HomeMy WebLinkAbout21 - CEQA Conclusions
Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR Page 21-1
21
CEQA Conclusions
Section Guidelines, Section 15126 and 15130 require that, “all aspects of a project be considered when
evaluating its impact on the environment including planning, acquisition, development and operation. The
subjects listed below shall be discussed . . . , preferably is separate sections or paragraphs of the EIR. If they
are not discussed separately, the EIR shall include a table showing where each of the subjects are discussed:”
● Significant environmental effects (including cumulative effects) of the Project
● Mitigation measures proposed to minimize significant effects
● Significant environmental effects (including cumulative effects) that cannot be avoided if the Project
is implemented
● Growth-inducing effects of the Project
● Alternatives to the Project, and
● Significant irreversible environmental changes that would be involved in the Project should it be
implemented
Each of these subjects is discussed in this EIR. The following summary identifies where in this EIR these
subjects are addressed, and provides a brief conclusion or summary of those subjects.
Summary of Significant Impacts
Chapter 5 through 19 of this EIR each include a description of the existing (or baseline) physical setting, the
thresholds of significance for assessing potentially significant environmental impacts, and an identification of
individual significant effects of the Project. Impacts are identified by their levels of significance based on the
following categories:
● those effects found to have No Impact (no noticeable adverse effect on the environment)
● Less than Significant Impacts (an environmental effect that would not exceed the threshold of
significance),
● impacts that are Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures (impacts that can be reduced to a
less than significant level with implementation of recommended mitigation measures), and
● Significant and Unavoidable Impacts (impacts that exceed the threshold of significance and cannot
be avoided or reduced through implementation of identified mitigation measures)
Qualitative and location-based environmental effects have been assessed in this EIR for certain topics. These
types of environmental effects identify where new development or redevelopment activities pursuant to the
Project may adversely affect location-based or site-specific environmental resource (e.g., aesthetics,
biological resources, cultural and historic resources, geology and soils, hazards and hydrology). Additionally,
the buildout scenario of the Project has been used to generate employment estimates and land use
projections for more quantitative analyses. Quantitative impacts have been identified for a number of
growth-based environmental topics (e.g., air quality emissions, greenhouse gas emissions, land use and
planning, noise sensitivity and noise generation, employment, public services, transportation and utilities).
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-2 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
The Executive Summary (Chapter 2) of this EIR provides a tabular summary of all environmental effect of the
Project as analyzed in this EIR.
Cumulative Effects
Chapter 5 through 19 of this EIR each concludes with an analysis of cumulative effects. Depending on the
topic, the cumulative context varies with the geography of cumulative implications. For example, cumulative
effects related to climate change are global in scale, and cumulative effects related to air quality emissions of
criteria air pollutants affect the entire San Francisco Air Basin. Conversely, some cumulative effects are local
in nature, such as cumulative water quality effects on those waters that are tributary to the Project Area. The
majority of cumulative effects discussed in this EIR (specifically including traffic) are based on anticipated
cumulative growth and development within the East of 101 Area of South San Francisco.
Mitigation Measures Proposed to Minimize Significant Effects
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4, Chapter 5 through 19 of this EIR each identifies feasible
measures that could minimize significant adverse impacts. Each chapter of the EIR distinguishes between
those measures that are proposed by Genentech and included in the Project, those measures that are
required pursuant to compliance with regulatory permits or other regulatory processes, and additional
measures that the City of South San Francisco has determined as necessary to reduce adverse impacts.
Accordingly, this EIR identifies a range of feasible mitigation measures that will minimize significant adverse
impacts of the Project. Each type of mitigation measure is identified throughout this EIR, and each will be
required as a condition of approval of the Project.
The Executive Summary (Chapter 2) of this EIR provides a tabular summary of all mitigation measures
required of the Project as identified in this EIR.
