue (#19): Widen the
westbound approach to consist of three dedicated left turn lanes, one through
lane, and one shared through-right lane. This measure would reduce both queuing
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-44
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
and vehicular delay to an acceptable LOS D in both the AM and PM peak hours.
(LTS)
Mitigation Measure Transportation 1: Additions to East of 101 Transportation Impact
Fee Program: The Project applicant shall pay its fair-share toward the following
intersection improvements by either; 1) fully funding the following improvement
subject to fee credits if the improvement is subsequently included in the City’s CIP
update; or 2) paying the City’s Transportation Impact Fees if the City has included
these improvements in its Capital Improvement Program (CIP) prior to issuance of
building permits for development that triggers these mitigation improvements:
a) 101 SB/Oyster Pt. Boulevard off Ramp (#4). Add an additional eastbound through
lane, and change the signal phasing to implement an overlap phase for the
northeast-bound right turn movement. These measures would reduce queues to
levels not exceeding existing conditions. However, this intersection is under the
jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City cannot ensure this mitigation is implemented.
(conservatively SU)
b) Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue (#8): Install a traffic signal with optimized
signal timing. This measure would improve intersection operations to an
acceptable LOS A in the AM and PM peak hours. (LTS with MM)
c) Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard (#9): Adjust the existing signal timing and extend the
southbound left turn pocket to 500 feet. This measure would partially mitigate the
impact by decreasing delay, but the intersection would continue to operate at an
unacceptable LOS F during the AM peak hour. (SU)
d) Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/ US-101 SB Off-Ramp (#10). Adjusting the signal
timing to lengthen northbound through and eastbound right phases. This timing
adjustment would improve intersection operations to an acceptable LOS C in the
PM peak hour. However, this signal is operated by Caltrans and requests to
modify signal timing may not be approved. As such, this impact is conservatively
assumed to be significant and unavoidable. (conservatively SU)
e) South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard/Mitchell Avenue (#20). Separate the
existing shared northbound through/right lane into one northbound through lane
and a northbound right turn lane, add one westbound through lanes, one
eastbound right turn lane, one eastbound left turn lane and one southbound right
turn lane. These improvements would lengthen crosswalk distances and
exacerbate conflicts with bicyclists along Airport Boulevard and Gateway
Boulevard; consequently, median pedestrian refuges and green bicycle conflict
zone markings should be added. This measure decreases delay to an acceptable
LOS C during the AM peak hour and acceptable LOS D during the PM peak hour,
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-45
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
and reduces queuing to an acceptable level. These improvements are only
partially included the East of 101 Transportation Impact Fee Program. (LTS with
MM)
f) Mitchell Road/Harbor Way (#24): Install a traffic signal at this intersection, add a
250-foot eastbound left turn lane and a 100-foot northbound left turn lane and
optimize the signal timing. This measure would improve intersection operations to
LOS B in the AM peak hour and LOS A in the PM peak hour. (LTS with MM)
g) Utah Avenue/Harbor Way (#25): Add a traffic signal at this intersection and
optimize signal timing. This measure would improve intersection operations to
LOS A in both the AM and PM peak hours. (LTS with MM)
Transp 2: Although the Project would generate more
than 100 peak hour trips onto the Congestion
Management Program roadway network, it would not
resulting in conflicts with applicable plans, ordinances
or policies that establish measures for effective levels
of service at freeway ramp locations.
None needed
Consistent with C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is
consistent with, and exceeds City requirements. That TDM program will further reduce
its contribution of trips on the CMP network, including its contributions of traffic to
freeway ramps.
Less than Significant
Transp 3: The Project would generate more than 100
peak hour trips onto the Congestion Management
Program roadway network, resulting in conflicts with
applicable plans, ordinances or policies that establish
measures for effective levels of service along two
freeway segments (southbound US-101 north of
Oyster Point Boulevard and northbound US-101 south
of Produce Avenue).
There are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts to freeway segments due
to constrained right-of-way and a corresponding inability to add traffic capacity or
reduce vehicular delay.
Consistent with C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is
consistent with and exceeds City requirements. That TDM program will serve to
reduce its otherwise greater contribution of trips on the CMP network, including
increased traffic on US-101 freeway segments.