Measures Included in the Project
This EIR recognizes the mitigation measures and sustainability initiatives that are proposed by, and will be
implemented pursuant to the Project by Genentech as the Project applicant. These measures are included in
the Master Plan Update (the Project), will be implemented as part of on-going corporate commitments and
include, but are not limited to the following:
● As part of the Master Plan Update, Genentech proposes to minimize traffic generation and
maximizing TDM opportunities. The Master Plan establishes a “Trip Cap” that limits the total number
of drive-alone vehicle trips at levels that have already been approved pursuant to prior land use
entitlements. Genentech (the Project sponsor) commits to ongoing implementation of its gRide TDM
program at levels that far exceed the City’s TDM target and fully offset any increase in single-
occupant vehicle trips that might otherwise exceed the Trip Cap.
● Genentech’s has numerous ongoing sustainability initiatives that are internally driven by their
private, corporate commitments as included in the Genentech Sustainability Strategic Plan. The
Sustainability Strategic Plan includes numerous sustainability initiatives that include, but are not
limited to reducing water consumption, lowering energy demands and GHG emissions and reducing
waste to landfill disposal.
● Genentech has voluntarily joined the California Climate Action Registry (now the Climate Action
Reserve), and is a participant in the California Cap-and-Trade Program. Under the Cap-and-Trade
Program, enforceable limits are set on the amount of emissions that Genentech can produce (known
as a "cap"), and this cap is gradually reduced over time. Genentech receives permits for the
emissions allowable under their cap, but if Genentech does not use all their permits they can auction
them off to other emitters (via “trade”), and those emitters can use the additional permits to exceed
their cap. Conversely, Genentech can trade for increased permits to offset increased GHG emissions
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-3 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
associated with new development. CARB collects revenue from the permit auctions and uses this
revenue to invest in offsetting projects that result in reductions in GHG emissions.
Regulatory Requirements
CEQA Guidelines Section 16126.4B specifically provides that, “compliance with a regulatory permit or other
similar process may be identified as mitigation if compliance would result in implementation of measures
that would be reasonably expected, based on substantial evidence in the record, to reduce the significant
impact to the specified performance standards.” Accordingly, this EIR itemizes those regulatory requirements
that are applicable to the Project, and that would serve to reduce or avoid otherwise potentially significant
environmental effects. Examples of these types of measures include, but are not limited to the following:
● 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 and preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(per Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1A, Construction General Permit and Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan), and incorporating post-construction stormwater controls and low-impact
development (LID) measures meeting Provision C.3 requirements for reducing long-term impacts of
development on stormwater quality (per Regulatory Requirement Hydro 1B, Provision C.3
Requirements/Stormwater Management Plan)
● Each new development project pursuant to the Master Plan Update shall have a site-specific
geotechnical study prepared by a certified licensed geotechnical engineer, including site-specific
geotechnical recommendations demonstrating compliance with all applicable seismic-related
geotechnical engineering standards of the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code, the California
Building Code and the California Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, with all recommendations to be
incorporated into individual development project designs and construction (per Regulatory
Requirement Geology 1, Seismic Hazards)
● 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 meets the guidelines of
the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists’ Threshold Limit Values and OSHA’s
Permissible Exposure Levels (per Regulatory Requirements Hazards 1A, Use of Chemical Materials)
● The Project Sponsor shall pay South San Francisco’s East of 101 Transportation Impact Fees,
representing their fair-share contribution toward intersection improvements included in the East of
101 Traffic Impact Fee Program (per Regulatory Requirement Transportation 1B - East of 101
Transportation Impact Fee Improvements)
Additional Mitigation Measures
This EIR also identifies those instances where the City of South San Francisco has determined that, in addition
to measures proposed pursuant to the Project and measures required pursuant to existing regulations,
additional mitigation measures are warranted to reduce or avoid adverse environmental impacts, or to
establish performance standards necessary ensure mitigation to less than significant levels. Examples of
these types of mitigation measures include, but are not limited to the following:
● Prior to any construction activity near the coastal salt marsh along the southeastern edge of the
Campus a protocol-level survey, which involves a series of site visits between mid-January 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 during the breeding season (per Mitigation
Measure Bio 2B, Protocol-Level Surveys and Buffers)
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-4 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
● For any construction activity that is within 50 feet of an adjacent off-site property and where
construction noise may exceed the 90dBA limit of the SSF Municipal Code, the Project applicant shall
be required, by contract specifications, to implement BMPs for construction activity to reduce
construction noise levels (per Mitigation Measure Noise 1A, Construction Period BMPs)
● The Project Sponsor shall pay its fair-share toward those intersection improvements not currently
included in the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee Program by either; 1) fully funding improvements
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 does subsequently include these
improvements in its CIP (per Mitigation Measure Transportation 1: Additions to East of 101
Transportation Impact Fee Program)
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:
Air Quality
Operational Criteria Pollutants
Chapter 6 of this EIR concludes that 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
Chapter 14 of this EIR concludes that 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 construction Period BMPs for construction that is within 50 feet
of an adjacent off-site property, and to route heavily loaded trucks away from noise-sensitive and vibration-
sensitive uses. 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
temporary and episodic in nature, and construction noise is typically not considered significant if its duration
is for a period of less than one year. However, the details of individual construction activities cannot be
known in advance, and achieving the noise standards established in SSF Municipal Code is not certain.