Significant and
Unavoidable
Transp 4: The Project’s on-site vehicle circulation
system would not present a design hazard.
None required Less than Significant
Transp 5: The Project would not conflict with a
program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities.
None needed. Less than Significant
Transp 6: The Project would contribute to cumulative
traffic levels that would result in conflicts with
applicable plans, ordinances or policies that establish
measures of effectiveness for intersection levels of
service (LOS) at 22 intersections.
Mitigation Measure Transportation 6A: Implement Existing plus Project Measures.
Pursuant to regulatory requirements and mitigation measures identified under Existing
plus Project conditions, the Project applicant shall pay its fair-share toward the
following intersection improvements by either; 1) fully funding the following
improvement subject to fee credits if the improvement is subsequently included in the
Significant and
Unavoidable
Mitigation measures
identify
improvements that
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-46
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Mitigation measures identify improvements that could
be made at 7 of the 22 affected intersections, but 4 of
these improvements do not currently have an
identified funding source. No feasible improvements
have been identified as being capable of reducing
impacts to less than significant levels under the
Cumulative plus Project scenario at 15 affected study
intersections.
City’s CIP update; or 2) paying the City’s Transportation Impact Fees if the City has
included these improvements in its Capital Improvement Program (CIP) prior to
issuance of building permits for development that triggers these mitigation
improvements. These Existing plus Project improvements also improve traffic
conditions under the Cumulative plus Project condition, as indicated below:
a) Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue (#8): Implement Regulatory Requirement
Transportation 1(d), which provides for installation of a traffic signal with
optimized signal timing. This measure would improve Cumulative intersection
operations to an acceptable LOS B in the AM and LOS C in the PM peak hour.
(LTS)
b) Grand Avenue/Littlefield Avenue (#23): Implement Mitigation Measure
Transportation 1(b), which provides for an adjustment to the signal timing to allow
the northbound right turn phase to overlap with the westbound left turn phase.
This measure would reduce Cumulative delay to LOS D in the AM peak hour.
(LTS with MM)
c) Mitchell Road/Harbor Way (#24): Implement Mitigation Measure Transportation
1(f), which provides for installation of a traffic signal at this intersection, and
adding an additional 250-foot eastbound left turn pocket as well as a 100-foot
northbound left turn pocket. These improvements would improve Cumulative
intersection operations to LOS D in the AM peak hour and LOS B in the PM peak
hour. (LTS with MM)
Mitigation Measure Transportation 6B: Additions to East of 101 Transportation
Impact Fee Program: If the City includes the following improvements in its East of 101
Transportation Impact Fee Program and Capital Improvement Program (CIP), the
Project applicant shall pay its fair-share toward these intersection improvements by
paying the City’s Transportation Impact Fees:
a) Airport Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard (#1): Add overlap phases for the
southbound right and northbound right movements, and optimizing signal timing.
This measure would improve intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D.
However, this mitigation measure would not reduce the length of the southbound
left turn vehicle queue to an acceptable level. There are no other feasible
mitigations at this location. (SU)
b) Dubuque Avenue/US-101 Ramps (#3): Change the eastbound through-right lane to
a left-through-right lane, introduce an overlap phase for the southbound right turn
movement and optimize the signal timing. This measure would reduce delay to
achieve LOS D during the AM and PM peak hour, and would reduce eastbound
left/through queue length to an acceptable level in the PM peak hour. (LTS with
could be made at 7
of the 22 affected
intersections, but 4
of these
improvements do
not currently have
an identified
funding source. No
feasible
improvements have
been identified as
being capable of
reducing impacts to
less than significant
levels under the
Cumulative plus
Project scenario at
15 affected study
intersections.
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-47
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
MM, conservatively SU)
c) Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (#4): Increase cycle length to 160
seconds, providing an overlap phase for the northeast-bound right turn movement,
and optimizing timing splits. These changes would decrease delay and improve
operations to an acceptable level of service in the AM peak hour, but would not
improve cumulative operations to an acceptable level of service in the PM peak
hour. This measure would also not reduce queuing to acceptable lengths. (SU)
d) Airport Boulevard/Miller Avenue/US-101 SB Off-Ramp (#10): Adjust the signal
timing to lengthen the westbound green time. This measure would improve
cumulative intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D in the PM peak hour.
However, this intersection is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the City cannot
ensure this mitigation is implemented. (SU)
e) Dubuque Avenue/Grand Avenue (#11): Adjust the signal timing to lengthen the
westbound green time. This measure would improve cumulative intersection
operations to an acceptable LOS D in the PM peak hour. (LTS with MM,
conservatively SU)
f) Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue (#19). Modify the signal
timing. This measure would decrease delay but would not improve cumulative
operations to an acceptable level of service. There are no additional feasible
mitigations at this intersection. (SU)
g) South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (#20). Update the signal timing. This
measure would decrease delay but would not improve cumulative operations to
an acceptable level of service. There are no additional feasible mitigations at this
intersection. (SU)
h) South Airport Boulevard/Utah Avenue (#22): Separate the westbound left turn lane
into one westbound left and one westbound through lane, and adjust the signal
timing to allow the northbound right and westbound left movements to overlap in
the AM peak hour. This improvement would reduce cumulative delay, but would
not achieve an acceptable level of service in the AM peak hour. In the PM peak
hour, changing configuration of the westbound approach would reduce delay to
LOS D. There are no additional feasible mitigations at this intersection. (SU)
i) Utah Avenue/Harbor Way (#25): Add a traffic signal at this intersection, and
reconfigure the approaches to add one eastbound left turn pocket and one
westbound left-turn pocket, and convert the existing shared westbound through-
right lane to a right turn lane. This measure would improve intersection operations
to LOS B in the AM and PM peak hours.(LTS with MM, conservatively SU)
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-48
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
j) Westbound Ramp/South Airport Boulevard (#26). Extending cycle length and
optimizing the signal timing at this location would improve cumulative
intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D in the PM peak hour, but would
not result in decreased queue lengths on the southbound right turn movement.
(SU)
k) I-380 Eastbound Ramp/South Airport Boulevard (#27): Extend the cycle length and
optimize the signal timing at this location. This measure would improve
intersection operations to an acceptable LOS D in the PM peak hour. (LTS with
MM, conservatively SU)
Transp 7: The Project would generate more than 100
peak hour trips onto the Congestion Management
Program roadway network, contributing to cumulative
traffic levels that would conflict with applicable plans,
ordinances or policies that establish measures for
effective levels of service at two nearby freeway
interchanges (US-101/Oyster Point Boulevard and US-
101/Produce Avenue).
There are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts to freeway interchanges.
The northbound freeway on-ramp at Oyster Point Boulevard has a constrained right-of-
way, and the Produce Avenue northbound off-ramp also has constrained right-of-way
and a lack of capacity on surface roadways to accommodate more exiting vehicles
Consistent with C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is
consistent with and exceeds City requirements. That TDM program will serve to
reduce its otherwise greater contribution of trips on the CMP network, including its
contributions of traffic to freeway ramps.
Significant and
Unavoidable
Transp 10: The Project would generate more than 100
peak hour trips onto the Congestion Management
Program roadway network, contributing to cumulative
traffic levels that would conflict with applicable plans,
ordinances or policies that establish measures for
effective levels of service on the freeway at 7 freeway
segments (northbound US-101 north of Oyster Point
Boulevard; southbound US-101 north of Oyster Point
Boulevard; northbound US-101 between Oyster Point
Boulevard and Grand Avenue; southbound US-101
between Oyster Point Boulevard and Grand Avenue;
northbound US-101 between Grand Avenue and
Produce Avenue; southbound US-101 between Grand
Avenue and Produce Avenue; and northbound US-
101, south of Produce Avenue).
As there are no feasible mitigation measures for these impacts to freeway segment due
to constrained right of way on US-101.
Consistent with C/CAG guidelines, the Project will implement a TDM program that is
consistent with and exceeds City requirements. That TDM program will serve to
reduce its otherwise greater contribution of trips on the CMP network, including
increased traffic on US-101 freeway segments.
Significant and
Unavoidable
Utilities and Service Systems
Utilities 1: The Project’s water demands would not Regulatory Requirement Utilities 1, CalGreen Water Conservation Standards: All Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-49
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
exceed water supplies available to serve the Project,
and there is sufficient water supplies to serve the
project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dray and multiple dry
years.
new development pursuant to the Master Plan (the Project) are subject to the water
conservation requirements of the 2016 California Green Building Standards Code,
Nonresidential (CalGreen, 2016), or as may be amended. These requirements, as
pertaining to water conservation, include:
1) Installation of separate sub-meters or metering devices for each individual leased,
rented, or other tenant space within the building projected to consume more than
100 gal/day, including, but not limited to spaces used for laboratories, and for
water supplied to sub-systems used for make-up water for cooling towers,
evaporative coolers, and steam and hot-water boilers. The intent of this code
requirement is to reduce potable water use in new or altered buildings by making
building owners and/or tenants aware of their daily potable water consumption to
encourage voluntary reduction.
2) Install water conserving plumbing fixtures (water closets and urinals) and fittings
(faucets and showerheads) that meet maximum allowable flow rates. The intent of
this code regulation is to reduce the overall use of potable water within the
building.
3) Compliance with mandatory Model Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance
(MWELO) measures for outdoor water use in landscape areas, or a local water
efficient landscape ordinance that is at least as effective in conserving water. The
intent of this code requirement is to reduce the overall outdoor water used for
irrigation for both new landscaping areas and rehabilitated landscape projects.
Utilities 2: The Project would not require or result in
the relocation or construction of new or expanded
water conveyance facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 2, Water Service Connections: Genentech will be
responsible for connecting new buildings pursuant to the Project to existing or new
Cal Water service connections. All such water service connections will be required to
adhere to applicable Code requirements, and these requirements will be incorporated
into individual development project designs and construction.
Less than Significant
Utilities 3: The Project will not require or result in the
relocation or construction of new or expanded
wastewater treatment facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 3, Wastewater Discharge Permit: New
development pursuant to the Project will be required to obtain a wastewater discharge
permit from the Environmental Compliance Supervisor of the City of South San
Francisco. Each new project shall comply with all requirements or limitations of that
permit as cited in the City's Wastewater Discharge Ordinance, Municipal Code,
Environmental Compliance Program or any applicable State and federal laws. New
development projects pursuant to the Project will be classified as institutional,
commercial or industrial users, depending on the types of discharge from the facility.
New industrial uses will be further classified as either Categorical Industrial User (an
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-50
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
industrial user subject to categorical pretreatment standards or categorical standards),
or as a Significant Industrial User (designated as such because the industrial use has a
reasonable potential for adversely affecting operation of the treatment plant or to
violate pretreatment standard or requirements).
1) New uses designated by the City of South San Francisco as Categorical Industrial
Users will be required to develop and implement a plan designed to reduce the
amount of pollutants of concern (copper, cyanide, selenium, mercury,
perchloroethylene and tributyltin) discharged into the sanitary and the storm water
sewer systems. Certain industrial uses within the Project Area may also require a
pH neutralization system for pretreatment of industrial process wastewater
discharge.
2) New uses designated by the City of South San Francisco as Significant Industrial
Users will be subject to additional requirements or limitations as may be cited in
the City's Wastewater Discharge Ordinance, Municipal Code, Environmental
Compliance Program or any applicable State and federal Laws. Effluent sampling
and monitoring is required to verify compliance with applicable regulations and
limitations.
Utilities 4: The Project will not result in a
determination by the wastewater treatment provider
(the City of South San Francisco) that it does not have
adequate capacity to serve the Project’s wastewater
treatment and disposal demands, in addition to its
existing commitments.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 4, East of 101 Sewer Fees: New development within
the Project Area will contribute to East of 101 sewer improvements in accordance with
existing requirements of the East of 101 Sewer Fee contribution formula, established
by Resolution 97-2002 (or as that resolution may be amended). These fees represent
“fair-share” payments towards the availability of sewer collection, treatment and
disposal capacity for the Project, and apply to all discretionary land use approvals,
including Administrative Review, Minor Use Permits and Conditional Use Permits.
Less than Significant
Utilities 5: The Project would not require or result in
the relocation or construction of new or expanded
wastewater collection facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 5, Sewer Lateral Construction: Pursuant to South
San Francisco Municipal Code, Chapter 14.14 Sewer Lateral Construction,
Maintenance and Inspection, as new development occurs within the Project Area,
Genentech will be responsible for constructing, operating and maintaining all
individual building sanitary sewer laterals from the building to the City sanitary sewer
main.
Mitigation Measure Utilities 5, Detailed Hydraulic Analysis and System Upgrades:
Subsequent detailed hydraulic analysis will ultimately be needed pursuant to
individual development projects that rely on the segment of sewer line contributing to
Pump Station #8. The results of this detailed analysis will determine whether and
when the capacity of these wastewater collection facilities may need to be increased to
meet demand. The wastewater collection system will be upgraded as necessary to
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-51
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
accommodate future growth.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 4, East of 101 Sewer Fees (see above)
Util-6: The Project will not require or result in the
relocation or construction of new or expanded storm
water drainage facilities, the construction or relocation
of which could cause significant environmental
effects.
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit/Stormwater
Pollution Prevention Plan: (see further detail in the Hydrology chapter of this EIR).
Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B, Provision C.3 Requirements/Stormwater
Management Plan: (see further detail in the Hydrology chapter of this EIR).
Less than Significant
Utilities 7: Future development pursuant to the Project
will not generate solid waste in excess of State or local
standards or in excess of the capacity of the local
infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of
solid waste reduction goals. The Project will comply
with federal, state and local management and
reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 7A, Construction Waste Management Plan:
Individual development projects pursuant to the Project will be required to develop
and implement a Construction Waste Management Plan, pursuant to City Ordinance
Chapter 15.60 Recycling and Diversion of Debris from Construction and Demolition.
Pursuant to these requirements, each new construction project must:
1) Direct one hundred percent of inert solids to reuse or recycling facilities approved
by the city, and either:
2) Take all mixed construction and demolition debris to a recycling facility and take
all sorted or crushed construction and demolition debris to approved facilities, or
3) Separate by source all non-inert materials such as cardboard and paper, wood,
metals, green waste, new gypsum wallboard, tile, porcelain fixtures, and other
easily recycled materials, and direct them to recycling facilities approved by the
city, and taking the remainder to a facility for disposal. In this option, calculations
must be provided to show that the minimum amount of debris as specified by
Section 4.408 of Chapter 4 of CALGreen has been diverted.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 7B, Recyclable Materials: Pursuant to South San
Francisco Municipal Code, section 8.28.070, persons desiring to participate in the
recycling materials collection service program shall prepare and separate recyclable
materials from other solid waste as required by the collection contract, so as to
constitute source separated recyclable materials, and thereafter place the source
separated recyclable materials within receptacles.
1) Each type of source separated recyclable material shall be placed in the receptacle
designated for such purpose, and shall not be mixed with any other solid waste,
including any other type of recyclable material.
2) Receptacles containing recyclable materials for multiple unit residential properties,
commercial and industrial and/or institutional properties shall be of a size and
serviceability agreed to by the authorized recycling agent and placed at the
designated collection location.
Less than Significant
Chapter 2: Executive Summary
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 2-52
Table 2-1: Summary of Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Potentially Significant Impacts Regulatory Requirements / Mitigation Measures Resulting Level of
Significance
Utilities 8: The Project would result in an incremental
increase in the demand for gas and electrical power.
However, the Project will not result in potentially
significant environmental impacts due to a wasteful,
inefficient or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources during project construction or operation, or
conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for
renewable energy or energy efficiency.
Regulatory Requirement Utilities 8, Energy Conservation: All new development
pursuant to the Project will be required to comply with all applicable regulatory
requirements related to energy, including but not limited to the standards of Title 24 of
the California Code of Regulations and the newest California Green Building Standards
Code, as applicable, which incorporate energy-conserving design and construction
requirements.
Less than Significant
Agriculture and Forest Resources
Agriculture 1: The Project would not convert
designated farmland under the Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program, nor would it conflict with any
existing agricultural zoning or a Williamson Act
contract, nor would it involve any changes to the
environment that would result in the conversion of
designated farmland.
None needed No Impact
Agriculture 2: The Project would not conflict with
existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forestland or
timberland, nor would it result in the loss of or
conversion of forestland to non-forest uses.
None needed No Impact
Mineral Resources
Minerals 1: The Project would not have a significant
adverse impact on the availability of a known mineral
resource or a locally important mineral resource
recovery site.
None needed No Impact