Mitigation measures presented in this EIR include all reasonable and feasible methods to reduce construction
noise effects, but this impact is conservatively considered significant and unavoidable.
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-5 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
Transportation
Chapter 17 of this EIR concludes that under Existing plus Project and/or under Cumulative plus Project
scenarios, the Project would make significant contributions to traffic levels that would conflict with applicable
plans, ordinances or policies that establish measures for effective levels of service. These impacts are more
fully described below.
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.
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 and northbound US-101 south of Produce Avenue during the morning 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. 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, and these impacts remain significant and
unavoidable.
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-6 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
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. 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. These freeway ramps include 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 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-7 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
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 due to constrained right of way on US-101 and these cumulative
impacts remain significant and unavoidable.
Growth-Inducing Effects
As described in Chapter 15 of this EIR, Genentech’s presence as the largest employer in the City and founder
of one of the largest biotechnology campuses in the world has, and will likely continue to draw a number of
support businesses and industries to the area. According to City publications, the East of 101 Area is one of
the largest and fastest-growing biotechnology cluster in the world, estimated to have more than 200
biotechnology firms employing over 20,000 people. This growth is primarily a function of non-CEQA factors
such as business decisions to be proximate to this growing industry, the availability of a specialty-skilled
workforce, and forward-thinking planning efforts by the City. These factors are not typical growth
inducement concerns of CEQA, such as the extension of roadways or expansion of infrastructure capacity
that would otherwise preclude new development or that would induce growth beyond what is otherwise
planned. The Project will not include any physical improvement that would induce growth in CEQA-based
concerns beyond that needed to support its own needs, or that would be in addition to City growth plans for
the area.
As also described in greater detail in Chapter 15 of this EIR, the Project is estimated to accommodate an
increase of approximately 12,550 new jobs, conservative estimated to result in a demand for approximately
9,160 new households. However, Genentech estimates that approximately 75% of its new labor force since
2010 were existing Bay Area residents choosing to change their employment to Genentech, and that only
approximately 25% of its new labor force is derived from new residents from outside the Bay Area. Assuming
a similar trend that 25% of new Project-generated jobs would be taken by new Bay Area residents, the
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-8 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
Project may more realistically result in a demand for approximately 2,290 new households. An increase of
9,160 new households (or even 2,290 new households assuming 75% of new jobs would be taken by existing
Bay Area residents) would exceed the projection of new housing potential in the City of South San Francisco
pursuant to its Housing Element. However, Genentech is a regional employer, drawing its employees from
across the entire Bay Area region. ABAG’s Plan Bay Area 2040 provides a regional forecast for growth,
indicating that between 2010 and 2040, the Bay Area is projected to grow from 3.4 to 4.7 million jobs and the
population is projected to grow from 7.2 to 9.5 million people. This population will live in approximately 3.43
million households or an increase of approximately 817,000 households over 2010 levels. The Project’s
potential indirect housing demand represents a small share (between 0.2% and 1.1%) of projected household
growth within the Bay Area region. On a regional basis, the Project’s demand for new housing is not a
significant share of the total projected regional household growth.
Alternatives to the Project
Three alternatives are presented and analyzed in Chapter 20 of 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. Specifically, these alternatives include:
● Alternative #1: No Project - defined as the current 2007 Master Plan and the existing Genentech
Master Plan Zoning District remaining in place, and with new development within the Campus
remaining 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.
● Alternative 2: Reduced Project - establishes an overall growth limit within the Campus boundaries of
up to 7.9 million square feet, or the 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.
● Alternative 3: Alternative Mix of Land Uses – representing buildout of 9 million square feet (like the
Project) but with a mix of land uses that have a substantially different shift from the higher trip-
generating office land use to the lower trip-generating lab and manufacturing space uses. One of the
purposes of this Alternative 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.
None of the alternatives is fully 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 severe impacts as compared to the Project.
CEQA requires this EIR to identify an alternative, other than the No Project Alternative, that would be
considered environmentally superior. The lower development potential of Alternative #2 would generate less
severe overall impacts as compared to the Project, and Alternative #2 is environmentally superior in terms of
relative magnitude of impacts. However, Alternative #2 does not substantially lessen or avoid any significant
environmental effects of the Project that cannot otherwise be substantially lessened or avoided under the
Project with implementation of all feasible mitigation measures identified in this EIR.
Two other alternatives were considered in preparation of this EIR, but rejected. A “No New Development
Alternative” was rejected because a “no project” alternative would reject the Project, but would continue the
existing 2007 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 baseline condition. An alternative site location was also considered but rejected.
Genentech does have other facilities in Vacaville and Oceanside, California, in Hillsboro, Oregon and in
Chapter 21: CEQA Conclusions
Page 21-9 Genentech Master Plan Update, Draft EIR
Singapore. While it is possible that Genentech could consider an alternative of developing at one of these
other locations, such an alternative would not enable Genentech to achieve its basic Project objectives.
Furthermore, 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 from one place to
another.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Change
Section 15126.2(d) of the CEQA Guidelines states that significant irreversible environmental changes
associated with a proposed project shall be discussed. These irreversible changes include long-term
commitments of natural resources and land, use of non-renewable resources during the initial and continued
phases of a project, impacts that commit future generations to similar uses (such as highway improvement
that provide access to a previously inaccessible area), and irreversible damages that could result from
environmental accidents associated with a project.
The Project would increase the intensity of use on the approximately 207-acre Genentech Campus, but the
Campus already exists with approximately 4.7 million square feet of industrial, office and R&D land uses. As
indicated in Chapter 8 of this EIR, much of the East of 101 Area, including the Project site, has been in
industrial or commercial uses since the late 1800s and early 1900s. Thus, the Project would occur on a site
that has already been committed to long-term use for similar purposes.
Project construction would result in an irretrievable commitment of non-renewable resources including
lumber, steel and other metals, sand and gravel, petrochemicals and water. On-going operations would result
in an irretrievable commitment of resources necessary to generate fuel and electricity, as well as resources
needed to manufacture products used during operations. However, as indicated in Chapter 18 of this EIR, the
use of these materials would not be wasteful, inefficient or unnecessary.
As disclosed in Chapter 14 of this EIR, the routine use, transport and disposal of hazardous materials
associated with the Project could potentially result in accidental spills, leaks, toxic releases, fire or explosion.
The consequences of an accident or spill involving hazardous materials depend on the specific hazards
associated with the material, the facility design and the availability of emergency response equipment.
Within the Project, hazardous materials will be stored in laboratories and in designated secured areas
designed to prevent accidental release to the environment. In the unlikely event of an accidental release,
these small storage volumes limit potential consequences to the individual laboratory in which they are
stored. For those employees that work with hazardous materials, the amount of hazardous materials that are
handled at any one time is relatively small, reducing the potential consequences of an accident during
handling. Major hazardous materials accidents are extremely infrequent. With implementation of fall
regulatory requirements related to the use, transport and disposal of hazardous materials, the Project would
not create a significant hazard to the public or a significant irreversible environmental change through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions.