The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About02-15-07 PC e-packet CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE February 15, 2007 7:30 PM WELCOME If this is the first time you have been to a Commission meeting, perhaps you'd like to know a little about our procedure. Under Oral Communications, at the beginning of the meeting, persons wishing to speak on any subject not on the Agenda will have 3 minutes to discuss their item. The Clerk will read the name and type of application to be heard in the order in which it appears on the Agenda. A staff person will then explain the proposal. The first person allowed to speak will be the applicant, followed by persons in favor of the application. Then persons who oppose the project or who wish to ask questions will have their turn. If you wish to speak, please fill out a card (which is available near the entrance door) and give it, as soon as possible, to the Clerk at the front of the room. When it is your turn, she will announce your name for the record. The Commission has adopted a policy that applicants and their representatives have a maximum time limit of 20 minutes to make a presentation on their project. Non-applicants may speak a maximum of 3 minutes on any case. Questions from Commissioners to applicants or non-applicants may be answered by using additional time. When the Commission is not in session, we'll be pleased to answer your questions if you will go to the Planning Division, City Hall, 315 Maple Avenue or telephone (650) 877-8535 or bye-mail at web- ecd@ssf.net. John Prouty Chairperson Judith Honan Commissioner Marc C. Teglia Commissioner Wallace M. Moore Commissioner Mary Giusti Vice-Chairperson Eugene Sim Commissioner William Zemke Commissioner Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Secretary to the Planning Commission Steve Carlson Michael Lappen Senior Planner Senior Planner Gerry Beaudin Associate Planner Chad rick Smalley Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar Clerk Please Turn Cellular Phones And Paaers Off. Individuals with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services to attend and participate in this meeting should contact the ADA Coordinator at (650) 829-3800, five working days before the meeting. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE February 15, 2007 Time 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Resolution Commending Marty Romero for Planning Commission Service ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Kaiser Use Permit Time Extension Kaiser Permanente/Owner Kaiser Permanente/Applicant 230 Oyster Point Blvd P04-0131: UP04-0031 & PCA06-0008 Request for a One Year Time Extension for a Use Permit to allow the construction of a single-story medical office building on Oyster Point Boulevard in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24 and 20.81. PUBLIC HEARING 2. T -Mobile USA/applicant SSC Property Holdings/owner 2679 Meath Dr P06-0041: UP06-0012 (Continued from February 1,2007) Use Permit and Design Review allowing a wireless communication facility consisting of two (2) antennas mounted inside a 40 foot tall flagpole and four (4) indoor equipment cabinets at 2679 Meath Drive in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.81, 20.85 & 20.105 Planning Commission Agenda - Cont'd February 15, 2005 Page 3 of 3 3. Lisa Sullivan/applicant Genentech ,/owner 1 DNA Way P05-0141: MP05-0001, TDM05-0006, RZ05-0003, ZA05-0001 and MPEIR05-0004 (Continued from February 1, 2007 Rezoning request to reclassify ten (10) parcels totaling 38 acres from P-I Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research and Development Overlay District; Zoning Text Amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 (Research and Development Overlay District) and 20.40 (Genentech Research and Development Overlay District); Master Plan update to address the long-range plan for growth and development in the expanded overlay district covering 200+acres; Transportation Demand Management Program to reduce drive alone vehicle trips; and review of Draft Master Environmental Impact Report; in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.39,20.40,20.87 and 20.120. ADMINISTRA TIVE BUSINESS ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT s~7~ Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting March 1, 2007, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. Staff Reports can now be accessed online at: htto:/Iwww.ssf.netldeots/comms/olannina/aaenda minutes.aso or via htto:/Iwebl ink.ssf.net SK/bla s:\Agevccl~s\PL~vcvclvcg COV1A.V1A.lsslovc\200J'\02-:i5-0J' RPc.cloc Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: February 15, 2007 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Time Extension of: 1. Use Permit allowing a one-story 19,200 square foot medical services treatment facility with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. 2. Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic impacts. 3. Design Review of a one-story 19,200 square foot medical services treatment facility building with landscaping and open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. Project Location: 230 Oyster Point Boulevard (APN 015-023-390) in the Planned Commercial (P-C) Zone District. Codes: SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.81, 20.85 & 20.120. Mitigated Negative Declaration: Previously adopted by the Planning Commission on January 3,2002. Owner & Applicant: Kaiser Permanante Case Nos.: P04-0131 (UP04-0031, DR04-0077, PM04-0003 & TDM04- 0004) RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission review and approve a One Y ear-Time Extension of a 1) Use Permit allowing a one-story 19,200 square foot medical services treatment facility with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces; 2) Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic impacts; and 3) Design Review of a one-story 19,200 square foot medical services treatment facility building with landscaping and open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission approved the proposed project, UP04-0031, at their meeting of January 6,2005. The project consists of a one-story medical building with a floor area of 19,200 Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: Time Extension of: P04-0131 230 Oyster Point Boulevard February 15,2007 Page 2 of 3 square feet and open at-grade parking for up to 85 passenger vehicle spaces. This project will convert one of the last remaining former industrial sites along Oyster Point Boulevard to a use that will be consistent with the newer research and development buildings. The original proposed development also included a split of the then existing 3.54 acre site into a 1.64 acre lot and a 1.9 acre lot. The Final Parcel Map has been approved by the City Engineer and recorded with San Mateo County - so no time extension is required for the Parcel Map. A copy of the original Planning Commission Staff Report of January 6,2005 and a copy ofthe project plans are attached. As stated in the project sponsor's letter, they cannot proceed with construction at this time due to operational constraints. The SSFMC Section 20.81.090 (a) provides that Use Permit is approved for a term of two years from the effective date of the Planning Commission action - in this case the effective date being January 21,2005 (January 6,2005 meeting + the appeal period of 15 calendar days) and the expiration date being January 21, 2007. The same code section also provides that the Planning Commission may grant up to a one-year time extension - in this case, if approved by the Commission, the new expiration date would become January 21,2008. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Mitigated Negative Declaration was previously approved by the Planning Commission on January 3, 2002 and does not require any action to be extended. RECOMMENDATION: The request appears reasonable and the applicant has indicated their intent to start construction sometime later this year. City staff supports the granting of the time extension and recommends that the Planning Commission approve the One-Year Time Extension for a 1) Use Permit allowing a one-story 19,200 square foot medical services treatment facility with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces, 2) Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic impacts; and 3) Design Review of a one-story 19,200 square foot medical services treatment facility building with landscaping and open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: Time Extension - P04-0131 February 15,2007 Page 3 of 3 Attachments: Planning Commission Staff Report January 6, 2005 Adopted Conditions of Approval Approved Plans Applicant's Letter ", 70'" .0 \ 5 CQ.- ... ~1"~ KAISER PERMANENTE@ Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, Inc. December 19, 2006 City of South San Francisco Economic & Community Development Department Planning Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA Re: Use Permit - UP04-0031 230 Oyster Point Request for Extension Kaiser Permanente requests that the City of South San Francisco extend our Use Permit: UP04- 0031 for a Cancer Treatment Center at 230 Oyster Point for one year. To date Kaiser Permanente has been unable to proceed with the construction of this facility due to operational restraints . We now anticipate construction of this facility can begin late in 2007. We would appreciate the Planning Department's consideration and processing of an extension for the next available Planning Commission hearing. Sincerely u}1-J 71'1~t-vL:fZlu'~1 M.F.Murphey c7 Sr. Project Manager National Facilities Services, Capital Projects Group 1200 EI Camino Real, CPG Trailer South San Francisco, CA 94080 Tel: (650) 742.2111 Fax: (650) 742-2115 - ~'tl\ 54# g ~ - ~~\ (0 ("> >- t;;1 ta g c;,lIFO~'\'" Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: January 6, 2005 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: 1. Use Permit allowing a one-story 19,200 SF medical services treatment facility with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. 2. Tentative Parcel Map to split the existing 3.54-acre lot into two lots with areas of 1.64 acres and 1.9 acres. 3. Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan in conjunction with the Variance to reduce traffic impacts. 4. Design Review of a one-story 19,200 SF medical services treatment facility building with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. Project Location: 3.54 acre site situated at 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard (APN 015-023-010) in the Planned Commercial (P-C) Zone District. SSFMC Chapters: 20.79 and 20.85. Owner: Malcolm Building, LLC Applicant: Hunter Storm, LLC (agent for Kaiser). Case No.: P04-0 131 (UP04-0031, D R04-0077 & PM04-0003) Mitigated Negative Declaration certified by the Planning Commission on January 3, 2002. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve 1) Use Permit allowing a one-story 19,200 SF medical services treatment facility with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces, 2) Tentative Parcel Map to split the existing 3.54-acre lot into two lots with areas of 1.64 acres and 1.9 acres, 3) Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan in conjunction with the Variance to reduce traffic impacts, and 4) Design Review of a one-story 19,200 SF medical services treatment facility building with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION: The Planning Commission previously reviewed the proposed plans for the small medical treatment facility at the Study Session of December 2,2004. The Commission's review focused Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 2 of9 on the design compatibility of the development. The Commission suggested that the open railing be replaced with a low rise opaque wall to screen views of the automobiles in the parking lot. The Commission also supported the provision of adequate parking but wanted more information regarding patient use ofUCSF treatment facilities that Kaiser patients now use. The applicant has revised the plans to incorporate the Planning Commission's suggestions. The ingress driveway has been relocated farther east and modified to restrict cars from exiting onto Oyster Point Boulevard. The project includes demolition of the remaining building and site improvements, and the construction of a one-story 19,200 SF medical treatment building, with open at-grade parking for as many as 85 parking spaces. The project includes new landscaping and an entry plaza area sheltered from Oyster Point Boulevard noise and westerly winds. A Parcel Map is proposed to split the site into two lots comprised of 1.64 acres (230 Oyster Point Boulevard) and 1.9 acres (200 Oyster Point Boulevard). The proposed project would be situated on the easterly lot of 1.64 acres. The property owner has not proposed a project for the proposed westerly lot. The easterly lot would be conveyed to Kaiser. The proposed project, including the Parcel Map, would supercede the office development previously approved by the Planning Commission. PROJECT SUITABILITY Medical Service Use The project site's General Plan land use designation is Business Commercial, which allows medical service uses. The medical service project is consistent with several General Plan goals and policies that support expansion of desirable and compatible uses in the Oyster Point Boulevard corridor. The proposed medical treatment facility use is consistent with the plan objectives. A key principle underlying the creation of the Economic Element and especially pertinent to this development proposal is the need for the City to undertake land use decisions that provide for the City's long term economic sustainability and diversification, fiscal stability, and optimization of infrastructure capacities. The proposed medical service development is in keeping with these principles. The site is surrounded by other R&D and related uses and is in an area that is set aside for such uses and that should be developed. The proposed medical service project also fulfills two specific Land Use Policies: Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 3 of9 Policy LU-l . Developments planned for the East of 101 Area shall be evaluated based on their merits and net benefits they provide to the East of 101 Area and the City of South San Francisco. . New development should enhance the net revenues to the City by providing increased sales tax, property tax and other fees. . New development should create quality jobs for South San Francisco residents. Policy LU-2 New East of 101 Area developments should generally meet the following criteria: . New land uses should enhance property values, thereby increasing property tax revenues in the East of 101 Area. . New development should not have a net negative fiscal impact on the City, and should pay for all on-going City services it requires through taxes and fees. This is particularly important for projects with low property improvement values, such as storage yards and parking lots. . New land uses that are similar to or compatible with surrounding development are encouraged. New uses should not be detrimental to the overall economic viability of the East of 101 Area. . New development approvals should reflect market conditions . New development should visually enhance and contribute to the aesthetic character of the East of 101 Area. . The trip generation of new lands uses should be within the projections of the Area Plan. . The demand for sewage treatment for each individual development should remain within the projections of the Area Plan. The revised proposed project complies with the East of 101 Area Plan Design Guidelines especially the following policies: Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 4 of9 . DE-4 Developments should incorporate the natural site topography rather than creating flat development pads. . DE-IS Developments should de-emphasize the visual prominence of parking areas by placing parking areas away from views from the public streets. . DE-20 Developments should minimize circulation spaces by using shared driveway access between adjacent properties. The development incorporates the natural site topography, to a large extent. A major portion of the parking is behind the building and that which would otherwise be visible from the street will be screened from views with a low rise opaque wall. The project includes the use of a shared access. In all other respects, the proposed medical service project generally meets all of the criteria. Vacant Parcel The proposed lot split creating a vacant remainder parcel complies with the General Plan. Neither the General Plan nor City ordinances preclude a lot split without an associated development plan. The Commission has expressed concern over whether it is desirable to leave a significant portion of a site vacant for an unknown periqd of time and for an unknown development. The remaining vacant lot is not only less valuable, but may be less suitable for R&D development, foreclosing greater development options and a future development that is compatible with the adjacent land uses. The applicant has submitted site plan and data to support the feasibility of development of as much as a two-story 50,000 SF R&D building with open at-grade parking. DESIGN COMP ATIBLIITY The Planning Commission has taken extraordinary steps to engage the adjacent land owners at 180 Oyster Point Boulevard and 200-230 Oyster Point Boulevard to propose developments that were compatible in all respects - building set backs, common shared entry driveway, building design, public amenities and landscape plans. Because the proposed developments demonstrate that the projects share common design vocabulary and all of the features desired by the Planning Commissioners, City staff s understanding is that the Planning Commissioners are willing to allow the current proposed development to proceed separately. To maintain the continuity of the overall site planning, a condition of approval has been added that requires the design of the vacant parcel to adhere to the same development standards including minimum building height and size, minimum build-to lines (setbacks), landscape plan, common shared entry, public amenities and exterior building finishes including colors and materials. Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 5 of9 ZONING COMPLIANCE Medical service uses are currently allowed uses in a Planned Commercial (P-C) Zone District. Medical service uses that operate on a 24-hour basis are allowed subject to an approved Use Permit by the City's Planning Commission [SSFMC Sections 20.24.040]. The building generally complies with current City development standards as displayed in the following table: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Site Area: Total 3.54 acres [154,202 SF] Lot A 1.64 acres [Project Site - 230 Oyster Point Boulevard] Lot B 1.9 acres [Vacant Lot - 200 Oyster Point Boulevard] Project Site Data Floor Area: 19,200 SF Floor Area Ratio: Maximum: 0.5 to 1.0 Lot Coverage Maximum: 60% Landscaping Minimum: Automobile Parking Minimum: Setbacks Minimum Proposed Front 20 FT 20 FT Side 6 FT 6-100 FT Rear 6 FT 10 FT Notes: 1. 6 foot landscaped side setback required of parking lots. 2. Parking based on a rate of 1 stall per 300 SF. Proposed: 0.27 Proposed: 27% 10% Proposed: 27% 64 Proposed: 85 The proposed parking exceeds the minimum requirements set forth in SSFMC Chapter 20.74 by 21 parking spaces. The Planning Commission may wish to consider reducing the parking closer to the minimum requirement of 64 spaces, and the area converted to a larger on-site entry amenity area and patient drop-off. The facility will be staffed by an estimated 36 employees, will accommodate up to 24 patients per hour and have up to 10 vendors and other visitors - a total of 70 persons on-site at any time except during the middle of the day when patients are not likely to be admitted. By way of Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 6 of9 comparison, Kaiser's other similar facilities have the following parking ratios: FACILITY FLOOR AREA PARKING RATIO SSF (4 Vaults) 19,200 SF Santa Clara (3 Vaults) 17,300 SF Rancho Cordova (2 Vaults) 10,300 SF 3.6/1,000 SF 4.4/1,000 SF 5.0/1,000 SF Kaiser representatives indicate that as the size of the facility increases the number of patients increases proportionately, but the staffing increases at a slower rate. The SSF facility would have the lowest parking ratio of the three facilities. At the Commission meeting City staffhas requested that the applicant provide additional data regarding staffing and patient census at the other two facilities and the adequacy of parking supply and demand. Because the average lot depth is less than 150 feet, the rear setback need only be 6 feet in depth. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN The SSFMC Chapter 20.120 requires that all uses generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips is required to develop a Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM) to reduce daily single occupant trips by 28%. Because the proposed development has a Floor Area Ratio (F AR) ofless than the 0.5 maximum base ratio allowed, the project is only required to comply with the minimum core TDM requirements (comprised of 15 elements). The Planning Commission previously approved a TDM associated with the approved larger office project (). The applicant, with the assistance ofFehr and Peers Associates, a qualified Traffic Engineering firm, has completed the PTDM Plan consisting of a table ofthe plan and a site plan showing general location of on-site facilities that are attached to this staff report [SSFMC Section 20.120.060 Submittal Requirements]. The Transportation Demand Management Ordinance, SSFMC Chapter 20.120, requires that developments that are less than the maximum allowed base Floor Area Ratio [FAR] of 0.50 include in the PTDM Plan only the 15 basic elements delineated in SSFMC Sections Schedule 20.120.030-B Summary of Program Requirements and 20.120.060. The applicant's project FAR of 0.27 does not exceed the base maximum FAR of 0.50. The applicant's PTDM Plan includes the 15 basic elements. The TDM Ordinance also requires that prior to the issuance of Building Permit, the applicant submit a final TDM Plan to the Chief Planner for review and approval. The plan is subject to a formal Annual Review by City staff [SSFMC 20.120.100]. The Annual review consisting of Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 7 of9 surveys prepared by the City staff or consultant is intended to monitor the success of the TDM Plan and make any adjustments [i.e. add/or substitute program elements] to achieve the intended TDM Plan objectives. The TDM Plan is not subject to the review and approval by the San Mateo City/County Association of Government because the project generates less than a 100 vehicle trips in the peak commute hours. The proposed TDM Plan is comparable to other recent developments approved by the City. The site's proximity to the Caltrain station increases the probability of success of the TDM Plan. The potential for parking spillover does not exist since parking is not allowed on Oyster Point Boulevard. As the Planning Commission observed at the December 2, 2004 Study Session, the TDM applied to the patients arriving for treatment is challenging at best. Staff will review the Final TDM with that in mind. Therefore, it is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the PTDM Plan, based on the attached findings. TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP The project includes splitting the 3.54 acre site into two lots with areas of 1.9 acres (to be retained by Malcolm) and 1.64 acres (Kaiser project site). The proposed lot split is conforming to the General Plan policies and the development standards and requirements of both SSFMC Title 19 Subdivision Regulations and Title 20 Zoning Regulations. Easements are required for public pedestrian access along Oyster Point Boulevard and vehicle circulation over the future Malcolm parcel providing vehicular access to and from the shared main entry/exit driveway. The City Engineer has reviewed the map and determined that it complies with the requirements of SSFMC Title 19. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD The project design was reviewed by the Design Review Board at its meeting of October 19, 2004. The Board offered the following comments: 1. Revise the planting plan to include plants that are better suited for the area. Blackwood Acacia is acceptable if available; otherwise a plant substitution is required. River birch, Crate Myrtle, and Columbia London Plane trees are acceptable. Rockrose and Australian bluebell shrubs are not acceptable because they do not thrive in the area. Acacia Redilines are not acceptable because they are too invasive. Monterey Carpet in large quantity is not preferred in large planting areas. An evergreen tree such as in the pine or conifer family should be considered. Fremont Poplars are acceptable, but care must be taken as they can be disruptive to infrastructure. The Pittosporum tobira Variegata shrub is okay, but the tree form is not likely to perform well in the area. Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 8 of9 2. Revise the plans taking into account the East of 101 Area Plan Design Guidelines. 3. Relocate the sidewalk so that it ramps up the slope to the building. 4. Provide a minimum 5-foot wide planting strip between the street and the sidewalk. 5. Revise the plans and resubmit to the Design Review Board. The plans have been revised to incorporate both the Design Review Board's and the Planning Commission's comments. The minutes of the Design Review Board are attached to this staff report. The Board concurred that the landscaping should be continuous from 180 to 230 Oyster Point and that the plan should provide a finished frontage for the new vacant lot that adequately screens view of the vacant site. A decorative opaque wall and/or graded 3 foot to 4 foot tall landscaped berm in the location of the proposed future building will need to be designed in conjunction with the landscaping until the vacant site is developed to obscure views of the vacant lot. The vacant lot should also be hydro seeded to minimize erosion and improve the visual aesthetics. A condition of approval has be included the requires these landscape improvements. City staffbelieves that the shared entry (opposite Veterans Boulevard) adjacent to 180 and 200 Oyster Point Boulevard should have a more generous landscape area at the southerly terminus than is shown on the sheet A9 of the applicant's plans. A condition of approval has been added to require a larger landscape area. The applicant will construct a roadway across the vacant site to link with the shared common entry/exit. The applicant has provided an easement for this purpose. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW As provided by the California Environmental Quality Act, because the proposed project is a compatible type of development, but is smaller in size and has fewer impacts than the previous development approved by the Planning Commission, the previous Commission-approved Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) adequately addresses the impacts. The environmental document is not required to be revised nor re-circulated and the Planning Commission is not required to take any further action. The key potential impacts identified in the previous MND were traffic, storm water drainage, sanitary sewer, removal of hazardous material from the site, and construction impacts. A TDM Plan and the payment of Traffic Fees for future traffic improvements in East of 101 Area, including the East of 101 Area Transportation Implementation Plan and the Oyster Point Interchange Fee will be required to help reduce traffic impacts. A sanitary sewer line impact fee is required to help reduce the costs associated with the sewer line and pump upgrade project. Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P04-0 131 - 200 & 230 Oyster Point Boulevard January 6, 2005 Page 9 of9 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve 1) Use Permit allowing a one-story 19,200 SF medical services treatment facility with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces, 2) Tentative Parcel Map to split the existing 3.54-acre lot into two lots with areas of 1.64 acres and 1.9 acres, 3) Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan in conjunction with the Variance to reduce traffic impacts, and 4) Design Review of a one-story 19,200 SF medical services treatment facility building with open at-grade parking accommodating up to 85 parking spaces. Is/Steve Carlson Steve Carlson, Senior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Draft Use Permit Findings of Approval Draft Parcel Map Findings of Approval Draft Transportation Demand Management Plan Draft Conditions of Approval Planning Commission Draft Minutes - December 2, 2004 Design Review Board Minutes - October 19, 2004 TDM Plan Plans CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P04-0131 Kaiser Medical Office Building 230 Oyster Point Blvd. (As approved by the Planning Commission on January 6, 2005) A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The applicant shall comply with the City's Standard Conditions and with all the requirements of all affected City Divisions and Departments as contained in the attached conditions, except as amended by the conditions of approval. 2. The construction drawings shall substantially comply with the Planning Commission approved plans, as amended by the conditions of approval including the plans prepared The Hagman Group, dated December 21,2004 and Kier & Wright dated December 2004, in association with P04-0031. 3. The landscape plan shall include more mature shrubs, trees shall have a minimum size of 24 inch box and 15% of the total number of proposed trees shall be a minimum size of 36 inch box. The landscape plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the City's Chief Planner. 4. Prior to the [mal inspection the applicant shall have a Final Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM) prepared by a qualified and licensed traffic engineer that incorporates the provisions of the City of South San Francisco SSFMC 20.120 Transportation Demand Management. The Final TDM Plan shall closely follow the PTDM Plan approved by the Planning Commission on January 6, 2005 in association with P04-0035 and shall be subject to the review and approval by the City's Chief Planner. The Final TDM shall also be subject to the review and approval by the San Mateo City/County Association of Governments. 5. Prior to the issuance of the building permit the applicant shall pay the Child Care Impact Fees estimated to be $ 9,600.00 based on the following calculation [19,200 SQ. FT. X $0.50/SQ. FT. = $ 9,600.00]. 6. Prior to the issuance ofthe Building Permit the applicant shall submit the results of the soils tests in association with the tank removal and the final site remediation plan. The final site remediation plan shall be subject to the review and approval by the City's Chief Planner. 7. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures associated with Mitigated Negative Declaration 00-014. (Planning Division contact: Steve Carlson, 650/877-8535) '-'''c, Conditions of Approval Page 2 of8 ENGINEERING DIVISION 1. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Engineering Division's "Standard Conditions for Tentative parcel Maps" section of the "Standard Conditions for Subdivisions and Private Developments" booklet dated January 1998. 2. The applicant shall pay the City's actual plan check costs to retain a land surveyor to plan check the preliminary map and to sign the parcel map as the City's Technical Reviewer. 3. Any appropriate access easements between the two parcels shall be provided in a form and content acceptable to the City Engineer and the City Attorney. 4. The main entry roadway into the site from Oyster Point Boulevard shall be designed with 4 lanes with two lanes into and two lanes out of the site. The applicant shall be responsible for the cost of the construction of this entry way and all modifications to the Veterans Boulevard/Oyster Point Boulevard intersection and traffic signal improvements necessary to accommodate this development, in accordance with plans approved by the City Engineer. The design of the access driveways shall conform to the City Standards Drawing Number 1. 5. The project's grading, drainage, roadway, utility and other infrastructure design shall comply with the requirements of the Engineering Division's "Standard Conditions for Commercial and Industrial Developments" section of the "Standard Development Conditions" booklet, dated January 1998. The design of these improvements shall be prepared by the Applicants civil engineering consultants and submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 6. Entrance from Oyster Point Boulevard shall be designed to prevent vehicles from exiting the site. Install a City standard driveway at this location. 7. Install wheel stops on parking spaces flush with the walkway adjacent to the building. 8. Oyster Point Boulevard has been recently repaved. No trenching will be allowed in the roadway. 9. Storm Drain Pipe in the right-of-way shall be Class ill RCP. 10. The following fees shall be paid by the developer: OYSTER POINT OVERPASS CONTRIBUTION FEE Prior to receiving a Building Permit for the proposed new office building, the applicant shall pay the Oyster Point Overpass fee, as determined by the City Engineer, in accordance with City Council Resolutions 102-96 and 152-96. The fee will be calculated upon reviewing the information shown on the applicant's construction plans and the latest Engineering News Record San Francisco Construction Cost Index at the time of payment. The estimated fee for the subject 19,200 GSF office is calculated below. (The number in the calculation, "8194.52", is the October 2004 Engineering Conditions of Approval Page 3 of8 News Record San Francisco construction cost index, which is revised each month to reflect local inflation changes in the construction industry.) Trip Calculation 19.2 gsf Office/R&D use @ 12.3 trips per 1000 gsf = 236 new vehicle trips Contribution Calculation 236 trips X $154 X (8194.52/6552.16) = $ 45,454 IV. EAST OF 101 TRAFFIC lMPACT FEES Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for any building within the proposed project, the applicant shall pay the East of 101 Traffic Impact fee, In accordance with the resolution adopted by the City Council at their meeting of September 26, 2001, or as the fee may be amended in the future. Fee Calculation (as of July 2004) 19,200 gsfOffice@ $1.51 per each square foot = $ 28,992 (Please note that the traffic impact fee is proposed to be increased early next year. If the applicant has not obtained a building permit and begun construction prior to the date on which the fee is increased, the applicant will be required to pay the revised fee.) V. SEWER SYSTEM CAPACITY STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT FEE The City of South San Francisco has identified the need to investigate the condition and capacity of the sewer system within the East of 101 area, downstream of the proposed office/R&D development. The existing sewer collection system was originally designed many years ago to accommodate warehouse and industrial use and is now proposed to accommodate uses, such as offices and biotech facilities, with a much greater sewage flow. These additional flows, plus groundwater infiltration into the existing sewers, due to ground settlement and the age of the system, have resulted in pumping and collection capacity constraints. A study and flow model is proposed to analyze the problem and recommend solutions and improvements. The applicant shall pay the East of 101 Sewer Facility Development Impact Fee, as adopted by the City Council at their meeting of October 22,2002. The adopted fee is $3.19 per gallon of discharge per day. The applicant shall meet with the Director of Public Works to determine the projected discharge from the project The Director of Public Works will determine the amount of capacity required in accordance with the criteria established in the Resolution adopted by the City Council on October 22, 2002. The Carollo Study, which forms the basis for the system upgrades, calculated Office/R&D uses to require a capacity of 400 gallons per day per 1000 square feet of development. Based upon this calculation, the potential fee would be, if paid this year: 0.4 ConilitionsofApprov~ Page 4 of8 gallons per square foot (400 gpd/lOOO sq. ft.) x $3.19 per gallon x 19,200 sq. ft. = $19,201. The sewer contribution shall be due and payable prior to receiving a building permit for each phase of the development. (Engineering Division contact: Dennis Chuck 650/ 829-6652) POLICE DEPARTMENT A. Municip~ Code Compliance The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the Municipal Code, "Minimum Building Security Standards" Ordinance revised May 1995. The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and safety conilitions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. B. Building Security 1. Doors a. The jamb on all aluminum frame-swinging doors sh~l be so constructed or protected to withstand 1600 lbs. of pressure in both a vertic~ distance of three (3) inches and a horizontal distance of one (1) inch each side of the strike. b. Glass doors shall be secured with a deadbolt 10ck1 with minimum throw of one (1) inch. The outside ring should be free moving and case hardened. c. Employee/pedestrian doors shall be of solid core wood or hollow sheet metal with a minimum thickness of 1-3/4 inches and shall be secured by a deadbolt lockl with minimum throw of one (1) inch. Locking hardware sh~l be installed so that both deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside knob, handle, or turn piece. d. Outside hinges on all exterior doors shall be provided with non-removable pins when pin-type hinges are used or shall be provided with hinge studs, to prevent removal of the door. 1 The locks shall be so constructed that both the deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside door knob/lever/tumpiece. A double-cylinder deadbolt lock or a single-cylinder deadbolt lock without a tumpiece may be used in "Group B" occupancies as defined by the Uniform Building Code. When used, there must be a readily visible durable sign on or adjacent to the door stating "This door to remain unlocked during business hours", employing letters not less than one inch high on a contrasting background. The locking device must be of type thatwill be readily distinguishable as locked, and its use may be revoked by the Building Official for due cause. ConilitionsofApprov~ Page 5 of8 e. Doors with glass panels and doors with glass panels adjacent to the doorframe shall be secured with burglary-resistant glazing2 or the equivalent, if double-cylinder deadbolt locks are not installed. f. Doors with panic bars will have vertical rod panic hardware with top and bottom latch bolts. No secondary locks should be installed on panic-equipped doors, and no exterior surface-mounted hardware should be used. A 2" wide and 6" long steel astragal shall be installed on the door exterior to protect the latch. No surface-mounted exterior hardware need be used on panic-equipped doors. g. On pairs of doors, the active leaf shall be secured with the type of lock required for single doors in this section. The inactive leaf shall be equipped with automatic flush extension bolts protected by hardened material with a minimum throw of three-fourths inch at head and foot and sh~l have no doorlmob or surface-mounted hardware. Multiple point locks, cylinder activated from the active leaf and satisfying the requirements, may be used instead of flush bolts. h. Any single or pair of doors requiring locking at the bottom or top rail sh~l have locks with a minimum of one throw bolt at both the top and bottom rails. 2. Windows a. Louvered windows shall not be used as they pose a significant security problem. b. Accessible rear and side windows not viewable from the street shall consist of rated burglary resistant glazing or its equiv~ent. Such windows that are capable of being opened shall be secured on the inside with a locking device capable of withstanding a force of two hundred- (200) lbs. applied in any direction. c. Secondary locking devices are recommended on all accessible windows that open. 3. Roof Openings a. All glass skylights on the roof of any building shall be provided with: 1) Rated burglary-resistant glass or glass-like acrylic material? or: 2) Iron bars of at least 1/2" round or one by one-fourth inch flat steel material spaced no more than five inches apart under the skylight and securely 25/16" security laminate, 1/4" polycarbonate, or approved security film treatment, minimum. ConilitionsofApprov~ Page 6 of8 fastened. or: 3) A steel grill of at least 1/8" material or two inch mesh under skylight and securely fastened. b. All hatchway openings on the roof of any buililing shall be secured as follows: 1) If the hatchway is of wooden material, it-shall be covered on the outside with at least 16 gauge sheet steel or its equivalent attached with screws. 2) The hatchway shall be secured from the inside with a slide bar or slide bolts. The use of crossbar or padlock must be approved by the Fire Marsh~. 3) Outside hinges on ~l hatchway openings shall be provided with non- removable pins when using pin-type hinges. c. All air duct or air vent openings exceeding 8" x 12" on the roof or exterior w~ls of any building shall be secured by covering the same with either of the following: 1) Iron bars of at least 1/2" round or one by one-fourth inch flat steel materi~, spaced no more than five inches apart and securely fastened. or: 2) A steel grill of at least 1/8" material or two inch mesh and securely fastened and 3) If the barrier is on the outside, it shall be secured with galvanized rounded head flush bolts of at least 3/8" iliameter on the outside. 4. Lighting a. All exterior doors shall be provided with their own light source and shall be adequately illuminated at all hours to make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises and provide adequate illumination for persons exiting the building. b. The premises, while closed for business after dark, must be sufficiently lighted by use of interior night-lights. c. Exterior door, perimeter, parking area, and canopy lights shall be controlled by photocell and shall be left on during hours of darkness or diminished lighting. 5. Numbering of Buildings Conditions of Approval Page 7 of8 a. The address number of every commercial building shall be illuminated during the hours of darlmess so that it shall be easily visible from the street. The numerals in these numbers shall be no less than four to six inches in height and of a color contrasting with the background. b. In addition, any business, which affords vehicular access to the rear through any driveway, alleyway, or parking lot, shall also display the same numbers on the rear of the building. 6. Alarms a. The business shall be equipped with at least a central station silent intrusion alarm system. NOTE: To avoid delays in occupancy, alarm installation steps should be taken well in advance of the final inspection. 7. Traffic, Parking, and Site Plan a. Handicapped parking spaces shall be clearly marked and properly sign posted. NOTE:For additional details, contact the Traffic Bureau at 829-3934. 8. Misc. Security Measures a. Commercial establishments having one hundred dollars or more in cash on the premises after closing hours shall lock such money in an approved type money safe with a minimum rating of TL-15. (police Department contact, Sgt. E. Alan Normandy (650) 877-8927) WATER QUALITY CONTROL 1. The onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo. 2. Stormwater pollution preventions devices are to be installed. A combination oflandscape based controls and manufactured controls are preferred. Existing catch basins are to be retrofitted with catch basin inserts or equivalent. 3. The applicant must submit a signed maintenance schedule for the stormwater pollution prevention devices installed. Conditions of Approvw Page 8 of8 4. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted. 5. Roof condensate needs to be routed to sanitary sewer. 6. Trash handling area must be covered and enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This must be shown on the plans. 7. Loading dock area must be covered and any storm drains must include stormwater pollution prevention devices. 8. Install a sampling point prior to the addition of domestic waste. 9. Fire sprinkler system test/drainage valve should be plumbed into the sanitary sewer system. 10. A construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan must be submitted. 11. Plans must include location of concrete wash out area and location of entrance/outlet of tire wash. 12. A grading and drainage plan must be submitted. 13. An erosion control plan must be submitted. 14. Applicant must pay sewer connection fee at a later time based on anticipated flow, BOD and TSS. 15. Applicant maybe required to obtain a wastewater discharge permit. (Water Quality Control contact: Cassie Prudhel (650) 849-3840) t. I (' I ~ . I~ I \ ! \\ I , J- - ~ ~ w c. w (j) J W a.. o o C/) I- o W ...., o ~ a.. uj & en!z o ~W t; ci ~~ W Z w~> z-J<1" OWO o tS..J 3 Cl 0:: ~-LL oC/)o. w@o zci::l: z~c/) ozUJ <(I-~ I-~e> LLOO I-~~ 00<( Z<(Z ZLLc.o Wo.o ow' ~ ~~ ~-r- W i= z >e>u.. O:3oozlu ~g~ ~~~ C/) 00 0 - C/) t; 2 '" -I W 0 o ''!. - 2 0 Om::> I-<(z -r- III C/) -I <( llJ ~!J! u.t: ~f2 I~ I~ - i~ ~ !Ii ~ ~II - Ifi ~. t ~5~ I ~ <( W l- I- o W ...., o ~ a.. o -I -I :::;E ..0:: ~o WI- a.. en o~ -IW WI- >z w::> OI ~C/) OW a.. W I- :J ~<( o -- ~ :cO C> 00 .. 0:: en ~ I- Z <U) w ..<( <( w:c b~ :f:5ze> we> <(-I e>g; 1-<( Ow Z::> II ~o W~ OW zO:: -10:: ~~ :5~ Z;~ C/) Z-l Z 0-1 I- 2 C/)enl-~:5 W <( W ::> a.. w -I en>g!frle>w Iz0.2ZI--C/)2 I- CI)~c>~OObc>Zcn O::o.ZQ..I-WWZ<(W w OLL<(o.o.-. >UJ-IO>cnC/)O~ 0:: o I- :5 0 ~ ~ 0:: -I.a: ~ o en III ~ W o.W W ::> ::> 0. 1Il~. u.. ~~~~~~~~ ~ x w o Z I- W W I C/) t'n .<( '-' 0- ..... Z >Z ....10::: - COo o I-LL --' Z- -....I - 0<( :J Q.. 0 al 0:: 6 wo W ~!Q () >-0 _ o~ u... go:: LL. N LL o ~ I- 00 Z ~ - ::::> o 0 c.. 00 et: w I- CI) >- o z ~ a.. W C> <( Z2 :5(2 0.0 W o.~ {3C> cnZ 00 2(2 :5C!J -r- -r- -10 - ~ <( ~~ 00 II -co II ON -- 00 ....10 ..J~ It) ~~ o::~ 0: .....m 00...... '<t O::g W .~ .....0 z6 ::>~ .~ :cw a.. >-5 (D1i o OZ W~ Q.." O~ ....I...J W~ >~ w~ o ! ! ; I ! ! , ! , ; , ; i i '" 'b~"" ~ ~, ~~tr1 ~/. ~l~ ~:~~ , - 'i l" ~ '" '\ \. <;;~ ~ ' - j ~~ ! A "',\>-- : ! ,--- ! ~.._---- : ._~ , ... , : IJ ' -- -- -,--",~J---'& " ~~~~ \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ '1- \ ~ \ \ \ \ \\ ; , , ~",I -j ,"'1*. ~ .'; \~ lil' i i .. ; :1 \ \\ ~----' ~.:p\' , ;..~: . o ~ , "'", o , ..r:- o 01 IJ S2 -J en I-- <: a Q eJ !-: ~ () LL CJ) u.: 0 C/)~ 00) LO T""" (J) . .. _ .. LLUJ o <( C/) in ,..... W 0 "-J .. ~ 0 ~ <( <( c-r)- W W C> c-r) > ~ ..0 <( ~ C>o ~ g ~O <(:J~Z ....I fll a.. ::s ~ <0 II u.: C/) o o f:2LO T""" CO ~ 0, ~ ,..... o. . W@ ~O :J> 00 W~ ~a.. (9C> ZZ - ~S2 ~~ 0:0: \ \. \ '\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ N <( Z :5 0.. W r- C/) \ ~ -~~ ~~~ I ~: [i u~ C[f2{~ ~ J;"GA ! , : ~ :;U)~ "~A j ",,'r: GJ ~ i r",'f,',-' ~c'-::!""~ \\ ~..~ I P- '* ' ~ : ;.1 ~ / ~ : Ai ::svGj)., ~ ~ . ~~~ ~ ffil i ",~.!. ~:~A. ~ s:3 ~ \ , "'f,'\ I M i"S' .,. \ > .: ~ ' ~> ~ ,,' 4~1~,' 1"\ > ')~"~" \\ ",IJ I r~: ,~ ' ~ '" . : ~;;::' .~';" ~ ' . : " ""'\II}' '''' \ 1~~:I_:,~~_;c,,": .: ~l ~ ~~, \ "-'I "t ,~~= : ~ l>'Y / \ ;;:r;i~: · '~i ~ .~: --..- k':' /' / ) \\ ,,' It. i :: ~_; ~1~ ~~ ~ i~ ~ \ O;~r I ~~T, i/J f<<,1( ~ ~_ · · f{{fu:J i 'lj1l1~!i \ ,<<{II! N,! UW:\ \ . ! ~ I (1!~"~ \ ,j ~WIp,:tHtl:o~Jtj~~ ~ ,\ . '1< =!.!!.Ii L-~'" "" ~ ~ ~ \ ~.G-: T I/~_ - -"L I' '" --. d:: ~ \oJ \\ ~ i i '"' v:,)<1 ~ . ! r ~ ,\!!\i)u, 1 ~ i \1 I ~~I' ~n I~ i J ~ \ i c"X. I <oJ - $h " , 1 -"~ ~~ ~ "~~ti : I ~ b >-~ ~ "~'" I~~ . . ~ ,."t;!!; \ i _!r[]J " , ~ I I. t,: 0 -' ~ --./ I , f- <l: 'Iii ~ '~// /'lj ~ I J I :J ~ g g E:u.,.y /~,' _' : ~; t{ t ~ ,,~~ ~~ ~" ~J :, rr: t-.- 'i:t -j!:\{Jl\: ~''''' ~ I' :,:!y I' ~ LJ :::r' J ,- . " ,:.;.. =.y.y J, n ~J ^ 'J ';JU~ 6~ ~ \ _,~,y.Y.V""-~ ~~~. ~ . ~~ ~\ ~) - ~ y ..... \ \\ :.-~ ~~ pp I I -U> I I 2~ r- ~ ~ W (L W C/) :J (9<( zZ -~ O~ ....J-l -<( ::JO m6 () wC/) ()~ u:~ LLLL O~ t-C/) Z~ _:J O~ 0..' \ffi ~ ~ o 00 ....10 ....I~ LO ~LO .r::::::::~ o::~ O~ r-ul C/)I-: '<t ~o W:g r-<3 Z6 =>~ Iffi a.. >-5 fllli o OZ wltl a..ffi O~ ....1...1 w~ >~ W~ o 1\ / I ______ ~--.--n---..--- , l ........:;::-=.::.:....=..=.::.=-~ ;(/ ~ r ) I -:9' /:7 ,// . // / II <i. /' I '\ /// II '\:: ///' II \\ // I y // I \v'/// \\ . I '//' ~\ / \\, . "\ ~\ ./' '~./ \\ , '~\ \\ 1\ , ..... \~- '., '-..:':'::"'~:-::::.:;:-::.:.::.:::::..:.:.:::...-===.--_=::::::::::::::::.:::;:-"~==--:::::.:.=:.:.=-,.~..:.:-::... ,/:..,,>~\\ \\ '\.. /' I I -.--.--..------..- I Il___._n_____ !1 I~---.------- II I r..------...-... n._......._ ll-~._..-. -..-..--.-.---.- II II I,...n--....--...----...--.. II ll---- ..-------.....- II II \1"..----.------. II IL-r-l \-1--1 [ Ii!. I I I I I ! I I I 1 J I I i I ~_J___.__L~___L_____.._L__._.._______ .___n..._ .____1_____J..__.__J . ..._..l I 1-.--.--...----- -----------....-1 --.--"..----.-.-------.-,-.-.-"--------.----.----,--- "---"--'--'--~--'-'--'-----"-----------"" -.. . I ..// .".'" ......~... \\ \\ jj .<~:? III en w () u.. u.. o 0::: w o > o 0::: a.. 8301;::/;::10 ~3al^0~d z o I- a.. w () w 0::: V3Hv' V\I\fX3 LL b w LL - I ....J . <( ..- ':2 I- "'" ~o:: en ..- ~ ~ + 0:::. <(:2 00:: I . {.;::.;;' 0;::~'^'\~\;' ~\.. ~, ,,' U \ ; \. 0 \' // Z\,\ --1 ~ \:':c"'" Z a::-\\ --1 ~ -/0 \~ ~\ ;(j LL /fi1 ~ \ .....I :4/ O~~ -,//<( I- B1 , , (/Y~"\;' ~ \.J / '<t '\-, ....J _/ ; 0:: c; \\ ,-.n ef w ~ /\ LL.I 0 ~/~/ W en /Z' 0 , . z - ::> i= ./ U ~ :r;/~/ , ::J -u.. <( >- 0 0:: (Dei/ 0/ LLLLO~ \.0 ~ ~ffi " en 0 ~ '\L- --1 <t. r::- I 'W> " I- :x ~ >~ I~~\ .-J W ~ 10\~ 0 11"\ \ \\ , u..> \\\ <( ! \.. '~\ : '" \ \ ~'~) I LL.. ),/ I LJJ:,>;:>~'/ ILL. l~\ ./ -1'. n ",/ 'v " '~; '- \. ,;'\ \~, ,/ 0\ \,:<;/ \\ \\, \ \\ ./"// \, ~I-:/' \ \(\ \.\ / \\ ./ \\ ,,' \ \~/ \. \\ \\ \~, / \ .. ,/ \ .\ \ ..,.....\ \'. \ :':';:", \ Z .' \\ '\.. \ ~ \\ --' 0- \ 0:: \0 ~ LL\ .../' x. . \>... \\ \'. " ....~\ '\ \" \~ ;/\\ .... " \::;-.. \\ \" /'~, /,/ \1, ",// ~ / ~ ..... ,/ .\ / n;\ ./'" LL.. ,// UJ/ .A:l. W . en,/ /zf .,/' .../" \,. i,; ""'~~ \\ H ":... \\ \'\ II H " il p U \\ ..,\~.. '\ \\ \\ ',\\ \" - J . ._\ \ \~ CD " " \\ '\ \ .~ \ - l.' ~ ~'~~ .Ol LL Z o u 0::: o C)~ z-' C)::> <(:2 ~- _en 0:: o I- en u w -' w cry <( .... o I "I o o I'l o .... o ~ '" ..'<>' /--/;.... b ~ in ,0 CD o :::- / ...,/'" // /,/ / .. .' ;/ \ ') I I _.._. _..._.__.~...... ..._______......_..1 Ii 11===:.,.===:===.="=0="7===,= """t=:.=-=~c:==::=:::.~=:::::=::::::::=_:.c"':=:o:::_..::===""'.= II 11._____________. --'---'lr ---- II Ir-.-...----.----- 1-------------- I II I r------.-...-....-..--- II I i---------------- 11------ I i 1____ --------- \ I ~.----------..----. i I \-...--------.--....--....-. I ! i Ii I !I------- I II I r---r-, 1--1 I ! i I I I I! I ,. I. I I I ----~,-----..-.._. .._..__.._____.___...____I__.._._L_.___._._ I I t-------------.....--.-..... I 1_...- <( ;f;:::'="--=--)'~~~ 1 "J II~ // II \,./ /' I \, / 'I '\ /./ I '\/ / I '\ ,/// ~/ . I .~ /' \\ ,/ I \\>\ /,,/ '1 '~ I \\ ." ". / II '\\\ ~\ ,.> ~ "/ ~:::::::::.~::::::=:::==-=::::--=.:.::.::;:..-::.::::::::.:.::.::::::::=.:..:...--:::::---:.::.-:::.:::'::;::: ~-,:: r-'I I 1_._] __LL_l__JI m (0 I ~ ..- + LL o o 0:: LL o a.. o I- . ,__ . _"'__""U .~__..' ,.- .. "'-"--'~-'--- _ _.-1_ ...;-::.. ~--. ,',-' \~... \\ " )j ;1 .0/ N N + Z ill ill 0:: () en LL o o 0:: -' <( () z <( I () ill ::E Co ...- : + . SV\JOO~ 8'v'NIl ~O.:l 3~nS018N3 .' . . .---- 3l.3~8N08 .:10 dOl. ..9-,v~+ m \ ,...j~'):\\ \ e'. ....~\. '~'. \ \" / 00' /;::\ \ ,/ '~'\:\ \ \~~. ,\ \ \\, /''''' <\ / \~ \ / '\\ LL //'\;\ \ 0 \~ ~ /",,/ \:, \ // \\ /~ /// ~~ / ,,// //'!s::\ \ / ~\~ /'/ 0::: '~ / W/ '. 0/0:. \~. ./// \\ . W \. / /'~ C/) / \, -" '\\ //~ ~\ ... .~ <:( z <( --.J 0.. o t<) o Cli "-t o I I e .~ ~ b .1 Co :u ~ o ~ {/; 0;;:;~~ 0 [1'-'\. \\....,::::-;::Y":...Z,. Z~;\\ j ~ 1.1. .'\ /~ \..~ ~ \ . "0 ',', ~. Ii ';\\ n' d: I' '~ ,/ .' u.. /~ ~ \ _J_u':\ I/~/ ~l ',\, ~ 0 ,./JtJ i \~" '\\ -J...,..,o '\ ,\, t7?' u.. 10 ;i\ '. \\ m X ~._.A~_//\ \\. \\ \,.J r7 ~ \.J \\ ~~, W~//~~, '. '\ () Oz I-Jr,).!fa..a::I-,//o \ \\ \ \ \ ~ / ~ \ \,\ -~ >-" .. \\ '-' \ '\ I..L. CO ~ ,/// \ \. I..L. LL 0 ~( \\\, OZ W~ ,..\ ..A" a.. '" '-. \ "'" '-' \, \:, C/) 0 ~ \L- .....J..J ~~. w~ ,24:J > ~ i~\O W N i \ 'tI) 0 ! ,\ In \ '\\ <( i L.L. \" \~\ ! \, \~ I: n;1 "\/;) ,LL. ,'J/ I '.' I UJ _~~';O-' / I~;(' ,/// I ,/ \ , ../ , \, r/ /' ~/ / ~ Z\ ,,/// O \~./ \. '\ /' \ ',\ // \ ~, // '\, \\/' \ \~'\ '\ \;, //. .. '\~/ '\ '\ l \v' .\ " I .. ! I I I j ----....-..-. -[=-~:~--~~=:=--==,=== ---------------- .~--_..~,-".~_._----_....__..__.__.._--~_. -.-..--....-.......---....---.-.--- -........---..--.-,.-----....-.....-...---.....-.-...------,---..-..----... ",. " ~ 15 o o ~ ~ 5 o 1Jj I-- w ~ IL :> :> z- :ii :> :> z :1 :> 5 ~ zZ 8 ~ z o ~ > W -1 W I= ....'1> o::t' 0= . ex) Z~ z o I- ~ W ....J . w_ 1-9 00 Ii <C= w~ ..- ",. ... z o ~ > W ....J W :c= 1-5> =>Ii 0= ~ 00..- LO <( en z o ~ > W ..J W 't; I- - ~ 0:: w a... w en ::> w o 3 ~ :> o w I-- Z ~ (9<( Z~ -0 Ou.. .....).....J -<( :J 0- cog Wen ()~ u::~ LLLL O~ I-~ Zl- _::J og 0... c::: W I- en >- o z o I- ~ W ....J ill 1-5> 00 Ii w= s~ 00 .....JO .....JT"" 1, 'o:::::::Ll) .::::::~ o::~ Qui I-m U)~ '<t o::~ we> I-c) Zc5 ::J~ Iffi a. >-5 COli o OZ wttl a...ffi Q~ .....J;J, w> >~ w~ o 5: w > t-:- en w $: I t-:- a::: o z 5: w > t-:- en <( w I t-:- a::: o z ~ r en I'- s <( w -. > w ~ r- 0 w a.. en c:: w 0 ..., 0.. 0 ... 0 r- C)<{ Uo ~ ...J~ ~ Z ...J~ 0:: Z~ 10 ~ 10 W -0 .~~ 0.. o!!: ~~ O~ w .....J-' I-~ en _<C en v- ::J :::::> 0- .- 0:::5 0)8 w~ I- u. / . en z~ w- :J~ o~ J:~ -~ >-~ COo::: LLLL . 0 Offi LLz w~ Q<{ o.~ en O~ I-I ...J-J. w;;; Z!3 >~ w~ -0 0 ~ Oen 0- cr: W I- CI) >- \ Q t. s w > I- Cf) W S I I- ::l o Cf) ~ z o I- o W en C> z o -' = -9 ::::It CD~ CD CO Z o I- o W en C> z - o -' = -9 ::::It CD~ . ...... .- M ~ :J U) ~ z W :J: U) ~ w tii rr o z o o en-' z-' g~ oC> WZ en- C>Z ~~ OW ::::!a: ::>ees CO J: U) ~ IL :J: b o iij ~ Cl z Z ~ ~ ~ l:! o z o o .0 -' -' ~ " Z Z <( I- W 0:: W o en I 1-= o ::>~ O~ en;; CX) <:( ~ I 'I o I- .~ 0:: W 0- W en ::> (9<( ZZ _0:: of2 .....1-' -<( :::>0 alO o w~ u~ u:~ u..Ll.. O~ I-en z~ _:J 00 0... en ~ W I- en >- o o -,8 -'~ ~~ o::~ 0: I-u:l enr:. v 0::0 w:g I-tS zo ::>~ :r:ffi a.. >-[5 CD~ Cl 02 will o-ffi O~ -,-' w~ >~ w~ o ....~ *. ".1' ! "\:' ~l ~.i '\/ .~ \ ~~ t~ : .--"-, li. ~ '\ \ ,,~ '" \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ~).,\ " -0 ... ... \ \ \ \\ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \. \ , , \, \ \.5 \ \ \ ~,,'i ..... j ,/ j I ! ; ~lc.i _. .1 H-J ~ <(l~j. ~ <, 080 rzo-s,O NJV ) z <( -I a.. w I- en w ~ ::> I- ::> LL I- ~ ~ w a.. w en ::> {..9<( ZZ -~ O~ .....j:J _<C ::>0 CO 0- o W~ (.)~ u:~ u..LL O~ I-en Z~ -::> 00 (Len tl:: W I- en >- o (j) <( ..... 00 I I -10 I I ~~ o -18 -I:;; ~~ ~~ O~ 1-u1 en~ ~ ~o W~ 1-l3 Z6 ~2 ..ji= Iffi a. >-6 cao= o 02 will a..ffi O~ -I...J w~ >~ w?;l o I- Ul :J i. .!~ ~ 5t!5~g. Z~ii:K~ ~2fi6S E:C~~~ 8&.s::c4. .=~ 0-'> p::~ Co -"9 ~-" " ~~~8~ ~ : g'i~ -.a -i n .~~~ 0~ IS 80 ~ Go ~c8~o:o:~ IJ '0 e 'I ~5 J!'.) !j", ~i Eli: 0.9 ~ .2,g .l:... ~r~! g~ Ii i-fi ~ f 1.5!~ ff. J~ ii:<.> "' -g ~ c.., 'X s", ~ ~ 8. E~ ~8. R . 11 lI'~ .E'i EQ. 0'1: 00 ~~ . Z III 1 ~ Eo .E ~ ~ E'i a~ 20- Eo&.'I: H~n o e e 1S1~l'<; ~~. "n~ .. ~g :z 1l.c 0 g;~ :t~ e-a.'81i 85~Jl;f . E .. !~~ gs'[ l~5 '. S ~1l -u 00 ~Gl ~.-t: ..8 !~ g"3 "'0: '. :.0 ~ o <.> ~~ 0.... i5 :n: 'c Co 0.., 'Gc o:S =E... oJ! EQ. ~tf g C> ~ e 'C ~~ I i ~ ~ e'~ :~ ]~;~~1 i!.s"i'08~ "iS~!l.:J11. . . o o . >.c .. .' clD ~! . I ii :5 ~i!!l ~j~ .!!. ~~i~ SQlQ.G: o .~~ ~~ ~,g ~f O@cZ)G}$ cSE , 515 Cl-fi~ ~5~ 8.5 8:: ~ E.5E g~2 'g-g 58-g i ~;g ~i's.s >> c , . 3E ..~ .f.. ~ . "f 00001 J ~ ., ~ ".). C> "- ;'I~';';)I :I \. \ \ \. \ \ ,!..j~:'\, :, \ \, .3\..1 - I I I I ! I I I I I ! i G\ U>C> I;:;l~ "'~ ~::> ~ro ".... ~l '6"- t.'5 g~ Vl " ~ ~ <, ., '" ~~ ~(j ~~ ~~ 0:", 8 ,. 0: l? Ul \ '\ t \ ~ \ \ \ . '!: \ ~, \ ~! \ : I i l..\ ! , ; i I I i .., 1 i ,J I i L, \ ~;E~\ \.- .., ::; ~ f3~ GQ ~s ~cn l? lo <, i- ~ -A....--of .-j. --r-~--.. ,...--'"'--g--- \,7' ~ I Ui z o l- t) UJ en w a.. o --I en w a.. <3 en o z :5i'l c:' :8 !;? o ~~ o 0", ~-o 56 .c....J "-" -0:5 ">. ~.o .c ~-o <~ lU 8.'~ :5 ge '" " 1'!.a .32 ,,~ '" .c" " ~ 0 -0 >. e Zi.2 O'i "i-o C we .g ~~ -0 ~~ q)~ ~~ 8g '" c "0 "'0 G) .c 5.0 '" - >. =0 o E .; ~ o --c " "- 8 '" --c c .2 <: ~ 'j ,. " "S: ~ o .e :E o < " "- o o '" -0 C o ..J " .,.; <: " E l' :; 0- l' ~ " ~ ~ .~ ~ "- " E [:> '" o :0 '" .3 c ~ :i -3 0 '" '" '" " " 0 :S " <: .E '" 0 C -0 3; 0 .2! .c '" '" .2, '" -0 0 0 " .a .3 '" " ~ :;;: .--: 0", <: ~o [g ..9tt= ~:c ...; ,,00 'S; E.e ~"'O:c lDe aiii:<( '" 3; o -0 C 'j i'i o :a -0 <: <: " l' o '" l' o Ul.,; <: '" 0" .- 0 Sg ..2" -0 ~" c,,- !;?E n. __ . ~ NO =a~ ;0= o q).!:! .c.c ~o. o E~ 0'" .t=~ '" ~ " 0& '" ~~ c" ".... E c ~8 ~5 " " ~~ e>. ot '~ ~ E5. '" -0..: ~~ -0", o c CIJ~ i] '" . (p~ "-a " 3; "'- "'0 c 0", '~f '" ,!; .0 -03 eO. ~o] 'C ~ 8 ~ 0=0 oi~.S .,.; ~ E ~ 0. ot5 "'~ -C 01 Q) .z -gg '0 ~.~ I...~ J:: 8. ~ <<> ~ ~ 6 ~ .cO o ...._ :5 ~:a 'i =E ~ ..E~ e 0", e -00 "'.c 0", o l5..~ Q) <0'0 .a .Q &. '5 ~Ul ~ {i :; E '0 2l '" 1.' -0 I "- .3 '" ~ o g ~-B o :> 0 o .8.0 -go 5 ~ ~-g -'" <c.c '0 C " e '" oj' o .E '" '" -0 " "'.0 c ~ ~a a... 0.0 -ti .e o o '0 ,!; '" '" .~ " :S o '" '" '" c " '" " c;. c o .c .g' '" ~ '" " -0 a Ol ~ o l' o ~ " c 5 o R .S! :;;: d '" " ~ u -ti " -0 c ~ .e " E o '0 ~ o '0 [:> --c " g~ :> .cL ...." 'i 0 '" E ..!!~ .g q; 01' ...... 0',., .:l.a c-o " " Eti "''' " c '" c o 1.'0 0" e.Q 3;-0 0' C .co " 3] > 0 L 0 " '" o " ~.o e ::8 -ti " tl :[ >. 'B :3 o E 2 ::> a " D -0 .c Ul '" a 1.' a 8- a o '" --c C !;? ~ "" :5 '10 .... o -g en 2.~ > " '" .Q'- ==~ 0'0 .s::", "'.... n:C -0 a L 'C <( " ...." 00. Eo o ....'" C-o o c 0...3 =", <:5 . ~ -"'0 0... 2", '" e ~~ eO. '" o ~.... Q)~ f.Q ~a ":5 .Dc o 'BE .s:: "'- -.... 0", ~j o'~ EO' ....>. e ~ a" -Ul o.L . " -c <" ..s:: "'~ ~ .....I z :5 (L UJ a.. <( () en o z <( -I ~ ~ r- ~ ~ UJ a.. UJ CJ) ::::> (9 Z - Cl ....J - :::::> en w () - U. LL o I- Z - o a.. 0::: w I- en >- o <( z r!: o LL - ~ C3 ~ o u (/) () Z <( 0:: LL Z <( (/) I I- ::::) o (/) b .., .~ ()g -I.... -11' 10 ~IO ~ CO O::~ O~ I-~ (/)~ .... 0:::5 W~ I-~ Z~ ::>~ Ilf ::l >-~ m:s o ill W~ o..~ O~ ...J~ W~ >f.':! W~ Cl I , ':; _~; Iy I [ ~~ ~ I: ..~_u un _ . .u. .... "'n 1<;'- ....,~ . (\\~ \ ... .... r ....~~/ ~" :\ - ,I---~ I~'I~\' III' ,,~~\ \~ ~ ./ / l?! :--','\\,-\ p-,.-' ITi'! .~~ \\\';, ~'I~- I /~.J MIll ':~~~~\ : j...-A ~ ~~~\\ l- -. lr L-/ - I I. '\~~'\ ! 1.._____ _________ ,. I I '" ..~ \\\'\\, \ \ ! "1'" ,.J I i \\ ~~~\'\ i--- :!!.. - I \'\:\~ \~ [ __ --~ I ~,,~~:\\\\ , I I LJA'" ~\ ~~ L ~.. I'J~" ~~~\'\b\ i J ; -- 21 :/ ~\\~>\ r __ ~ .- < . 4>') .j>' ~/ ~ ;,\ \\.\ ~ ! ~ I Y"'! ~\\\\,.\ &..0 '" ~\\'\ .. i'''. /. - :<\\,' , ' ;- -- / -! ! I'" \'Y..'A ~~~~\~\\ ~ ;/. .-' ,Vr--l" . '\iJ'~ 7~1 \~~~~\\\\ . V i - d/ ""... \ /" "'01 \'\ '\ \ \\,:" .j 'll I ~.r :/:/" ~\\\\'\ \ L- ~_ ~ __ -, I~ \f. "r (/' '6- \ ~~\\~\~\\ [ ',,~ l ~~ .-"-'- s~ / ~/" ~~\~\ ~ f.-- -If; --.-. , , .. ~,:,,~, I' -- ~ ~" // ., ,\ '\ \ " p >~_. -- --- ~ \\ \ \\ P-- ~ :!! ;1/ I N--- )1 ---0'"" .~ 0 '\\~:~~, , "':... _ 1111' -.- ~, .^ "^"\ , I ~":-- I: ~, ~~%\ I _ -7 . II 0 0 ,/ . ~~\\ r ~_ _- .-' T...... ~.__. ... 0" ~. S~r \ ~i '\'./~l\\ ~ n"'\\ . ~...,L- ':--:,.. "- ,'^~ ~, C-- A / / - _ '" · V" )."0 ! i1JI, !;. .~ ~ -- .....".. .!! \A;; ~^.~:\~, V Iil. tt. 1- · -.'" .j,.'>./~ " '..'''., i ~t ~. / ~ .. ". '\~ ,~I /~ "'/" }~; ~\ t. k'~. !---. '/1"'\~~' \~~ I' ,.'-.1 ' 1/ ' ., ,),1 .~ ,,\~ "/'-..,/ ~ \ .' "\; \' ~ \ . \ , ___/ ~ ~\' HJ~~_~ --l o~ ~.~ " ';q. ~ ",~l \\\ \ \ \ I . "," , N .,'. ,,' , I V !!! ~ 1~' .-----'5- "'f! lJ;i.' '(l ~ \ \ V). , I I ~ . If...;' >," \ l : \~ ~~ it ". ~ / r I "." ...... , ' \ . ", !~ ( .;.' m r€"""- .. . ,,' .;, ~~ ~ I ' ,,, "'I ' u , ... , . '.. " .,'''' . I !--y 1_ / / '" I ~ '. ., \ oil" / ~~ ,\\ ,\'\ ' . V _ c< ~ "'. ~ ' \ i 0( ~OD ---f._L.-- 1 f'f.,'t'fl- ~F~ll'~-r','- \. \ \ i,;\...r--I __ Y" r:~! I -, J :-J..,,,,- 'I: /- i I i ,/.. ~~~ \\ \ J, · , i~ ' , ,. . "., " · · ~ 0 (K+ .1 ~' \. \ II C: <>\;;'1 \.~. '~\~\\ II \ i! _' ""''i ) ~ '--" ~ \2 . \. ". L -, )'\ '\; ,>~ ~\~~\~ ~ ",-*n~: ,..:;; ':Ii ,,,' '\" \" \ 1,* / ~ ~ ,I ~ iU - - ~r / i'~ ~ :1': . \ I \ \\\ \ \ ") ( \: ~\.' \\ t. ....] W ~ t j ',' \. \ ~ 'l' I \ '~,5<~' I; ~, ~ " ./ : l-- . i ~ .", / }I '\ '"" \ ,J7,'" . ~ · · 1~1 ~ FtfJ~;/l" l, '\ ,U;\\.I "" I .';,:> \ \'(J .\:~ ! 0,~ ~ [7 . ~ Al(llll · . · V 0$1' \ ~ Y. " ,i . j,u~1 II 'l, I!J "' . ' ;,' ::'TT \~. \ ~ co< ..i!\'U' . -me< ;/ ~ ' 7/ ;-~. V" '" -'\~\~/(Q \ \\ ~ "'. , ' ~ ~ " 0 ~ o.~I". ",,! < . ~.' ", ~I CJY 5. '<~ ~ -- - ~.,. ~ ~ r . ,'. .;. .. ,1' ! _ I i::::!--<: .....\ =, f-"-EJ:"tiii't /~;,. \ ~ I: .;0, ,,' ~ 0; I , k! ," tr\)c R~''rl\ \{G" \: . i /<., \" ( ~ ' '~12:4~\ ~j! ~ ?-~~\Ct '1lA'.~ t~ ~ ./ \ \ \ \ \ \ I I ~ii i;' !~ " " · ,J! N' I\.. " '1./ r<..;" , }//' \ \ \ \ \ \ " \ '... ,I : 8\ ""- ",U; \ ~ \' \ 17 \ \ ," ,i i ' ii ~, \ L\i- " ~ ' 'IAI,#' ,V'~ ' \ '\' \ Ii.""""" ,"f:!. ,,,'.':T", '~ 1;9 / ~ I!' \) \\ '. \. '\ ,'iti!'7-f \'. \ · - \\ ,,\'], \~ u-:c \ ,. "" ':' ! i ,_~ ,-" Ie, @!,L-I \ " ,_-:\U__~ 1\ ZS";', t:t..- ,II ;I,~ {~ ~! i \ o'~ "-~~lf?!;. \~L~ .;::::~\-1, 111~, ", I -: \. \," ~ -;,~~i~ '~~;t~'''~:~!~>I! _ ..: I--{-< c( '\ \ ~ f';''lTJ-j'jl -~ ~---'--"-... ~ :~\~? Vi ~'. 'I) ~ i ~ \ \ " ('-- [t~li-.t.,.~t.. '~; ~J:::=-\ ., I -~- ! . \ I ( i,tl+III,' , .- I' o " ; \ , itlCCIJ1C:=:J' _..~--~,.' I' e . " ! l,. ! " ,! IH.ttiff --- W';~j '". :;:;'~ I@ ... ~._;- i! 5 ~, ~! 1-___-< \\" f '+I'hF __.~u . ''''^ ~~. -, ' _ ...Ii ~ ,\ \']ltt ~ ~.l \ 2 It . I I o i' ,- __ _ -.L \ I rnt I -' I. i 1;_J[~ILlw~~:73B!-f1H~~ 11=:", ,~]~::: {\ j" \1 '" _ _Lj_.. ~ " l -- -.- ... =bc"J 1 ,,- . U I lUlU, ~......_._..-..._- ~OBt'~1~3~7- ~ ~+- J~ H:JJ. 'rIW - ~~~ f5V'1l11 ~I'l 1Il!ic1: '-;", h:z~',~ ~~ ?: ~~~ I j-t..ht" I I m -'-1 ,,-;;a~ gk'~~ : -It-wOO c.,~-:k<" int .' .~~ a>N "" '-- ~, -.~ ~~~~'; ~",,- W -.-, J~./. '\.. <5 ~( \ o~ lJ; ~' ,""\"'; I - - - -- ._.-- -.. .-- ~ ,\:~f)\ltHR ilh- ~ ~".~<\\ ~ '(:t.. ~~ ~: ~~ ;:1Jr ~'E ~6 o ~ t','" - U :!t-...-i<nn: t ~. ~ '""' ~ :::t;qID~ ()I, Iy l.4.I (iJY Q_bt;~~ 0'..)'/. c~'" ~.... Cl:1J . ~/nl\ ~.. Q ~r-~~~~ == Z g ~ti:;;:t:3~ _ I!)~Vl~O~ a: t: lJfZ5~~in Q. 1,1:: ~~Ft.1~lrl j~~ I!i;i! (!J ~ '7 OI..;...:.-J:!:2e" o ~~':l g:~~r.r~E~ a: roo.: t:=::;~'of!l~ 0. =Er;] ::E~~~~8 ~ ~ ~,'.," L. Ji:. ~~ <'" ,. t ,.I f L.:: D'L i1!o i\f - o ....... ^ U I) saaJl; ,~....L-,,_._=-- .~~ :[1 ~I } '''HI-m,.., G:J--, ' , I --. ~ I ~ ~ I I I <:(, I c( Z o - 0' I-<!. O~ Wu CI) :: ...J8 <:(' o ii: -, ~I : "' ! .,; , , I i ! I i_ .m'! r-----"'--'- , u m! I m z Q "' I- ., o::'j w :~: (I): -Ig < o ii: ~I w (9 <( Z - <( 0:: o ~ (9 Z o 1/ ~ (9 [ I- ~ 0:: w a. w en :J LL LL o I- Z - o c.. ~ W I- en >- o <.9~ ZZ _0:: oft -1-' -<( ::>() CO o~ () w~ u~ -~ LL Z <( en I I- :J o C/) i ;l !~ ;~ Ii ()o -'0 -'~ 10 ~~ o::~ Qui I-m wI-:. <;j' D::g WID J-c3 Z6 :J~ Iffi IL >-B LOa: o OZ will a.~ o~ -l--' w~ >~ w~ o i ~ I!! 'i' u ~ ! L(')- co.r co~ u'f J zf"..~ -~"" ;"' ~ ~co COo o~.r t~~ ...~~! :C:::>>='O ~ U) ciS 0> _.. '0 D:: U) ~ 'c :1:.:>'-- lII~g .... ::J- zoo ~_rnU O~ci z~'-- -' .... 8 E _ (f)U "'=00 _>L(')~ ~ -n C -Un 0 ~(f) - - ~~\l s~ S ~ - "':.\.j.\ (~ ~l ~ g GtlIFO'P-~\'i-. Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: February 15, 2007 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Use Permit to allow at 40-foot flag pole as a means of masking a cellular phone tower site in the C-l Retail Commercial Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.76, 20.81, 20.85, and 20.105. Subproject: Owner: Applicant: Case Nos.: P06-0041 & UP06-00 12 SSC Property Holdings William Stephens (T -Mobile USA) P06-0041: UP06-00 12 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit applications P06- 0041 and UP06-0133 based on the attached draft Findings and subject to the attached draft Conditions of Approval. BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION: The South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) contains flagpole standards in section 20.76.155. This section identifies 30 feet as the maximum height for a flagpole. The application is for a 40-foot tall pole, and therefore, the project requires a use permit. Because this is a cellular tower application, the subject tower is also subject to SSFMC Chapter 20.105, Antenna and Tower Regulations. Location & Project Description The site is located at the corner of Meath Drive and Carter Drive on what was a "Shurgard Storage" site (recently changed to "Public Storage"). City records indicate that the storage use was approved with a Use Permit in 1980. An existing 40-foot tall flag pole stands in the location of the proposed 40- foot tall cellular tower/flag pole. The proposed project consists of installing two antennas within a new 14-inch diameter flag pole, four associated equipment cabinets (located inside an existing onsite building) and one new structure called a "doghouse". The "doghouse" will be constructed on the front of the existing storage building, near the flag pole location. The size of the dog house (two feet tall by two-and- a-half feet wide by two-and-a-halffeet deep) and the grade change on the property is such that the dog house will have little visual impact from the street. The "doghouse" will be painted to match the existing building. Finally, all cable routing will be contained within the flag pole and run underground from the pole to the building. P06-0041: UP06-00 12 T-Mobile USA - Use Permit 2679 Meath Drive February 15,2007 Design Review Board The Design Review Board (DRB) reviewed the project at its November, 2006 meeting. The DRB recommended design changes including: . Consider a 10-foot tall by two-foot wide square base for the pole, finished in stone, masonry or calstone type material, with a 12-inch diameter ball on top of the pole, and . Add landscaping at the base of the pole to soften the look of the base. Since the meeting, the applicant has modified the design of the flag pole to incorporate the recommended changes. Staff supports the recommended changes. The intent of the comments from the DRB was to add some proportion and scale to the new flag pole. The flag pole now has a thicker base that will surround a quarter of the pole height (lO-feet), while the top quarter of the pole will house the two antennas. Finally, a larger ball has been proposed for the top of the flag pole to be more in keeping with the scale of the pole. The plan does not include additional landscaping. Staff has drafted a condition of approval requiring that additional low scale landscaping (shrubs) be installed near the base of the pole to further screen the base of the pole (Planning Condition #3). The project includes replacing an existing 40-foot tall flag pole with a new, thicker 40-foot tall flag pole. By placing the cellular antennas inside a flag pole, the cellular infrastructure will have little, if any visual impact on passersby. CEQA: The proposed project is a Class 3 Categorical Exemption pursuant to the provisions of Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act - new construction of minor facilities. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve application P06-0041 for Use Permit application number UP06-0012 based on the attached draft Findings and subject to the attached draft Conditions of Approval. The proposed facility complies with the City development standards, including the Antenna and Tower design regulations contained in SSFMC Section 20.105, and all of the proposed equipment would be concealed inside of new and existing buildings on the property. P06-0041: UP06-00 12 T-Mobile USA - Use Permit 2679 Meath Drive February 15,2007 \ TMS/ghb Attachments: Draft Findings of Approval Draft Conditions of Approval Plans, revision date 12/13/06 P06-0041: UP06-00 12 T-Mobile USA - Use Permit 2679 Meath Drive February 15, 2007 DRAFT FINDINGS OF APPROVAL P06-0041: UP06-0012 T -MOBILE USA - USE PERMIT 2679 MEATH DRIVE (As recommended by City Staff February 15, 2007) As required by the "Use Permit Procedures" (SSFMC Chapter 20.81) the following findings are made in support of allowing the erection of a 40-foot tall flag pole to mask a cellular tower at 2679 Meath Drive in the C-l Retail Commercial District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22,20.76, 20.81, and 20.105 subject to making the findings of approval and, based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission which include, but are not limited to the: Plans prepared by the applicant, with a revision date of December 12,2006; Planning Commission staff report, dated February 1,2007; and Planning Commission meeting of February 1,2007: 1. The location of a cellular tower at 2679 Meath Drive will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community, or detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. Staff has drafted conditions of approval to ensure that the aesthetics of the pole are optimized. 2. The proposed project complies with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of "Community Commercial" by including a use that will improve cellular phone service in the area. 3. The proposed project complies with the standards and requirements of the C-l Zone District, the Sign Regulations, and the Antenna and Tower Regulations. The applicant is working within the City's Use Permit process, as required by the SSFMC to erect a flag pole that is more than 30 feet tall. * * * DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P06-0041: UP06-0012 T -MOBILE USA - USE PERMIT 2679 MEATH DRIVE (As recommended by City Staff February 15, 2007) A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: I. The applicant shall comply with the Planning Division's standard Conditions and Limitations for Commercial Industrial and Multi-family Residential Projects. 2. The project shall be completed and operated substantially as indicated in the plans prepared by the applicant, with a revision date of December 13,2006. 3. Prior to submitting for plan check, the applicant shall submit a landscape plan for additional shrubs and landscaping near the base of the flag pole for review and approval by the Planning Division. Planning Division contact Gerry Beaudin, Associate Planner, (650) 877-8353 B. Building Division conditions of approval are as follows: I. Comment at plan check. Building Division contact Jim Kirkman, 650/829-6670 C. Engineering Division conditions of approval are as follows: 1. Any work performed on City's property shall require an encroachment from the Engineering Division. 2. The owner shall apply and pay all fees and deposits for the encroachment permit. Engineering Division contact, Sam Bautista, 650/829-6652 ';; Existing Existing Flag Pole (To be Replaced) l"il- . Shurgard Storage o Je f1 2679 Meath Drive site # BA 73040A South San Francisco I CA view from Callan Blvd. looking southwest at site Proposed T-Mobile Flag Pole ~J~Y,~uQis~~1~1~ ) Existing Existing Flag Pole ITa be Replaced) Shurgard Storage '" 2679 Meath Drive site # BA 13040A South San Francisco, CA view from Duhal/ow Way looking southeast at site Proposed T-Mobile Flag Pole ~o~Y,~ntS~~utn~ ) Existing Existing Flag Pole (To be Replaced) ':l:' " llll\t( 1 '1 J. ~ Shurgard Storage "~" 1..10 ,)1 E. 2679 Meath Drive site # SA 73040A South San Francisco, CA view from Meath Drive looking northeast at site Proposed T-Mobile Flag Pole togY?",~ts~~1~1~ ) ~> I w<o-""....,~u') "" if) :::::> z~ t- g~ <( Q:;~ I- 5 if) ~~~~~~ zzzzz ~ 22222 if) ~:g",,,,,,,:g (f) <(.......0001"') o-"m,,""'" -1""')f""')CO~ <J l . I- Z - o c. - Z< ~~ o ~\ . H-4 ~ D III I ~ ~UI :)1: ~ ~ 2i 5 ~ ".1 '" ~ 52 ....::: !i", 0'" .. ~z ~~ I a ~ ~c; w'" ~ I ~ IIIz: ~<l iO'~ Zl;: Q... i'iz ~~ t; ~ >!o ~'" w'" o N 3m I;; ...e 0: ~! ~.. ~i lOa.. o~ 00 ~ o o ~ ~ ~ ~ 0\ "" ~O ~~ ~~ 0\ ~< ~U"" ~~ ~8 V)Z v)o ~U ~ ~ D D i I: ~ ~ ~ ~ C) ~ <0 O~ ~r:Fl ~~ ~< r:FlC) ~ ~ ~ r:Fl ~ ~ ll! LlJ III ~ ~ z 2 III III ~ & ~ ~<3~ .... om6 'VJ 'ffiIOJNOJ <..> f- ~~oa < ~ ~ LlJ 1l001d Hl6 <IA1H AVh\31.VD sm < ~ ~j:!:~u 0 ... '" 1= t- .3allqoW · 8i:S~@ 0 0 '" >- <::0< c;: "" l::J LlJ . ill ~",e:~ < ~ '" <..> :I: "" V1 V)~~~ => i= voa :I: V1 l.NIOdINII\IO~ F!' => Sl .. ~ ~ < -I ~ ~ ~ ~ z i= i= Z ~ ~ < ~ ~8 irl ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ .. .. ~ ~ -- g ~ i= 0 mm Z ~ Nf1l"t \-<(<(<(<( ~ llj 2~ ~~ <Q-I!!l~ f-<C1l10 e@8~f- ~f--I[~ &~~tH~ ~~Iii~~ llj!l! !a;?; S ~f-lLl!)f- cti~~~~ ~~~~2 ~~~Ei ~~S~~ t~~~~ ~Ia~~~ ~~~~ffilli ~~~g38 ~ ll" < " ~~. i2Z "" to' tr ~~ I I ~ ~~ Z :t * l! ~ . . ifi t!l2 ~ ~ 'tS ~~~ S 1l;R::ll.~ ::;I'tS~ NZ zo-~ ~LlJ 0,,9 ~8~ ~:<i!iB.~ ~ l!:!"=> :Z~:<i!"z ;Z; ~~~8~~~~! S ">1l1,... "\l:)LlJIT Qo .....:l ~ ~ 'tS :('tS ~ g~9 S 2~S 8 !!l~iB ~ ~lQ:<i! ~ ~;;~ - ~~~ 0 DLlJ~ iil ~~~ 0 <~o I: u..~" U <c;:::!!: ll! ~!!l~ ~-I:<i! ~ Ill;?; o~" ~ ;?;~& !!:cCi ,... 9<~ ~'tS~~~~iB~~ ....:SNSIl'i~-tSu) ~ III III ;?; ll! D - ~liJQ~ 1:~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ .: >r:f-'!M ~~~3~ ~ . ~~2ii1 I:~<z ~,,~~ ~f-~ll. ~~~~ s~~!Z .LlJ~< ~~~~ <~~~ ~liii= " u..-~LlJ ~gz~ ~~SID "I- _f- --~:J -I-Iz- ~~z5 ....u..!1:J1ll Z ;ZZ <l1.l< i= . 1l1~ "~ ~~~~~ i=:rlo..S" ~ i= IT. ~ ~ i ~o\ll~ ~~I:~ ilS'<t~N )-1T:!::ii ~~:fo ~lQg~in ~~S~~ :!:fRZZ() ~!5iSSif ~ \0 ;?;O ~~ ~lR :z~ Om ~- !!l9 mm'<t~~ ~<::ii~"> ~~~u..~ Illll.~~~ ;5~!M;5~ irlll.~fj~ DIO_"it ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ CI.l -I~llj ~~~~ ~2~~ -<-~ ~~~!l! 2iii;?;f- <llllQE 1l1()!H:t ~-':zlll -I~-Z ~Z~~ <(o::!~ ~~~~~. ~~:~~ cti2~l1.l~ ~~~~~ ~Q<!l.~ ~~iS~~O o-~- "D_D ll. ~ o -I It: ~ ~ ~ 8 . 0.. 00.. < Ii ~ 0 f- ~ O~~5~ 8If-ll!~~~~ -I 8LlJooo I !Z D S _ ~ ~ o o~ ~~ 2 - ll! ~ ~ f- ~ ili~!~~ i 0 ii ;i 0 i i ~ III ii ;1 o ~ ~ ~ T g ~ 3 ~~ z<c 2~ <~ . D:I:D ~:i~ <00 ~i=&! =>;5 t !!l~~ ~ 5;~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ 5 Ill- ~ ~ \0 ;?;O ;~ ~lR -~ ~9 ~m'<tlll~ ~~'~~i ~~~~~ <~ .~.. ~~~~~ DIO_"1l. ~ i= IT . f- lo~~ ~~~~ ilSll"a~ }-<u.."" ~"ll!1O ~lQg~~ ffi~S~~ ~~3S~ CI.l ~ ~ o z ~ o ~ u ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ !Z~ <!( ~~ . I~i ~ ~~~ 0 ~~;; ~ ::!u..LlJ U ~~E ~ u..Zf- ~ Poi ~! ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ Poi N ~ ~ LlJ ~ (!; z~~ . z-$\ll D ~~i1:!::2~~z~ ..( g2.~~~~~~f- :t " CI.l ~ g fj~2lii~G~ .1l1 ~ tZi U ~ ~~~~S~~~~ ~ 0 ~~~TlljD~~~ """'" Z .....:l S ~ ~ ~~~~~i~~f- U I ;?; ~ ~ ll! ~ LlJ LlJ " o~ Z ~ ~f5f5~~;5~.z ll! .. . ~o I: :I:~~~:I:~ f- ~ ~~ f-g~;5S~ ~ ~ U II~ I I II ; rr ~ > N'" ...on ,....~I ~ ,. ., ,.. ""Ill ,... ., ,. ...,- 0 '" CO I Aoz: .. ~ (/) :)- ;;; ill '" :=> ~~ 2~ s 0 ~tH: ..., ~ ~ '" f- ~~ Om'6 'V'J'mIOJNOJ ~~g~ '" <( l'il ~ ~ Q !2 :!:l 5'" 11001.1 H.L6 GA1H AVA\H.LVD ml '" l!:! - f- <z: ~~ ~~ ~j:!::~(..) 0 V> i= v>'" Iii ... \j) <C (/) "'''' "'''' ~LS~~ g 0 ~~ :z :z :z :z ! lD .~aIJqow · t- i :z zz zz !:it; wO> ~J. '" ","'", ;:;: '" ttI '" w 0 00 00 I " . m ~",e:", V> '" :I: N NN NN MiI!i ~~ <O'~ z'r '" V> :=> <0 " ffi;z' ~~ t; v;.......zz :::> (/) ~:g ~<'i~ :I: :gl~ ~I~ o ~i ;g alii vaG V> (/) "'- 1;::15 &"z .LNIOdINWO~ i!' 0- .....'" co~ ~ IE~ w~ :::> "'''' :il ..... <l .... lOa.. 01.1: 8~ .... ...oIIl ~ ~ ~ ~ .... \..\~~\\1~1 _~ji r.~ ~-. ~ .JJ Jjf ',- : N 1::> ,., n 1::> ,., 1::> ~ (S -1 ill oJ) :z i= '" X llJ <t: ~I~ uil rn .S II I . 9N1a11f19 9N11SIX3 -I ~ '1'.0-,09 ~I \ill 0 ~ o~ ! ~ ~I ~I ~ ...1 $~I ::i ~I I u ~ 9 ill ~ tii ~ ~ 9 2 '" ~ I m j> ::!: ~ 9 . ~ j' ~ x I x I x I x I oJ) z (S -1 ill oJ) z ~ X llJ ~ (S -1 ill ~ i= '" X llJ 3:ArnaHLV3W <( ~ ~ ~ .t/I ~j-,1:S III i! m u; ;~ ;=...11;: -' trim ~~::i ~ ~ ~o ~~~ @ I~ ;~~I ~~;~; ~I i ~~~ ~~ ~< ;=~ !~~ II~ i~ ~i~ ii ~8! ~~i ~I~ ~~; ~"! ~~; ~I! ~~I ~II ~I~ e e e e 8 ~ w~~ ~ mlll~ ?i2 ~~~~ i nb !~_! iS~~~ \03 ~l!f9~ ~5 ~~ill?i <~ ~II~ I~ ~~W~ I~ 2~m~ iC @g~~~ .~ ~L.,,~~;>i ",ll:l o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .... ll. ~ ~ ~ I ~ [ ~ ~ ~ ; I I i I i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ tii\!! ~ ~ ~ ~ tii ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 88@0@@ j ~ ~ E--< ~ fZ) ....:l ~ ~ o Ir ;u > "',.., ....'" P'''''I """'III ... """'IIIIl P' ""'IIIl P' ""lIl ... UJ - 0 ~a "" '" (/) !;!: ~ ~ !;j! i51~ '" :::) ~! ~ ~ ~<3~ ~ ~:S I- h:~ Om6 'V'J 'ffilOJNOJ ~gs8B < ~~ <C 5~ -r' lI001i1 Hl6 aA11I AVM31VD sm < ~ ~ N I- == ~ 0'" ~F!:~~ 0 (/) ~<.:> <.:><.:> <.:><.:> ~z: d ~~ ; .... en F= 0;0:; zz zz .@allqow. ~~~~ 0 0 I- ~~ <( i ,.., z ~~ zz ;.,t; ",'" J, ;:;: "" w l.J..J 2 22 ~!i: < w NN I MlI!i ~1S 'il~ . m j:!",e:", en <.:> :J: :::) "" en <0 <0 I Q 15", "'~ t; V;""'Z:Z :::> I~ (/) j:!o <0 <0 ~!~ ~ ~I ;~ 3~ vaa <0<< :J: (/) ~l~ "'en en en <- \:::1'5= l!:z .1NIOdININO~ FE 0- ,..,,.., N I ~ It~ "'~ 5 ~:5 lX:>_ ... <J ...... lOa.. Oli: g~ .. ........ .IIIl ... ..... ... en ..... \ 4 \ \ \ i 4 \ I I II \ \ @ J \ \ \ \ \ 4 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 4 \ \ \ \ 4 \ _____________LL~~~- \ '------- I {J i ~ ~ j ::t j It) j in ~ -'I" . ~~ ~~ 9 - ~~lQo ~~~; ~~~~ -----.... " .J.~ "" .. '" " " " " " "" " " " .. " " "" " " " .. " " "" " " " " " " " ", ' " ' , , .. , '. '" " , , .. , , "" , " .. , , "" " .. " " , , , .0-,01 ViIl:JV .lN3Wd1r1l%l .9-,t> ..0 N ~ x I x I x I x I x I x I x I x I x I x I x I x I x L c1 .9-,L ~~~I :< ~~~i~il ~1~~~3:~ MUll ';" ~ N "" A.tfJ/ r <:> S> In "" q,: t ~I~ j u.~ 0- rJJ~ ~ S> It) 0 ~ ...:l < ffi E--- ~ ::t !:: n .9-,yl ,9 .9 .9 .~lh6 G ;) 0- J It) 0 c ~ ~ o 115~ Q ~~;:: o ~l!l N \';:!a5 lilF~<jG\B ~3:t(i ~~ ~~~ ~ia il as ,'3 "o-I~ .O-,v .E.-,v .o-,€ .6.-,1 - ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ 115~ 115~ ~ i~ ~~~~ 8~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ ~?i: i~ ~~ ~ ~~ I~~: es~~ ~9 ~9 ~ ~~ ~~~ B:~?il ?ilia ?ilia ?il?il1E S~?il @ @ @00 @ 5 ~I!~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ I ~~~ I ~ @ i ~I~ ~ i~I~~! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ N~~i< ;i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~9 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~I~~:f ~ ~ ~i ~ ~ I~ J~~~ ~ ~~ I~ ~us ~ B:~~~~3~ ~ ~~ B:~ ~~ (0 8 G@0@ 8) !~ I ~ -~~ ~ ~ 5 w !I.1i E' ;" ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ I~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ t~~ ~ ~ ;iinX~ ~ .. . -it! ~ 0( ~~ ~ s~ lll~ \S)t~~ ~ 8 S~~o I!!~ ~~ 5~!~ ~ i~ ~~~i ~j ~~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~cs ~~~i ~~ ~~ ~18Ge \3 08 Do "" <:> '" ,'" N ~ w~~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~~ :f \) Z ~csi~ ~ ~ < ~~~~ ~i ~ ~ ~~~i!t ~~ ~ < ~!Ii~~ ~E ~ ~ ~~ia~ ~~ ~ < ~~~~ ~~! ~ ~i~~ ~. ~ ~ ~!!~ ~i ~ S ~~~~! ~!! g ..~ 3: ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ !j5 ~ ~ ~ 80 "" <:> "" q,: ~I~ U.S cn~ ~ ~ x ;;j ~ ~ Ii3 ~ ~ '" ~ i i ~ q L J) ~~ ~~ ~ ! S ~ ~ ill Il:i~ Il:i~ ~~ ~ ~ u. :c ~ h 11111111 ~8G e G08e ~ o j ~ CI J:.Ll ~ ~_N""'...l.() 0 ~ a:: ~VI ex:> .. 0 ~ ::)!i .... (/) ;;; '" :::::) Z;o: 20 ~ ~<3~ w ~ Ow "" I- ~5 => OZS\76 'v:> 'mIO:>NOJ ~~oa < ~ <( ~~ 10%1 '" "' < ~ ~ m ~i ~.. ~~ lIOO1d H!6 CIA 18 A V A\3!VD sm ~~~u 0 l- e.> Iii .... en ~ (/) ~~~~~~ o:::~ I .@aIlqow. ~l5~~ ~ 0 f- ~ <( ~~ !cr lD a:: w zzzzz '" ",,<< 0:;: < w W 00000 ~t; ~c5 ;n~ => . m ~",e:"" en "" :I: NNNNN :S!i Z!i: a:: en ... :::::) '" ~~ e.~ t; Vi~~~ => :I: ! (/) ~~tOtOtOO ~ aiii vea en (/) ~:::~~~~ In! tJe l!:~ .LNIOdININOSi iO' => -""'l"")aJ~ ~Q. ~~ "'~ 0 80 en <J z ~ ~ ~~~ ~ .~~~ f- o ~a3 9 ~ :I: ~~~~ \D ~~ii.i => ~ NI"I!:!In ~~ii ~'l'<~ ~ ~~I~ ro~ ~ ~ ~dSo Xll.l ll.lu.. j - tl ;0 '" ;0 <l:: .z.i\'iT ':<!~ u." tI)~ ... ~~ ~ ll:lSt I~~a I~~ ~ Ni 0<1 ~ ~~bit~~ \D ~Hi 0: z ~8 < ,,~~ 3 I~ ~~9 5 '0 -~i1:~ f [Q Iii :z: I~~~ mrblh \D \D:S -~ :z: ~~~ <1= t= ~~~ U) U)ll.l~ 8!!l X _ll.l ll.l ilS~~ -1GS z o - Eo-< ~I ~I ~. ~ =:c: ~ o z .0-,01> .<roLE C'l ll:l~ ~ N~ o<w ~~~~~it~~ Im~dh ~ ~~ ~~ Ii~ t\ .<r,;:" IMI ~ i II I ni Ii I I I I I ,,6<:J\;?~0 ~~ 0 If!> !Yi( ~ ~ <J' <J t? [><1 9 ~ [(J1 ~ ~~B ~~~i ~ ~~GSo ~ o~ ~~"'~ ~l:~a3 b~~~ IN~<~I!:!~ j!: ~ 'f ~ ;0 '" ;0 <l:: .z.illl ~t tI) \01 ~I \D :z: is -I fi3 ~ t= U) :f1 ~ ------------------------, , !+! ~ ~ ~9 a~~Bl b~~~ N"'1!:!1n !~~~ !f~~~ II s - Eo-< ~ ~ ~ Eo-< en <: ~ ~ ~. I I : ~~ , ,-------------------------; I > w-"""'vl.() <>: ~~I:! :1l 2i ~ ~ ".1 In ~ 2 .ceil ~~ n ~ !:;G ",":j! I 2 ~i ~C5.~;:'i: A ~~ :~ i: ~ ~~ ~~ ~~ 1r)Q,. 01./,; 00 <:> ~ 00 <:> ~ .... en '5!<3~ w ~ om6 'V;) 'mIOJNOJ ~gso~ ~ <>: ~ ~OO'll Hl6 GAllI AVM.H.LVD ml ~i:!:~u < ~ ~ ~ Vl 1= .~aIlqow · 8L5~~ <:> '" 0 I- ~ <( <::E~<( 1;: <>: l;j . W < l=!0)l..L..::::E Vl to :r: cn~~~ <>: Vl ... :::> vau :r: ~ Vl .1NIOdININOSi ~ :::> 0 Vl (f) ~ ~~ <( ~~ f-- u (/) ~~~~~~ ~~~~~ NNNNN w ::::> (j') (f) ~~~, ~ i~~Uh ~i~ ~Io'i~~ @ · ~~~I~~~ ~III - ~ Co <:> Co 4:: <ill';;' ~-E u.s oo~ .., 6 .... ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~- ~~ ~ ~~~ :> ;=~ ~ ~fil ~ ~B ?-~ ~ _z_ Q ~ m~9 Nlii\!:!~ I!i I~<~ f :I: ~~i ~~ ~ ~~ 0 rn C"l ~ I'~~ ~ u~~ ~~I5 I~~~ Co ~~i !i1~~~1 <:> ::!? Co ~p~~ 1S ..J iJ3 4:: MUh '" ~I~ z ;:: "' x u.s UJ oo~ .., I ~~~ ~ ~ ~- d I b~~~ 6 ~I ~ ~ Q ~iil ~~B 1\ b~~~ I~I~ .... II ~~~i \{~ ~ iI II ~ I5 i!: ~ ~ u..~ :f ~ E-t .9-.;::" rn .9-,L" ~ ~ uO-.OY ~ Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: February 15,2007 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Genentech Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update - Rezoning request to reclassify ten parcels totaling 39 acres from P-I Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research and Development Overlay District; Zoning Text Amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 (Research and Development Overlay District Regulations) and 20.40 (Genentech Research and Development Overlay District); Master Plan update to address the long-range plan for growth and development in the existing and expanded overlay district covering 200 acres; Transportation Demand Management Program to reduce drive alone trips; and review ofthe Final Master Environmental Impact Report, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.39,20.40,20.87 and 20.120. Applicant: Genentech, Inc. Case Numbers: P05-014I: MEIR05-0004, ZA05-000I, RZ05-0003, MP05-000I, & TDM05-0006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council: 1) certify MEIR05-0004, including findings and a statement of overriding considerations for traffic, air quality and noise impacts; 2) adopt RZ05- 0003, to reclassify ten parcels totaling 39 acres from P-I Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research and Development Overlay District; 3) adopt ZA05-000I, zoning text amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 (Research and Development Overlay District Regulations) and 20.40 (Genentech Research and Development Overlay District); 4) approve MP05-000I, Master Plan update to address the long-range plan for growth and development in the existing and expanded overlay district covering 200 acres and; 5) approve TDM05-0006, Transportation Demand Management Program to reduce drive alone trips. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission held four study sessions between September and November 2006 to review the proposed project and allow an opportunity for public comment on the draft Master Environmental Impact Report. A public hearing was subsequently held on February 1,2007 to formally review the project in detail. At that hearing, the applicant responded to Planning Commission requests and presented the revisions to the Master Plan. The Planning Commission was generally very pleased with the overall approach to the Master Plan and the applicant's proposed revisions. The Commission also provided consensus and direction on several topics regarding the proposed Master Plan and the draft Implementation Plan, dated February 1,2007. Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 2 The Planning Commission did ask for more detail showing the proposed campus entries (specifically the intersection at DNA Way and Forbes Boulevard). Additionally, the Commission also expressed concern over proposed transportation improvements outlined in the recirculated Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report. The item was continued to this meeting to present the final project components including the Implementation Plan, the streetscape improvements, and the Final Master Environmental Impact Report. DISCUSSION: (The attached staff report preparedfor the February 1, 2007 public hearing outlines the overall project description, proposed amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 and 20.40, consistency with the General Plan, components in the draft Implementation Plan dated February 1, 2007, and the components in the draft Master Plan.) The purpose of the public hearing is to continue the formal review of the proposed project and address the issues that were not reviewed at the February 1,2007 meeting. The focus of this meeting will be to address outstanding Planning Commission issues from the February 1, 2007 meeting and review the proposed streetscape improvements and discuss the mitigation measures outlined in the Master Environmental Impact Report. Revisions To SSFMC Chapters 20.39 and 20.40 The February 1,2007 staff report includes a summary of the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District. The Planning Commission asked Staff to address the issue regarding treatment of property that has been removed from the R and D Overlay District, and its conformity with the underlying zoning district's development standards. The current draft of the ordinance provides for structures and uses on property that has been removed from a district to remain as nonconforming uses or noncomplying structures. To address the issue of whether such structures or uses on these properties could be under served after removal, Staff and/or the Project Sponsor will present specific language to the Commission at the hearing. Proposed Street Improvement Plan and Traffic Calming Measures The Master Plan Update includes several proposals to reconfigure Grandview Drive, DNA Way and Forbes Boulevard. The street improvements would include new landscaping along DNA Way and Grandview Drive, new sidewalk segments on Grandview Drive, a new crosswalk at the intersection of DNA Way and Forbes Boulevard, several new crosswalks on Grandview Drive, a new bike path on Forbes Boulevard, Allerton Avenue, Grandview Drive and DNA Way, install potential traffic calming measures along DNA Way and Grandview Drive, and locate on-street shuttle stops on Grandview Drive and DNA Way. The draft Implementation Plan outlines the 933819_1; 405.1027 Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 3 proposed phasing of the street improvements listed above. The proposed improvements have been reviewed by the City's Traffic Advisory Committee (TAC) and the City Engineer. Draft Implementation Plan The Implementation Plan lists the appropriate construction phasing, by neighborhood, for the improvements under the Master Plan. The Planning Commission reviewed the draft Implementation Plan, dated February 1,2007, at the February 1,2007 meeting. The applicant has resubmitted the draft Implementation Plan on Friday afternoon, February 6, 2007. This draft of the Implementation Plan includes the following changes that were not reviewed by the Planning Commission: · Changing the benchmark for the installation of directional signage from six months to December 2007. · Changing the construction benchmark for the food concession and open space area along the San Francisco Bay Trail from the construction of Building 50, which would occur within the next few years, to the construction of Building 4, which may occur toward the end of the planning period. Planning Staff will review the proposed changes to the improvements and the proposed actions listed in the Implementation Plan for Planning Commission approval at this meeting. Master Environmental Impact Report The City of South San Francisco has prepared a Draft Master Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project. This DMEIR was circulated on August 28, 2006, for a forty-five day review period, and closed on October 11,2006 (SCH #2005042121). In September 2006, the Planning Commission held a public meeting to allow the public and the Commission an opportunity to present oral comments on the draft report. As a result of discussions with the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"), as well as a comment letter from Caltrans dated October 6, 2006, the City determined that a clarification of the traffic-related impacts was necessary to be consistent with other regional projects. To this end, the City has re-analyzed traffic impacts, incorporating new data that reflects impacts generated by other recently approved projects in the City. Additionally, the City has conducted a Synchrony Analysis ("Synchro") that was not included in the DMEIR. On December 11, 2006, the City recirculated a Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (PRDMEIR) for public review and comment for 45 days, from December 11, 2006 to January 25, 2007. The PRDMEIR identifies the following potentially significant impacts to traffic and circulation. The Final MEIR (FMEIR) document, including responses to 933819_1; 405.1 027 Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 4 comments, is now available for consideration by the Planning Commission. Final Master Environmental Impact Report (FMEIR) and Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) The City has prepared the draft Final MEIR to allow the public and the City an opportunity to review revisions to the Draft MEIR, the response to comments, and other components of the MEIR, prior to approval of the project. The FMEIR also includes the "Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program," which serves as the environmental document to support approval of the proposed project, either in whole or in part, ifthe project is approved. During the Draft MEIR public hearing, the Planning Commission suggested that the Genentech MEIR should investigate the feasibility of constructing a new fly over from the intersection of Oyster Point Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard to the US 101 SB Ramps. The FMEIR states that the feasibility should be examined as part of the future East of 101 traffic study. The DMEIR does not identify the need for a fly over, but has identified other mitigation measures that would reduce the impact at the subject area. City staffwill address the impact and the mitigation measures at this public hearing. Significant Impacts The MEIR identifies 43 significant or potentially significant impacts. With the exception of the following impacts, related to air quality, noise and traffic, mitigation measures are identified to reduce all other impacts to a less than significant level. Of the identified significant traffic impacts, six relate to Oyster Point Boulevard and seven relate to traffic impacts on U.S. 101 on- and off-ramps. The MEIR has identified the following significant impacts that would remain significant because there are no feasible mitigation measures to reduce the impact to a less than significant level. (MEIR Impact 4.3-4) Operational emissions generated by both stationary and mobile sources would result from normal day-to-day activity within the MEIR Study Area. These would potentially exceed air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). There are no feasible mitigation measures, therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. (MEIR Impact 4.4-6) Operation of the proposed project would generate increased local traffic volumes that would cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project 933819_1; 405.1027 Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 5 vicinity. This is considered a significant and unavoidable impact, as there are no feasible mitigation measures. (MEIR Impact 4.7-1) Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS F conditions at Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection during the P.M. peak hour. After implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On- Ramp intersection would still operate at LOS F using the the Traffix modeling or LOS E using the Synchro modeling during the P.M. peak hour with the Synchro modeling being the more current and comprehensive analysis. Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. (MEIR Impact 4.7-5) Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E conditions at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. However, construction of additional lanes along Grand Avenue, as identified in MM 4.7-5, would require expanding the right of way, which in addition to the expense associated with such an expansion, would have a negative effect on adjacent businesses. Because there exist no additional feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. (MEIR Impact 4.7-12) Implementation of the proposed project would result in a volume to capacity increase of 0.05 or more along the already deficient (LOS F) U.S. 101 segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard in the southbound direction during the A.M. peak hour, and in the northbound direction during the P.M. peak hour. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. In order to sufficiently mitigate the significant volume-to-capacity ratios for the U.S. 101 mainline, the freeway would need to be widened or a new freeway would need to be constructed. Given the location of this segment of the U.S. 101, and its close proximity to the surrounding development, such widening or new construction is not possible. Additionally, this mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the type of land uses that it would benefit. Furthermore, the South San Francisco's General Plan Guiding Policy 4.2-G-9 states that the City should "[a]ccept LOS E or F after finding that: There is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and The uses resulting in the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit." Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. (MEIR Impact 4.7-15) Implementation of the proposed project would increase traffic at the already unacceptable Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque Avenue/U.S. 101 NB On-Ramp by more than two percent. While implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15 would reduce this impact, it would not reduce it to a less-than-significant level. The increase in traffic volume would still be significant after mitigation, therefore this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. 933819_1; 405.1 027 Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 6 (MEIR Impact 4.7-18) Implementation of the proposed project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation measure MM 4.7-18 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. However, as MM 4.7-18 would require a widening of the freeway, as well as shifting Dubuque Avenue east of its current location, implementation of the mitigation measure would require an expansion of the right of way, which would have a substantial adverse effect on adjacent businesses. Therefore, because MM 4.7-18 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. (MEIR Impact 4.7-19) Implementation of the proposed project would increase baseline traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation measure MM 4.7-19 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. However, implementation ofMM 4.7-19 would require the relocation of at least one support column for the Oyster Point flyover ramp. Such relocation is not feasible given the expense and geometries of the rights of way. Therefore, because MM 4.7-19 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Statement of Overriding Considerations The Project cannot be approved unless a Statement of Overriding Considerations is adopted which balances the benefits of the proposed Project against its unavoidable transportation impacts. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission find that the following benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable transportation impacts: 1. Implementation of General Plan Goals and Policies: The project implements the City's vision to redevelop former industrial properties into higher and more economically sustainable uses, while incorporating several of the General Plan's Guiding and Implementing Policies, as further described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. 2. Employment Benefits: The Project would be a source of office/R&D biotechnology industries in South San Francisco, generating an additional 6,700 jobs. 3. Campus Development: The project site would include generous open space areas, and pedestrian plazas, as well as paths linking the campus neighborhoods to the San Francisco Bay Trail and Wind Harp Park. 4. Economic Benefits: The project would increase property and other tax revenues to the City. 933819 1; 405.1027 Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 7 5. Transportation Demand Management: Although the Project will create unavoidable traffic, air quality and noise impacts, the FMEIR includes innovative TDM measures to reduce vehicular trips and air pollution, including a broad range of incentives for employees to ride-share, vanpool, ride BART, Caltrain, shuttles, and other transit, or ride bicycles. The Program would be aggressively managed on an ongoing basis by "transportation coordinators" to facilitate wide participation and the Annual Report to the Planning Commission to monitor its effectiveness. 6. Additional Benefits: a. The Project will contribute to the City's reputation as a premier biotechnology and research and development center by maintaining the corporate headquarters of one of the biotechnology industry founders in South San Francisco. b. The Project will provide stability and predictability for the possible development of future facilities, encouraging Genentech to continue its growth within the City. Demonstrating the City's support for such facilities will enhance the City's reputation as the "birthplace of biotechnology", and will attract other biotech companies to the area. c. With the company's growth and expansion, Genentech has incurred approximately $800 million in construction costs alone in South San Francisco in the past five years. The Project will result in the growth of this expenditure by approximately $600 million over the next five years. This additional Project- related growth will result in the employment of an average of 800 to 1000 people per year to support Project-related construction projects. CONCLUSION: The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives of the City of South San Francisco General Plan to develop high-quality, well-designed, high-technology campuses throughout the northern portion of the East of 101 area. In addition, the project complies with all the development standards and requirements in the East of I 0 1 Area Plan. A MEIR was prepared which thoroughly reviewed and analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the project. The proposed Conditions of Approval, the Implementation Plan and the Master Plan provide adequate controls to ensure the orderly development of the site. Consequently, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following action: Adopt a Resolution recommending that the City Council: 1) certify MEIR05-0004, including findings and a statement of overriding considerations for traffic, air quality and noise impacts; 2) 933819_1; 405.1 027 Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 15,2007 Page 8 adopt RZ05-0003, to reclassify ten parcels totaling 39 acres from P-I Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research and Development Overlay District; 3) adopt ZA05-000 1, zoning text amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 (Research and Development Overlay District Regulations) and 20.40 (Genentech Research and Development Overlay District); 4) approve MP05-0001, Master Plan update to address the long-range plan for growth and development in the existing and expanded overlay district covering 200 acres and; 5) approve TDM05-0006, Transportation Demand Management Program to reduce drive alone trips. Respectfully Submitted, ~">'/ .' /", - ~lr'/ .,/" /' Michael L Senior PI ......__......-~~,.,. ." ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Planning Commission Staff Report, dated February 1,2007 3. Draft Resolution: Project approvals and exhibits a. Modifications to the Zoning Ordinance b. Amendments to SSFMC Chapter 20.39 and 20.40 c. Genentech Ten Year Master Plan Update (folder) d. TDM Plan e. MEIR Findings f. Statement of Overriding Considerations g. Final MEIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program h. Conditions of Approval 4. Draft Implementation Plan, dated February 9, 2007 5. Recirculation Draft Master Environmental Impact Report 933819_1; 405.1027 Attachment 1 Location - Existing & Proposed Genentech R&D Overlay Disrtrict '::J EIR Study Afea Ii-Ad 2005 Genentech UD Overlay Dldrlct 1_'8":;' Propcuad Genentech Rloe Overkly DJmlct Expansion o FIGURE 4.8-3 Genentech Project Area Existing and Proposed Zoning Not to Scale ElF 11117..00 Source: Genenlech Central Campus Master Plan - ~'t\\ S:1,V iI ~ . ~"'t.\ (0 n ~ ~) v 0 ~lIFO'P-~\.~ - Planning Commission Staff Report DATE: February 1, 2007 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Genentech Research & Development Overlay District Expansion - Rezoning request to reclassify ten parcels totaling 39 acres from P-I Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research and Development Overlay District; Zoning Text Amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 (Research and Development Overlay District Regulations) and 20.40 (Genentech Research and Development Overlay District); Master Plan update to address the long-range plan for growth and development in the existing and expanded overlay district covering 200 acres; Transportation Demand Management Program to reduce drive alone trips; and review of the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.39, 20.40, 20.87 and 20.120. Applicant: Genentech, Inc. Case Numbers: P05-014I: MEIR05-0004, ZA05-000I, RZ05-0003, MP05-000I, & TDM05-0006 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission hear the staff report and the applicant's presentation, provide comments on the project and continue the public hearing to February 15,2007. BACKGROUND: Between September and November 2006, the Planning Commission held four study sessions to review the draft Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. During the four study sessions, Genentech's representatives presented a model and illustrations to help clarify each topic presented in the Master Plan. The Planning Commission commented on the campus structure, public open space, pedestrian connections, the Bay Trail improvements, density, streetscape improvements, and the design guidelines. The staff reports and minutes from the study sessions are attached. DISCUSSION: Purpose of the Public Hearing The purpose of this meeting is to open the public hearing and present the proposed project to the Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 2 Planning Commission. Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission hear the staff report and the applicant's presentation, provide comments on the project, and continue the public hearing to February 15, 2007 when the Final MEIR is expected to be available. Purpose of the Project The Municipal Code (Chapter 20.39) establishes guidelines that permit Genentech to expand the Overlay District from time to time. Since the approval ofthe original Master Plan in 1995, the Genentech campus has grown from 72 acres to 124 acres. The existing campus comprises approximately 2.8 million square feet of research and development, office, employee amenities, and manufacturing space on 124 acres. Over the past few years, Genentech has purchased new properties and leased several other R&D facilities in order to accommodate growth. The 1995 Master Plan is nearing its 2010 planning horizon. The Master Plan Update outlines the potential expansion that would allow the campus to grow to approximately six million square feet on 163-acres during a ten-year planning period. Both the MasterPlan and the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) address the potential to expand the Overlay District by another 37 -acres within the 200-acre study area. The Master Plan Update outlines development and design guidelines in order to promote a sense of place that capitalizes on the topography, views and the waterfront, fosters close relationships between the campus neighborhoods, and promotes pedestrian circulation. It includes mapping of key characteristics such as view sheds, pedestrian corridors, open spaces, connections between neighborhoods, and building heights permitted under the updated San Francisco Airport Land Use Plan. Project Description The applicant is proposing initially to reclassify ten parcels (as shown on Attachment 2) located in the Planned Industrial (P-I) zone district to Genentech Research & Development Overlay District. The potential expansion area is comprised of parcels located at the northern and western edges of the existing Genentech campus. The majority of the reclassified parcels would be incorporated into a new West Campus that would lie north of East Grand Avenue and east of Allerton Avenue. The new parcels would increase the Overlay District from 124 acres to approximately 163 acres. Genentech does not propose to reclassify any property that is currently leased to Genentech (Gateway and Britannia East Grand) nor the vacant Bay West Cove property, which they own. In addition to the proposed campus expansion, the project would update the 1995 Master Plan as the key framework and long-range plan for growth and development on campus. The proposed project includes text amendments to Chapters 20.39 and 20040 in the South San Francisco Municipal Code. The project would also revise the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 3 Program for all parcels within the Overlay District area. Growth and Development Projections The Master Plan analyzes the proposed campus expansion, which encompasses 163 acres, and the 200-acre study area during the ten-year planning period which ends in 2016. The following table shows the existing build-out and outlines the anticipated build-out on the 163-acre campus. The Growth and Development projections are consistent with the projections analyzed in the Master Environmental Impact Report. Existing Genentech New Genentech R&D Net Increase (sf) R&D Overlay District Overlay District (sf) (sf) Land Area (acres) 124 163 36 Office 1,008,801 2,629,395 1,620,594 Laboratory 970,173 2,002,482 1,032,309 Manufacturing 779,892 1,041,668 261,776 Amenity 69,500 322,000 252,000 Total Building Area 2,828,366 5,995,545 3,167,179 Source: Table 3-1, Master Environmental Impact Report for Genentech Corporate Facilities Research and Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Adopted in 1995, the Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan established a campus-wide design and site plan standard for a 72-acre campus with an estimated build-out horizon of2010. The Master Plan divides the Overlay District into three sub-campuses: 1) Lower Facility (facing Forbes Avenue), 2) Middle Facility (along the San Francisco Bay, DNA Way and Point San Bruno Boulevard), and 3) Upper Facility (along Grandview Drive and near San Bruno Knoll). Each facility housed a different company product or corporate function. For example, the Lower Facility contained a concentration of manufacturing uses, the Middle Facility was developed as the R&D center and the Upper Facility contained the majority of administrative support uses. The Master Plan provided detailed standards for campus architecture, pedestrian connections, the central spine, and bay views in order to create a campus theme and link each facility area. The City has adopted two amendments to the Research & Development Regulations (Chapter 20.39) and the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District (Chapter 20040), once in 1998 and again in 2001. On April 19, 2001, the City Council approved Genentech's request to rezone five parcels into the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District. The project increased the size of the Genentech R&D Overlay District from 82.6 to approximately 98 acres. The City Council also approved a Zoning Amendment to remove the development limitations and change the parking ratio to 1.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet oflab, office, manufacturing, and amenity uses. Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 4 Master Plan Update Features The Master Plan Update has a ten-year horizon (2016) and addresses a comprehensive range of topics including land use, urban design, design standards, transportation (including demand management, transit, parking, and bicycle and pedestrian circulation), and infrastructure (water and sewer capacity). The key features include: · The Master Plan allows for growth of up to six million square feet on 163 acres, with the potential to grow to 200 acres. · Growth in South San Francisco will emphasize office and research and development. . The Master Plan estimates that the campus-wide density will be approximately 0.69 FAR. · Genentech proposed to change the campus-wide parking at a ratio from 1.6 spaces to 1.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet. · Genentech will provide additional open space amenities on campus and along the San .Francisco Bay front (restaurant). The applicant will allow expanded public parking in the lots along the shoreline on weekdays after 5 :00 P.M. and on weekends. . The Master Plan will provide a consistent architectural character and design palette for the campus. . The Master Plan creates four distinct neighborhoods. The Master Plan also identifies how to strengthen linkages to transit locations, such as Caltrain and BART stations, and to other non-main campus sites in the East of 101 Area, including Gateway, Britannia East Grand and Bay West Cove, which Genentech owns or leases. Proposed Street Improvement Plan and Traffic Calming Measures The Master Plan Update includes several proposals to reconfigure Grandview Drive, DNA Way and Forbes Boulevard; including new crosswalks, bike lanes, traffic calming measures, and on- street Shuttle Stops. During the four study sessions, the Planning Commission made the following comments: . Bike lanes would be acceptable on Grandview Drive. . The medians on Forbes Boulevard should be improved. . Shuttle buses should pull off all streets and shuttle stops should be located on ''turn-in'' areas that do not block traffic. · Genentech should retain shuttle drop-off areas internal to the sites and adjacent to buildings. . The City should not permit on-street parking. In response to the Planning Commission comments, the City's Traffic Advisory Committee (T AC) met in October and November 2006 to review the Genentech Proposal. The memorandum Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 5 from the T AC responding to the Genentech proposal is attached to this staff report. In brief, the T AC recommended: 1) a cut out for the shuttle stops on DNA Way due to the narrow road width; 2) a minimum travel width of 12 feet on DNA Way and Forbes Boulevard and a four foot wide bike lane in each direction at several sections along the roadway; 3) retain and re-landscape the median islands on Forbes Boulevard at a minimum width of four feet; 4) no bike path on DNA Way; and 5) no crosswalk just west of the westbound shuttle stop on DNA Way. The street improvements and T AC recommendations are incorporated into the draft Implement~tion Plan. (see Attachment 3) Implementation Plan The Genentech campus is organized into neighborhoods to provide a sense of scale and support Genentech's diverse functional requirements. These neighborhoods are geographically defined as Lower, Mid, Upper & West campuses in the Master Plan. The Master Plan requires that Genentech construct specific improvements and facilities - such a traffic calming measures, utilities, public facilities or open space amenities - that would support growth within each campus neighborhood. The Implementation Plan lists the appropriate construction phasing, by neighborhood, for the improvements under the Master Plan (Attachment 3), including the following: . San Francisco Bay Trail facilities . Campus entries · Streetscape improvements, including new shuttle stops and shelters . Bike path on Forbes Boulevard . Sign program, including banners and flags Planning Staff will introduce the improvements and proposed actions listed in the Implementation Plan at the February 1, 2007 public meeting. The Implementation Plan does not include improvements identified in the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) as those will be outlined separately in the Final MEIR Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Summary of Planning Commission Comments During the four study sessions, the Planning Commissioners asked several comments regarding the project and topics outlined in the Master Plan. The bullets below summarize the key points made during the study sessions. . Modernize the shuttle stops. . Improve the pedestrian and open space environment. · Setbacks and landscaping should be used to soften the impact ofthe buildings along the streets. Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 6 . The Planning Commission requested further detail regarding the building orientation, site planning and massing for each neighborhood. (The Commission was concerned that the lower campus would become too dense.) . Expand public amenities and public open space (Several commissioners noted that Genentech should provide better access to both the Bay Trail and the Wind Harp Park.) . Provide public art throughout campus. . Define the use and appearance of the central spines. . Address congestion on Oyster Point Boulevard (Several Commissioners noted that the City should investigate adding another overpass connecting Oyster Point Boulevard and US 101 Southbound.) . The campus entry points, with water features, should be designed to identify the campus. . Address the problems in the proposed Parking Management Plan, including the proposed parking ratio of 1.8 per 1,000 square feet. (Genentech should develop an "exit strategy" for parcels within the Overlay District.) . Bay Trail signage is inadequate. . On-street parking should not be allowed. The applicant will respond to the Planning Commission comments and provide additional information, illustrations and explanations at the February 1, 2007 public hearing. Genentech Research & Development Overlay District Consistency (Zoning Ordinance) The project also requires that the City Council adopt amendments to the South San Francisco Municipal Code, Research and Development Overlay District Regulations (Chapter 20.39) and Genentech R&D Overlay District (Chapter 20040). Genentech is proposing to modify the two chapters in order to ensure consistency with the Master Plan. This will encompass the following topics: 1. Implementation Plan. The City would require Genentech to prepare a program that lists the appropriate phasing, development and construction of public open space, parking, pedestrian, bikeway, and infrastructure improvements identified in the Master Plan. The draft Implementation Plan is attached to the staff report. 2. Removalfrom the District. Responding to Planning Commission comments, City staff has prepared a new section in Chapter 20.39 that addresses how a project can be removed from the Overlay District without reverting to a nonconforming use. 3. Permit Review. Genentech is proposing to amend Section 20.39.060 as follows: Amend regulations to add new buildings ofless than 50,000 s.f. and increase the size of building additions to less than 50,000 s.f. subject to administrative review. Amend Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 7 regulations to add buildings of 50,000 to 100,000 s.f. and increase the size of building additions to 50,000 to 100,000 s.f. subject to issuance of a minor use permit. Staff Comment: Planning Staff does not support the proposed amendment to the permit review section. The current regulation permits an administrative review for building additions up to 10,000 square feet (or 20 percent of the existing floor area) and a minor use permit for an addition to an existing building between 10,000 s.f. and 30,000 s.f. (but not to exceed thirty percent ofthe existing gross floor area). The Municipal Code requires that all new buildings are subject to approval of a Use Permit. Staff recommends retention of the existing requirements. 4. Annual Report. The annual report is currently required in Chapter 20.39. Planning staff is proposing to expand the report requirements to include the status of facility- wide improvements, progress in completing the Implementation Plan, anticipated new construction, update on transportation and parking needs, an update on the security plan, an update on vendor services, projected changes in the facility usage and requirements, advance notice of any proposed changes to the facility-wide development standards and design guidelines, and notice the City of any proposed changes to the Master Plan. 5. Development Standards. The development standards and build-out will be updated to include the total allowable square footage of development on campus and items such as lot coverage, FAR, open space, setbacks, buildings heights, and parking ratios, as well as sign standards. 6. Development Fees. Genentech will be required to pay a fair share contribution for all infrastructure improvements in the East of 101 area and the appropriate childcare fees. The Fees will be updated to reflect South San Francisco's current practices as well as conclusions of the MEIR. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program Based on a campus-wide floor are ratio of no more than 0.69, Genentech is required to implement sufficient programs to achieve a target mode shift of 30 percent. In an effort to minimize the traffic associated with this new development as well as the costs of building new parking structures, Genentech is currently exploring the following new TDM strategies as integral to its Master Plan: . Shuttle Service Improvements. Genentech plans to improve the efficiency of its existing intra-campus shuttle, and is exploring expansion of its connections to BART, Caltrain and potentially Muni. Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 8 . Shuttle Facility Improvements. Genentech is exploring improvements to shuttle stops, including new shelters and signs, and improved pedestrian connections to its buildings. . Parking Cash-Out. As Genentech puts buildings on its existing parking lots, it must build costly parking structures. It is now exploring whether it would be more cost effective to pay its employees not to drive, rather than provide them with ever-more-expensive structured parking. Similar strategies have worked for a variety of other employers, and they have produced significant traffic reductions. . Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements. As its shifts from being more of an industrial facility to more of a pedestrian-oriented campus, Genentech is developing significant improvement to its overall bicycle and pedestrian networks. General Plan Consistency The proposed expansion of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District is consistent with the South San Francisco General Plan Land Use and Economic Development Elements that promote the expansion of high-technology campuses in the East of 101 area. In 1999 and 2001, the City analyzed and approved the continued expansion of the research and development, ancillary manufacturing, and office functions on high-technology campuses in the East of 101 area, supported by the necessary service and administrative staff. The 1999 General Plan EIR and the South San Francisco General Plan Amendment and Transportation Demand Management SEIR (2001) evaluated all properties located in the "Business and Technology Park" land use classification for research and development uses similar to the Genentech campus (up to a 1.0 FAR). The Master Plan has identified several R&D buildings that will be constructed within the next few years, including the following: . Building 31 near the intersection of Grandview Drive and DNA Way (Genentech submitted the application for approval of a Use Permit in 2005). . Childcare Center on Allerton Avenue (Genentech submitted the application for approval of a Use Permit in 2006). . Building B50 on Forbes Boulevard (the draft plan was submitted to the City's Design Review Board for a preliminary review in December 2006). . Four buildings, initiating the West Campus development, near the intersection of East Grand Avenue and Grandview Drive (Genentech has recently submitted a draft site plan and planning documents to the City for a preliminary review by the DRB in February 2007). The conversion of former industrial properties to R&D uses would be consistent with the land uses analyzed in the 1999 General Plan. Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 9 Master Environmental Impact Report The City of South San Francisco has prepared a Draft Master Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project. This DMEIR was circulated on August 28, 2006, for a forty-five day review period, and closed on October 11, 2006 (SCH #2005042121). In September 2006, the Planning Commission held a public meeting to allow the public and the Commission an opportunity to present oral comments on the draft report. As a result of discussions with the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"), as well as a comment letter from Caltrans dated October 6, 2006, the City determined that a clarification of the traffic-related impacts was necessary to be consistent with other regional projects. To this end, the City has re-analyzed traffic impacts, incorporating new data that reflects impacts generated by other recently approved projects in the City. Additionally, the City has conducted a Synchrony Analysis ("Synchro") that was not included in the DMEIR. On December 11, 2006, the City prepared a Recirculation Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (RDMEIR) for public review and comment for 45 days, from December 11, 2006 to January 25,2007. The RDMEIR identifies the following potentially significant impacts to traffic and circulation. It is anticipated that the Final MEIR (FMEIR) Response to Comments document will be available for consideration at the February 15, 2007 Planning Commission public meeting. CONCLUSION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission hear the staff report and the applicant's presentation, provide comments on the project, and continue the public hearing to February 15, 2007. Respectfully Submitted, /', ,/1 A / ,.1 ,/ ./ // / . ,..-~<>.</ /,./ 1/ / / /' r . I " MIChael Lapp / Senior Planner _..._,....0.. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Location Map 2. Proposed New Parcels And Existing Building Conditions 3. Planning Commission Staff Reports Staff Report RE: Genentech Corporate Facilities Master Plan Date: February 1, 2007 Page 10 4. Planning Commission Minutes 5. TAC Memorandum 6. Draft Implementation Plan 7. Draft Text Amendments to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 and 20040 8. Recirculation Draft Master Environmental Impact Report 9. Draft Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan, August 2006 (in folder) RESOLUTION NO. PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO RECOMMENDING THAT THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 20.39 AND 20.40 OF THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE, ZA05-0001; APPROVE A ZONING MAP CHANGE TO RECLASSIFY TEN PARCELS, LOCATED ON GRANDVIEW DRIVE, ALLERTON A VENUE, FORBES BOULEVARD, AND EAST GRAND AVENUE IN THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICT, TO GENENTECH RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT, RZ05-0003; APPROVE THE GENENTECH FACILITIES TEN YEAR MASTER PLAN UPDATE, MP05-0001; APPROVE THE GENENTECH RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT TDM PLAN, TDM06-0003; AND CERTIFY THE MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE GENENTECH CORPORATE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT EXPANSION AND MASTER PLAN UPDATE, MEIR05-0004. WHEREAS, Genentech, Inc. has submitted a request to the City of South San Francisco ("City") to amend the Zoning Map and "reclassify" ten parcels, totaling approximately 36 acres, and located at 560 Forbes Boulevard, 342, 410, and 444 Allerton Avenue, 400-428/448 and 425 Grandview Drive and 345 East Grand Avenue in the Planned Industrial Zoning District to the Genentech Research & Development Overlay District, as further described in Exhibit A; and, WHEREAS, Genentech, Inc. has submitted a request to the City of South San Francisco to amend Chapters 20.39 and 20040 in the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC), as further described in Exhibit B; and, WHEREAS, Genentech, Inc. has submitted a request to the City of South San Francisco to approve the "Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan" update ("Master Plan Update"), including an Implementation Plan, as further described in Exhibit C; and, WHEREAS, Genentech, Inc. has submitted a request to the City of South San Francisco to approve the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan TDM Plan, as further described in Exhibit D; and, WHEREAS, the amendment to the Zoning Map, amendment to Chapters 20.39 and 20.40 in the SSFMC, approval of the Master Plan Update, and approval of the TDM Plan will not change the land use classification, approved uses or increase the approved density in the East of 101 Area over that analyzed in the South San Francisco General Plan Environmental Impact Report; and, WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission held duly noticed study sessions on September 7, 2006, September 21, 2006, October 5, 2006, and October 19, 2006; and, WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission held duly noticed public hearings February 1,2007, and February 15,2007; and, WHEREAS, on February 15, 2007, the Planning Commission finds that the above described amendments to the Municipal Code and Master Plan Update will maintain internal consistency in the General Plan; and, WHEREAS, the above described reclassification of ten parcels will maintain internal consistency in the General Plan; and, WHEREAS, a Final Master Environmental Impact Report (FMEIR) for the Genentech Corporate Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update has been prepared in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code ~~ 21000, et seq.); and, WHEREAS, the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (DMEIR) was circulated for a 45-day public/agency review period beginning on August 28,2006 and ending on October 11, 2006. Public notice of availability of the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report was published in a newspaper of general circulation and mailed to agencies. In addition, all persons who had requested notification were mailed a notice; and, WHEREAS, the City prepared responses to comments on environmental issues received during the public review period and at the public hearing, which responses clarify, amplify, and make minor corrections to the information contained in the DMEIR, providing good faith reasoned analysis supported by factual information. The comments were published in the FMEIR, dated , 2007, and were distributed to or otherwise made available to the City Council, the Planning Commission, responsible agencies, and other interested parties; and, WHEREAS, a Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (PRDMEIR) was prepared for the project, and was available for public review and comment for 45 days beginning on December 11,2006 and ending on January 25, 2007, described as follows: a. Chapter 4.7, Transportation and Circulation of the August 23, 2006 DMEIR was revised and recirculated per CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, which requires the lead agency to recirculate an EIR if significant new information is added to the EIR after public notice is given of the availability of the Draft EIR for public review, but before certification. b. The PRDMEIR was prepared and issued in response to a request from the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to determine the 95th percentile vehicle queuing on the approaches to three study intersections, including an off-ramp from the U.S. 101 freeway. Caltrans' main concern was that off-ramp traffic not queue back onto the freeway mainline during peak traffic periods. To provide Caltrans the most accurate queuing evaluation, a different software package was used to evaluate the three subject intersections than had been used to evaluate all other intersections in the study. Thus, updated levels of service using the new software were incorporated into the revised circulation section. The revised section identifies potentially significant impacts to traffic and that were not identified in the DMEIR. WHEREAS, Conditions of Approval for the project have been proposed, attached to this Resolution as Exhibit H, and incorporated herein by reference; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on October 5,2006 on the DMEIR and on February 1, 2007, and February 15, considered the FMEIR, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7. The Planning Commission received written and oral comments on the DMEIR and written comments on the PRDMEIR from the public, responsible agencies, and other governmental and private organizations; and, WHEREAS, staff reports, dated October 5, 2006, February 1, 2007, and February 15, 2007, and incorporated herein by reference, were prepared for distribution to the Planning Commission for review, which reports describe and analyze the DMEIR and PRDMEIR, the reclassification of ten parcels, and the amendments to the Municipal Code; and, WHEREAS, the findings and determinations contained herein constitute the independent judgment and analysis of the Planning Commission and are supported by substantial evidence in the entire record, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution, and the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby adopts the following findings, based on the entire record for the Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007: 1. General Findings 1. Documents and other material constituting the record of the proceedings upon which the City's decision and its findings are based, are located at the Planning Department of the City of South San Francisco, in the custody of Chief Planner, Susy Kalkin. 2. The proposed project is consistent and compatible with all elements in the City of South San Francisco General Plan. The 1999 General Plan includes policies and programs that are designed to encourage the development of high technology campuses in the East of 101 Area, allow for employee-serving vendor services, preparation of a TDM plan and traffic improvement plan to reduce congestion impacts, and provision of a framework for requiring future circulation system improvements as they are needed to prevent deficient levels of service from being reached. II. Environmental Impact Report As required by CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, SS 21000, et seq.), the following findings are made in support of approval of the Final Master Environmental Impact Report (FMEIR) and Statement of Overriding Considerations, based on the entire record for the Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007: 1. Pursuant to CEQA, the adoption of the South San Francisco General Plan and certification of the South San Francisco General Plan EIR on October 13, 1999, included findings that addressed significant and potentially significant environmental impacts of the South San Francisco General Plan Update and measures to mitigate those impacts. All findings from the October 13, 1999 hearing are hereby restated in their entirety and incorporated herein by reference to support adoption of the proposed project. 2. A Notice of Preparation was prepared on December 15, 2005, published in a newspaper of general circulation, and mailed to responsible agencies, public agencies having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, and other interested parties. 3. The DMEIR and the PRDMEIR for Chapter 4.7 were prepared for the proposed project. Two Notices of Completion were filed with the State Secretary of Resources State Clearinghouse (SCH No. 2005072165) 4. The FMEIR for this project, dated 2007, has been completed in compliance with CEQA, and consists of and incorporates the DMEIR, dated August 23, 2006, the PRDMEIR, dated December 11, 2006. 5. The FMEIR was presented to the Planning Commission and the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the FMEIR prior to taking action on this matter. 6. The project will result in some significant and potentially significant environmental impacts, most of which can be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through mitigation measures required as part of the project. As required by CEQA, specific findings regarding significant effects and proposed mitigation, as well as project alternatives, are discussed in Exhibit E, and incorporated herein by reference. Where significant impacts related to the project cannot be sufficiently mitigated, a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared, attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein by reference. Additionally, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared, attached hereto as Exhibit G and incorporated herein by reference. III. Ordinance to Amend Chapter 20.39 and 20040 of the SSFMC As required by the "Amendment Procedure" (SSFMC Section 20.87) and the "Research and Development Overlay District Regulations" (SSFMC Section 20.39.040 and Section 20.39.050), the following findings are made in support of the amendments to the zoning ordinance of the "Research & Development Overlay District Regulations" (Chapter 20.39) and "Genentech Research & Development Overlay District" (Chapter 20.40), based on the entire record for the Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1,2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan which designates this site for Business and Technology Park Use. The proposed amendments are consistent with this designation. 2. The project proposed amendments are compatible with the intent and purpose of the "Research and Development Overlay District" (SSFMC Section 20.39.050, subdivisions (a), (b) and (c)) that state "Development standards and requirements of the underlying zoning district including, but not limited to, building setbacks, lot coverage and floor area ratio may be amended for the properties to be reclassified." 3. The proposed amendments meet all standards of the "Genentech Research and Development Overlay District" (SSFMC Chapter 20040). The proposed amendments comply with the Purpose, Definitions, Design Review, and the Development Standards and requirements of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District. 4. The proposed amendments meet all the requirements of the "Research & Development Overlay District Regulations" (SSFMC Section 20.39.050), which permit the City Council to approve changes from the underlying zoning district and identify certain standards that may be met for a facility in its entirety, rather than on a lot-by-Iot basis. Development standards and requirements of the underlying zoning district, including setbacks, lot coverage, maximum facility development capacities, and floor area ratios may be amended for the properties to be reclassified. 5. The proposed amendments meet the requirement of the "Research and Development Overlay District Regulations" (SSFMC Section 20.39.040), which require an Annual Report. The project includes an Annual Report that will address future projects, maximum facility capacity, the parking ratio, TDM Plan, vendor services, and notice of any changes to the Facility Master Plan. IV. Zoning Map Change As required by the "Research and Development Overlay District Regulations" (SSFMC Section 20.39.040(b)), the following findings are made in support of the reclassification of ten parcels located in the Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research & Development Overlay District, based on the entire record for the Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007: 1. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan which designates this site for Business and Technology Park Use. The proposed reclassification of ten parcels located in the Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research & Development Overlay District is consistent with this designation. 2. The project is consistent with the "Research and Development Overlay District" provlSlons (SSFMC Sections 20.39.040 and 20.39.050) in the City's Zoning Ordinance, which states that the requirements for reclassification to and/or removal of lots from the R&D Overlay District may be considered pursuant to Chapter 20.87 and include minimum area, required signatures, documentation of existing conditions, facility master plan, and procedure for review of the facility master plan. 3. The proposed reclassification of ten parcels located in the Planned Industrial Zone District to Genentech Research & Development Overlay District meets all standards of the "Genentech Research and Development Overlay District" (SSFMC Chapter 20.40). The project complies with the Purpose, Definitions, Design Review, and the Development Standards and requirements of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District. V. Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update As required by the "Research and Development Overlay District Regulations" (SSFMC Section 20.39.040(b)(4)), the following findings are made in support of approval of the Genentech Facility Ten Year Master Plan Update, based on the entire record for the Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007: 1. The Facilities Master Plan Update demonstrates the existence of sufficient roadway, intersection and infrastructure capacity to accommodate facility development proposed by the Facility Master Plan Update. 2. Proposed modifications to the standards and regulations of the underlying zoning proposed by reclassification to the R&D Overlay District are supported by information contained in the Facility Master Plan Update and related documents. 3. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan which designates this site for Business and Technology Park Use. The proposed Facility Master Plan governs facility wide parking standards, development standards, design guidelines, and uses on all parcels located in the Genentech Research & Development Overlay District. VI. TDM Plan As required by the "Transportation Demand Management" (SSFMC Section 20.120.070(b)), the following findings are made in support of approval of the Genentech Facility Ten Year Master Plan Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM) (TDM06-0003), based on the entire record for the Genentech Master Plan, which includes, without limitation, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study and Master Plan Update environmental impact report, including the recirculated Chapter 4.7; comments received on the draft environmental impact report; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February I, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007: 1. The proposed project's TDM measures are feasible and appropriate for the project, considering the proposed mix of uses and the project's location, size, and hours of operation. The TDM Plan is designed to take advantage of and promote the use of public transit. The Plan also provides incentives for employees to use alternative modes of transportation, promotes parking cash-out incentives, and uses a lower parking ratio to increase ridership on BART and the East of 101 shuttle service, as well as constructing pedestrian walkways linking the Project to the adjacent shuttle stops and bikepaths. 2. The proposed project's TDM Plan contains performance guarantees that will ensure that the target alternative mode use established for the project by this chapter will be achieved and maintained. The project includes an Annual Report, which will review the campus-wide parking ratio and survey mode uses, an annual survey, and a triennial report that documents the effectiveness of the TDM Plan in achieving the alternative mode use. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby recommends that subject to those Conditions of Approval contained in Exhibit H, and incorporated herein, the City Council: 1. Certify, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the Genentech Corporate Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update, as well as the following findings assessing significant impacts, mitigation, and alternatives associated with the project: a. Findings regarding significant impacts, mitigation, and project alternatives, attached hereto as Exhibit E; b. A statement of overriding considerations, attached hereto as Exhibit F; c. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), attached hereto as Exhibit G. 2. Amend the Zoning Map to reclassify ten parcels, totaling approximately 36 acres and located on Forbes Boulevard, Allerton Avenue, Cabot Court, and Grandview Drive in the Planned Industrial Zoning District to the Genentech Research & Development Overlay District, as further described in Exhibit A. 3. Adopt an Ordinance to amend Chapters 20.39 and 20040 in the South San Francisco Municipal Code, as further described in Exhibit B. 4. Approve the Genentech Ten Years Facilities Master Plan Update, including the Implementation Plan, as further described in Exhibit C. 5. Approve the TDM Plan for the Genentech Research & Development Overlay District, as further described in Exhibit D. I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of South Francisco at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held the _ day of February, 2007 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco EXHIBIT A Modifications to the Zoning Map February 2007 Modify the Zoning Map to reclassify ten parcels in the Planned Industrial Zoning District, into the Genentech R&D Overlay District boundary established in Chapter 20.40 "Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Regulations, Overlay district designation. II Genentech Research & Development Overlay District Proposed Reclassification of Ten Parcels RZ05-0003 ... ..... .... .... .... EXHIBIT B Amendment to Chapters 20.30 and 20.40 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.39 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT REGULATIONS Sections: 20.39.010 20.39.020 20.39.030 20.39.040 20.39.050 20.39.060 20.39.070 20.39.080 Short title. Purpose. Definitions. Overlay district designation. Development standards and requirements. Permit review. Effect of pre-existing approvals. Annual Report. 20.39.010 Short title. This chapter may be referred to as the R and D Overlay District Regulations. This district may be referred to as the R and D Overlay District (Ord. 1162 9 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.020 Purpose. This chapter establishes the Research and Development Overlay District (R and D Overlay District), prescribes regulations for reclassifying properties to and from this district and establishes development standards and requirements within the district. The Rand D Overlay District is intended to enhance planning and design principles for research and development facilities. In addition to the general provisions described in Chapter 20.04 and the purposes of the underlying zoning district, the specific purposes of the R and D Overlay District include the following: (a) To create a framework defining a facility-wide architectural character, a system of open space elements and a pedestrian and vehicular circulation plan linking buildings and uses together in a flexible, logical and orderly manner for each R and D Overlay District; (b) To increase the flexibility of the city's land use regulations and the speed of its review procedures to reflect the quickly changing needs of research and development focused corporations; (c) To establish facility-wide design guidelines and development standards to produce an attractive, coherent and efficient environment; (d) To establish facility-wide development capacities consistent with the city's general plan, including any area plans, existing conditions, and growth and development projections submitted as part of a reclassification for a particular property; (e) To establish procedures to define a baseline of existing conditions for each lot to be reclassified to an R and D Overlay District with regard to those items and obligations identified in Section 20.39.040(b)(3) at the time the lot is reclassified so that the city may use this data to reestablish the baseline in the event that the lot is removed from the R and D Overlay District classification. (Ord. 1162 9 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.030 Definitions. The following definitions shall be supplementary to those contained in Chapter 933228-2 1 20.06 of this code: (a) "Facility" means all lots of record and their structures owned or leased by a single entity and engaged in research and development and associated activities, which are reclassified such that the uniform regulations and requirements covered by the R and D Overlay District apply. (b) "Facility master plan" means a long-range plan which provides guidance for the growth and development of a public or private facility. (Ord. 1162 ~ 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.040 Overlay district designation. (a) Application. R and D Overlay Districts are established consisting of all lands so reclassified on the Zoning Map of the city. All regulations, development standards and requirements shall be those set forth in the underlying zoning district, and other rules and regulations of this code, except as provided by this chapter. (b) Reclassification. Reclassification to and/or removal of lots from an R and D Overlay District may be considered pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 20.87 and the following: (1) Minimum Area. Reclassification to the R and D Overlay District may be considered only for one or more lot(s) totaling twenty acres or more. (2) Required Signatures. The petition for reclassification to or removal from the R and D Overlay District must be signed by the sponsor of the Facility Master Plan and the property owner(s). (3) Documentation of Existing Conditions. Applications for reclassification to an R and D Overlay District shall be accompanied by documentation that establishes the condition of each individual lot to be reclassified. The documentation shall include, but is not limited to: (A) Lot area; (B) Building height; (C) Building setbacks; (D) Building floor area; (F) Landscaping area; (G) Parking spaces; (H) Off-street loading areas and their dimensions; (I) Land uses; and (J) Conditions in any preexisting discretionary permits or approvals issued for such lot by the city that would be superseded by the reclassification. All the information shall be provided in a form acceptable to the city's chief planner. The chief planner may waive the submittal of certain information does not relate to the standards to be modified in the particular reclassification. (4) Facility Master Plan. (A) Application Requirements. Applications for reclassification to an Rand D Overlay District shall be accompanied by a Facility Master Plan. (B) Procedure for the Review of the Facility Master Plan. Facility master plans shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission to determine: (i) That sufficient roadway, intersection and infrastructure capacity exists to accommodate facility development proposed by such Facility Master Plan; 933228-2 2 (ii) That any proposed modifications to the standards and regulations of the underlying zoning proposed by an reclassification to the Rand D Overlay District are supported by information contained in the Facility Master Plan or other documents; and (iii) As part of its review, the panning commission must find that the Facility Master Plan is consistent with the city's general plan and any application area plan, and fulfills the purposes of the R and D Overlay District as set forth in Section 20.39.020. (C) Use of the Facility Master Plan. If, after review of the Facility Master Plan, the Planning Commission has made the determinations in subsection (b)(4)(B) of this section, the city may establish facility wide development standards. Such facility- wide development standards shall be incorporated in the reclassification of the facility to an Rand D Overlay District. (D) Contents. The Facility Master Plan shall include, but is not limited to, the following components: (i.) A description of the facility including the physical setting and the proposed activities; (ii) Growth and development projections with estimates of the facility's building areas, employment, vehicular trip generation, public infrastructure and utility needs; (iii) Transportation and parking programs to support any facility-wide parking standards; (iv) Design Guidelines. Design guidelines shall be prepared and submitted to the city both as part of the Facility Master Plan and for use by the city to evaluate facility development proposals. The guidelines shall promote quality design of the facility's buildings and grounds, promote a functional, safe and attractive environment and preserve and enhance the valuable natural and historic character of each facility. The design guidelines shall contain, but are not limited to, the following components: a. An inventory of the existing physical setting of the facility's site including: site access and entries, landforms, adjoining properties, views to and from the facility, micro-climates, vegetation, historical structures and other unique physical features and visual landmarks, b. A conceptual framework and overarching goals for the facility and sub. facility designs. These should include the establishment of guidelines for creating senses of entry into a facility and orientation within the facility in response to the components of the site inventory, c. Plans, standards and character statements of the facility's circulation systems for pedestrians and vehicles, d. Plans, standards and character statements for a hierarchical system of open spaces, activity nodes and interconnections, e. Guidelines for site planning, including guiding principles for the location and massing of buildings, opens spaces with special consideration of the relationships to the architectural context of building sites, local micro-climates (wind) and useable outdoor spaces within building sites, f. Guidelines for the architectural character of structures, walls, signage, utilities and other components of the built environment, g. Guidelines for the landscaping of the facility including plant pallets, street furniture, lighting standards and street tree planting programs, 933228-2 3 h. Guidelines for the location and design of parking and loading facilities. (v.) Implementation Plan. A program shall be provided that identifies the appropriate phasing of development, including construction of public open space, parking, pedestrian and bikeway improvements, and street improvements, as identified in the Master Plan. The Implementation Plan is important to ensure the adequacy of services and facilities required to meet increased demand created by new development. (5) Removal from a District. (A) If a lot no longer qualifies to be included in the Rand D Overlay District under the requirements contained in this Chapter, from and after the time that such lot no longer so qualifies, any new use, construction, or demolition on that lot, shall conform with the provisions of the underlying zoning district and related provisions of the Code as they existed at the time of the initial reclassification of that lot to be included in the R and D Overlay District. However, any use, building, or structure that (i) is existing or under construction at the time that a lot no longer qualifies to be included within the District and (ii) is not hazardous or dangerous to public health or safety, shall be considered a nonconforming use, building, or structure, such that the lawful existing uses of those buildings or structures at the time of removal may be continued, despite that such uses may not conform to the underlying regulations specified for the district in which such buildings or structures are located. In the event of damage or destruction, such uses, buildings, or structures may be reconstructed and restored to the same extent that they existed before the damage or destruction, provided that there may be no expansion of the non-conformity beyond that which existed prior to the damage or destruction. (B) Any property removed from a Facility Master Plan may be removed from its R and D Overlay District upon receipt of a petition from the sponsor of the Facility Master Plan and the property owner(s). Any such petition shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 20.87. (C) TEXT TO BE INSERTED TO ADDRESS ACTIONS WHEN PROPERTY IS REMOVED FROM DISTRICT. (6) Reclassification Ordinance. The ordinance reclassifying a property to the R and D Overlay District shall also create a chapter of this title establishing a statement of purpose of the district and listing any revised zoning standards and regulations applicable to a reclassified facility. These revised standards may include: (i) Changes from the standards of the underlying zoning district regulations; and (ii) Maximum facility development capacities, including total floor area, employee count, average daily traffic generation or peak hour traffic volumes and utility usages. (c) Design Guidelines. (1) The facility design guidelines are subject to the review and approval of the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission may approve the facility design guidelines if it finds that such guidelines are consistent with the applicable reclassification ordinances for purposes of this chapter (as set forth in Section 20.39.020) and the criteria set forth at Section 20.39.040(b)(4)(D). (2) The city shall use these facility design guidelines to evaluate projects within the applicable R and D Overlay District. The facility design guidelines shall supersede any other design guidelines of more general application that have been or may 933228-2 4 be adopted by Planning Commission resolution that would otherwise apply to the reclassified properties. The facility design guidelines shall not supersede any design guidelines contained in the general plan or any applicable area plan. (Ord. 1162 S 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.050 Development standards and requirements. Except as follows, whenever a structure is enlarged or newly constructed or a new use is inaugurated in a structure, it shall comply with the development standards and requirements set forth in the underlying zoning district, and conditions of any prior city approvals. (a) Changes to Standards and Regulations. The City Council may approve changes from the underlying zoning district's standards and requirements for each R and D Overlay District. Any such changes shall be set forth in a chapter of this zoning ordinance. (b) Facility-Wide Compliance. The ordinance adopting such changes may identify certain standards that may be met for a facility in its entirety rather than on a lot- by-lot basis. When standards and/or regulations are to be satisfied on a facility-wide basis, it shall be the responsibility of the property owner or facility operator to maintain tables demonstrating how the facility complies with the facility-wide standards, and how each individual lot contributes to such compliance. Said tables shall be in a form acceptable to the chief planner and shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission each time a project is submitted for its discretionary approval or at least once a year as part of the Annual Report discussed in Section 20.39.080 below. (c) Standards and Requirements That May he Changed. Development standards and requirements of the underlying zoning district including, but not limited to, building setbacks, lot coverage and floor area ratios may be amended for the properties to be reclassified. (1) Off-Street Parking Requirements. Off-street parking and loading requirements may be established based on a parking demand study, consistent with general plan and any applicable area plan policies. (2) Floor Area Ratio. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) may be exceeded, consistent with general plan and any applicable area plan policies. (Ord. 1162 S 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.060 Permit Review. Development review of projects within Rand D Overlay Districts shall be in accordance with all provisions of this title. (a) Design Review Procedure. The following procedures shall apply to design review for projects subject to subsections (b) and (c) ofthis section. Except where the chief planner finds that a proposed project does not require design review, the procedures contained in Chapter 20.85 are not limited or changed by this chapter. The standards and guidelines to be used during the design review procedure for Rand D Overlay District proj ects are: (1) Those contained in the general plan and any applicable area plan; and (2) Those contained in any relevant Planning Commission resolution, except where superseding facility design guidelines have been adopted pursuant to Section 933228-2 5 20.39.040(c). (b) Administrative Review. The following projects are not subject to discretionary review under this title except those projects determined by the chief planner to potentially have a significant adverse environmental impact or which are not consistent with the design guidelines or the purposes of the R and D Overlay District. The chief planner's decision to approve or disapprove a project under this subsection may be appealed to the Planning Commission pursuant to Chapter 20.90. (1) Additions to existing buildings where only one such addition to such building occurs within a twelve-month period, and where the addition is limited to the lesser of: (a) ten thousand square feet in area; or (b) twenty percent of the existing gross floor area of the building, measured as of the date the specific project application is submitted; (2) Accessory structures and above grade utility systems equal to or less than five hundred square feet in area; (3) Interior building modifications which involve changing the use of less than thirty percent of a building's gross floor area; (4) Changes in the use of existing buildings where both the prior and proposed use are defined in the underlying zoning district as permitted uses; (5) Minor site improvements, including, but not limited to: landscape amenities, small at-grade open parking lots of less than fifty parking spaces and minor above grade utility systems to service existing buildings. Minor site improvements under this section shall also be subject to the square footage limitations contained in subsection (b)(1) of this section; and (6) Replacement, relocation or reconstruction of parking lots or spaces which does not result in a parking capacity increase. (c) Minor Use Permits. The following projects are subject to the review and approval of a minor use permit by the city's chief planer. The chief planner may approve, approve with conditions or deny approval of such projects. (1) Procedure. The chief planner's review of minor use permits shall comply with the procedures established in Chapter 20.81. (2) Appeal. The chief planer's actions may be appealed to the Planning Commission by direction of the Planning Commission or pursuant to procedures set forth in Chapter 20.90. (3) Project Subject to Minor Use Permits. (A) Addition(s) to an existing building where only one such addition to such building occurs within a twelve-month period, and where the addition is limited to between ten thousand and thirty thousand square feet (but not to exceed thirty percent of the existing gross floor area of the building, measured as of the date the specific project application is submitted). In the event that the total of such additions exceeds thirty percent of the floor area existing at the time of the first request for expansion, the chief planner shall notify the Planning Commission of the project approval within four days of the approval. (B) Accessory structures and above grade utility systems of between five hundred one and five thousand feet. (C) Small, at-grade parking lots of fifty-one to one hundred fifty parking spaces. 933228-2 6 (D) Temporary uses, such as trailers, parking facilities, storage of construction materials. (4) Required Findings. The chief planner's decision to issue a minor use permit shall be based on all of the following findings: (A) The proposed use will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community, nor be detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. (B) The use is consistent with the city's general plan and any applicable area plan. (C) The proposed use complies with all applicable standards and requirements of this title. (D) The use complies with the R and D Overlay District's facility design guidelines (Ord. 1217 SS 1,2, 1998; Ord. 1162 S 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.070 Effect of pre-existing approvals. Notwithstanding any other provisions of this chapter, all pre-existing zoning requirements and conditions of approval for any building or use within a Facility Master Plan area shall continue in effect except where modified by the reclassification ordinance or facility design guidelines adopted hereunder. (Ord. 1162 S 1 (part), 1995) 20.39.080 Annual Report. (a) Upon approval of a reclassification ordinance, the sponsor of the applicable Facility Master Plan shall thereafter submit an annual status report ("Annual Report") for review by the Planning Commission. The Annual Report shall include, as appropriate, the status of facility-wide improvements, progress in completing the required tasks and benchmarks described in the Implementation Plan, anticipated new construction or renovation projects, an update on transportation and parking needs, an update on mobile vendor (employee amenity) activities on the Genentech campus, an update of the facility-wide Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program, an update on the security program, projected changes in the facility usage and requirements, advance notice of any proposed changes to the facility-wide development standards or design guidelines, and notice of any changes that have been made to the Facility Master Plan since the most recent Annual Report. (Ord. 1162 S 1 (part), 1995) (b) Upon approval of a reclassification ordinance, the sponsor of the applicable Facility Master Plan shall submit an triennial Transportation Demand Management summary report ("TDM report") for review by the Planning Commission. The TDM report shall include documentation of the effectiveness of achieving the goal of the alternative mode usage and trip reduction by facility employees." Chapter 20.40 GENENTECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT Sections: 20.40.010 Short title. 933228-2 7 20.40.020 20.40.030 20.40.040 20.40.050 20.40.060 20.40.070 20.40.080 20.40.090 20.40.100 Purpose. Definitions. Overlay district designation. Permit review. Design review. Development standards and requirements Annual development review. Transportation system management. Fees. 20.40.010 Short title. This chapter may be referred to as the Genentech Rand D Overlay District Regulations. This district may be referred to as the Genentech R and D Overlay District. (Ord. 1163 ~ 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.020 Purpose. This chapter establishes the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District (Genentech Rand D Overlay District) and prescribes planning and design principles for facility-wide development in accordance with the Genentech Facilities Ten- Year Master Plan Update as defined in Section 20040.030. In addition to the general provisions described in Sections 20040.030 and 20.39.020, the specific purposes of the Genentech Rand D Overlay District are as follows: (a) To establish a facility-wide architectural character, a system of open space elements and a pedestrian and vehicular circulation plan linking buildings and uses together in flexible, logical and orderly manner for the Genentech facility; (b) To increase the flexibility of the city's land use regulations and the speed of its review procedures to reflect the quickly changing needs of a research and development focused corporation; (c) To establish facility-wide development standards and design guidelines consistent with the city's general plan and the East of 101 Area plan; (d) To define a baseline of existing conditions for each lot reclassified to the Genentech R and D Overlay District. (Ord. 1163 ~ 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.030 Definitions As used in this chapter: "Genentech facility" means all lots of record and their structures owned or leased by Genentech and reclassified such that the uniform regulations and requirements covered by the Genentech Rand D Overlay District apply. "Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update" means the long-range plan for guidance for the growth and development of the Genentech facility which was submitted to and reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council in accordance with Section 20.39.040(b)(4) as part of the application for reclassification of the Genentech properties to the Genentech R an D Overlay District. (Ord. 1163 9 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.040 933228-2 Overlay district designation. 8 (a) Application. The Genentech R and D Overlay District is established consisting of all lands so reclassified on the Zoning Map of the city to P-I/GR & D. (b) Reclassification. Additional reclassification to and/or removal of lots from the Genentech R and D Overlay District may be considered pursuant to the provisions of Chapters 20.39 and 20.87. (Ord. 1163 ~ 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.050 Permit review. Development review of projects within the Genentech Rand D Overlay District shall be in accordance with all applicable provisions of this title, including Chapter 20.39. (Ord. 1163 ~ 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.060 Design review. Design review of projects within the Genentech R and D Overlay District shall be in accordance with the provisions of this title, including Chapter 20.39 and any facility design guidelines adopted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Chapter 20.39.040(c). (Ord. 1163 ~ 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.070 Development standards and requirements. Development standards and requirements are established in accordance with Chapter 20.39. Projects shall comply with the development standards and requirements set forth in the underlying zoning district, and conditions of prior city approvals as provided in Chapter 20.39, except for the following: (a) Application of Development Standards and Requirements. Development standards to be applied on a facility-wide basis to the Genentech R and D Overlay District include the following: (1) Lot coverage; (2) Floor area ratio; (3) Off-street parking and loading requirements; (4) Building height; (5) Landscape buffering; (6) Growth and development proj ections; (7) Facility-wide open space standards; (8) Public parking spaces and locations; (9) Pedestrian connection standards; (10) Shuttle stop standards; (11) Signs; and (12) Displays. (b) Lot Coverage. The maximum lot coverage is established as sixty percent of the total area of the lots within the Genentech Rand D Overlay District. (c) Floor Area Ratio. The maximum floor area ratio (FAR) is established as 1.0 of the total area of the lots within the Genentech Rand D Overlay District. (d) Off-Street Parking Requirements. Off-street parking requirements are established within the Genentech R and D Overlay District at the ratio of the specific number of spaces identified on the following table per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area for each building type. 933228-2 9 Off Street Parking Building Type Office Lab MfglOther Warehouse Number of Required Spaces Per 2.75 1040 0.90 0.50 1,000 sfofGross Floor Area For purposes of this determination, office buildings are defined as those for which fifty percent or greater floor area is devoted to business, financial, or other administrative uses. For office buildings meeting this definition, a rate of 2.75 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet shall apply. The city shall review these ratios every year in the Annual Report, to determine whether they continue to adequately reflect parking needs at the Genentech facility. The Planning Commission may adjust the ratios to adequately reflect parking needs following the Annual Report review. ( e) Off-Street Loading Requirements. Off-street loading requirements are established at a rate of one loading space per one hundred thousand square feet of gross floor area for all buildings within the Genentech R and D Overlay District. (f) Building Height. The maximum building height is established at one hundred fifty feet above the average finished grade as measured on the perimeter of the subject building within the Genentech Rand D Overlay District. The maximum building height shall also be restricted to maximum limits permissible under Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77. (g) Parking Lot Landscape Buffering. A landscaped parking lot buffer strip not less than six feet wide shall be required only for properties within the Genentech R and D Overlay District that are located along a public street frontage or adjacent to properties not within the Genentech R and D Overlay District. (h) Growth and Development Projections. Consistent with the projections analyzed in the Master Environmental Impact Report for Genentech Corporate Facilities Research and Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update, development for the Genentech Facility shall be limited to the following through the year 2016: Neighborhood Acres Office Lab Manu Ancillary Total Lower Campus 55.1 290,000 880,000 395,000 60,000 1,625,000 West Campus 36.9 430,000 0 200,000 107,000 737,000 Mid Campus 23.8 135,000 680,000 0 95,000 910,000 Upper Campus 4604 1,327,000 0 0 60,000 1,387,000 Subtotal 162.2 2.182.000 1.560.000 595.000 322.000 4 659 000 Expansion 37.8 450,000 440,000 451,000 0 1,341,000 Master Plan 2,632,000 2,000,000 1,046,000 322,000 6,000,000 Total Source: Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update, Table 2.3-3, Total Projected 2016 Distribution of Development by Neighborhood. These figures represent the maximum allowable development for the Genentech Facility through the year 2016, as identified in the Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update. Any such development is subject to obtaining the required development permits and approvals and the existence of adequate infrastructure capacity. Any greater level of 933228-2 10 development would require, at a minimum, additional area-wide environment review, an amendment to the South San Francisco General Plan, and an amendment to the zoning ordinance. (i) Handicap Parking Requirement. Handicap parking requirements consistent with the California Accessibility Regulation and the Federal "Americans with Disabilities Act" (ADA) standards, must be incorporated as a facility-wide standard. G) Wheel Stops. The requirement to install wheel stops set forth in Section 20.74.110(b) shall not apply in the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District. (Ord. 1291 S 1 Exh. B, 2001; Ord. 1217 SS 4, 5, 1998; Ord. 1163 S 2 (part), 1995) (k) Facility-Wide Open Space Standards. The facility-wide open space standards are those established by the 2006 Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update, Section 3.6 "Open Space," identified in Figure 3.6-1. (1) Public Parking Spaces and Locations. The public parking spaces and locations standards are established by the 2006 Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update, Chapter 4, "Transportation and Parking," identified in Figure (m) Pedestrian Connection Standards. The pedestrian connection standards are established by the 2006 Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update, Section 304, "Pedestrian Connections," identified in Figure 304-1. (n) Shuttle Stop Standards. The shuttle stop standards are established by the 2006 Genentech Facilities Ten-Year Master Plan Update, Section 3.1, "Shuttle Stops." 20.40.080 Annual development review. Development activity shall be reviewed at least once a year by the Planning Commission. Genentech shall submit an Annual Report as provided by Section 20.39.080. (Ord. 1163 S 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.090 Transportation demand management. Genentech shall continue to comply with the city transportation demand management (TDM) ordinance, Chapter 18.04 ofthis code, and any revisions thereto, and will provide an triennial report on the effectiveness of achieving the goal of alternative mode usage and, as part of the Annual Report provided for in Section 20.39.080(b), an update on compliance with the TDM ordinance. (Ord. 1163 S 2 (part), 1995) 20.40.100 Fees. (a) Contributions to the Oyster Point Interchange. Genentech shall continue to contribute to the Oyster Point Interchange, in accordance with the existing requirements of the Oyster Point Contribution Formula, established by Resolution 71-84. These requirements shall apply to all discretionary land use approvals, including minor use permits and use permits issued pursuant to Chapter 20.39, and approvals pursuant to administrative review under Section 20.39.060(b) where additional vehicle trips will be generated. (b) Contributions to the Capital Improvement Program. Genentech shall continue to contribute its fair share toward the costs of capital improvement projects that support Genentech's development activity, in accordance with the financing policies established in the East of 101 Area Plan. (Ord. 1163 S 2 (part), 1995) 933228-2 11 (c) East of 101 Traffic Fee. Genentech shall contribute to East of 101 traffic improvements in accordance with the existing requirements of the East of 101 Traffic Fee contribution formula established by Resolution 101-2005, or as that Resolution may be amended. This requirement shall apply to all discretionary land use approvals, including administrative approvals, minor use permits and use permits issues pursuant to Section 20.39.060. (d) East of 101 Sewer Fee. Genentech shall contribute to East of 101 sewer improvements in accordance with the existing requirements ofthe East of 101 Sewer Fee contribution formula established by Resolution 97-2002, or as that resolution may be amended. This requirement shall apply to all discretionary land use approvals, including administrative approvals, minor use permits and use permits issues pursuant to Section 20.39.060. ( e) Childcare Fee. Genentech shall contribute to childcare in accordance with the existing requirements of the Childcare Fee contribution formula established by South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.115. Such contributions may be in the form of childcare facility construction, fees, or a combination of both facility construction and fees, consistent with Section 20.115.060. This requirement shall apply to all discretionary land use approvals, including administrative approvals, minor use permits and use permits issues pursuant to Section 20.39.060. 933228-2 12 EXHIBIT C Genentech Ten Years Facilities Master Plan Update SEPERATE BOUND DOCUMENT EXHIBIT D TDM Plan for the Genentech Research & Development Overlay District TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARy.............. ...........................................................................................i SUMMARY OF GENENTECH TDM MASTER PLAN MEASURES.................................. ii 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE.. ..... .................................................... .......... .......1 Report Purpose .... ....... ....... ......... ............................ ...... ... ..................... ..................... ...1 Genentech TDM Master Plan Goals. ........................... ...................................... ..... ..... 2 Figure 1 - Genentech's Campus Location...................................................... ............. 3 Regulatory Setting............ .......... ........................ .... ............................................... .......4 2.0 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT GOALS ...................................4 Current Genentech TDM Program ................................ ..... ........................... ...... .......5 Future Genentech TDM Program...... ................ ..... ......... ................................. ....... ...5 3.0 EMPLOYEE MODE SPLIT EAST OF HIGHWAY 101..............................................6 Table 1 - Comparable Transportation Mode-Use Rates............................................6 Table 2 - Sample Alternative Transportation Modes ................................................7 4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ....................... .....................................................................7 Table 3 - Summary of 10-Year Expansion Changes...................................................8 5.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT...................................................... ................................. 8 5.1 Parking Supply...... .......................... .................. ............................... ..... ...... ...... 8 5.2 Free Parking for Car and V~npools and Clean Fuel Vehicles .......................9 5.3 Preferential Car and Vanpool Parking....................................... ............... ...... 9 5.4 Passenger Loading Zones............. .............. ..................................... .... ............. 9 5.5 Motorcycle Parking.......... ..................... .................................................... ........ 9 6.0 BAY AREA CARPOOL AND VANPOOL RIDE MATCHING SERVICE................9 7.0 TRANSIT............. ................... ... ................ .................. .......................... ....... .... ...........10 7.1 Direct Route to Transit. .......... ................ .................. ................ .......... .... ........11 7.2 Genentech BART and Caltrain Shuttle Services...........................................ll 7.3 Dedicated Commuter Services - GenenBus......................................... .........12 Table 4 - Shuttles Serving the Genentech Campus.................................................. 12 7.4 Intra-Campus Shuttle Service.. ........... ............ ...... ................... .......... ............13 7.5 Inter-Campus Shuttle Service ...... .......... ............. ................. ........... ...... .........13 7.6 Shuttle / Bus Stops........................................................... ..................... ...........13 Figure 2 - Existing Shuttle Services............ ........................ ................. ............... ......14 7.7 Caltrain ............ .... .......................................................................... ....... ......... ..15 7.8 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) ....................................................................15 7.9 SamTrans ............... ........................... .......................................... ......... ........... .15 7.10 Downtown Dasher Taxi Service ....................................................................16 7.11 Ferry Service. ............................................................................... ......... .......... .16 8.0 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES ...........................................................16 8.1 Pedestrian Connections............ .............. ........ ............................................... .16 8.2 Bicycle Parking - Long-Term and Short-Term .............................................17 Table 5 - Bicycle Parking Recommendation............................................................. 17 8.3 Bicycle Connections...................... ........................................... ......... .......... ....17 8.4 Bicycle Resources.................................... ............ .......................... ....... ......... ..18 8.5 Shower and Clothes Lockers........... .............. ............. .............. ...... ............ ....18 Figure 3 - Existing Bicycle Facilities .........................................................................19 Figure 4 - Physical Site Design TDM Facilities........................................................20 9.0 EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR.............................................21 9.1 Designated Employer Contact at Leased Sites .~;..;..,........,-;.;.......;...;;......;.;;;22 9.2 Promotional Programs....................................................... ......... ........ ...........22 10.0 EMPLOYEE INCENTIVES .. ...................................................................................... 22 10.1 Commute Allowance I Subsidy Program ..... .......... ....... ................................ 23 10.2 Pre-Taxi Commuter Choice Transit Passes .................................................. 23 10.3 Carpool Incentive Program.......................... .................................. ................23 10.4 Vanpool Incentives..................................... .... ............................. ...................23 10.5 Try Transit Program .................. ............................... .................... ..... ....... ...... 24 11.0 GUARANTEED RIDE HOME PROGRAM..............................................................24 12.0 FLEXTIME............................ ........... ....... ....... ............... ............ ........... ...... .................. 24 13.0 TELECOMMUTING ..... .......... ................. ........ ............ ........... ........... .......... ......... ..... 25 14.0 INFORMA TrON BOARD I KIOSK.......... ....... ...... ..................................... ...... ..........25 15.0 ON-SITE AND NEARBY PROJECT AMENITIES ...................................................25 16.0 KICK-OFF MARKETING CAMPAIGN ...................................................................26 17.0 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION .......................................26 18.0 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT.......................................27 18.1 Annual Employee Commute Survey ............................................................27 18.2 Annual Summary Report ............................................ .............. ... ......... .... ..... 28 18.3 Triennial Report ................................................... ........ .............................. ..... 28 18.4 Penalty for Noncompliance ........................ ..... ..................... ......................... 28 19.0 CONCLUSION........................................................................................................... 29 A TT ACHMENTS (pending): Downtown Dasher - Mid-day Taxi Service Sample Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program Employee Transportation Flyer Carpool Incentive Program Flyer Rideshare Reward$ Flyer Vanpool Program Flyer Try Transit Program Flyer Guaranteed Ride Home Program DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Reducing traffic congestion and air pollution are critical to maintaining a healthy economy and lifestyle within the city of South San Francisco. Traffic congestion results in time lost to residents and commuters and increased demand on City fiscal resources for roadway construction and maintenance. Mobile sources, such as automobiles, account for 50% of all air pollution within South San Francisco. As part of their 10-year 2016 Master Plan, Genentech prepared a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Master Plan in September 2006. This plan is developed to achieve a minimum 30% alternative mode-use rate to address both traffic and air quality concerns in South San Francisco. The plan assumed occupancy based on a speculative, future six million square-foot campus and a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.69. This comprehensive plan includes City ordinance-required and extra measures, annual survey monitoring and triennial reporting. The plan has a variety of infrastructure and incentive-based measures that encourage all forms of alternative mode-use such as car and vanpool, transit and shuttles, bicycling, walking, and telecommuting. Other measures include an expansive commuter and internal shuttle program, daily commute allowance / subsidy program, Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) program, preferential carpool parking, showers and bicycle facilities, commuter incentives and an extraordinary number of on-site amenities designed to support car-free employees. An important feature, although not a formal TDM plan measure, is the modest parking availability planned to discourage single occupancy vehicle (SOV) use. This plan is performance-based with the TDM Master Plan goal of achieving a 30% alternative mode-use by Genentech employees. The mode-use will be monitored annually with the first employee commute survey to be conducted two years after approval of the Genentech Master Plan. An alternative mode-use summary report will be submitted to the City's Chief Planner after the first employee commute survey has been conducted. Every three years thereafter, a triennial report will be prepared by the City to audit the employee mode-use rate. It should be acknowledged that efforts to reduce drive-alone commuting and expand the mode options available to commuters may take several years to develop and mature to their full capacity. The elements contained in this TDM Master Plan are consistent with other South San Francisco employee commute programs and meet the measures required by the City and the 30% alternative mode-use goal. A summary of city-required and corresponding Genentech measures is provided on the following page. m The Hoyt Company Pagei DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 SUMMARY OF GENENTECH TDM MASTER PLAN MEASURES zone J. Pedestrian connections K. 10% referential car and van L. Promotional ro rams M. Showers and clothes lockers N. Shuttle Pro ram - Central Carn us Caltrain - South San Francisco Station - Gatewa Caltrain - South San Francisco Station (Gatewa ) - Glen Park BART Station (Central Carn us and Gatewa ) - South San Francisco BART Station (Central Cam us and Gatewa - Utah-Grand BART - Utah-Grand Caltrain - Commuter San Francisco Dedicated Shuttle (GenenBus) - Commuter Vacaville Corridor 1-80 Dedicated Shuttle (GenenBus) - Dedicated Genentech Main Cam us/DNA Site Shuttle - Dedicated Genentech South Cam us Shuttle - Dedicated Genentech Gatewa Site Shuttle ation es *Note1: Employee survey response methodology may be subject to change pending a consistency review by the City of South San Francisco. Current methodology requirements are inconsistent with methodologies used by the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (RIDES Survey). m The Hoyt Company Page ii DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 SUMMARY OF GENENTECH TDM MASTER PLAN MEASURES - CONTINUED Additional Measures in TDM Plan A. Alternative Commute Subsidies I transportation allowance program yes B. Bicycle connections yes C. Compressed work week yes D. Flextime yes E. Land dedication for transit facilities Ibus shelter yes F. On-site I nearby amenities yes - On-site food and drink vending on every other floor yes - Employee sundry kiosk yes - Campus Automated Teller Machine (ATM) yes - On-site coffee bar on every floor yes - Cafeteria (6:30 am - 2:00 pm) yes - "Grab and Go" Cafe (multiple) yes - On-site occupational health clinic yes n - On-site childcare yes -- - On-site hair cutting, dental, auto services, recreational paths yes - Nearby recreational (Bay Trails) yes - Nearby Fitness Center wi free shuttle (435 Forbes Ave) yes G..... Paid parking at market rates (*see note 2) n/a H..: Telecommuting yes 1..} Reduced parking (*see note 2) n/a J. .... .)...<.... . .......,,".... ..;. ""';:.", .D ...................... ....'.......\"......i...i-.... ..)..... Reduce parking yes Commuter Choice I Wage Works program yes Pre-tax payroll deductions yes Employee Transportation Coordinator (ETC) and staff yes Contribute funding for Alliance Bike to Work promotion yes Motorcycle parking yes Downtown Dasher - free midday services yes Spare the Air Program participation yes Include transportation link for future Bay Ferry Service yes Designated US EP A Best Workplaces for Commuter employer yes Charter buses for group activities and off-site meetings yes *Note 2: This city TDM ordinance measure was not approved as part of the final 2001 ordinance. m The Hoyt Company Page iii DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE Genentech, Inc., one of the world's leading biotech companies, is a drug development company that delivers innovative medicines to patients with serious or life-threatening medical conditions. Their corporate headquarters and manufacturing facility are both located at 1 DNA Way in South San Francisco, California, as shown in Figure 1. Genentech currently has 7,500 employees based at the South San Francisco central campus and has plans to expand substantially over the next 10 years. In order to facilitate expansion, Genentech has updated its Master Plan, originally created in 1995, to guide the company's growth and development of the central campus. The central campus is anticipated to grow to approximately six million-square feet during the 10-year planning period. This expansion represents a 100% increase in space compared with the current central campus development. The Master Plan envisions Genentech meeting its potential space requirements by both the re-development of buildings that Genentech currently owns and occupies, and by the re-development of expansion property that Genentech has recently acquired or may acquire during the 10- year planning period. Report Purpose This report presents the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Master Plan to accompany the updated Genentech Master Plan and discusses how the plan satisfies the City of South San Francisco's TDM ordinance. A TDM Plan is a set of strategies, measures and incentives designed to encourage employees to walk, bicycle, carpool, use public transportation, or use other alternatives to driving alone in private automobiles. TDM measures increase mobility while using existing transportation systems and boost the economic efficiency of the current transportation infrastructure. These measures are also designed to improve air quality, save energy and reduce traffic congestion. Convenience, reduce travel times, and cost are the primary factors affecting transportation mode choice. Options must be considered on a case-by-case basis as some measures that work well for some people or types of businesses do not work as well for others. An effective TDM Plan provides multiple options and incentives and is flexible enough to allow customization to meet the varied needs of individual employees. Genentech is committed to being a good corporate citizen and neighbor within the community and understands the importance of minimizing environmental impacts as it expands. As demonstrated by their mission statement, Genentech embraces a philosophy that the promotion of wellness and high standards contributes to the health of the whole community. The mission statement addresses the wellness goals for employees and the community: m The Hoyt Company Page 1 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Genentech's mission is to be the leading biotechnology company, using human genetic information to develop novel medicines for serious and life-threatening diseases. We commit ourselves to high standards of integrity in contributing to the best interests of patients, the medical profession, our employees, our communities and our stockholders. 1 As a developer and provider of medicines for serious and life-threatening diseases, Genentech's philosophical approach for improving the state of human health is also demonstrated by their environmental programs designed to investigate the "immeasurable connections between human health and the environment... with the two so closely linked, we see environmental protection as one more way that Genentech can help enhance and extend lives". The Genentech Master Plan improves and expands the campus facilities for the next 10-year period to accommodate future increases in research and development demands. As part of this planning process, Genentech embraces the air quality and wellness benefits to be gained by the development and implementation of the TDM Master Plan. As indicated in the Master Plan, Genentech seeks to offer an attractive, creative, productive, and comfortable environment for its employees. Genentech's current and future TDM programs focus on reductions in congestion and pollution by promoting extensive and innovative alternative methods of commuting. These comprehensive programs include a wide variety of benefits, services and programs designed to make it easIer and more convenient for employees to manage the quality-of-life issues juggled between work and everyday life. Genentech TDM Master Plan Goals Genentech strongly supports the City of South San Francisco's policy of focusing clustered development along major transportation corridors. Genentech campus sites are strategically located near to, and are served by U.S. Highway 101 and Interstate 280, several Caltrain stations, and a BART station. The comprehensive trip-reduction measures identified in this report are essential to realizing Genentech's trip-reduction potential in South San Francisco. The combination of these critical factors will provide the momentum to maintain a 30% alternative mode- use rate for existing and future campus facilities. Through monitoring efforts such as the annual survey of employees to determine transportation mode split - Genentech will be better able to focus transportation coordination efforts and encourage tenant employees to use alternative transportation. The first official mode-use survey report will be submitted to the City of South San Francisco two years after approval of the Genentech Master Plan. 1 http://www.gene.com/gene / index.jsp III The Hoyt Company Page 2 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 -""'l1lI( '" :> a. E '" U .<= " " C " " f- ~ C 0:: " <( iii Cl ID U Q ! z III Q CI ] III ~ .. o u c: .0 ~ c '" .z: >- '" CD ~~ 'u.2 't Cwo atES c""" ~+ o .. . II: :; g z o w ~ g; (J Cl o ii: ...I UJ ::l a. ::;; c( (J UJ :l: (J W I- Z W Z w Cl I ;; " '" .. .. .. '" a; '" '" ~ ~c3 ~ jj -" ~' ~ ~ ~ " " ~ d L.L., ~'" liThe Hoyt Company Page 3 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Regulatory Setting Chapter 20.120 of the Municipal Code outlines the TOM objectives for the City of South San Francisco. The specific purposes of Chapter 20.120 are to: · Implement a program designed to reduce the amount of traffic generated by new non-residential development, and the expansion of existing non-residential development, pursuant to the City's police power and necessary in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare. · Ensure that expected increases in traffic resulting from growth in employment opportunities in the City of South San Francisco will be adequately mitigated. · Reduce drive-alone commute trips during peak traffic periods by using a combination of services, incentives, and facilities. · Promote the more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that new developments are designed to maximize the potential for alternative transportation usage. · Establish minimum TOM requirements for all new non-residential development. · Establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure that measures are implemented. The TOM requirements apply to all non-residential developments located on lands within the jurisdiction of the City of South San Francisco expected to generate 100 or more average daily trips. The base required alternative mode-use for all projects is 28%. Additionally, developments with a floor area ratio (FAR) above minimum are subject to further the alternative mode-use requirements. Genentech's central campus, classified as "Genentech R&O Overlay" under the City of South San Francisco's General Plan land use classification, currently has a FAR of 0.52. The Master Plan calls for expansion that will result in an ultimate FAR of 0.69, which is subject to a 30% alternative mode- use requirement. 2.0 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT GOALS The basic premise of TOM is the maximum utilization of existing transportation resources. The City of South San Francisco, as is typical of other urban areas in the United States, has hundreds of millions of dollars invested in roadway infrastructure and public transit infrastructure. The goal of TOM is to more efficiently and economically take advantage of these major capital investments. The following are three basic goals that can be achieved through effective utilization of TDM measures: 1) Convert trips to an alternative mode of transportation (e.g., transit, carpools or vanpools, bicycling, walking) 2) Provide technological solutions (e.g., compressed natural gas, electric/hybrid vehicles, or other zero-emission vehicles) 3) Eliminate trips (e.g., compressed work weeks, telecommute or telework) m The Hoyt Company Page 4 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Until recently within the United States, the answer to relieving congestion on roads and in parking structures, was to build more roads and parking structures (similar in concept to building another manufacturing plant to expand productivity on levels). Current economics and limited resources affect the ability to build and maintain more roads or parking structures. This reality necessitates better utilization of the existing transportation infrastructure (similar to adding a second shift at an existing plant). To this end, TDM measures support the transition to a greater use of existing alternative transportation options. The measures and programs outlined in this plan support and meet the 30% trip reduction goal as identified by the City of South San Francisco's TDM Ordinance 1300- 2001. Current Genentech TDM Program Genentech operates a comprehensive and successful TDM program aimed at reducing the use of single-occupancy private vehicles by their employees. The program addresses daily commute-to-work trips as well as business-related travel during the day between the various campuses and downtown South San Francisco. The current program elements emphasize measures that are transit-oriented, include on-site amenities that support the use of alternative modes of travel, offer flexible hours and telecommuting as alternatives to traveling during peak periods, and promote ridesharing. Extensive convenience services are provided on campus - such as ATMs, credit union, barber shop, dental facility, video rentals, film developing, and dry cleaning - to minimize off-campus trips. Cafeterias, a childcare facility and a fitness center are also available to Genentech employees and contribute to reduced single- occupancy vehicle usage Using the City of South San Francisco's TDM Ordinance guidelines as an example target, the estimated number of trips needed to meet a 30% reduction for the current 2006 number of employees estimated to work at Genentech would be 2,250. This TDM Master Plan also meets many requirements of the Revised CICAG Guidelines for the Implementation of the Land Use Program approved by the City I County Association of Governments (CI CAG) of San Mateo County in September 2004. Future Genentech TDM Program As noted above, the purpose of this TDM Plan is to identify measures that will facilitate Genentech's Master Plan, which outlines potential expansion of the central campus to approximately six million square-feet during the la-year planning period. This m The Hoyt Company Page 5 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 expansion represents a 100% increase in space compared with the current central campus development. In order to minimize the traffic associated with new development identified in the Master Plan and the costs of building new parking structures, Genentech is currently exploring several new TDM strategies. Many of these strategies will be implemented by the end of 2006 but will continue to be refined and expanded over the duration of the Master Plan. The goal of the future TDM program is to continue to reduce the use of single-occupancy private cars by Genentech employees while providing efficient, price competitive, safe and attractive alternative modes of transportation. 3.0 EMPLOYEE MODE SPLIT EAST OF HIGHWAY 101 According to the Commute Profile 2005 Regional Report, prepared by RIDES for Bay Area Commuters, the San Mateo County alternative mode-use rate is approximately 29% with the Bay Area regional rate comprising approximately 34% alternative modes. The larger Bay Area alternative mode-use rate is largely a result of the proliferation of paid parking in the more urbanized core areas, whereas parking is free, or much less expensive, in many areas of San Mateo County (e.g. the City of South San Francisco). Tn.e 2005 Employee Transportation Survey conducted by the Alliance identified the San Mateo County alternative mode-use rate at 29.9%. The overall alternative mode-use rate for the City of South San Francisco was identified at 30.2%. In Fall 2005, an employee commute survey was conducted at a similar biotech employment center at Britannia Oyster Point in South San Francisco. Results from the survey indicated an alternative-commute mode rate of 35%. Table 1 shows the comparison of alternative mode-use rates for the Bay Area region, county of San Mateo, city of South San Francisco and a similar employment site. Table 1 Comparable Transportation Mode-Use Rates San Mateo County Bay Area Region City of South San Francisco South San Francisco - Britannia Oyster Point Campus 29.0% 34.0% 29.9% 30.2% 35.0% m The Hoyt Company Page 6 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Based on current and historical alternative mode-use data for the South San Francisco and East of Highway 101 business areas, a 30% alternative mode-use distribution was estimated for the current number of Genentech employees. This sample scenario reflects the TDM measures described in this plan. Table 2 shows a possible distribution example of various alternative transportation modes estimated for life science employees commuting to South San Francisco. Table 2 Sample Alternative Transportation Modes Drive alone to work site Car ool Transit (public and commuter shuttles) Other (motor de, telecommute) Bic cle Van ool Walk Non-commutin (sick, vacation, business travel) Total 58.50% 12.95% 12.00% 1. 97% 1.33% 1.60% 0.15% 10.00% 98.50% 4,387.5 971.3 900.0 147.8 100.0 120.0 11.3 750.0 7,500 The implementation of TDM measures identified in this plan will result in an estimated alternative mode-use rate of more than 30% - representing approximately 2,250 employees from a total of 7,500 (using 2006 numbers). This sample scenario provides a distribution example of employee alternative transportation choices depicting a typical workweek day. The actual distribution of transportation modes could vary and will be identified in future survey results. 4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION During the next 10 years, the Genentech corporate headquarters may expand to approximately six million square-feet. Located south of the U.S. Highway 101 in South San Francisco, Genentech's central campus is located in an area known as the birthplace of the biotechnology industry. The Genentech TDM Master Plan is designed to maximize opportunities for pedestrian, bicycle, carpool, transit and shuttle connectivity. These opportunities include: · A daily commute allowance program that subsidizes employee use of alternative transportation participation · Ten percent (10%) of car and vanpool parking (phased stripping) at full build-out · Free Class I (long-term) and Class II (short-term) bicycle facilities at campus sites for bicycle commuters m The Hoyt Company Page 7 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Showers and lockers for bicyclists, pedestrians and other alternative commuters Free shuttle services to BART and Caltrain stations are conveniently offered throughout the campus in addition to dedicated commuter shuttles On-site food service A substantial number of on-site employee amenities Bay Trails access for bicyclists help to create a self-sufficient development reducing the number of employee trips made daily to and from the project The lO-year master planned FAR is 0.69. This increased or bonus FAR requires more stringent annual employee surveys and triennial reporting (auditing) to the City. . . . . . Parking will be provided at a reduced ratio. Parking supply is a key factor for employees choosing how to travel to work. Reduced parking helps to encourage using alternative commute modes. Table 3 shows a summary of Genentech's 10-year Master Plan expansion changes. Table 3 Summary of 10- Year Expansion Changes 100% 7,500 2,815,000 0.52 28% 2,100 100% 13,000 6,000,000 0.69 30% 3,900 5,500 3,185,000 0.17 2% 1,800 5.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT 5.1 Parking Supply Planned parking is expected to accommodate employees, visitors, vendors and service vehicles. The ability and willingness to rideshare is directly linked to parking availability. By not providing an overabundance of parking spaces at full build-out, the project will lay the groundwork for successful promotion of alternative transportation. Preferential parking spaces in garages and within 100 feet of building entrances are excellent incentives that send a clear message to employees and the community that alternative transportation is important. Genentech proposes modest blended parking ratios to reflect the evolving development during the next 10 years. As higher TDM alternative mode rates are achieved and the commute allowance / subsidy program becomes more integrated, parking demand is m The Hoyt Company Page 8 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 expected to decrease. As parking demand is decreased, parking ratios will also be decreased accordingly. 5.2 Free Parking for Car and Vanpools and Clean Fuel Vehicles Parking will be free for all carpool, vanpool and clean-fuel vehicle participants. 5.3 Preferential Car and Vanpool Parking One effective means of encouraging employees to rideshare and/ or use clean-fuel vehicles is to reserve the most preferred parking spaces for the exclusive use of car and vanpools. At total build-out, a minimum of 10% of employee parking will be designated for carpool, vanpool, and clean-fuel vehicles. Genentech will provide car and vanpool parking spaces in premium, convenient locations (i.e., close to buildings, in the shade, etc.) within 100 feet of the building entrance. These preferential parking spaces will be specially signed and/ or striped and may require employee registration and permitting. Designated carpool and vanpool parking spaces will be available until 9 a.m. for vehicles displaying Genentech carpool placards, at which time unused spaces will be open to all Genentech employees. These future preferential parking spots will create a benefit for current users while also providing a visible incentive for employees that do not participate in the carpool or vanpool programs. 5.4 Passenger Loading Zones In order to facilitate the disembarking and embarking of rideshare passengers, passenger loading / unloading areas are provided in each neighborhood. Passenger loading zones for carpool and vanpool drop-off are located in the main entrances of various building sites. 5.5 Motorcycle Parking Areas are provided for motorcycle parking. Motorcycles produce less air pollution and occupy less space than automobiles. For these reasons, motorcycles may use carpool lanes, and are exempt from charges to cross toll bridges during commute hours. 6.0 BAY AREA CARPOOL AND V ANPOOL RIDEMA TCHING SERVICE Carpools in the Bay Area consist of two or more people riding in one vehicle for commute purposes (access to carpool lanes, free tolls, etc.). Genentech only requires two people or more to qualify for commuter benefits (daily commuter allowance / subsidy, preferential parking, etc.). The Genentech intranet site provides a Web portal to the 511 Rideshare Web site to access free ride-matching services. Employees carpooling to BART may apply for a "Carpool to BART" parking permit through the 511 transportation intranet site. Vanpools provide similar commuting benefits to carpool. A vanpool consists of between seven and 15 passengers, including the driver. The vehicle is owned either by one of the vanpoolers or leased from a rental company. The m The Hoyt Company Page 9 DRAFT Genentech TOM Master Plan September 25, 2006 intranet site offers a list of available vanpools providing service between the Genentech campus and various points in the east and south Bay Area. In order to increase participation in the carpool and vanpool programs, Genentech is working with 511.org to set up a Genentech-specific Rideshare Web site that will lead employees to the regional Rideshare Web site if no matches are found among the registered Genentech employees. This Genentech-specific ride-matching service will be publicized through email announcements, informational kiosks, and Genentech's internal intranet site. The Regional Rideshare 511 Program's Ridematch Service provides free car and vanpool matching services. On-site Genentech employee transportation coordinators (ETCs) promote the on-line 511 service directly to employees on a regular basis and allow the Alliance to solicit carpool sign-up at on-site employer events such as annual Transportation Fairs, Wellness or Benefits events, etc. Car and vanpooling is strongly encouraged throughout the campus. Employee transportation and shuttle flyers promote the free personalized matching assistance through the 511 Rideshare program. This car and vanpool ridematching service provides individuals with a computerized list of other commuters near their employment or residential ZIP code, along with the closest cross street, phone number, imd hours of availability. Individuals are then able to select and contact others with whom they wish to car or vanpool. They will also be given a list of existing car and vanpools in their residential area that they may be able to join. The 511 system gives commuters information they need to make informed choices when planning trips. By calling in or logging on, commuters can get up-to-the-minute information about traffic conditions, public transportation options, ridesharing, and bicycling anytime, anywhere throughout the greater Bay Area region and northern California. The 511 system offers one-stop shopping for regional traffic, transit, rideshare and bicycle information. The nine-county system is the first 511 service to go online in California. It provides links to 511 systems in Sacramento, Oregon and Nevada and is available via any phone, provided the carrier supports 511. Most counties in the region have wireless and landline access to the service through major carriers. 7.0 TRANSIT Caltrain, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and SamTrans provide transit service to South San Francisco in proximity to Genentech campus sites. An expansive Genentech operated shuttle system, providing 111 daily trips, connects transit riders throughout the campus. Genentech provides substantial funding, operations and support for BART, Caltrain, commuter, intra and inter-campus shuttles serving South San Francisco. m The Hoyt Company Page 10 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Employees can access the Nextbus link to estimate arrival times for the campus shuttle. To further enhance commuter connectivity, bicycle racks are provided on all Genentech shuttles. 7.1 Direct Route to Transit Well-lit pedestrian paths are provided from buildings, utilizing the most direct route, to the nearest shuttle stop. 7.2 Genentech BART and Caltrain Shuttle Services Genentech operates a comprehensive shuttle system serving the South San Francisco Caltrain station and two BART stations. Employee shuttle services are provided throughout the campus. · Glen Park BART Shuttle - travels directly from the Glen Park BART station to the Genentech campus. The shuttle stops at buildings B4, B24, and B83 traveling in opposite directions for morning (6:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.) and evening (3:30 p.m. - 7:30 p.m.) runs, every 15 minutes. · South San Francisco BART Shuttle - travels directly from the South San Francisco BART station to the Genentech campus. The shuttle travels in opposite directions for morning (6:00 a.m. -10:00 a.m.) and evening (3:00 p.m. -7:00 p.m.) runs, every 30 minutes. · Main Campus Caltrain Shuttle - provides service between the South San Francisco Caltrain station and the Genentech Campus every 30 minutes in the morning (6:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.) and every hour in the evening (3:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.). · Gateway Area Caltrain Shuttle - provides service between the South San Francisco Caltrain station and the Gateway area office buildings every 30 minutes in the morning (6:00 a.m. - 10:00 a.m.) and every hour in the evening (3:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m.). The Utah-Grand Area Caltrain and a BART shuttles operated by the Alliance will also serve Genentech sites located in the south campus area. The daily Utah-Grand shuttle system adds 35 additional trips for Genentech employee. · The Utah-Grand Area BART shuttle serves the South San Francisco BART station at 15, 30 and 45-minute frequencies. There are currently a total of 18 peak-hour BART shuttle trips. · The Utah-Grand Area Caltrain shuttle serves the South San Francisco Caltrain Station during the morning and evening peaks at 20, and 35-minute frequencies. Seventeen (17) Caltrain shuttle trips provide connecting service to and from the project site. m The Hoyt Company Page 11 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 Table 4 shows the number of shuttle trips provided for Genentech employees connecting with Glen Park BART, South San Francisco BART and South San Francisco Caltrain stations. 7.3 Dedicated Commuter Services - GenenBus Dedicated commuter Genenbus shuttles provide employee service between San Francisco and Vacaville. These employee coach buses offer luxury seating, WiFi connections and bicycle accommodations. The 2006 services include: . Church and Market (San Francisco) - the San Francisco GenenBus is a free shuttle with non-stop service from Church and Market Streets to the Genentech Campus. The shuttle makes three trips each morning and three return trips each evening at peak commute times. . Vacaville/I-80 Genenbus - the Wi-Fi equipped Vacaville/I-80 Genenbus picks up at Vacaville BI0 at 5:30 a.m., Fairfield Park & Ride at 5:50 a.m., Richmond Parkway Transit Center 6:20 a.m. arriving at B83 at 7:25 a.m. and B5 at 7:30 a.m. The evening commute departs from B5 at 4:00 p.m. and B83 at 4:05 p.m. arriving Richmond Parkway Transit Center at 5:00 p.m., Fairfield Park & Ride at 5:40 p.m., and Vacaville BI0 at 6:00 p.m. A comprehensive accounting of all shuttle trips, including BART, Caltrain, intra and inter shuttles and commuter services is provided in Table 4. Table 4 Shuttles Serving the Genentech Campus Glen Park BART Shuttle 13 13 26 South San Francisco BART Shuttle 7 7 14 Main Cam us Caltrain Shuttle 7 7 14 Gatewa Area Caltrain Shuttle 7 7 14 Utah-Grand Area Caltrain Shuttle 8 9 17 Utah-Grand Area BART Shuttle 9 9 18 GenenBus San Francisco Commuter 3 3 6 GenenBus Vacaville/I-80 Commuter 1 1 2 m The Hoyt Company Page 12 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 7.4 Intra-Campus Shuttle Service Genentech operates intra-campus shuttle routes to provide circulation between buildings and parking facilities in and around the main campus, as shown in Figure 2. Intra-campus shuttles include: · DNA Shuttle - runs continuously through the main campus, every 5-10 minutes, between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The shuttle stops at the following buildings: B4, Forbes parking lot, B9, B5, B3, B12/B36, B32, B24, B29, B24, and B12 Downhill. The bi-directional route is designed to be useful to employees in the West Campus, Upper Campus, and Lower Campus areas. · Gateway Shuttle - connects the main campus to the Gateway campus (building 83) and Gateway parking structure via a continuous loop, every 6-10 minutes, between 5:45 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The shuttle stops at the following buildings: B4, B9, B24, Forbes parking lot, B83 and B25. · South Campus Shuttle - service is approved and initiated. The Genentech Fitness Center (Club Genentech) is served by the Gateway and DNA shuttles. 7.5 Inter-Campus Shuttle Service Genentech operates one inter-campus shuttle route to provide connections between the main campus and the Redwood City Campus. · Redwood City Shuttle - connects the South San Francisco and Gateway buildings with Genentech's Redwood City campus. The shuttle stops at B4, B82, and B90 on the Main Campus every 90 minutes, between 6:55 a.m. and 5:20 p.m. Genentech also encourages chartering of buses for group activities and off-site meetings. Services include booking, group discounts, invoicing, and special services, as needed. 7.6 Shuttle/Bus Stops Multiple shuttle drop-off and pick-up locations for commuter service, BART and Caltrain are located throughout the Genentech campus. Figure 2 shows the existing shuttle services and a comprehensive shuttle map of routes and stops. m The Hoyt Company Page 13 ;:!: &'0 ~ ... '" '" Q) G '" :> 5 .r:; <C CIJ Q) G g ~ E .E 12- Q) CIJ ~ E lD c: ~ .E 0 g ... CIJ 0 t7; ~ e Q) .... .~ lii c: Q) g ~ c: U <;; E ~ .r:; l!! Ul .., :> CIJ lD L1. :> lii t7; :> ~ c: ~ .r:; ~ III U Ul CIJ ! III CIJ III I :> <<: n. .r:; U lD ~ Z c: S c: c: c'!J Q) :g z 0 (9 s ~ UI c'!J " G I:l , UI ..I , , Ii lfi N ~ W 0: (.) Ill: ~ ~ ;:l .c W Cl -~ u u: . II) c W ~ -' '" t: Ul = :::> lii :I: II) Cl % ~ ~ II ~ .. ","' r.I ...." :>n. ~ .. 0== .,<( CJ i c: o ~ .3 ~ CIJ ~ :> .r:; CIJ . '~ 'i t ~,~, ~~"J:!tIC.: ~~~.: :IE: '11': .:I~: 1 :~I;: ~ :r :;I: ;fg,~i' ~#.:~:~-: ~l:t;~:. .~... "iii' .~ll/.-:' - . .. .' . . .. /1$,:1' ~,-II~. . .'(.:~. . .. .. ., . " l\l E: ~ ~ ~ ~ -5 ~ ~ t.? ~ ,,,....,, \~, 'I'~ \1, " i,1 .." -0" .....~, ~I .~ \1:;'1.. 'Cil ..~.. i1!1 B > ".I~.. .'1' ...,." ~I' ~} '1;:1 0,.1'. ~\ ill:' ii' \\-~!I il'.' '1::1 '.11. \, ~~i! " ~ I' ,~I ..::.... .... ' ,I." i(<1'.......M.~ . "iI:i: ~ ~~ $ It " ,. .1:. :'.\ . .'(....: o~ ::~ \ ::\ ~.l)... "'" .~.:.!f.r.' : ,.. ... .), ",..~.~. ;.~. ~..,:~~!'!t". . :10 ,.<l: u i/~" ..'" ,.~J, ..... . --is ~ .j.~,::., .. ~,.. i · iI'" \ \~.. ,', i .~.;- ... ~ .i ".; " .. ~. -.:......, , '.' ". "" ..4P ,: ~,', ~'"' ~l;~' ..:.;r-'.... .... J '. ... "" -wL~ 'i -- r '-. ... . ~' I " '. . ". I i \, ", "", ' , \::........'c....., I '~'" :1 '... ". :\, ... .' . .\ .~.<...;, l5 ,. A j! ...~>;. 3j. ~6Qc: .:1 '. '. '. 'ill ","._C '~ ...~~;........l <5 :s~~.g :i .~.;~.::-,:".... ~J:8~ Ii .........~.."-~...... ' :~ .~..~~...::;::~::7....- ., rID .,q, '"'"" -tra} 01~ ~ ~ ~' ~~ ~~ ~~ ~ .Q.. Q., g l ~ c<l~ i "~ J:~ 8~ 2 ~~ ~~ a ... ~Ul g U ~ J! f-< DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 7.7 Caltrain Caltrain operates a frequent fixed-route commuter rail service seven days a week between San Francisco and San Jose, and a limited service to and from Gilroy on weekdays. Caltrain operates on 15 to 3D-minute frequencies during the morning and evening peak periods. Midday service operates approximately every hour with service less frequent during weekends, and holidays. Caltrain service is available approximately 1.22 miles from the Genentech campus at the South San Francisco station at 590 Dubuque Avenue and Grand A venue. Caltrain services were enhanced in 2004 to add express trains during peak hours. However, this new service does not provide an express stop to the South San Francisco Caltrain Station and hence does not benefit Genentech employees. 7.8 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) BART is a 92.7-mile, 43-station automated rapid transit system on five lines of double track. Trains traveling up to 80 mph connect San Francisco to Colma and other East Bay communities - north to Richmond, east to Pittsburg IBay Point, west to Dublin/Pleasanton, and south to Fremont. Service is scheduled every 15 minutes during peak periods. Service during holidays, and weekends are modified. BART-to-the-Airport expanded the system by 8.7 miles along the peninsula from Colma to a new intermodal station in Millbrae. Four new stations were created including the South San Francisco Station located between El Camino Real and Mission Road to the south of Hickey Boulevard. The Genentech campus is approximately 3.39 miles from the South San Francisco BART Station, and _miles from the Glen Park Station. 7.9 SamTrans SamTrans provides bus service throughout San Mateo County with connections to the Colma, Daly City, and South San Francisco BART stations, San Francisco International Airport, peninsula Caltrain stations and downtown San Francisco. The system connects with San Francisco Muni, AC Transit and Golden Gate Transit at San Francisco's Transbay Terminat with the Dumbarton Express and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority in Menlo Park and Palo Alto. There is no direct SamTrans service east of Highway 101. SamTrans service does connect at the South San Francisco BART Station and, subsequently, the Utah-Grand Area Shuttle. SamTrans does not provide a direct connection to the South San Francisco Caltrain Station, however; Routes 130, 292, 133, and 132 are within approximately 1 14- mile walking distance from this station and the connecting shuttle services for Genentech employees. m The Hoyt Company Page 15 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25,2006 7.10 Downtown Dasher Taxi Service This free taxi service provides an 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. pick-up service throughout the East Highway 101 business parks in South San Francisco. Using existing stops, taxis drop off riders at locations in the downtown retail area. The Downtown Dasher, operated by the Peninsula Yellow Cab of South San Francisco and managed by the Alliance, requires employer-provided vouchers and trip reservation before 10:00 a.m. This midday service is currently free to participating employers and is actively promoted by Genentech. A detailed Downtown Dasher flyer is provided as an attachment. 7.11 Ferry Service Currently, no scheduled water transit service exists in the South San Francisco area. Water transit service to South San Francisco is anticipated to begin by September 2009. Prior to this service becoming operational, Genentech employees will be given a link to this resource. 8.0 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES Pedestrian facilities comprise pedestrian paths, sidewalks, crosswalks, and pedestrian signals. There are numerous pedestrian paths throughout Genentech's campus. Bicycle facilities include bicycle paths (Class I), bicycle lanes (Class II), and bicycle routes (Class III). Bicycle paths are paved trails separated from roadways. Bicycle lanes are lanes on roadways designated by striping, pavement legends, and signs for use by bicyclists. Bicycle routes are roadways designated for bicycle use by signs only and mayor may not include additional pavement width for bicyclists. The San Francisco Bay Trail, a public pedestrian and bicycle trail accessible to Genentech employees, is part of a planned 400-mile system of trails encircling the Bay. It is located along the eastern edge of the Genentech campus. The section of Bay Trail adjacent to the campus provides amenities such as seating and lighting. It also provides good recreational opportunities for Genentech employees as well as access to the Oyster Point Marina. However, there are gaps in the trail to the north, above Brisbane, just south of the Genentech Campus and at the airport. 8.1 Pedestrian Connections Currently, crosswalks connect Genentech buildings on both sides of Grandview A venue and DNA Way. Sidewalks are located on both sides of Grandview Drive, DNA Way, and the north side of Forbes Boulevard in the vicinity of the central campus. A segment of the San Francisco Bay Trail runs immediately adjacent to the Genentech campus on the north and east sides, hugging the Bay shoreline. Safe, convenient and well-lit pedestrian paths are provided, utilizing the most direct route, to the nearest shuttle stop close to Genentech campus sites. Lighting, landscaping and building orientation is designed to enhance pedestrian safety. m The Hoyt Company Page 16 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 8.2 Bicycle Parking - Long-Term and Short-Term Genentech provides free bicycle storage lockers and racks at most Genentech buildings to help promote cycling as an alternative commute option. The bicycle lockers can be reserved, on a first-come, first-served basis, by employees through the internal TDM Web site. Secure, covered, bicycle parking facilities, Le. bicycle lockers and locked, controlled-access areas, will be provided for all new buildings within 75 feet of the building entrance. Bicycle lockers will be placed within campus neighborhoods in locations that will maximize use and visibility. The Class I (long-term) and Class II (short-term) bicycle parking facilities will be provided on-site at the follow level: · Commercial, R&D, and office uses: one bicycle space for every 50 vehicle spaces required. Table 5 shows the recommended and total number of bicycle facilities for the proposed expansion. Currently, Genentech provides 100 Class I lockers in excess of current requirements. All 100 lockers are utilize and there is a waiting list for 30 more facilities. Table 5 Bicycle Parking Recommendation All bicycle-parking facilities will be located in convenient, safe and well-lit areas with maximum space for the ingress and egress of bicycles. Note: The Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance provides a 50% match for the costs of purchasing and installing any bicycle parking, from basic racks to high security lockers, up to a maximum of $500 per unit. 8.3 Bicycle Connections In the vicinity of Genentech, a bicycle path is provided on Forbes Boulevard to DNA Way with bicycle lanes provided on East Grand A venue and Oyster Point Boulevard. The Genentech sites also connect directly with regional bicycle facilities and the San Francisco Bay Trail. The Bay Trail is a network of multi-use pathways circling San Francisco and San Pablo Bays. The ultimate route is planned to be a 400-mile route m The Hoyt Company Page 17 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 through nine Bay Area counties and 42 shoreline cities. The trail provides commuters an excellent route to bicycle or walk to work in the South San Francisco Area. A map of surrounding existing bicycle facilities is provided on page 20. Bicycle accommodations are also available on all Genentech-operated commuter shuttles. 8.4 Bicycle Resources Free Bicycle Buddy matching, bicycle maps and resources are provided via the 511 system. Bicycle commuters looking to find a riding partner can log-on to bicycling.511.org for more information. The Alliance provides a free one-hour, on-site Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program for employees. This workshop informs commuters about bicycling and walking as safe, stress relieving commute modes; traffic laws for bicyclists and pedestrians; bicycle maintenance tips; and offers a drawing for free bicycle-related prizes. A program flyer is provided as an attachment. 8.5 Shower and Clothes Lockers Genentech provides shower and locker facilities within each campus neighborhood to heJp promote cycling as an alternative commute option. Currently there are 36 showers and associated clothes locker facilities spread out over 13 buildings on the Central campus. Future site plans provide one shower stall for men and one shower stall for women and locker facilities per 500-600 additional employees. New shower and changing room facilities will be clustered among the different campus neighborhoods to assure maximum availability of facilities while minimizing employee waits. Figure 3 shows the existing bicycle facilities and Figure 4 shows physical site design and TDM facilities for shuttle stops and buildings with shower facilities. m The Hoyt Company Page 18 II) W I- ::I o c:: ~ u > u m c w z z :3 a. c ~ (!) z j:: II) X w C'l W c:: ::I (!) ii: ~ ~ <ll0 '<ii '5~ 0. fj,~o ?: C:-l-~~ ~ ~~tJ,.!! ~ gO) c~G: ~_ 'S o'iQ,1';~ - ~.c. g.., (/) <ll sa ~U)'umc~ ~_Q)~~~'~i '0 9. ~ <( u: a.co ~ ~~~~~~~~ gz~rocn<)~~ en r1> ~ [l.. Z. c:. (p c G)<.ll)C:;l"(5to'J) =z~~a\:ot:lt:l a ~ 0 t:l ~ l:I . ~ -g a'i ~ .0 "- ~ o g -0 <ll . -'" ~~ ::>-0 u~ ~.Q ""0 e.. <llC>. -g~ e- '" <o~-a. '8 .~ g- ...1[0'" '" .. "00) ~o a;~ \l!l $ :e. ~ ., U- ~ ~ tJ, ~ .~ '" '" c ~ .5 '" tii-0 ~~@ q"~UlJn; @.. :;;@ ! ~ ~ ~ .."" ';i; 19 '0' .. 0 N .. .", 0", o. ~"1p..r. <j9~ .o-1;Q-1"e '11~J~,!) ;; ~ ~ ~ Cl N .. JO""'-1IJ1jl ~~-9 ! ~ \i\ "- '" u '" '" ;: ~ ~ ~~--~ i~ <J @ ~ @O.....~ ",yQ ::\@ .,. ~ ~ ! .~ @ 0 0 ill . . ~~-'! ffi~ e;o ",'" .. "'~ N ::>(,) l\@ i o. " o -;~10 ~ (.-~.b \!l I< ;1; .. ~ N (j ;s .'" o :: ~a ~ ~ce.S6 . ii ~.~ ~._ U of ~:g2 ~ItUVl .. z ~ :t"' i %~ ili "'~ .. i III ~~ ...:e ;:<. (,) ~ ~ ." ia \5 w o. ~b-" ""~qb- 00 \ " ~ 1i \ co g .. ~ :. a: E ':l :::! C) ~ u: \lO :E o I- ;z: C> ~ 0, w l:: (fl :t () in ~ a. C) ;z: ~ x w '%-.;> -r" ""~"'~.9 N " ., ] ~ ~ l:J ~ \ ce- <Z~ g~ ~~ ~~ :d t ~ ~~ l~ ~:. WID V>~ .,:~ "..~ "..'" '"-'e DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25,2006 9.0 EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR The Genentech Transportation Department is staffed by a commute services manager and an operations I shuttle manager and several additional full-time staff. The commute services manager is also the ETC and has primary responsibility for implementing this Plan. The ETC provides employee commute program assistance to all Genentech employees, produces on-site transportation fairs and promotional events, collaborates with the Alliance and 511 to maximize resources, conducts the annual survey and produces the triennial report. TDM industry data supports that having an ETC has a very positive impact on increasing alternative mode-use. This position is filled by: Name: Nathan Byerly Employee Transportation Programs Manager Genentech Transportation Department Address: 1 DNA Way South San Francisco, CA 94080-4990 Phone: (650) 225-8285 The ETC provides the following services: · Promotes trip reduction and air quality strategies to employees. · Main point of contact for employees wanting to commute usmg an alternative. · Conducts annual employee surveys and provide reports to the City of South San Francisco, which will include commute patterns, mode splits, and TDM program success (process includes: annual surveying of employees, tabulation of data, and provision of results in report format). · Evaluates survey results for alternative transportation potential and/or changes to current program. · Catalogs all existing incentives that encourage employees to utilize alternative transportation programs. · Works with local agencies such as Caltrain, SamTrans, BART, the Alliance, 511 and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) and posts informational materials on the transportation kiosks in employee common areas, as well as disperses alternative program information to employees via posters, flyers, banners, campus newsletters, new employee orientation, etc. · Participates in BAAQMD Spare the Air program. Spare the Air day notices are forwarded to employees to encourage not driving to work alone. m The Hoyt Company Page 21 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 · Coordinates and manages various aspects of the plan that require periodic updating or monitoring, such as the GRH program, car and vanpool registration, parking enforcement, locker assignment and enforcement. 9.1 Designated Employer Contact at Leased Sites Leased campus sites require a designated contact to be identified. The designated employer contact at leased sites will be the Genentech ETC. The ETC will maintain on- site TDM programs and employee outreach, administrate the annual surveys and provide information continuity for the developer / landlord and the City of South San Francisco. 9.2 Promotional Programs Genentech's current promotional programs include new employee orientation packets, flyers, posters, em ail notices, transportation fairs, trip-planning assistance, Green Genes program, and an emergency ride home program. Genentech offers an orientation program to new employees to explain the importance of trip-reduction methods and their benefits to the community. The orientation addresses Genentech's TDM mission statement and alternative-commute options, describes on-site amenities, provides transit schedules, maps, and offers free ride-matching services. Genentech employees are encouraged to participate in the BAAQMD "Spare the Air" program during unhealthy weather conditions by not driving to work alone, and seeking other methods of commuting. Enrollment is via the BAAQMD Web page, and a "Spare the Air Day" notification is sent via emaiL Genentech also sponsors the annual "Bicycle to Work Day" with promotions and on-campus activities. Other events and promotions on-site at the project may include Caltrain Day, Rideshare Thursday's or a comprehensive transportation/ commute fair. Various transit and rideshare organizations may be invited to set up a marketing booth during lunchtime at a central location in the building during the year to promote alternative commute options. Free trial transit passes will be available for first time riders. Periodic on-site tabling is also conducted throughout the year. 10.0 EMPLOYEE INCENTIVES Genentech employees are offered a variety of incentives to use alternative commute options. Incentives include a pre-tax, payroll deduction (Commuter Choice) for transit and vanpool users and a daily commute allowance / subsidy program for employees who use transit, carpool, vanpool, bicycle or walk to work. The federal Commuter Choice option is a tax-free payroll deduction for vanpool and rail transit pass fares. An employee can deduct up to $1,260 a year from their salary as a pretax payroll deduction. This program encourages non-drive alone commute trips. Transit or commute subsidies can be set dollar amounts or a percentage of the monthly costs of transportation. Employment sites that offer transit or commute subsidies m The Hoyt Company Page 22 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 generally tend to have higher levels of alternative mode-use. Subsidies can be provided in tandem with the pre-tax option. Other carpool, vanpool and transit incentives are made available to encourage employees to use alternative transportation options (e.g. Try Transit, You Pool-We Pay, etc.). 10.1 Commute Allowance/Subsidy Program To better utilize land as Genentech adds employees, Genentech provides alternative mode commuters with a daily commute allowance / subsidy in order to reduce parking demand on campus. Genentech views parking as an employee benefit and, as of late 2006, offers employees a daily incentive for not parking onsite. Those who choose to participate in the program are compensated for each day they do not drive alone to the main campus. Employees who choose to continue to drive will continue to receive their parking benefit. Genentech employees report their monthly commute activity and are paid accordingly. This parking benefit strategy and incentive significantly will reduce drive-alone trips to the campus. 10.2 Pre-Tax/Commuter Choice Transit Passes Genentech employees receive transit passes through WageWorks, a Commuter Choice service that mails transit passes directly to participants. Employees are eligible to purchase passes through pre-tax deductions that are deposited into their WageWorks account. This option also allows employees to use their commute allowance/ subsidy towards their transit passes. 10.3 Carpool Incentive Program Genentech employees can participate in the "You Pool, We Pay!" program offered by the Alliance. Employees who are currently driving alone, and are commuting to, from or through San Mateo County, are encouraged to carpool. When employees form a new carpool with two or more people over the age of 18, or add a new member to an existing car pool, all participants will receive a $60 gas card incentive.2 A carpool program flyer is provided as an attachment. 10.4 Vanpool Incentives As an incentive for vanpooling, the Alliance will pay half the cost for the first three months of vanpooling, up to $80 per month. Drivers of new vanpools, on the road for at least 6 months, can receive $500. This one-time incentive is provided for those who join a new vanpool in the last six months who have not vanpooled for a three-month period before joining a new vanpool. A program flyer is provided as an attachment. 2 http://www.commute.org/programs.htm#carpool m The Hoyt Company Page 23 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25,2006 10.5 Try Transit Program The Alliance offers a Try Transit Program that provides free transit tickets to people who are interested in trying public transit to get to work. These free tickets are meant for people who are new to transit. Commuters requesting tickets must work, live in or drive through San Mateo County. A copy of the Try Transit Program is provided as an attachment. Transit ticket options include: . One BART ticket 3 round-trip Caltrain tickets 6 one-way SamTrans tickets, 6 Dumbarton tickets 3 round-trip VTA tickets. . . . . 11.0 GUARANTEED RIDE HOME PROGRAM Genentech offers its employees a Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) program, which allows employees who utilize alternative forms of commuting a free ride home for emergencies up to four times per year via taxicabs or rental cars. The program may not be utilized for doctor's appointments, meetings, shopping trips or other scheduled purposes. To qualify for the program, participants must fill out a registration form located on the transportation intranet site and must commute by an alternative mode. The GRH program is managed by the Alliance. The Alliance covers 75% of the cost for GRH services. Genentech pays the remaining 25% cost. A sample Alliance GRH program flyer is provided as an attachment. All employees who commute to work using transit, bicycle, or by carpool or vanpool, will be guaranteed a ride home in the case of a personal emergency, or when they unexpectedly have to work late thereby missing the last bus, or their normal carpool home. The GRH program has proven very successful as it removes one of the major objections employees have to giving up their private automobile, especially those with young families. The GRH program provides employees with a security blanket, a feeling of reassurance that if a child becomes ill or injured during the day the employee can get to them quickly. If employees need to work late and miss their bus or carpool, or if their vanpool breaks down, they will be guaranteed a ride home. 12.0 FLEXTIME In order to use alternative modes of transportation, employees may need special consideration regarding start and end times of work. For example, the workplace may open at 8:00 a.m., the carpool drops the employee off at 7:45 a.m., leaving them to wait III The Hoyt Company Page 24 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 until the building is open. Many employees would drive alone given those conditions. Flextime allows the employer to adjust opening and closing times to facilitate the use of alternative commute modes. Genentech provides flextime to employees wishing to commute via alternative transportation rather than SOY. Campus buildings are open and accessible in the early morning and evening hours to support an active flextime program. 13.0 TELECOMMUTING Telecommuting is a viable option for Genentech employees. Telecommuting involves the use of telephones and computers to enable an employee to work off-site or outside of the traditional work place. It can mean working at home or at a telecenter. Many employers look at telecommuting as a way to reduce work-space demand. Telecommuting, used as a tool to reduce the cost of doing business and employee commute trips, has proven to be very effective. The secondary and related benefits include recruitment and retention value, reduced sick time and absenteeism, improved productivity and morale, and reduced stress. The benefits mentioned above focus on employers and employees, but telecommuting will also reduce energy consumption related to commuting, vehicle miles traveled, and mobile source emissions. 14.0 INFORMATION BOARD/KIOSK Genentech's TDM Coordinator has transportation kiosk boards located within the lobbies of major buildings. These displays include shuttle maps and schedules, transit maps and schedules, bicycle facility maps, information regarding car and vanpool matching services, and information regarding alternative commute subsidies provided by Genentech. Flyers for "Ride Your Bicycle to Work Week" and "Spare the Air" programs are also posted. Genentech's TDM Program information is also available electronically through Genentech's internal Web site. The site also links directly to the BART Web site that provides Caltrain train and fare schedules, and offers schedules for each of the shuttle lines. Employees may also access the Nextbus link through the site to estimate the arrival time of a campus shuttle. Ride matching services are also offered through the Web site for those interested in carpooling or vanpooling via the regional 511 Rideshare Web site. 15.0 ON-SITE AND NEARBY PROJECT AMENITIES On-site amenities provide employees with a full-service environment. Eliminating the need for an automobile to make midday trips increases non-drive alone rates. Many times, employees regard themselves as dependent upon the drive-alone mode because of errands and activities that must be carried out in different locations. By reducing this dependence through the provision of services and facilities at the work site, an increase in alternative mode usage for commute-based trips should be realized. m The Hoyt Company Page 25 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 The on-site amenities currently provided promote the use of alternative modes by reducing employee reliance on the single-occupant vehicle. Genentech's extensive list of on-site and nearby amenities and services include: 16.0 . On-site food and drink vending on every other floor On-site employee sundry kiosk On-site campus automated teller machine (A TM) On-site credit union On-site coffee bar on every floor On-site cafeteria (6:30 am - 2:00 pm) On-site "Grab and Go" Cafe (multiple) On-site child care On-site occupational health clinic On-site hair cut, barber shop, dental, recreational, vehicle services, etc. Nearby recreational (Bay Trails) Nearby Fitness Center wi free shuttle (435 Forbes Ave) On-site video rentals On-site film developing On-site dry cleaning On-site concierge service, also available to employees, includes party planning, running errands, buying gifts, etc. for a nominal charge. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . KICK-OFF MARKETING CAMPAIGN Prior to occupancy of any new facility, Genentech will host a targeted employee commute marketing campaign. Regional transportation service providers, Genentech shuttles, commute allowance I subsidy program, guaranteed ride home information and otherprogram benefits will be highlighted for~mployeesrelocatiI1gtoa newsit~.This outreach process will continue to promote alternative commute opportunities and the unique benefits available to employees at Genentech and any special amenities at the new site. 17.0 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) are usually private, non-profit organizations run by a voluntary Board of Directors with typically a small staff. They help businesses, developers, building owners, local government representatives and others work together to collectively establish policies, programs and services to address local transportation problems. The key to a successful TMA lies in the synergism of multiple groups banding together to address and accomplish more than any single employer, building operator, developer, or resident could do alone. In South San Francisco, the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance operates as a TMA organization. The Alliance provides: · Shuttle programs · Information on local issues · Transit advocacy · Newsletter m The Hoyt Company Page 26 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 · Parking management programs · Trial transit passes · Emergency ride home programs · Bicycle facilities · Car and vanpool incentives · Bicycle training program · Training · Marketing programs · Promotional assistance Genentech participates in Alliance programs and utilizes their services. They are also registered in the Alliance GRH program for their employees. The Alliance is a clearing- house for information about alternative commute programs, incentives, and transportation projects affecting San Mateo County businesses. 18.0 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT The intent of the City of South San Francisco's TDM Ordinance is to reduce SOV trips and, in doing so, lessen the resulting traffic congestion and mobile source related air pollution. It is important to ensure TDM measures are actually implemented and effective. Therefore, a monitoring and enforcement program is necessary for each application. Because the City's TDM Program is performance-based (i.e. project requires percentage alternative mode usage and corresponding trip reduction at 30%), an annual evaluation program will allow Genentech and the City to assess the effectiveness of the unique program designed for the campus, and to make adjustments as necessary to meet requirements. Genentech will establish and maintain a 30% trip reduction program subject to annual monitoring. Annual monitoring and penalty programs are consistent with previously approved methodologies implemented by the City of South San Francisco at other project sites in the east of Highway 101 area. 18.1 Annual Employee Commute Survey An employee commute survey will be a critically important part of the monitoring process to determine the success or failure of TDM measures. This report, via results from an employee survey distributed and collected by the ETC, will provide quantitative data (e.g., mode split) and qualitative data (e.g., employee perception of the alternative transportation programs). Employees who do not participate in the commute survey will be counted as drive-alone or SOV commuters by default. Given the size and multiple locations of campus work-sites, Genentech proposes to conduct employee commute surveys at selected buildings to sample the success of the TDM program. Data collection will monitor the activities of all employees of the selected building or group of buildings to be representative of the company as a whole. Information from the Genentech rideshare database and commute allowance I subsidy program will augment the survey data. Survey data may then be used to focus TDM marketing and the efforts of the ETC. The TDM program could be re-tooled, if necessary, to maintain the project's 30% peak-hour alternative mode-use rates and commitment at the site. A summary report based on m The Hoyt Company Page 27 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 results from the annual employee commute survey will be submitted to the City of South San Francisco and presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. 18.2 Annual Summary Report Each year, Genentech employee survey data, will be used to prepare an annual TOM summary report. This report will be submitted to the City to document the effectiveness of the TDM Plan in achieving the goal of the alternative mode usage and 30% trip reduction by employees throughout the campus. The TOM summary report will be prepared by an independent consultant or TMA who will work in concert with Genentech. The TDM summary report will main a historical employee commute record to be used in all future reports. If the trip-reduction rates have not been achieved, the report will explain how and why the goal was not reached and specify additional measures and activities that will be implemented in the corning year to improve the mode-use rate. The initial TOM summary report for Genentech will be submitted within two (2) years after approval of the Master Plan and each year thereafter. The survey reporting is targeted for the 4th quarter of each year. 18;'3 Triennial Report For projects with increased FAR, a triennial report will be performed by the City. Modifications from the Genentech expansion have increased the FAR and require the project to conduct a triennial report. This report or audit will state whether the development has or has not achieved the required percent alternative mode-use. If the development does not achieved the required mode-use, the applicant will: Explain how and why the goals have not been reached Describe additional measures that will be adopted in the corning year to attain the required mode-use rate Provide an implementation schedule by month of additional measures The triennial report will also include a comparison of historical responses to the survey, identify if mode share has changed significantly, and describe why the mode share changed. The Chief Planner will review reports. Reports that indicate failure will be submitted to City Council. . . . 18.4 Penalty for Noncompliance If the subsequent triennial report indicates that, in spite of the changes in TOM programs, the required alternative mode-use is still not being achieved, or if Genentech fails to submit an annual report, the City may assess a penalty. The penalty shall be established by City Council resolution on the basis of the project size and actual m The Hoyt Company Page 28 DRAFT Genentech TDM Master Plan September 25, 2006 percentage alternative mode-use as compared to the percentage alternative mode-use required or established in the TDM Plan.3 In determining whether a financial penalty is appropriate, the City may take into account the more than $10 million dollar annual investment currently invested and consider whether Genentech has made a good faith effort to meet the TDM goals. If the City determines that Genentech has made a good faith effort to meet the TDM goal, but a penalty is still imposed, and such penalty is imposed within the first four (4) years of the TDM plan (commencing with the first year in which a penalty could be imposed), such penalty sums, in the City's sole discretion, may be used by Genentech toward the implementation of the TDM plan instead of being paid to the City. If the penalty is used to augment the TDM Plan, an Implementation Plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to expending any penalty funds. The City may assess Genentech a penalty in an amount no more than $50,000 per year for each percentage point (compounded at $25,000 increments) below the minimum 30% alternative mode- usage goal as determined by survey methodology used by the Alliance or other methodology agreed to with the city. 19.0 CONCLUSION The report identifies TDM measures that pro actively encourage employees to use alternative commute modes and will, at a minimum, support for a 30% alternative mode-use program according to South San Francisco guidelines over the next 10 years. This Plan meets the 30% minimum alternative mode-use required of Genentech under the City of South San Francisco's Municipal Code. As outlined in this document, Genentech is committed to providing an aggressive, comprehensive TDM plan to its employees to promote the use of alternative modes. Genentech is already exceeding program requirements (e.g. shuttle services, commute allowance, on-site amenities, etc.) and continues to expand and enhance its robust TDM program. Through internal dedication and partnerships with local agencies and organizations, Genentech is poised to be a model company in terms of TDM. In order to be part of the transportation solution, this project contains the density and critical mass necessary to encourage the use of all alternative modes of transportation including bicycling, carpooling, vanpooling, and public transit. By balancing air quality with economic growth, Genentech will help South San Francisco thrive as a community and contribute to South San Francisco's future livelihood. 3 Ordinance No. 1300-2001, Chapter 20.120, Transportation Demand Management, South San Francisco Municipal Code, October 2001. m The Hoyt Company Page 29 ATTACHMENTS (pending) Downtown Dasher - Mid-day Taxi Service Sample Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program Employee Transportation Flyer Carpool Incentive Program Flyer Vanpool Program Flyer Try Transit Program Flyer Guaranteed Ride Home Program EXHIBIT E Findings Regarding Significant Impacts, Mitigation, and Project Alternatives EXHIBIT E CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FINDINGS IN SUPPORT OF CERTIFICATION OF THE MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT, MEIR05-0004, FOR THE GENENTECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT EXPANSION AND MASTER PLAN UPDATE The California Environmental Quality Act, California Public Resources Code 21000 et seq. (CEQA), particularly sections 21081 and 21081.5, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, sections 15000 et seq. (CEQA Guidelines), particularly sections 15091 through 15093, specify that a City shall not approve a project for which an EIR has been certified where one or more significant effects of the project have been identified, unless the City makes written findings, including a rationale for each finding, for each of the project's significant effects. Pursuant to these requirements, the following findings are hereby adopted by the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission with respect to the Genentech Corporate Facilities Research & Development (R&D) Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update ("Project"), pursuant to an analysis of the 220-acre Master Environmental Impact Report Study Area ("MEIR Study Area"). The findings are based on the entire record, which includes without limitation, the Final Master Environmental Impact Report (FMEIR) and the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update.l The FMEIR, dated February 2007, includes and incorporates the Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (DMEIR), August 2006, and the Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (PRDMEIR), December 2006 for the Project. As described in the Planning Commission's resolution to which these finding are attached ("Resolution"), the entirety of the record also includes, but is not limited to, the City of South San Francisco General Plan adopted in 1999 and environmental documents supporting the General Plan; the Genentech Master Plan Update initial study; all comments received on the DMEIR and PRDMEIR; all proposed site plans, floor plans and elevations submitted in connection with the Genentech Master Plan Update; the Design Review Board meeting of October 17, 2006; the staff reports, consultant reports, the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 1, 2007; the Planning Commission meeting of February 15, 2007; the staff reports, consultant reports, and minutes for the Planning Commission meeting of February 15,2007: The FMEIR identifies a number of significant or potentially significant impacts that can be mitigated to less than significant. Related mitigation findings are presented below. All mitigation measures are required as part ofthe Project, and may not be substituted except in accordance with Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. Some ofthe impacts cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level; therefore, these findings also address Project alternatives as required by Public Resources Code section 21002 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091. Additionally, for those significant and unavoidable impacts, a Statement of Overriding 1 The public hearing transcript(s), a copy of all letters regarding the Final MEIR received during the public review period, the administrative record, and background documentation for the Final MEIR including all of the documents that comprise the Final MEIR are located at the Planning Department, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco. The Planning Department is the custodian of these documents and materials. TIlls information is provided in compliance with Public Resources Code section 21081.6(a)(2), and CEQA Guidelines section 15091 (e). 928816-4 1 Considerations has been prepared pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15093, and is included as Exhibit F to the Resolution, and incorporated herein by reference. Many of the impacts, mitigation measures, and project requirements in the following findings are summarized rather than set forth in full. The text of the FMEIR, including the DMEIR and PRDMEIR, should be consulted for a complete description ofthe impacts and mitigations. FINDINGS REGARDING IMPACTS BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Impact 4.1-1: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would not substantially affect the California clapper rail, salt marsh vagrant shrew, or salt marsh harvest mouse. There would be no impact associated with this effect. No mitigation required. Finding 4.1-1: A small salt marsh area was identified along the shoreline at the end of Forbes Boulevard, however, the area is fragmented with strands of salt grass and very small, scattered patches of pickleweed, as well as ruderal grassland uplands. California clapper rails, salt marsh vagrant shrews, and salt marsh harvest mice are dependent on high quality salt marsh habitats, especially those with dense strands of pickleweed. Habitat of sufficient quality does not exist in or adjacent to the MEIR Study Area, therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact associated with construction activities' effect on the clapper rail, salt marsh vagrant shrew, or salt marsh harvest mouse. Impact 4.1-2: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project could substantially affect the salt marsh common yellowthroat and Alameda song sparrow. This is considered a significant impact. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.1- 1, this impact would be reduced to less than significant MM 4.1-1: On land adjacent to the coastal salt marsh, pile-driving associated with construction activities shall avoid the February 1 through August 31 bird nesting period (Hunter 1999) to the extent possible. If no pile-driving is proposed during the nesting period, no surveys are required. If it is not feasible to avoid the nesting period, a survey for nesting birds shall be conducted by a qualified wildlife biologist no earlier than 14 days prior to pile-driving. The area surveyed shall include all areas within 150 feet outside the boundaries of the area where pile-driving is to occur or as otherwise determined by the biologist. Survey results shall be valid for 21 days following the survey date. In the event that an active nest is discovered in the areas within 150 feet of construction boundaries, pile-driving shall be postponed for at least two weeks or until a wildlife biologist has 928816-4 2 determined that the young have fledged (left the nest), the nest is vacated, and there is no evidence of second nesting attempts. Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-1 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.1-2: Implementation ofMM 4.1-1 would minimize potential impacts to disruption of nesting of sensitive species. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planming Commission finds that implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-1 would reduce Impact 4.1-2 to less than significant. Impact 4.1-3: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Project could substantially affect sensitive plant species. This is considered a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified project requirements, PR2 4.13-I(a) and PR 4.13-I(b), would ensure this impact would remain less than significant. PR 4.13-1(a): Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the Project applicant shall develop a SWPPP prior to construction to protect water quality during and after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures for the construction period: . Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro-seeding, shall be utilized, in accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABA G) Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. Silt fences used in combination with fiber rolls shall be installed down slope of all graded slopes. Fiber rolls shall be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets. . BMPs for preventing the discharge of other construction-related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e., paint, concrete, etc.) to downstream waters. . After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for accumulated sediment, and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and sediment. PR 4.13-1(b): The applicant shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City of South San Francisco in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control Plan shall include controls for winterization, dust, erosion, and pollution in accordance with the ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. The Plan shall also desc:ribe the BMPs to be used during and following construction to control pollution resulting foml both storm and construction water runoff. The Plan shall include locations of vehicle and equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and planned access routes. Public works staff or representatives shall visit the site during grading and construction to ensure compliance with the grading ordinance and plans, and note any violations, which shall be corrected immediately. The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.13-I(a) and (b) is more fully described in the 2 Project Requirements ("PRs") are applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations that are considered part of the Project description. PRs will be further implemented through the :Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. 928816-4 3 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Finding 4.1-3: As described in more detail in FMEIR section 4.13, PR 4.13-I(a) and (b) would require the applicant to develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and an Erosion Control Plan that would address construction run off. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that implementation ofPR 4.13-I(a) and PR 4.13-I(b) would reduce this impact to less than significant. Impact 4.1-4: Construction activities associated with implementation of the proposed Project could lead to soil erosion that, if allowed to enter adjacent coastal salt marsh habitat, would impact this sensitive resource. This is considered a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified project requirements, PR 4. 13-1 (a) and PR 4.13-1(b), would ensure this impact would remain less than significant. Finding 4.1-4: As described in more detail in FMEIR section 4.13, project requirements PR 4.l3-I(a) and (b) would require the applicant to develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan and an Erosion Control Plan that would address soil erosion. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that implementation ofPR 4.13-I(a) and PR 4.13-1 (b) would reduce this impact to less than significant. Impact 4.1-5: Implementation of the proposed Project would not have a direct impact on federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. There would be no impact associated with this effect. No mitigation required. Finding 4.1-5: There are no wetlands on the MEIR Study Area. Coastal salt marsh habitat occurs adjacent to the MEIR Study Area, but would not be directly impacted. The proposed Project does not include development in the Bay or on the salt marsh. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no direct impact on federally protected wetlands through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means. Impact 4.1-6: Implementation of the proposed Project could interfere with the movement of species or established migratory corridors, or impede use of native wildlife nursery sites. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation ofthe identified project requirements, PR 4.13-I(a) and (b), would ensure this impact would remain less than significant. Finding 4.1-6: Construction and development associated with implementation of the proposed Project would not occur within any critical or sensitive habitat. However, sensitive salt marsh habitat occurs and sensitive species could occur adjacent to the MEIR Study Area, and may be impacted by noise or soil erosion associated with construction activities. Noise impacts associated with construction activities to sensitive species have been addressed and mitigated in Impact 4.1-2, which requires pile-driving to occur outside of the nesting season, or if the nesting season cannot be avoided, a nesting survey must be conducted by a wildlife biologist to determine the presence of any nests. Soil erosion impacts to sensitive habitat (i.e., migratory 928816-4 4 corridors) have been addressed in Section 4.13 of the FMEIR (Utilities and Service Systems) and Impact 4.1-4, where it was determined that project requirements reduced the impact to a less- than-significant level. Impact 4.1-4 is mitigated through PR 4.13-1 (a) and (b), which requires the applicant to prepare and submit to the City a soil erosion control plan. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.1-7: Vegetation removal and ground-clearing activities could result in minor disruption of locally nesting birds. While the disturbance of active nests would be a violation of State Fish and Game Code and potentially the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, there are ample alternate nesting sites available. Because of this, this impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.1-7: The landscaping vegetation within the MEIR Study Area provides nesting habitat. It is expected that relatively minor amounts of landscaping would be removed at anyone time. Because of this, access to and use of native wildlife nursery sites will not be substantially interrupted by the proposed Project. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.1-8: Implementation ofthe proposed Project could conflict with the local Tree Preservation Ordinance. This would be a significant impact. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measure, MM 4.1-2, this impact would be reduced to less than significant. MM 4.1-2: Prior to the start of construction, the Project applicant shall retain a certified arborist to conduct preconstruction surveys of trees within the MEIR Study Area, and provide a map to the applicant and the City. Each protected tree identified that will be directly impacted by removal or pruning shall require a Tree Pruning/Removal Permit per Title 13, Chapter 13.30 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC). This permit shall be submitted to the City and must be approved before building permits are issued. Replacement trees shall be determined as set forth in SSFMC Section 13.30.080: (a) Any protected trees that are removed shall be replaced as follows: (1) Replacement shall be three 24-inch box size or two 36-inch box minimum size landscape trees for each tree removed as determined below. However, the director maintains the right to dictate size and species of trees in new developments. (2) Any protected tree removed without a valid permit shall be replaced by two thirty- six-inch box minimum size landscape trees for each tree so removed as determined below. (3) Replacement of a protected tree can be waived by the director if a sufficient number of trees exist on the property to meet all other requirements of the tree preservation ordinance. (4) If replacement trees, as designated in subsection (b)(l) or (2) of this section, as applicable, cannot be planted on the property, payment of twice the replacement value of the tree as determined by the International Society of Arboriculture 928816-4 5 Standards shall be made to the City. Such payments shall be deposited in the tree planting fund to be drawn upon for public tree purchase and planting. (Ord. 1271 S 1 (part), 2000: Ord. 1060 S 1 (part), 1989). Mitigation Measure MM 4.1-2 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.1-8: Landscaped areas in the MEIR Study Area may contain trees defined as "protected" by the South San Francisco Tree Preservation Ordinance, Title 13, Chapter 13.30. Development activities could involve "removal" or "pruning" of protected trees. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.1-2, would reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level. Impact 4.1-9: Implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) adopted by the City of South San Francisco. There would be no impact associated with this effect. No mitigation required. Finding 4.1-9: No HCP or Natural Community Conservation Plan has been adopted by the City that includes the MEIR Study Area. Because the proposed Project does not conflict with any conservation plans, the Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the record, that there would be no impact. FLOOD AND INUNDATION HAZARDS Impact 4.2-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would not place housing in a designated flood hazard area and would result in no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.2-1: Since housing would not be placed within the 100-year flood hazard area under the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update (FMPU), the Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the record, that there would be no impact. Impact 4.2-2: Implementation of the proposed Project could place structures in a 100-year flood hazard area, but not in a manner that would substantially impede or redirect flood flows. This impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.2-2: The presence of the Bay Trail, a public open space area, make it unlikely that development under the 2006 FMPU would place structures directly on the shoreline. However, potential opportunity sites identified in the 2006 FMPU are near the shoreline. Unlike flood flows along a drainage channel, flood flows at the shoreline would not travel a substantial 928816-4 6 distance on land. The flow of coastal flood waters that encounter a building constructed under the 2006 FMPU would not be substantially obstructed or redirected because the path of flow, i.e., the width of the shoreline, is short. In addition, structures that substantially impede flood flows, such as dams and levees, would not be constructed under the 2006 FMPU. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the record, that the impact of the 2006 FMPU on flood flows is less than significant. Impact 4.2-3: Implementation of the proposed Project could place people or structures in an area susceptible to flooding, but would not expose people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury, or death. This impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.2-3: It is unlikely based on the proposed development under the 2006 FMPU, that structures would be sited on the shoreline, where there is a flood hazard area. Structures near the shoreline, however, could potentially be exposed to coastal flooding. Buildings constructed in this area are required to comply with Chapter 15.56 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC), which identifies standards for construction in coastal high hazard areas. The MEIR Study Area is not prone to flooding in the event of dam or levee failure. Failure of a small-scale levee in the vicinity of the City would not release a volume of water such that the MEIR Study Area would become flooded. Thus, based on proposed locations for development and required compliance with the SSFMC, the Planning Commission finds, based on the entirety of the record, that the 2006 FMPU would not expose people or structures to flood risks associated with coastal flooding or dam or levee failure, and this impact would be considered less than significant. Impact 4.2-4: Implementation of the proposed Project could expose people and structures to inundation by tsunami, resulting in a potentially significant impact. Compliance with flood damage prevention provisions of the City's Municipal Code would reduce tsunami inundation impacts to less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.2-4: A few of the potential opportunity sites identified in the 2006 FMPU are in the tsunami inundation zone. However, as described in Impact 4.2-3, buildings constructed in flood hazard areas, including the tsunami inundation zone, are required to comply with the building standards identified in SSFMC Chapter 15.56, including elevation of development above flood level and use of materials resistant to flood damage. Additionally, both the City and Genentech have in place emergency services to respond to natural disasters. Thus, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission finds that via compliance with the SSFMC, tsunami inundation impacts are considered to be less than significant in the MEIR Study Area. AIR QUALITY Impact 4.3-1: Development associated with implementation of the Project is consistent with current zoning and land use designations, and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation 928816-4 7 of the Clean Air Plan. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.3-1: Based on the entirety of the evidence, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that the Project's consistency with the Clean Air Plan indicates that this impact will be less than significant. Impact 4.3-2: The proposed Project would implement and conform to various transportation control and trip reduction measures that are consistent with the BAAQMD's goals for reducing regional air pollutants, and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Clean Air Plan. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.3-2: TDM programs in place and planned for implementation would provide amenities and incentives that would help to encourage non-motor vehicle transportation by employees and visitors. The proposed Project would implement and conform to various transportation control and trip reduction measures that are consistent with the BAAQMD's goals for reducing regional air pollutants. Therefore, the Planning Commission fmds that, based on the entirety of the record, the proposed Project would not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of an applicable air quality plan, and this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.3-3: Implementation of the proposed Project would include excavation, grading, and construction activities which could generate dust, thus exposing people to the potentially unhealthy effects of particulate matter or the annoyance of particulate matter soiling. This would be a temporary but potentially significant impact. However, with implementation of identified mitigation measures MM 4.3-I(a) and MM 4.3-I(b), this impact would be reduced to less than significant. MM 4.3-1(a): Implement appropriate dust control measures recommended by the BAAQMD as outlined below. The Project contractor(s) shall comply with these dust control strategies. Genentech shall include in construction contracts the following requirements or measures shown to be equally effective: . Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose construction and demolition debris from the site, or require all such trucks to maintain at least two feet of freeboard. . Water all exposed or disturbed soil surfaces in active construction areas at least twice daily. . Pave, apply water three times daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved . parking areas and staging areas. . Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved parking areas and staging areas. . Provide daily clean-up of mud and dirt carried onto paved streets from the site. . Enclose, cover, water twice daily or apply non-toxic soil binders to exposed stockpiles (dirt, sand, etc.). 928816-4 8 . Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph. . Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways. . Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. . Install wheel washers for all existing trucks, or wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment leaving the site. . Install wind breaks at the windward side(s) of construction areas. . Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 25 miles per hour over a 30-minute period or more. . To the extent possible, limit the area subject to excavation, grading, and other dust generating construction activity at anyone time. MM 4.3-1(b): Designate a dust control coordinator. All construction sites shall post in a conspicuous location the name and phone number of a designated construction dust control coordinator who can respond to complaints by suspending dust-producing activities or providing additional personnel or equipment for dust control. Mitigation Measures MM 4.3-1(a) and MM 4.3-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.3-3: Construction-related activities are generally short-term in duration and the BAAQMD does not recommend any thresholds of significance for construction-related emissions. Instead, the BAAQMD bases the determination of significance on a consideration of the control measures to be implemented. At this time, the only construction-related control measures the BAAQMD recommends are those related to dust. If all appropriate emissions control measures recommended by the BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines relating to dust are implemented for a Project, then the BAAQMD consider construction emissions to be less-than- significant. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.3-I(a) and MM 4.3-I(b) would reduce Impact 4.3-3 to a less-than-significant level. Impact 4.3-4: Operational emissions generated by both stationary and mobile sources would result from normal day-to-day activities within the MEIR Study Area. These would potentially exceed air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). As there is no feasible mitigation to reduce these emissions, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. No feasible mitigation measures available. Finding 4.3-4: The proposed Project has incorporated certain features in its design that would help reduce the operational emissions that would otherwise be generated. In addition, Genentech offers employees several TDM programs. Still, the average daily emissions would exceed the 928816-4 9 thresholds of significance recommended by the BAAQMD. Although TDM and design features have been incorporated into the proposed Project, the performance of these measures is unknown. As there is no quantifiable and feasible mitigation to reduce these emissions, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.3-5: The proposed Project would not potentially expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.3-5: As sensitive receptors would not generally be exposed to substantial pollution concentrations, the Planning Commission finds that, based on the entirety of the record, this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.3-6: Construction and operation of the proposed Project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. This impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.3-6: There would be no substantial odor impacts to on-site or off-site sensitive receptors. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that, based on the entirety of the record, this impact would be less than significant and no mitigation is required. NOISE AND VIBRATION Impact 4.4-1: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would generate noise levels that exceed the noise standards established by the SSFMC. This is considered a potentially significant impact. However, compliance with the project requirement PR 404-1 and mitigation measures and MM 404-1 (a) through MM 4A-I(c) would reduce this impact. While noise levels could still be substantial, the proposed Project's construction noise impacts would be temporary, would not occur during recognized sleep hours, and would be consistent with the exemption for construction noise that exists in Section 8.32.050(d) of the SSFMC. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant. PR 4.4-1: Consistent with the City's Municipal Code, Section 8.32.050(d), all construction activity within the City shall be limited to between the hours of 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 10:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Sundays and holidays, or at such other hours as may be authorized by the permit, if they meet at least one of the following noise limitations: (1) No individual piece of equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding ninety dB at a distance of twenty-five feet. If the device is housed within a structure or trailer on the property, the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to twenty-five feet from the equipment as possible. (2) The noise level at any point outside of the property plane of the project shall not 928816-4 10 exceed ninety dB. MM 4.4-1(a): The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that the following construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels: . Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction, notification must be provided to surrounding land uses disclosing the construction schedule, including the various types of activities that would be occurring throughout the duration of the construction period. . Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards. . Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, where feasible. . Schedule high noise-producing activities between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. to minimize disruption on sensitive uses. . Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are not limited to, noise barriers or noise blankets. MM 4.4-1(b): The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that construction staging areas along with the operation of earthmoving equipment within the MEIR Study Area would be located as far away from vibration and noise sensitive sites as possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. MM 4.4-1(c): The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks used during construction would be routed away from noise- and vibration-sensitive uses, to the extent possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. Project Requirement PR 4.4-1 and Mitigation Measures MM 4-4-1 (a) through MM 4-4-1 (c) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.4-1: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation ofPR 404-1 and MM 404-1 (a) through 4.4-I(c), this impact would be less than significant. Construction noise that occurs during these hours is exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance because these hours are outside of the recognized sleep hours for residents, and outside of evening and early morning hours and time periods where residents are most sensitive to exterior noise. Consequently, the Planning Commission finds that, based on the entirety of the record, impacts resulting from construction noise during these hours would be less than significant. Additionally, the mitigation measures will further reduce noise impacts on sensitive receptors where feasible. Impact 4.4-2: Operation of the proposed Project would not expose noise-sensitive land uses off site to noise levels that exceed the standards established by the City of South San Francisco. This impact would be less than significant. 928816-4 11 No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-2: Large HV AC systems would be the project's primary source of noise. While occupants of the proposed childcare center on Allerton could potentially be exposed to noise levels as high as 72 dBA CNEL, This noise level, however, will likely be substantially reduced (perhaps by as much as 30 dBA CNEL) by several factors, including intervening structures and the exterior-to-interior reduction. In any case, the noise level would not exceed the City's 75 dBA CNEL threshold for the land use designation for the MEIR Study Area. Furthermore, the noise level that the proposed childcare center will experience will be further Noise levels that would be experienced by the sensitive receptor nearest to the MEIR Study Area (Larkspur Landing Hotel) would be below the City's 50 dBA CNEL standard for night-time use. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.4-3: Operation of the proposed Project would not generate traffic that would contribute to the exposure of persons off site to noise levels in excess of the standards. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-3: Traffic-related noise would increase by as much as 4.1 dBA CNEL at Project buildout in the Year 2016, which is in excess of the 3.0 dBA CNEL threshold of significance for traffic-related noise (see Impact 404-6). However, as shown in Table 404-10 in the FMEIR, traffic noise levels would not exceed the 75 dBA CNEL noise limit for industrial and institutional uses. As the proposed Project would not exceed local noise standards for the City of South San Francisco, the Planning Commission finds that the Project would not generate traffic that would contribute to the exposure of persons off site to unacceptable noise levels, and therefore, this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.4-4: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would not generate or expose persons or structures off site to excessive groundborne vibration. However, the construction activities may adversely affect vibration sensitive equipment within the MEIR Study Area. Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4A-2(a) and MM 4A-2(b) would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.4-2(a): Prior to the commencement of ground clearing activities, the Project applicant shall conduct a preconstruction survey to determine whether the construction activities would impact vibration sensitive equipment located in adjacent buildings within 100 feet of the construction activity. If it is determined that no impact would occur then construction activities shall begin and no further action need be taken. MM 4.4-2(b): If the Project applicant determines that vibration sensitive equipment has the potential to be affected, it shall implement a construction schedule to ensure that construction activities would occur during times when vibration sensitive equipment would not be in use. Mitigation Measures MM 4A-2(a) and MM 4.4-2(b) are hereby adopted and will be 928816-4 12 implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.4-4: Implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.4-2(a) would ensure that construction related activities, including caisson drilling would not occur adjacent to existing buildings containing vibration sensitive equipment. If construction activities were to occur adjacent to building containing vibration sensitive equipment, mitigation measure MM 4.4-2(b) would ensure that construction activities that could potentially impact vibration sensitive equipment, such as pile-driving, would be scheduled such that vibration sensitive equipment would not be impacted. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.4-2(a) and MM 4A-2(b), the potentially significant impact to vibration sensitive equipment would be reduced to a level of less than significant. Impact 4.4-5: Operation of the proposed Project would not generate and expose sensitive receptors on or off site to excessive groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-5: Because no substantial sources of groundborne vibration would be built as part of the proposed Project, no vibration impacts would occur during operation of the proposed Project. Therefore, operation of the proposed Project would not expose sensitive receptors on or off site to excessive groundbome vibration or groundborne noise levels, and the Planning Commission finds that, based on the entirety of the record, this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.4-6: Operation of the proposed Project would generate increased local traffic volumes that would cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. This is considered a significant impact. As no feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. No feasible mitigation available. Finding 4.4-6: Four roadway segments are expected to experience a significant increase over existing conditions, with a maximum increase of 4.1 dBA CNEL, which is considered an audible and substantial increase and would exceed the identified thresholds of significance. All other roadway segments in the project vicinity would not experience increase in traffic-related noise above the 3.0 dBA CNEL threshold of significance. However, it should be noted these roadway segments would not be located adjacent to any existing or proposed sensitive uses. Nonetheless, these roadway segments would experience an increase in traffic-related noise levels in excess 3.0 dBA CNEL, which is considered a significant impact. As no feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.4-7: Construction activities associated with the proposed Project would result in a 928816-4 13 substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels at off-site locations. However, construction noise is exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance; thus, this impact would be less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-7: The construction activities associated with the proposed Project would only occur during the permitted hours designated in the SSFMC. In addition, as discussed in Impact 404-1, construction noise that occurs within the permitted time frames is exempt from the City's Noise Ordinance. Due to this exemption, the Planning Commission finds that the temporary increases in ambient noise at off-site locations associated with construction activities of the proposed Project would be less than significant. Impact 4.4-8: Operation of the proposed Project would not result in temporary or periodic increases in ambient noise levels at off-site locations. There would not be a substantial temporary or periodic increase and, thus, no impact would occur. No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-8: Operation of the proposed Project would not include special events or temporary activities which would cause an increase in ambient noise levels. In addition, operation of the proposed Project would not require periodic use of special stationary equipment that would expose off-site sensitive receptors to an increase in ambient noise levels above those existing without the proposed Project. Therefore, there would be no temporary or periodic noise impacts to off-site receptors due to operation of the proposed Project. Based on the entirety of the evidence, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that no impact would occur. No mitigation would be required. Impact 4.4-9: The proposed Project would not expose people working in the project area to excessive noise levels due to proximity to airport-related noise sources. No impact would occur. No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-9: The MEIR Study Area is located approximately one mile from the San Francisco International Airport. Noise measurements taken on site showed the ambient levels at the site to be 71 dBA during daytime hours and contour levels from the East of 101 Area Plan indicate that the exposure level at the project site is less than 65 dBA CNEL. In addition, no residences currently, or are planned to, exist within the MEIR Study Area. Therefore, the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Based on the entirety ofthe evidence, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that no impact would occur. No mitigation would be required. Impact 4.4-10: The proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the project site to excessive noise levels from a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. No impact would occur. 928816-4 14 No mitigation required. Finding 4.4-10: The MEIR Study Area is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Thus, no impact related to the exposure of people residing or working in the MEIR Study Area to excessive noise levels is anticipated. Based on the entirety of the evidence, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that the proposed Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels, and no impact would occur. No mitigation would be required. GEOLOGY AND SOILS Impact 4.5-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would not expose people and/or structures to potentially substantial adverse effects resulting from rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic ground shaking, seismic related ground failure (i.e., liquefaction), or landsliding. Implementation of project requirements, PR 4.5-I(a) through PR 4.5-I(d) would ensure the impact would remain less than significant. PR 4.5-1(a): Development within the preliminary boundary of the Coyote Point hazard area, as depicted on Figure 15 of the East of 101 Area Plan and referred to as Figure 4.5-6 in the FMEIR, shall be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Fault trenching may be required on individual development sites where feasible and determined necessary by the engineer. No structure for human occupancy shall occur within 50 feet of active faults identified as Earthquake Fault Zones on maps prepared pursuant to the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act or the Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, unless a geotechnical investigation and report determine that no active branches of that fault underlie the surface. PR 4.5-1(b): New slopes greater then 5 feet in height, either cut in native soils or rock, or created by placing fill material, shall be designed by a geotechnical engineer and should have an appropriate factor of safety under seismic loading. If additional load is to be placed at the top of the slope, or if extending a level area at the toe of the slope requires removal of part of the slope, the proposed configuration shall be checked for an adequate factor of safety by a geotechnical engineer, based on applicable codes and professional standards,. PR 4.5-1(c): The surface offill slopes shall be compacted during construction to reduce the likelihood of surficial sloughing. The surface of cut or fill slopes shall also be protected from erosion due to precipitation or runoff by introducing a vegetative cover on the slope or by other means. Runoff from paved or other parts of the slope shall be directed away from the slope. PR 4.5-1(d): Steep hillside areas in excess of30 percent grade shall be retained in their natural state. Development of hillside sites should follow existing contours to the greatest extent possible and grading should be kept to a minimum. The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.5-I(a) through PR 4.5-I(d) is more fully described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.5-1: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning 928816-4 15 Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. The project site is not located within an Earthquake Fault Zone, and no known active or potentially active faults traverse the Genentech Campus. Because ground rupture generally only occurs at the location of a fault, and no active faults have been identified in the MEIR Study Area, the Area would not be subject to a substantial risk of ground surface rupture. Compliance with PR 4.5 -1 ( a) through (d) will ensure that this impact remains less than significant by requiring the applicant to prepare geotechnical reports, and provide design recommendations in response to any identified hazard. Continued compliance with the California Building Code, as well as applicable provisions of the Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act Seismic Hazards Mapping Act, and following identified project requirements will ensure that this impact remains less than significant. Impact 4.5-2: The construction and operation of the proposed Project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.5-2: All construction activities will be required to comply with California Building Code, Chapter 18, which regulates excavation activities and the construction of foundations and retaining walls, as well as Chapter 33, which regulates grading, including drainage and erosion control. Additionally, given the other construction requirements discussed in the FMEIR and these findings, specifically, Impacts 4.3-3 (dust control) and 4.13-1 (drainage and erosion control) construction and operation ofthe Project will not result in a substantial loss of topsoil. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that substantial erosion is unlikely to occur, and therefore, this impact would be considered to be less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.5-3: The proposed Project would not expose people or structures to on-site or off-site landslides, lateral spreading, ground subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. Implementation of project requirements PR 4.5-2(a) and 4..5-2(b) would ensure this impact remains less than significant. PR 4.5-2(a): The City shall assess the need for geotechnical investigations on a project-by project basis on sites in areas of fill as depicted on the East of 101 Area Plan, Figure 17 and referred to as Figure 4.5-7 in the FMEIR, and shall require such investigations where needed. PR 4.5-2(b): Where fill remains under a proposed structure, project developers shall design and construct appropriate foundations. The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.5-2(a) and PR 4.5-2(b) is more fully described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.5-3: Adherence to the City's codes and policies and following the identified Project Requirements would ensure the maximum practicable protection available for users of the project and would result in a less than-significant impact. Pursuant to the City's permitting process, the applicant will need to prepare geotechnical reports, which identify any potentially unsuitable soil conditions, and if necessary, apply measures to eliminate these conditions. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning 928816-4 16 Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.5-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in construction of facilities on expansive soils, and would not create a substantial risk to people and structures. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.5-4: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that identification of expansive soils before construction and implementation of appropriate design measures, as required by the Uniform Building Code and California Building Code, would ensure that foundations and structures would provide an adequate level of protection according to current seismic and geotechnical engineering practice to provide adequate safety levels, as defined in the California Building Code, Uniform Building Code, and the East of 101 Plan Geotechnical Safety Element, and as subjected to structural peer review. Therefore, no substantial risk to people or structures with respect to expansive soils would result. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Impact 4.5-5: The Project would not have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. There would be no impact associated with this effect. No mitigation required. Finding 4.5-5: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that because no septic tanks or alternative wastewater systems are proposed, there are no effects associated with soils incapable of adequately supporting these systems and no additional analysis is required. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact associated with this impact. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Impact 4.6-1: Implementation of the proposed 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). This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6-1: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds as follows: While the proposed Project would result in the development of additional laboratories and other research facilities that would use, store, or require the transportation and disposal of hazardous materials, as well as a limited increase in the average population that could be exposed to hazardous materials risks, compliance with Genentech programs, practices, and procedures and safety standards related to the use, disposal, and 928816-4 17 transport of hazardous materials and wastes, and the safety procedures mandated by applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations (RCRA, California Hazardous Waste Control Law, and principles prescribed by the USDHS) would ensure that risks resulting from the routine use of hazardous materials and disposal of hazardous wastes remain less than significant. In addition, safety programs reduce the risk of exposure to biohazardous and chemical hazardous materials by establishing protocols to safely handle and store hazardous substances, which ensures that a less-than-significant impact would occur. Genentech ensures that their facilities are in compliance with the California Code of Regulations (Title 17) and conditions of the radioactive materials license, and the utilization of radiation use authorizations and ongoing training regarding radiation safety also reduce the risks from radiation-related use or disposal on- site, thereby ensuring that a less-than-significant impact would occur. In addition, the CHP and USDOT strictly regulate hazardous materials transportation to and from the site. Although implementation of the proposed Project would expose more people to potential hazards, safety procedures mandated by federal and state laws and regulations, as previously described, as well as the continuation of existing ( or equivalent) Genentech programs, practices, and procedures would ensure that the use, transport, or disposal of hazardous materials does not expose employees, visitors or the nearby public to significant health or safety risks. As part of implementation of the proposed Project, federal and state law, as well as all Genentech procedures for handling hazardous wastes, would be extended to all new facilities developed under the proposed Project. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the potential impact of increased hazardous chemical, radioactive material, and biohazardous material use at Genentech would remain less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.6-2: Implementation ofthe proposed Project would not expose construction workers or Genentech employees to a significant hazard through the renovation or demolition of buildings, or relocation of underground utilities, that contain hazardous materials. This is considered a less- than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6~2: Based on the entirety ofthe record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that compliance with federal and state health and safety laws and regulations, as well as following existing (or equivalent) Genentech programs, practices, and procedures, would ensure that this impact remains less than significant. Pursuant to federal and state regulations, federal and local government agencies must be notified prior to the renovation or demolition of any structure that could potentially disturb asbestos. These regulations further require use of precautions and safe work practices to eliminate or reduce the risk of asbestos exposure. Similar programs exist for reducing lead exposure. Additionally, Genentech's comprehensive asbestos management program, which includes regular surveys, annual notifications, signage, and notification to all employees, will help further reduce these risks. Genentech's programs and practices with respect to demolition of buildings containing biohazardous materials, including medical waste, will also operate to ensure that this impact remains less than significant. Consequently, the Planning Commission finds that Impact 4.6-2 is 928816-4 18 a less-than-significant impact. Impact 4.6-3: Implementation of the proposed 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. This is considered a less-than- significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6-3: Genentech programs, practices, and procedures specifically govern receipt of hazardous materials at Genentech. Additionally, the USDOT Office of Hazardous Materials Safety prescribes strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials, as described in Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, and implemented by Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations. In addition to transport of hazardous materials to and from the Genentech facility, the movement of hazardous materials also occurs among Genentech facilities. Genentech's various business units exercise appropriate practices to prevent against the risks of accidental spills or releases of hazardous materials during internal transfers and movement of these materials. Ifa spill occurs, the Genentech First Alert Team (FAT) would be immediately notified. If required, the area of potential affect would be isolated and evacuated as appropriate in accordance with the Integrated Contingency Plan to reduce the potential for human exposure and to allow for prompt and effective cleanup by the Genentech FAT, an emergency response contractor, or the appropriate regulatory agency. Furthermore, Compliance with all applicable federal and state laws and existing Genentech programs, practices, and procedures related to the storage of hazardous materials will continue to be implemented to maximize containment. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that compliance with federal and state health and safety laws and regulations, as well as following existing (or equivalent) Genentech programs, practices, and procedures, would ensure that this impact remains less than significant. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.6-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would not create a significant risk of exposure of Genentech employees and construction workers to contaminated soil or groundwater. Implementation of mitigation measure, MM 4.6-1 would ensure this impact remains less than significant. MM 4.6-1: While not expected to occur on-site, if contaminated soil and/or groundwater is encountered during the removal of on-site debris or during excavation and/or grading activities, the construction contractor(s) shall stop work and immediately inform the appropriate Genentech representative. An on-site assessment shall be conducted to determine if the discovered materials pose a significant risk to the public or construction workers. If the materials are determined to pose such a risk, a remediation plan shall be prepared and submitted to comply with applicable legal requirements to assure the proper handling and management of contaminated soil and/or debris, and the protection of human health and the environment for the new building. Soil remediation methods could include, but are not necessarily limited to, excavation and on-site treatment, excavation and off-site treatment or disposal, and/or treatment without excavation. Remediation alternatives for cleanup of contaminated groundwater could include, but are not 928816-4 19 necessarily limited to, on-site treatment, extraction and off-site treatment, and/or disposal. The construction schedule shall be modified or delayed to ensure that construction will not inhibit remediation activities and will not expose the public or construction workers to significant risks associated with hazardous conditions. Mitigation Measure MM 4.6-1 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.6-4: Pursuant to the California Water Code, the Regional Water Quality Control Board issues Waste Discharge Requirements to control discharges (including groundwater) to land or water. Additionally, MM 4.6-1 would require that Genentech follow specific procedures in the unlikely event that contaminated groundwater is discovered during construction activities to ensure that the risk of exposure to Genentech employees or construction workers remains less than significant. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implementation ofMM 4.6-1 would ensure that this impact remains less than significant by providing specific procedures to follow in the event that contaminated soil and/or groundwater is discovered. Impact 4.6-5: The proposed Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. There would be no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6-5: CEQA Appendix G specifically identifies schools as an area of concern for exposure to hazardous materials, apparently distinguishing schools from other areas where children may congregate such as childcare centers, parks, and playgrounds. There are no existing schools within one-quarter mile of the MEIR Study Area. There are existing and planned child centers within the MEIR Study Area, but no schools. The MEIR Study Area is located in an area zoned for industrial uses only. Thus, no school can be proposed within one-quarter mile of the MEIR Study Area. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.6-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in construction of facilities on a site containing hazardous materials, and thus would not create a significant hazard to the public or environment. Following MM 4.6-1 would ensure that this impact remains less than significant. Finding 4.6-6: The EDR Report identifies the locations of known hazardous materials sites on- site based upon a review of federal, state, and county hazardous waste lists and databases pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. The lists and databases include, but are not limited to, the Department of Toxic Substances Control Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List (Cortese List), the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) database, and the California Hazardous Material Incident Report System (CHMIRS). These lists and databases contain information about asbestos waste, underground storage tanks, 928816-4 20 photo processing chemicals, PCBs, unspecified solvent and organic mixture wastes, unspecified aqueous solution, metal sludge, other hazardous materials monitored by statute or regulation, known releases of hazardous substances, and locations where radioactive or other hazardous materials are stored or used. There are no listed contaminated soil or groundwater sites on-site; however, there are on-site active or inactive Underground Storage Tanks (USTs) included on the lists and databases, as well as locations where hazardous materials are stored and/or used. These USTs conform to applicable federal, state, and local regulations and are registered and permitted by the SSFFD. If future UST-related cleanup were determined to be necessary, all work would be performed in accordance with appropriate guidelines of the regional Underground Storage Tank Program. All non-UST hazardous waste storage locations are managed in accordance with all applicable federal and state laws, such as RCRA and the California Hazardous Waste Control Law, as well as with all existing Genentech programs, practices, and procedures described in Section 4.6.3 (Existing Conditions) and Section 4.6.4 (Regulatory Framework) of the FMEIR. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that compliance with federal and state law, as well as implementation ofMM 4.6-1, which would require an on- site assessment if contaminated soil or groundwater were to be discovered, would ensure that this impact remains less than significant. Impact 4.6-7: The proposed Project is located within an airport land use plan; however, the proposed Project would not result in a safety hazard for people working in the project area. There would be no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6-7: The MEIR Study Area is located within two miles of the San Francisco International Airport. Both the existing and the proposed Genentech R&D Overlay District areas are within the San Francisco International Airport Flight Zone and are subject to the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Airport Height Limits established in the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan. In addition to FAA standards, the 2006 FMPU keeps a maximum building height limitation of 150 feet above ground level on buildings within the MEIR Study Area, which is in compliance with the FAA standards. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.6-8: The proposed Project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip and would pose no safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6-8: No private airstrips are located in the vicinity of the MEIR Study Area. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. Impact 4.6-9: Implementation of the proposed Project would not impair implementation 928816-4 21 of, or physically interfere with, an adopted emergency response or emergency evacuation plan. Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.6-2(a) and 4.6-2(b) would ensure this impact remains less than significant. MM 4.6-2(a): To the extent feasible, the Project applicant shall maintain at least one unobstructed lane in both directions on the site's roadways. At any time only a single lane is available, Genentech shall provide a temporary traffic signal, signal carriers (i.e., flagpersons), or other appropriate traffic controls to allow travel in both directions. If construction activities require the complete closure of a roadway segment, Genentech shall provide appropriate signage indicating alternative routes. MM 4.6-2(b): To ensure adequate access for emergency vehicles when construction Projects would result in temporary lane or roadway closures, the Project applicant shall consult with the South San Francisco Police and Fire Departments to disclose temporary lane or roadway closures and alternative travel routes. Mitigation Measures MM 4.6-2(a) and MM 4.4-2(b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.6-9: Construction and operation activities associated with development under the proposed project could potentially affect emergency response or evacuation plans due to temporary construction barricades or other obstructions that could impede emergency access on- site. However, through implementation ofMM 4.6-2(a), multiple emergency access or evacuation routes would be provided on-site to ensure that in the event one roadway or travel lane is temporarily blocked, another may be utilized. Furthermore, ongoing coordination between Genentech and local agencies pursuant to MM 4.6-2(b) would ensure that roadway or travel lane closures will be coordinated with emergency response personnel to ensure that individual development projects under the 2006 FMPU would not impair implementation of, or physically interfere with, emergency response and evacuation efforts. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implementation ofMM 4.6-2(a) and MM 4.6-2(b) ensures that impacts associated with emergency response or evacuation would remain less than significant by providing multiple emergency access or evacuation routes and coordinating roadway or travel lane closures with emergency response personnel. Impact 4.6-10: The proposed Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires. There would be no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.6-10: The MEIR Study Area is highly developed, and no wildlands are intermixed within this urbanized area. The MEIR Study Area is bordered by developed land to the north, east, and south. To the west is the San Francisco Bay. No wildlands are directly adjacent to the MEIR Study Area. The closest wildlands area, San Bruno Mountain County Park, is located approximately one mile away. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds there would be no impact. No mitigation is required. 928816-4 22 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Impact 4.7-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at Oyster Point BoulevardlU.S. 101 NB On-Ramp intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Implementation of the identified mitigation measures MM 4.7- lea) (included in the East of 101 plan) and 4.7-1(b) would reduce the impact; however, it would not reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Therefore this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. MM 4.7-1(a): Oyster Point BoulevardlU.S. 101 NB On-Ramp (East of 1013): . Create additional westbound right-turn lane. MM 4.7-1(b): Oyster Point BoulevardlU'S, 101 NB On-Ramp: . Add an additional lane on northbound Dubuque Avenue between the U.S.IOl Ramps intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. Reconfigure the northbound approach to Oyster Point Boulevard to provide two exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and two exclusive right turn lanes. As part of this widening, eliminate the left turn lane on the southbound Dubuque Avenue approach to the U.S.101 Ramps intersection (which serves mini warehouse facilities) and allow southbound left turns from the southbound through lane. This will allow provision of five full northbound travel lanes on Dubuque Avenue between the northbound Off-Ramp intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. . Adjust signal timing. Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-1(a) and MM 4.7-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. For mitigation measure MM 4.7-1(a), Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation by paying the East of 101 traffic impact fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Genentech will be responsible for funding its fair share (as determined by the City Engineer) ofthe implementation (including design, approval, and construction) ofMM 4.7-1(b). Finding 4.7-1: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the Oyster Point BoulevardlU.S. 101 NB On-Ramp intersection would still operate at an unacceptable level during the P.M. peak hour. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that despite implementation ofMM 4.7-1 (a) and MM 4.7-1 (b) this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.7-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the A.M. peak hour, and LOS F during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation ofthe 3 Mitigation measures that are taken from the East of 101 Study have "East of 101" in parentheses. 928816-4 23 identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-2 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level in the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant. MM 4.7-2: Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard: . Create an additional through lane on westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. . After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours would be reduced to less than significant, as the intersection would operate at LOS D with an average delay of 48.5 seconds during both periods. Genentech would be responsible for its fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the implementation of this measure. As shown in Table 4.7-20(a), analysis of this intersection and proposed mitigation measures using the Synchro software, also demonstrates that with mitigation, operation at this intersection will be reduced to an acceptable LOS D. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-2 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech will be responsible for funding its fair share (as determined by the City Engineer) ofthe implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of the mitigation measure, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-2: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours would be reduced to acceptable levels of service. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with the implementation of MM 4.7-2 this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-3: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive intersection during the A.M. peak hour, and LOS F during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-3 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.7-3: Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive (East of 101): . Widen northbound Gull Drive to provide two left-turn lanes and one through/right-shared lane and adjust signal timing; . Existing signal modification. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-3 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation by paying the East of 101 traffic impact fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Finding 4.7-3: After implementation ofthe proposed mitigation measure, the impact at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gull Drive intersection would be reduced to less than significant. During 928816-4 24 the A.M. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS D with an average delay of 44.7 seconds. During the P.M. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS C with an average delay of33.5 seconds. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with the implementation ofMM 4.7-3 this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-4 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.7-4: Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard: . The existing westbound shared through/right-turn lane shall be reconfigured to be a right- turn only lane; . The westbound right-turn movement shall have an overlap phase with the southbound movement; . The southbound right-turn movement shall have an overlap phase with the eastbound left- turn phase. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-4 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech will be solely responsible for funding of the implementation (including design, approval, and construction) of the mitigation measure. Design of improvement shall begin prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payment or construction shall be completed prior to issuance of building permit for 1,400,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Finding 4.7-4: After implementation of the identified mitigation measure, this intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS D (37.9 second delay) during the P.M. peak hour. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission hereby finds that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the proposed Project's impact at this location would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-5: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation ofthe identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-5 could reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level if the entire mitigation measure was feasible. MM 4.7-5: Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue (East of 101): . Re-stripe existing southbound Airport Boulevard right turn lane to a shared through-right lane and southbound shared through/left lane to a left turn lane . Widen eastbound Grand Avenue to add two left turn lanes; re-stripe the eastbound through/left shared lane to a through lane and eastbound right turn lane to shared through/right lane 928816-4 25 . Provide a third left-turn in the westbound approach and restrict truck traffic on westbound Grand Avenue . Existing signal modification The widening of Grand Avenue, as proposed in Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-5 is infeasible due to the effect that the expansion of the right of way would have on the businesses located on either side of the street. Such an expansion would require acquisition of a substantial portion of the business owners' property. Therefore, improvements to Grand Avenue will not be implemented. The infeasibility of this portion of the Mitigation Measure will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. The remainder of improvements identified in MM 4.7-5 are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation by paying the East of 101 traffic impact fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Finding 4.7-5: Those improvements to Airport Boulevard, as identified in MM 4.7-5, will be implemented in accordance with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Such improvements, including re-striping of existing southbound Airport Boulevard right turn lane to a shared through-right lane, and the southbound shared through-left lane to a left turn lane, will reduce the severity ofthe impact at this intersection. However, due to the infeasibility of the proposed Grand A venue improvements, this intersection is expected to operate at an unacceptable level. Because the identified mitigation measure for this impact cannot be feasibly implemented in its entirety, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.7-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-6(a) and 4.7-6 (b) would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.7-6(a): East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard (East of 101): . Widen westbound Grand Avenue to add one additional through lane and one additional left turn lane. . Widen southbound Forbes Boulevard to add one through lane and change the existing shared through-right lane to a right turn only lane . Widen northbound Harbor Way to add one through lane, one right turn lane and change the existing shared through-right turn lane to a right turn lane to a through lane . New signal installation . Signal interconnection installation MM 4.7-6(b): East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard: 928816-4 26 The eastbound approach to this intersection shall be widened to allow the existing shared through/right-turn lane to be reconfigured into separate through and right-turn lanes and southbound right-turn overlap. Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-6(a) and MM 4.7-6(b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. For MM 4.7- 6(a), Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. For MM 4.7-6(b), Genentech shall pay its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,500,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 1,500,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-6: After implementation of the both the East of 101 Study mitigation measures and mitigation measure MM 4.7-6(b), the Planning Commission finds, based on the entire record, that the impact at the East Grand Avenue/Harbor Master Road/Forbes Boulevard intersection would be reduced to less than significant. During both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours, this intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS D with an average delay of 43.3 seconds. Impact 4.7-7: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-7 would reduce this impact to less than significant. MM 4.7-7: East Grand Avenue/Allerton Avenue (East of 101): . New signal installation . Signal interconnection installation Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-7 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share contribution through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Finding 4.7-7: By applying the previously identified East of 101 Study mitigation measure, the proposed Project's impact would be less than significant at this location. After mitigation, the intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS ofB in both the A.M. (10.4 second delay) and P.M. hours (17.3 second delay). Therefore, based on the entirety ofthe record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation of the identified mitigation measure, this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. Impact 4.7-8: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at East Grand A venue/Grandview Drive intersection during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measures MM 4.7- 8(a) and 4.7-8(b) would reduce this impact to less than significant. MM 4.7-8(a): East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive (East of 101): 928816-4 27 . New signal installation . Add one southbound Grandview Avenue right turn lane; add one northbound Grandview Avenue thru lane (merging back to one lane after 110 feet); re-stripe eastbound East Grand Avenue to provide one left turn lane and one shared left/through lane. . Signal interconnection installation. MM 4.7-8(b): East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive: . The westbound shared through/right-turn lane shall be reconfigured into a right-turn only lane. The southbound right-turn lane would then be able to become a free right turn, and shall be striped as such. These reconfigurations would cause the southbound approach to require less green time, 4 creating more available green time for the eastbound approach. Mitigation Measures MM 4.7-8(a) and MM 4.7-8(b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. For MM 4.7- 8(a), Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Genentech is solely responsible for implementation ofMM 4.7- 8(b). Therefore, for this mitigation measures, Genentech shall pay for full implementation prior to issuance of building permit for 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-8: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that after implementation of the both the East of 101 Study mitigation measures and mitigation measure 4.7-8(b), the impact at the East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive intersection would be reduced to less than significant. During the A.M. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS B with an average delay of 18.7 seconds. During the P.M. peak hour, this intersection would operate at LOS C with an average delay of 20.1 seconds. Impact 4.7-9: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at Produce Avenue/South Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-9 would reduce this impact to less than significant. MM 4.7-9: Produce Avenue/Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue (East of 101): . Widen westbound Airport Boulevard to add one additional left-turn lane and re-stripe the existing through/left shared lane to a left-turn lane to make it a total of three left-turn lanes. . Modify northbound Produce Avenue to bring the southbound 101 to eastbound Airport Boulevard traffic to stop at the intersection to eliminate the merging and weaving conflicts on eastbound Airport Boulevard . New signal installation 4 "Green time" is the amount of green light allotted to any given phase at a traffic signal. 928816-4 28 Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-9 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share contribution through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Finding 4.7-9: After implementation ofthe identified mitigation measure, this intersection would operate at an acceptable LOS D (38.2 second delay) in the P.M. peak hour. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that by applying the previously identified East of 101 Study mitigation measure, the proposed Project's impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-10: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at South Airport/Gateway Boulevard intersection during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation ofthe identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-10 would reduce this impact to less than significant. MM 4.7-10: South Airport Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard (East of 101): . Widen eastbound Airport Boulevard to add one additional right-turn lane; re-stripe the existing through/left shared lane to a through lane . Widen Mitchell Avenue to add two additional through lanes and a right-turn lane . Widen southbound Gateway to add one right turn lane and change the existing shared through-right lane to another right-turn lane . New signal installation Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-10 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Finding 4.7-10: After implementation of the identified mitigation measure, this impact would operate at an acceptable LOS D (38.2 second delay) in the P.M. peak hour. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that by applying the mitigation measure previously identified by the East of 101 Study, the proposed Project's impact would be less than significant at this location. Impact 4.7-11: The Project would not result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks. This would be a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that Impact 4.7-11 would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required. 928816-4 29 Impact 4.7-12: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a volume-to-capacity increase of 0.05 or more along the already deficient (LOS F) U.S. 101 segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard in the southbound direction during the A.M. peak hour, and in the northbound direction during the P.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. No feasible mitigation measures. Finding 4.7-12: In order to sufficiently mitigate the significant volume-to-capacity ratios for the U.S. 101 mainline, the freeway would need to be widened or a new freeway would need to be constructed. Given the location of this segment of the U.S. 101, and its close proximity to the surrounding development, such widening or new construction is not possible. Additionally, this mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the type of land uses that it would benefit. For these reasons, mitigation ofImpact 4.7-12 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA S 21061.1, which states that "economic. . . and technological factors" are to be taken into account when determining feasibility. Additionally, potential mitigation measures to reduce this impact would require approval from outside agencies. The South San Francisco's General Plan Guiding Policy 4.2-G-9 states that the City should "[a]ccept LOS E or F after finding that: There is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and The uses resulting in the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit." Thus, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission finds that no feasible mitigation measures exist that would reduce Impact 4.7-12 to a level ofless than significant, and therefore, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.7-13: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue U.S. 101 Off-Ramp during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-13 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.7-13: Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue Off-Ramp: . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the re-stripe (reconfigure) of the eastbound Grand Avenue approach from an existing exclusive right turn land and a shared through/left turn lane to provide an exclusive left turn land and a shared through/right turn lane. . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the re-stripe (reconfigure) of the southbound Airport Boulevard approach from an existing left, shared through/left turn, exclusive through and exclusive right turn lane configuration to provide two exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and a shared through/right turn lane. . Adjust signal timing. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-13 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master 928816-4 30 Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-13: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue Off-Ramp would operate at an acceptable LOS D (49.9 second delay) during the A.M. peak hour. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission finds this impact would be considered less than significant after mitigation. Impact 4.7-14: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS E conditions at Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-Ramp during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-14 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. The proposed Project would degrade the baseline operation from an acceptable LOS D to an unacceptable LOS E at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-Ramp during the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-14, however, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. MM 4.7-14: Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-Ramp: . Adjust signal timing. . Implement MM 4.7-2. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-14 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-14: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway BoulevardlU.S. 101 SB Fly-Over Off-Ramp would operate at an acceptable LOS D (52.1 second delay) during the A.M. peak hour and an acceptable LOS D (41.0 second delay) during the P.M. peak hour. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be considered less than significant after mitigation. 928816-4 31 Impact 4.7-15: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic at the already unacceptable Oyster Point BoulevardJDubuque AvenuelU.S. NB On-Ramp by more than two percent. This would be a significant impact. Implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-15 would reduce the impact, however, not to a less-than-significant level. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this impact to a less- than-significant level. Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. The proposed Project would increase traffic volume at the Oyster Point BoulevardlDubuque AvenuelU.S. NB On-Ramp by more than two percent (12.7%) during the P.M. peak hour. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-15, however, would reduce this impact to a still- significant LOS E. Therefore, this impact is considered significant and unavoidable. MM 4.7-15: Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque AvenuelU.S. NB On-Ramp: . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the addition of a second exclusive right turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. . Implement MM 4.7-1(b). . Adjust signal timing. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-15: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the impact will be reduced, however not to a less-than-significant level; operations at this location would still exceed the City's thresholds. There are no additional feasible mitigation measures that can be implemented to reduce this impact to less than significant. Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.7-16: Implementation ofthe proposed Project would increase traffic by more than one percent (12.1 %) at the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue off-ramp, where baseline 95th percentile queuing is already Projected at unacceptable lengths. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-16 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. The proposed Project would increase traffic at the Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue off-ramp by more than one percent (12.1 %). Because the Projected baseline 95th percentile queuing at this off-ramp is already at an unacceptable length, this would be considered a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-16, however, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. MM 4.7-16: Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue: 928816-4 32 . Implement measures identified in Mitigation Measure 4.7-13. . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards an exclusive right turn lane on the southbound Airport Boulevard approach to Miller Avenue. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-16 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. Finding 4.7-16: After implementation ofthe proposed mitigation measure, the queuing will be less than the 95th percentile. In accordance with the City's identified thresholds of significance, the 12.1 % increase will no longer be considered significant. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be considered less than significant after mitigation. Impact 4.7-17: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic by more than one percent during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours (8.5% and 12.7%, respectively) at the Oyster Point BoulevardlDubuque A venue off-ramp, where baseline 95th percentile queuing is already projected at unacceptable lengths. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-17 would reduce the impact to a less-than- significant level. The proposed Project would increase traffic at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque A venue off- ramp by more than one percent during both the A.M. and P.M. peak hours (8.5% and 12.7%, respectively). Because the Projected baseline 95th percentile queuing at this off-ramp is already at an unacceptable length, this would be considered a significant impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-17, however, would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. MM 4.7-17: Oyster Point BoulevardJDubuque Avenue: . Implement measures identified in Mitigation Measure 4.7-15. . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the re-stripe of the U.S. 101 NB Off-Ramp approach to Dubuque Avenue from an existing exclusive left, shared through/left and exclusive right turn lane to provide two exclusive left turn lanes and a shared through/right turn lane. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-17 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-17: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, the queuing will be less than the 95th percentile. In accordance with the City's identified thresholds of significance, the percentage increase will no longer be considered significant. Therefore, based on the entirety 928816-4 33 of the record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be considered less than significant after mitigation. Impact 4.7-18: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. To the extent that MM 4.7-18 can be feasibly implemented, this impact would be reduced to a less-than-significant level. However, ifMM 4.7- 18 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. The proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be considered a significant impact. MM 4.7-18: Northbound Off-Ramp to Dubuque Avenue: . Provide a fair-share contribution, as determined by City Engineer, to provision of a second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Dubuque Avenue off-ramp. Proposed Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-18 is infeasible for the reasons stated below, and those set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Therefore, this Mitigation Measure will not be implemented. Finding 4.7-18: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue would not increase past unacceptable levels. However, as MM 4.7-18 would require a widening of the freeway, as well as shifting Dubuque Avenue east of its current location, implementation of the mitigation measure would require an expansion of the right of way, and have a substantial effect on adjacent businesses. Given these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-18 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21 061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic and technological concerns, against the benefits ofthe project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic and technological concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, and based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.7-19: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. To the extent that MM 4.7-19 can be feasibly implemented, this impact would be reduced to a less- than-significant level. However, ifMM 4.7-19 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. 928816-4 34 The proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be considered a significant impact. MM 4.7-19: Southbound Fly-Over Off-Ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard: . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the construction ofa second southbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Oyster Point Boulevard off-ramp. Proposed Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-19 is infeasible for the reasons stated below, and those set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Therefore, this Mitigation Measure will not be implemented. Finding 4.7-19: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard would not increase past unacceptable levels. However, implementation ofMM 4.7-19 would require the relocation of at least one support column for the Oyster Point flyover ramp. Such relocation is not feasible given the expense and geometries of the right of ways. In light of these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-19 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21 061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, and based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. This impact will be addressed further in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F. Impact 4.7-20: Implementation ofthe proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to South Airport Boulevard/W ondercolor Lane intersection from 1,807 vehicles up to 2,031 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour-a 12% increase. This would be a significant impact. However, implementation of the identified mitigation measure MM 4.7-20 would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.7-20: Northbound off-ramp to South Airport Boulevard/Wondercolor Lane: . Provide a fair-share contribution towards the provision of a second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the South Airport off-ramp. (This measure is already programmed as part of the East of 101 capital improvement program). Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-20 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall satisfy its fair share obligation through payment of the East of 101 fee prior to issuance of a building permit. 928816-4 35 Finding 4.7-20: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the northbound off-ramp to South Airport Boulevard/W ondercolor Lane would not increase past unacceptable levels. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant after mitigation. Impact 4.7-21: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to East Grand Avenue/Executive Drive intersection from 1,666 vehicles up to 2,065 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour-a 24% increase. This would be a significant impact. Implementation ofMM 4.7-21 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.7-21: Northbound off-ramp to East Grand Avenue/Executive Drive: . Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the construction ofa second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the East Grand A venue off-ramp. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-21 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Genentech shall be responsible for payment of its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permit for 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development approves pursuant to 2006 Master Plan. Payments shall be made for each approved building permit, based on the proportionate share of the 750,000 cumulative square feet of new development that the particular building permit allows. Finding 4.7-21: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that after implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the northbound off-ramp to East Grand A venue/Executive Drive would not increase past unacceptable levels. Therefore, with implementation of the identified mitigation measure, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-22: Implementation of the proposed Project would not cause an increase in transit use that is substantial in relation to existing transit conditions. This impact is less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.7-22: When implemented, enhanced shuttles, as described in the FMEIR, should be sufficient to address the future ridership demand. In addition, the shuttle program would allow for expansions to meet demand levels, so that all riders could be accommodated. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that his impact is less than significant. Impact 4.7-23: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in inadequate parking capacity. This impact is less than significant. No mitigation required. 928816-4 36 Finding 4.7-23: Genentech is expected to create a daily parking demand of approximately 10,204 spaces in the 2015 Future Plus Project condition, which represents approximately 94 percent of the total available parking supply. Thus, the number of parking spaces made available as part of the buildout of the proposed Project would accommodate the expected increase in peak hour parking demand. Therefore, based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-24: Implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). This impact is less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.7-24: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that in consideration of the Project's compatibility with surrounding uses and the incorporation of design features to ensure traffic, pedestrian, and bicycle safety, the impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.7-25: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact is less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.7-25: Based on the entirety ofthe record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that in consideration of the incorporated design features to ensure adequate emergency access, the Project would have a less-than-significant impact upon emergency access. Impact 4.7-26: Implementation of the proposed Project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks). This impact is less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.7-26: Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds as follows: In consideration of the fact that the Project would include TDM, would be designed to accommodate and encourage bicycle and pedestrian connections and access/use throughout the Genentech Campus, the Project would result in a less than significant effect upon these alternative transportation modes. Since the City has a TDM ordinance and requires implementation ofTDM programs, development of the Project would result in a less- than-significant impact on alternative transportation as the Project is expected to exceed the City's TDM requirements. LAND USE AND PLANNING Impact 4.8-1: The proposed Project would not physically divide an established community. There would be no impact. 928816-4 37 No mitigation required. Finding 4.8-1: Existing and future uses within the MEIR Study Area include commercial, manufacturing and research and development activities. These uses are consistent with existing land uses in the surrounding area, which include industrial, warehouse, commercial and research and development activities. No residential structures currently occupy the existing project site, and they are not permitted in the East of 101 Area. Further, the Proj ect will not entail any residential development. No existing business or residential community would be displaced by the proposed Project. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact. No mitigation required. Impact 4.8-2: The proposed Project would not conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the proposed Project (including, but not limited to, the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Therefore, this impact is considered less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.8-2: Development standards relating to building height, Floor Area Ratio and parking within the 2006 FMPU are not consistent with the Planned Industrial District regulations. However, as identified in the 2006 FMPU, the Genentech Campus development standards have been designed to reflect the current Genentech R&D Overlay standards. The Planning Commission is concurrently recommending approval of Genentech's application to expand the R&D Overlay District to include the Genentech property currently within the boundaries of the underlying Planned Industrial District. As such, any future Project-related development in the existing Planned Industrial District would be subject to the expanded Genentech R&D Overlay District standards. As the proposed Project is consistent with the Genentech R&D Overlay District, the fact that potential impacts associated with the proposed Projects are not consistent with the P-I District standards would be less than significant. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be a less-than-significant impact. Impact 4.8-3: The proposed Project would not conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or plan or natural community conservation plan. There would be no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.8-3: No natural community plan or applicable habitat conservation plan are located within the MEIR Study Area and the MEIR Study Area does not contain any critical or sensitive habitat. Impacts to potential biological resources are addressed in Section 4.1 (Biological Resources) of the FMEIR. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds there would be no impact. No mitigation required. AESTHETICS 928816-4 38 Impact 4.9-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. Implementation of the project requirement PR 4.9-1 would ensure this impact remains less than significant PR 4.9-1: Future development within the West Campus shall be constructed so as not to obstruct existing views of San Francisco Bay and Point San Bruno Hill and the associated "Wind Chimes" sculpture, from areas west of the Genentech Campus, including U.S. 101. Open space areas and new roadways shall be designed to provide views of these resources. The implementation of Project Requirement PR 4.9-1 is more fully described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.9-1: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that proposed development would not substantially alter or obstruct existing views of the San Francisco Bay, San Bruno Mountains, Point San Bruno Hill, or the "Wind Chime" or "Wind Harp" sculpture. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.9-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in a substantial adverse effect on scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. There is no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.9-2: The Genentech Campus is built on and around Point San Bruno Hill-the highest point in the East of 101 Area-with views overlooking San Francisco Bay and many major landmarks in the Bay Area. Sections of Bay Area Interstate-280 (1-280), Interstate-580 (1-580), and Interstate-680 (1-680) have been designated as scenic corridors under the State Scenic Highway program but do not provide motorists with expansive or continuous, uninterrupted views of the Bay. None of these designated highways is in the vicinity of the Genentech Campus. The closest scenic highway is I-280, which runs north-south more than 5 miles to the west of the Genentech Campus. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that there are no impacts to resources within a scenic highway. Impact 4.9-3: Construction of the proposed Project would not adversely alter the visual character or quality of the MEIR Study Area. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.9-3: While the 2006 FMPU proposes redevelopment and intensification in the next ten years of various sites in each of the Campus neighborhoods, the 2006 FMPU does not establish the location, size, or design of each individual building which will follow over the next ten years. However, during construction, four basic types of activities would be expected. First, demolition of existing structures within the Genentech Campus would occur. Second, the sites would be prepared, excavated, and graded to accommodate the new building foundations. Next, new buildings and associated landscaping and site improvements would be developed. Visual impacts 928816-4 39 associated with construction activities would be temporary in nature as they would only exist for the duration of construction activities. Such temporary impacts would include exposed pads and staging areas for grading, excavation, and construction equipment. In addition, temporary structures could be located in the MEIR Study Area during various stages of demolition or construction, within material storage areas, or associated with construction debris piles. While these activities would take place exclusively within the MEIR Study Area, these visual impacts could affect surrounding land uses to the north, south, and west of the Genentech Campus, which is comprised of primarily industrial areas. In addition, automobiles traveling along Forbes Boulevard and East Grand Avenue would have short-term views of the MEIR Study Area during construction. Boats and bicyclists along the Bayshore bike path may also have short-term views of construction activity occurring on the eastern side of the Genentech Campus. However, this visual condition would be a temporary visual distraction typically associated with construction activities and equipment and would be considered less than significant. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.9-4: Implementation of the proposed Project would not adversely alter the visual character or quality ofthe existing MEIR Study Area. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.9-4: The comprehensive list of design strategies identified in the 2006 FMPU, in combination with guiding policies from the East of 101 Area Plan and development and design standards of the Genentech R&D Overlay District, and implementation of the identified Project Requirement PR 4.9-2, will ensure that new development as a result of implementation of the 2006 FMPU enhances the visual quality and character of the existing MEIR Study Area. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact is less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary. Impact 4.9-5: Implementation of the proposed Project could result in an adverse effect on scenic resources visible from U.S. 101 and this effect is a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of identified Project requirement PR 4.9-2 would reduce the potentially significant impact to a less-than-significant impact. PR 4.9-2: Developments within the proposed MEIR Study Area visible from U.S. 101 be designed with a high visual quality. Future developments within the proposed MEIR Study Area shall be designed to enhance the visual image of the area as seen from U.S. 101 and shall be designed with the views from U.S. 101 in mind in order to create an aesthetically pleasing and inviting environment from U.S. 101. The implementation of Project Requirement PR 4.9-2 is more fully described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.9-5: According to the General Plan, buildings and structures which reflect the character of districts and centers for activity, provide reference points for human orientation, and may add to (but can detract from) topography and views. People perceive the visual quality of 928816-4 40 developments from the streets while traveling, and from entranceways and observation points, such as U.S. 101, while visiting the City. New buildings erected as part of implementation of the proposed Project would be subject to the same height requirements as the existing structures in the MEIR Study Area, and be similar in size and scale as those currently on site, in order to protect existing views. Project requirements PR 4.9-1 and PR 4.9-2 above would also ensure that views of the Wind Harp from U.S. 101 are retained. Therefore, through implementation of City policies, existing height regulations, and PR 4.9-1 and PR 4.9-2, the proposed expansion and intensification of the Genentech Campus would not create adverse effects with respect to potential impacted views from U.S. 101. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. Impact 4.9-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in new sources of increased daytime glare. This is considered a potentially significant impact. However, implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.9-1 would reduce the impact associated with daytime glare to less than significant. MM 4.9-1: Design for the proposed structures on the Campus neighborhoods shall include the use of textured or other non-reflective exterior surfaces and non-reflective glass types, including double glazed and non-reflective vision glass. All exterior glass must meet the specifications of all applicable codes. Mitigation Measure MM 4.9-1 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.9-6: Implementation ofMM 4.9-1 would reduce impacts from daytime glare on the Campus neighborhoods to a less-than-significant level by eliminating or minimizing increased glare by the use of non-reflective glass and non-reflective textured surfaces for new development. New development in the other Campus neighborhoods as a result of implementation of the proposed Project would not create an adverse affect on views created by an increase of daytime glare due to the absence of sensitive land uses in the vicinity or within viewing distance of these other neighborhoods. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation ofMM 4.9-1, this impact would be considered less than significant. Impact 4.9-7: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in new sources of increased light that could adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area. This would be a significant impact. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, MM 4.9-2(a) through 4.9-2(c), would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level. MM 4.9-2(a): Maintain appropriate levels of light at building entries, walkways, courtyards, parking lots and private roads at night consistent with minimum levels detailed in Genentech's security plan and building codes. MM 4.9-2(b): Enhance campus character with consistent use of light fixtures, finishes and colors. 928816-4 41 MM 4.9-2(c): Fixture types and heights shall conform to the following styles as feasible: . Parking lots and roads-provide round fixtures on 22' poles on raised concrete footings not to exceed 25' total finished height, appropriately finished black, or approved equal. . Sidewalks, pathways, and plazas-provide round hardtop on post top fixtures not to exceed15'total finished height, appropriately finished black, or approved equal. . Accent pedestrian lighting-provide bollard style fixtures, not to exceed 42" total height, appropriately finished black, or approved equal. Mitigation Measures MM 4.9-2(a) through MM 4.9-2(c) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.9-7: Additional lighting would not have the potential to create "spillage" onto sensitive land uses, as none exist within the area. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that with implementation ofMM 4.9-2(a) through MM 4.9-2( c), this impact would be considered less than significant. CULTURAL RESOURCES Impact 4.10-1: Implementation of the proposed Project is not anticipated to cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource. This impact would be less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.10-1: As discussed in Section 4.10.1 (Existing Conditions) ofthe FMEIR, there were no previously identified historic structures located within the MEIR Study Area. State and federal inventories list no historic properties within the MEIR Study Area. The nearest NRHP- listed structure is outside the MEIR Study Area on East Grand Avenue. The MEIR Study Area currently comprises non-historic structures used to support the functions of Genentech. The Project would not require demolition of a structure or structures which are potentially eligible for listing on the NRHP or CRHR. The Planning Commission finds that, based on the entire record, this impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required. Impact 4.10-2: Implementation of the proposed Project could affect the significance ofa previously unidentified archaeological resource as defined in 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5, and PRC Section 21083.2. This impact would be potentially significant. However, implementation of identified mitigation measures MM 4.10-1(a) and MM 4.10-1(b) would reduce this impact to less than significant MM 4.10-1(a): If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a qualified archaeologist approved by the Project applicant shall conduct further archival and field study to identify the presence of archaeological resources in the area surrounding the discovery. Field study may include, but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, auguring, and monitoring construction activities as well as other common methods used to identify the presence of archaeological resources in a fully developed urban area. 928816-4 42 If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during project related construction in a State Right of Way, all construction within 50 feet of the site shall cease, and Caltrans District 4 Cultural Resources Study Office shall be immediately contacted and a Caltrans staff archaeologist shall evaluate the finds within one business day after the Cultural Resources Study Office is contacted. MM 4.10-1(b): If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a qualified archaeologist approved by the Project applicant shall first determine whether this resource is a "unique archaeological resource" under 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5, and/or Public Resources Code Section 21083.2. If the archaeological resource is determined to be a "unique archaeological resource," the archaeologist shall formulate a mitigation plan that satisfies the requirements of, 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5, and/or Public Resources Code 21083.2. Work in the vicinity ofthe find may resume at the completion ofa mitigation plan or recovery of the resource. If the archaeologist determines that the archaeological resource is not a unique archaeological resource, work will resume, and the archaeologist may record the site and submit the recordation form to the California Historic Resources Information System Northwest Information Center. The archaeologist shall prepare a report of the results of any study prepared as part of a mitigation plan, following accepted professional practice. Copies of the report shall be submitted to the City and to the California Historic Resources Information System Northwest Information Center. Mitigation Measures MM 4. 10-1 (a) and MM 4. 10-1 (b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.10-2: A records search conducted for the preparation of the FMEIR revealed that there are four historic-period archaeological resources in the MEIR Study Area and two Native American resources in or adjacent to the Study Area. Given this moderate to high possibility that such resources will be identified during construction, MM 4.10-1(a) and 4.l0-1(b) would protect against substantial adverse change in the resources by requiring further field study to determine the uniqueness of the resource. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that the potentially significant impact on previously unidentified archaeological resources would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation ofMM 4.1O-1(a) and MM 4. 10-1 (b). Impact 4.10-3: The proposed Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. This impact remains less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.10-3: As discussed in FMEIR Section 4.10.1 (Existing Conditions), no previously identified unique paleontological or unique geologic features are located in the MEIR Study Area. A review of a map produced by Kleinfelder Associates depicting the MEIR Study Area 928816-4 43 shows the potential existence of vertebrate and invertebrate fossils within the MEIR Study Area. However, according to the LACM, no vertebrate fossil localities exist on the San Francisco peninsula, thus, no unique paleontological resource or unique geologic features are anticipated to exist in the MEIR Study Area. The University of California, Berkeley Museum of Paleontology database was also searched to determine whether invertebrate or vertebrate fossils were present. No vertebrate fossils were listed (UCB 2006). Based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that this impact is less than significant and no mitigation is required. Impact 4.10-4: Implementation of the proposed Project could disturb unknown human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries as defined in 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5 and/or PRC Section 5097.98. This impact would be potentially significant. However, implementation of identified mitigation measure MM 4.10-2 would reduce this impact to less than significant MM 4.10-2: In the event of the discovery ofa burial, human bone, or suspected human bone, all excavation or grading within 100 feet of the find shall halt immediately, the area ofthe find shall be protected, and the Project applicant immediately shall notify the San Mateo County Coroner of the find and comply with the provisions ofPRC Section 5097 with respect to Native American involvement, burial treatment, and re-burial, if necessary. Work may resume once the area is protected or the body is removed. Mitigation Measure MM 4.10-2 is hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.10-4: The MEIR Study Area is not known to be located within a human burial ground, and no known human burial sites were identified within the MEIR Study Area or its immediate vicinity. However, previous unidentified human remains could be encountered during ground disturbing activities. MM 4.10-2 will ensure that should such an encounter occur, the remains will not be disturbed by requiring excavation to cease until the area is protected or the remains removed. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that this potentially significantly impact on previously unidentified human remains would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with implementation ofMM 4.10-2. POPULATION AND HOUSING Impact 4.11-1: Implementation of the proposed Project could directly and indirectly induce substantial population growth in the area by proposing increased employment. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.11-1: The significant increase in employees during the 10-year planning horizon could simultaneously create a significant demand for new housing in and around the City. Continued job growth in the City will promote a greater regional balance between jobs and housing. Because Genentech's continued employment growth would serve to balance regional needs between jobs and housing, this impact is considered to be less than significant. Based on 928816-4 44 the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that this impact is considered less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary. Impact 4.11-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not displace existing housing, and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, there would be no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.11-2: Residential uses are not permitted in the East of 101 Area. As South San Francisco's employment base, the East of 101 Area is expected to accommodate a major share of South San Francisco's new non-residential development. As no residential uses exist in the MEIR Study Area, implementation of the proposed Project would not displace existing housing. Based on the entirety of the record, including the FMEIR, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact. Impact 4.11-3: Implementation of the proposed Project would not displace substantial numbers of people, and would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Therefore, there would be no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.11-3: No residential uses exist in the MEIR Study Area. Thus no residents would be displaced, and construction of replacement housing elsewhere would not be necessitated. Existing businesses in the proposed expanded Genentech R&D Overlay District could be displaced by Genentech. However, these employees would likely find other locations in the East of 101 Area. Therefore, displacement of existing businesses and associated employees would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing elsewhere as these potentially displaced employees could find employment in the East of 101 Area. The Planning Commission finds that, based on the entire record, there would be no impact. PUBLIC SERVICES Impact 4.12-1: The proposed Project would not result in the alteration of existing police protection facilities or require the construction of new police protection facilities resulting from the SSFPD's inability to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.12-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would constitute a negligible increase in the City's population, and would not result in SSFPD's inability to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Current response times and service ratios are adequate, and no new facilities that would result in potential significant impacts would be required. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the Project will result in a less-than-significant impact. 928816-4 45 Impact 4.12-2: The proposed Project would not result in the alteration of existing fire protection facilities or require the construction of new fire protection facilities resulting from the SSFFD's inability to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives. This is considered a less-than-significant impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.12-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would constitute a negligible increase in the City's population, and would not result in SSFFD's inability to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Current response times and service ratios are adequate, and no new facilities that would result in potential significant impacts would be required. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the Project will result in a less-than-significant impact. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Impact 4.13-1: Implementation ofthe proposed Project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.13-1(a) through (c) would ensure that the proposed Project would have a less- than-significant groundwater impact. MM 4.13-1(a): The Project applicant shall include methods of water conservation in the proposed Project's buildings and landscaping. These methods shall include, but not be limited, to the following (this Mitigation Measure would not apply to process development or research development laboratory equipment, or to biopharmaceutical manufacturing processes conducted pursuant to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs).): . Install water-conserving dishwashers and washing machines, and water-efficient centralized cooling systems in all new buildings. . Install water-conserving irrigation systems (e.g., drip irrigation and Evaportranspiration- based irrigation controllers). · Gray water irrigation system (as detailed in General Plan Policy PF -7, but other elements of that policy do not apply here, such as wastewater treatment facilities). . Design landscaping with drought-resistant and other low-water-use plants. . Install water-saving devices such as water-efficient toilets, faucets, and showerheads. MM 4.13-1(b) The Project applicant shall install separate water meters for buildings and landscaping for parcels with greater than 10,000 sf irrigated area. Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-1(a) and MM 4.13-1(b) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.13-1: The California Water Supply Company (CWSC), which provides the South San 928816-4 46 Francisco District with water, supplements the water supply that it purchases from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) with groundwater from several operational wells. CWSC does not plan to expand production of groundwater as a result of growth in the service area, but is actively participating in groundwater management planning to ensure safe yield of the basin is not exceeded. Furthermore, the water conservation measures identified in MM 4.13-1(a) and 4.13-1(b) will operate to reduce the proposed Project's contribution to total groundwater demand. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implantation of Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-1(a) and 4.13-1(b) would render Impact 4.13-1 less than significant. Impact 4.13-2: Implementation of the proposed Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or alter the course of a stream or river; however, construction activities associated with the proposed Project could increase the potential for erosion or siltation on- or off-site; however, implementation of Project requirements PR 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1 (b) would ensure that this impact remains less than significant. PR 4.13-1(a): Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the Project applicant shall develop a SWPPP prior to construction to protect water quality during and after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures for the construction period: . Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro-seeding, shall be utilized, in accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. Silt fences used in combination with fiber rolls shall be installed down slope of all graded slopes. Fiber rolls shall be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets. . BMPs for preventing the discharge of other construction-related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e., paint, concrete, etc.) to downstream waters. . After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for accumulated sediment, and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and sediment. PR 4.13-1(b): The applicant shall complete an Erosion Control Plan to be submitted to the City of South San Francisco in conjunction with the Grading Permit Application. The Erosion Control Plan shall include controls for winterization, dust, erosion, and pollution in accordance with the ABAG Manual of Standards for Erosion and Sediment Control Measures. The Plan shall also describe the BMPs to be used during and following construction to control pollution resulting form both storm and construction water runoff. The Plan shall include locations of vehicle and equipment staging, portable restrooms, mobilization areas, and planned access routes. Public works staff or representatives shall visit the site during grading and construction to ensure compliance with the grading ordinance and plans, and note any violations, which shall be corrected immediately. The implementation of Project Requirements PR 4.13-1(a) and PR 4.13-1(b) is more fully described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. 928816-4 47 Finding 4.13-2: Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that when erosion and run-off is controlled with the NPDES general permit for construction activities, the impact would be considered less than significant. Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans are an integral part of construction planning, and the Planning Commission finds that PR 4.13-1(a) and (b) are designed specifically to mitigate the impacts associated with construction run-off and reduce them to less than significant. Impact 4.13-3: Implementation ofthe proposed Project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site, alter the course of a stream or river or substantially increase runoff which would cause on- or off-site flooding. Therefore, the impact of flooding would be less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.13-3: While Colma Creek is the City's main natural drainage system, Colma Creek does not intersect the MEIR Study Area, nor does the Project area drain to Colma Creek. Therefore, the proposed Project would not alter the course of the waterway. Additionally, because the proposed Project would not substantially increase the amount of impervious surface area on the MEIR Study Area, and would not increase the amount of runoff from the MEIR Study Area, the proposed Project would not cause increased runoff levels that would induce on- or off-site flooding. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.13-4: Implementation of the proposed Project could contribute runoff that could add substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; therefore, the proposed Project could have a potentially significant impact on polluted runoff. However, with the identified mitigation measures, MM 4.13-2(a) through MM 4.13-2(d), this impact would be reduced to a less-than- significant level. MM 4.13-2(a): The Project applicant shall develop an operational SWPPP prior to construction to protect water quality after construction. The Project SWPPP shall include, but not be limited to, the following measures for Project operation: . Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the Project site. Industrial activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used at the proposed Project site shall be described. This shall include a thorough assessment of existing and potential pollutant sources. . Identification of BMPs to be implemented at the Project site based on identified industrial activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control BMPs, with treatment controls uses as needed. . Development of a monitoring and implementation plan. Maintenance requirements and frequency shall be carefully described including vector control, clearing of clogged or obstructed inlet or outlet structures, vegetation/landscape maintenance, replacement of media filters, regular sweeping of parking lots and other paced areas, etc. Wastes removed from BMPs may be hazardous; therefore, maintenance costs shall be budgeted to include disposal at a proper site. Parking lot areas shall be cleared on a daily basis of debris that may enter the storm drain system. 928816-4 48 . The monitoring and maintenance program shall be conducted at the frequency agreed upon by the RWQCB and/or City of South San Francisco. Monitoring and maintenance shall be recorded and submitted annually in coordination with the STOPPP. The SWPPP shall be adjusted, as necessary, to address any inadequacies of the BMPs. . The Project applicant shall prepare informational literature and guidance on industrial and commercial BMPs to minimize pollutant contributions from the proposed development. This information shall be distributed to all employees at the Project site. At a minimum, the information shall cover: (1) proper disposal of commercial cleaning chemicals; (2) proper use of landscaping chemicals; (3) clean-up and appropriate disposal of hazardous materials and chemicals; and (4) prohibition of any washing and dumping of materials and chemicals into storm drains. MM 4.13-2(b): The Project applicant shall install a storm drain interceptor (also known as an oil/water or oil/grit separator) on-site to remove oils and heavy particulates from stormwater. Appropriate sizing of the unit relative to the impervious surface drainage area is important and should be taken into consideration when choosing the interceptor unit model and size. MM 4.13-2(c): The Project applicant shall incorporate alternative drainage solutions around surface parking lots and near large areas of impervious surfaces such as public plazas. Such solutions may include, but are not limited to, vegetated swales, bioretention areas, planter/tree boxes, and ponds. MM 4.13-2(d): The Project applicant shall incorporate rooftop or downspout retention into all building plans. Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-2(a) through MM 4. 13-2(d) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.13-4: Surface and stormwater runoff in the MEIR Study Area is collected by the City's storm drainage system and is discharged to San Francisco Bay east of the Project area. The existing storm drainage system in the Project area is designed to accommodate flows from industrial development and takes of the amount of existing impervious surfaces in the area. The proposed Project would remove existing buildings on the site and redevelop the area with similar uses. The exact uses of the buildings that could be developed are currently unknown, as a result potential sources of pollutants can not be quantified. However, simply as a result of increased traffic, increased stormwater pollutants, such as copper and zinc from break pads (Woodward- Clyde, 1994) or oil from leaking engines, may result in a potentially significant change in storm water quality. To comply with the Clean Water Act (CW A), San Mateo County and the twenty cities and towns in the County formed the San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program (STOPPP). STOPPP holds a joint municipal NPDES permit from the San Francisco Bay RWQCB. The permit includes a comprehensive plan to reduce the discharge of pollutants to creeks, San Francisco Bay, and the ocean to the maximum extent possible. The San Mateo Countywide STOPPP has a Site Design Standards Checklist to evaluate proposed 928816-4 49 Projects against guidelines intended to reduce stormwater pollution. These guidelines are regulated by the SSFMC, General Plan, or other best management practices guidelines. Construction impacts are mitigated through PR 4.13-1(a) and (b). Still, operation of the proposed Project could contribute to polluted stormwater runoff. This would be a potentially significant impact. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implementation of mitigation measures MM 4. 13-2(a) through (d) would reduce operation impacts associated with polluted runoff to a less-than-significant level. Impact 4.13-5: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase the development density ofthe site; and as result the proposed Project could have a potentially significant impact the water system to deliver the required fire flows. However, with implementation of mitigation measures MM 4. 13-3(a) through MM 4. 13-3(c), this impact would be reduced to less than significant. MM 4.13-3(a): Prior to first building permit, the Project applicant shall consult a NCEES certified Fire Protection Engineer to prepare an analysis of the proposed Project and determine the required design fire flow and fire duration. A certified report shall be submitted to the South San Francisco Fire Department for review and comment. MM 4.13-3(b): Prior to receiving a building permit, the Project applicant shall perform fire flow tests for all hydrants within 500 feet of the Project site pursuant to American Water Works Association filed testing standards (A WW A 1989) to verify if adequate fire flows defined in mitigation measure MM 4. 13-3(a): are achieved. Any deficiency measured shall be corrected and retested prior occupancy. MM 4.13-3(c): California Water Service Company shall certify that reservoir storage, beyond their operational and emergency allotments, required for adequate protection identified in mitigation measure MM 4. 13-3(a) will be maintained at all times. Mitigation Measures MM 4. 13-3(a) through MM 4.13-3(c) are hereby adopted and will be implemented as provided by the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Finding 4.13-5: The water distribution system is owned and operated by the California Water Supply Company. The water system consists of a network of 12 and 10-inch lines which should be adequate to serve the required flows (Brady, 1994). Several buildings in the 2006 FMPU have water storage tanks and fire pumps for local pressure control (Dyett & Bhatia, 2005). The automated fire suppression systems in existing buildings significantly reduce the risk of fire spreading and may require fire flows beyond the current design standard of 2,000 gpm. Because the 2006 FMPU does not detail the ultimate building configuration and land use, the fire risk can be assessed generally and not in fine detail. As a result, there is a potentially significant impact to the water system to serve the peak flow demands. Based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that implementation of mitigation measures MM 4. 13-3(a) through (c) would reduce the construction impacts associated with an increased fire flow demands to a less-than-significant level. 928816-4 50 Impact 4.13-6: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities. Therefore, the impact is less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.13-6: The 2006 FMPU would redevelop an area of the Genentech Campus that is already populated by buildings and impervious surfaces. The expansion of the Genentech Campus will require new drainage structures and localized on-site storm drain systems. However, the amount of stormwater created in the 2006 FMPU area would not increase above existing conditions because the amount of impervious surfaces would be approximately the same as existing conditions. Because no additional stormwater runoff would be created, no additional storm water would need to be accommodated in existing stormwater drainage facilities, and no expansion of stormwater drainage facilities would be warranted. Therefore, the Planning Commission finds that the impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.13-7: Implementation of the proposed Project would not result in insufficient water supplies. Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.13-1 (a) and (b) would ensure the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant impact on water supply. Finding 4.13-7: Approximately 89% of the South San Francisco District's water supply is purchased from the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) through the California Water Service Company (CWSC). The remaining 11 % is acquired through reservoirs and local groundwater. According to the SFPUC's Water Supply Master Plan, there is sufficient water to meet all expected future demand in normal and wet hydrological periods. SFPUC system operations are designed to allow sufficient water remaining in SFPUC reservoirs after six years of drought to provide some ability to continue delivering water, although at significantly reduced levels. While there is some potential for CWSC and SFPUC to experience water shortages, there would be enough water for the proposed Project based on current supply levels during normal and wet years. Furthermore, the water conservations measures identified in Mitigation Measures MM 4.13-1(a) and (b) would reduce the proposed Project's contribution to the total water demand during all years. Therefore, based on the FMEIR and the entirety of the record before it, the Planning Commission finds that this impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.13-8: Projected flows from the proposed Project would not exceed planned improvements to the collection system and existing capacity in the treatment plant. As a result, the impact to the wastewater system is less than significant. No mitigation required. Finding 4.13-8: No water quality violations have occurred within the last two years, and as a result, the projected 3 percent increase in dry weather flows from the proposed Project to the WQCP would not exceed the WQCP capacity. Improvements identified as part of the City's Sewer Master Plan and subsequent updates are included in a capital improvement plan that once fully implemented, would ensure that flows do not exceed capacity. Pursuant to a 2007 report from Genentech's consultant, Wilsey Ham, several ofthese improvements benefit only the 928816-4 51 Genentech development. As such, Genentech will be responsible for funding 100% of the cost of implementing these improvements. Other improvements benefit many of the East of 101 area developments. For these improvements, Genentech will be responsible for funding its fair share of the implementation of improvement. Genentech's "fair share" for each improvement will be as determined by the City Engineer. The estimated costs for both "100% improvements" and "fair share improvements" will be as determined in the forthcoming report from Carollo, expected in February 2007. These costs will be calculated in current-year dollars, and will be adjusted annually in accordance with Engineering News-Record's (ENR) Index for San Francisco, California. Additionally, for each building permit, Genentech will be responsible for paying the applicable sanitary sewer connection fee in effect at the time Genentech applies for the particular building permit. Based on the entirety of the record, the Planning Commission finds that Genentech's funding of the sewer improvements, in accordance with the terms of this paragraph, will ensure that the impact is less than significant. Impact 4.13-9: Solid waste generated under the proposed Project would be sufficiently served by the Scavenger Company's Blue Line MRF/TS and the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill; therefore, the proposed Project would have a less-than-significant solid waste impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.13-9: Development under the proposed Project would result in an additional approximately 2,775 tons of solid waste per year. The remaining capacity of the MRF/TS would be able to accommodate the additional solid waste. Furthermore, the Scavenger Company has stated that a doubling of the Genentech South San Francisco Campus and subsequent increase in solid waste generation would not impact Scavenger's current available capacity of 500 to 600 tons per day (Formosa 2005). While the Ox Mountain landfill is currently in excess of its permitted capacity, BFI continues to accept waste as the landfill gradually settles and new space becomes available. Thus, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that the increase in waste generated under the proposed Project would be sufficiently served by the MRF/TS and the Ox mountain landfill and the impact would be less than significant. Impact 4.13-10: The proposed Project would comply with federal, state, and local regulations related to solid waste and would not impede the City of South San Francisco from compliance; therefore, the proposed Project would have no impact. No mitigation required. Finding 4.13-10: Genentech currently complies with Municipal Code regulations, including those requiring collection of solid waste by the Scavenger Company. Genentech would continue to comply with this requirement under implementation of the proposed Project. The Genentech Campus is not a substantial contributor to the City's generation of solid waste disposal at the Ox Mountain Sanitary Landfill. Implementation of the proposed Project could double Genentech's 3 percent contribution to 6 percent, but Genentech's contribution would remain relatively small. Additionally, the proposed Project would not impede the City's compliance with AB 939. Therefore, based on the entire record, the Planning Commission finds that there would be no impact. 928816-4 52 The Project Sponsor has agreed to implement all Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements identified in the FMEIR, and the Planning Commission has imposed those Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements as Conditions of Approval, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit H. Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081.6, adopted Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements will be implemented and monitored as described in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan that is attached to the Resolution as Exhibit G, and incorporated herein by reference. The Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements proposed for adoption in these findings, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations, attached to the Resolution as Exhibit F, are the same as, or are summaries of, the Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements identified in the FMEIR. Further, the Planning Commission finds that the Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements identified in these findings are appropriate and feasible for adoption, unless otherwise specifically noted above or in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as Exhibit G is designed to ensure compliance with the measures and requirements that are identified in these findings, and includes the same Mitigation Measures and Project Requirements described herein. Thus, the Program set forth in Exhibit G should be adopted and implemented. FINDINGS REGARDING CONSIDERATION OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES CEQA requires that EIRs assess feasible alternatives or mitigation measures that may substantially lessen the significant effects of projects prior to approval. (Pub. Res. Code S 21002.) With the exception of the "no project" alternative, the specific alternatives or types of alternatives that must be assessed are not specified. CEQA "establishes no categorical legal imperative as to the scope of alternatives to be analyzed in an EIR. Each case must be evaluated on its own facts, which in turn must be reviewed in light of the statutory purpose." Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Bd. of Supervisors, 52 Cal. 3d 553, 556 (1990). The CEQA Guidelines state that the "range of potential alternatives to the proposed Project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic purposes of the Project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects" of the Project. CEQA Guidelines S 15126.6(c). Thus, an evaluation of the Project Objectives is key to determining the range of alternatives that must be assessed in the EIR. The Planning Commission certifies that it has independently reviewed and considered the information on alternatives provided in the FMEIR and in the record. The FMEIR reflects the Planning Commission's and the City's independent judgment as to alternatives. The Planning Commission finds that the Project provides the best balance between satisfaction of the project objectives and mitigation of environmental impacts to the extent feasible, as described and analyzed in the FMEIR. The following are the Project objectives for both the City and the Project Sponsor, as identified in Section 1.3 of the DMEIR: . Provide appropriate setting for a diverse range of non-residential uses. 928816-4 53 . Promote campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research and development uses. . Unless otherwise stated in a specific plan, allow building heights in the East of 101 Area to the maximum limits permissible under the Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77. . Do not vary permitted maximum development intensities based on lot size. . Encourage the development of employee-serving amenities with restaurants, cafes, and support commercial establishments such as dry cleaners, to meet the need of the employees in the East of 101 Area. Such uses could be located in independent centers or integrated into office parks or technology campuses. . Keep Genentech's key scientific personnel in proximity, so that they may continue to work together in support of research, development, and production goals. . Keep certain aspects of Genentech's business, both scientific and administrative, together physically for efficiency and maximum support. . Assure Genentech's proximity to world-class scientific and academic institutions. . Foster a sense of community among Genentech's employees, creating interconnectivity and ease of access. . Articulate vision and policies that will server as a general guide for the placement and design of individual buildings and other Genentech Campus elements, as well as an overall development program to provide the basis for future approvals. . Foster development ofa Genentech Campus befitting its setting on the City's eastern bayshore, that capitalizes on views and access to the waterfront. . Promote alternatives to automobile transportation to further the City's transportation objectives by emphasizing shuttles, linkages, transportation demand management, and pedestrian access and ease of movement between buildings. . Establish the basis for the zoning provisions to be contained in an amended Genentech R&D Overlay District. . Provide design guidelines to be enacted after adoption of the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update that will serve as a basis for design review and approval for development in the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update area. . Establish a facility-wide architectural character, a system of open space elements and a pedestrian and vehicular circulation plan linking buildings and uses together in a flexible, logical, and orderly manner for the Genentech facility. . Increase the flexibility of the City's land use regulations and the speed of its review procedures to reflect the quickly changing needs of a research and development focused corporation. . Establish facility-wide development standards and design guidelines consistent with the City's General Plan and East of 101 Area Plan. . Define a baseline of existing conditions for each lot reclassified to the Genentech R&D Overlay District. 928816-4 54 Alternatives Analysis in MEIR The CEQA Guidelines state that the "range of potential alternatives to the proposed Project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most ofthe basic objectives of the Project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more significant effects" of the Project. Pursuant to CEQA, the Planning Commission considered the following alternatives to the Project described in the FMEIR, which would reduce or avoid certain Project-specific and cumulative impacts, and rejected them as infeasible for the reasons set forth below. The Planning Commission adopts the FMEIR's analysis and conclusions regarding alternatives eliminated from further consideration during the scoping process. Alternative 1: No Project Alternative (Continuation Of 1995 Master Plan) Under the No Projectl1995 Master Plan Alternative, the Master Plan Update would not be implemented and development of the Project site would continue under the terms of the 1995 Master Plan. The existing campus would continue to operate on its 124-acre site, and building would be limited to current project entitlements (which are all under construction or approved). Alternative 1 would avoid or reduce impacts related to biological resources, cultural resources, air quality, noise and vibration, transportation and traffic, geological hazards, population and housing, public services, and utilities and services. Most impacts would be reduced because Genentech has largely built out its existing acreage within the Genentech R&D Overlay District, and without further new development, many development-associated impacts would be avoided. However, some impacts could be greater under Alternative 1 than under the proposed Project. For example, transportation and traffic impacts would not benefit from mitigation proposed by the project, including mitigation related to supporting alternative transit and pedestrian safety. Without the proposed Project, the interconnectedness of the campus would not occur, with resulting benefits to separating parking uses from the central campus area as well as promoting even greater TDM effectiveness. Further, Alternative 1 would not encourage the development of employee-serving amenities, and would fail to keep Genentech's key scientific and administrative personnel in proximity. Alternative 1 would also not achieve the City's or Genentech's objectives with regard to fostering the City's reputation as a bio-technology capital. The City's objectives with regard to completing the transition of the East of 101 Area from an industrial and light industrial area to a research and development and office center would also not be realized. Finding: Alternative 1 is rejected as infeasible because it would not achieve the Project's objectives or the objectives ofthe City. Explanation: Although Alternative 1 reduces or avoids many of the impacts associated with the Project as proposed, it fails to achieve several of the principle objectives of the project, including objectives of the City's General Plan, including, but not limited to: · GP 3.5-G-3 (promote campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research and development uses). Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it fails to provide for the expansion of an existing campus-style biotechnology and research and development use. 928816-4 55 · GP 4.3-G-l (develop a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation). Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it would not result in Genentech's development of new bike lanes along Forbes Boulevard and DNA Way/Grandview Drive. · Implementing Policy 3.5-I-8 (development of employee-serving amenities): Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it would not provide new space for campus amenities such as cafeterias and Grab-and-Go facilities for food, a fitness center, various amenities and services that allow Genentech employees to attend to personal and family needs without having to leave the Campus, and a robust new childcare program. · Implementing Policy 3.5-I-13 (waterfront enhancements): Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it would not involve a commitment by Genentech to develop approximately one mile of the San Francisco Bay Trail along its entire bay frontage. · Implementing Policy 5.1-I-2 (parkland standards): Alternative 1 would not achieve this policy because it would not result in the development of an open green space for public use of approximately 0.8 acres. Continuing to operate the Project site under the terms of the 1995 Master Plan would avoid many development-related impacts, but could also possibly result in an increase in severity of other impacts, because other development, not integrated in a Master Plan (and therefore not providing similar benefits) could otherwise occur. For these reasons, Alternative 1 is rejected as an alternative. Continuing to operate the Project site under the terms of the 1995 Master Plan would avoid many development-related impacts, but could also possibly result in an increase in severity of other impacts. For these reasons, Alternative 1 is rejected as an alternative. Alternative 2: Reduced Development Alternative Though the total campus build out area would remain the same as with the proposed Project (160 acres), Alternative 2 proposes less development: total final buildout would be 4.6 million square feet compared to 6.0 million square feet with the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would result in nearly three-quarter million less square feet of laboratory space, nearly one-half million less square feet of manufacturing/warehouse space, and approximately 166,000 less square feet of office space. Additionally, Alternative 2 would employee nearly 2,300 fewer individuals than the proposed Project. This Alternative would involve less construction and would result in less development, less traffic volumes, and less traffic-related air quality and noise impacts. Additionally, impacts related to population, employment and housing, public services, and utilities and service systems would be less than the proposed Project. Alternative 2 would also meet most of the City's objectives for the site and East of 101 Area. However, it would not meet some ofthose objectives, including less new employment and less tax revenue. Further, this Alternative would fail to meet many of Genentech's objectives, including: it would fail to include sufficient space for the development of certain employee-serving amenities; it would fail to keep certain of Genentech's key scientific personnel in proximity; it would fail to keep certain aspects of Genentech's business, both scientific and administrative, together physically for efficiency and maximum support; and it would fail to promote, to the same extent, alternatives to automobile transportation to further the City's transportation objectives. 928816-4 56 While Alternative 1 would be environmentally superior to the proposed Project, CEQA requires lead agencies to identify the environmentally superior alternative that is not the "No Project" alternative. As Alternative 1 is the no project alternative, Alternative 2 would be the environmentally superior alternative under CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(e)(2). Finding: Alternative 2 is rejected as infeasible. Explanation: While Alternative 2 would have fewer environmental impacts than the proposed Project, the reduced laboratory, manufacturing, and office space would not allow for full realization of the many of the Project's objectives, as set forth above. Additionally, the reduced development alternative would deprive the City of many of the proposed Project's benefits, including the increased tax revenue of the proposed Project and the nearly 2,300 additional jobs created by the proposed Project. 928816-4 57 EXHIBIT F Statement of Overriding Considerations STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERA nONS 1. General. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15093, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the Master Environmental Impact Report ("MEIR") for the Genentech Corporate Facilities Research & Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update ("Master Plan Update" or "Project"), and hereby finds that the specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project outweigh the significant and unavoidable impacts. (Resolution .) The City Council has carefully considered each impact in reaching its decision to approve the Project, and that decision is based on the findings of fact and the substantial evidence presented in the whole record of this proceeding. The Project proposes to increase the size of the current Genentech campus to approximately six million square feet of office, research and development, manufacturing, amenities buildings, and parking structures. The proposed Project is located in the City's East of 101 Area and is controlled by the East of 101 Area Plan. The City Council adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations concurrently with the Project findings, and adoption and approval of the MEIR, the 2006 Facilities Master Plan Update, reclassification and zoning map change often parcels in the Planned Industrial zone into the Genentech R&D Overlay District, zoning text changes to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapters 20.39 and 20.40, and the Transportation Demand Management Plan. The City Council hereby adopts specific overriding considerations for the impacts listed below that are identified in the MEIR as significant and unavoidable. The City Council believes that many of the unavoidable environmental effects identified in the MEIR will be substantially lessened by mitigation measures adopted through the current project approval, and further implemented through the related Conditions of Approval for each future development that is part of the Project, including the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan for the MEIR and Master Plan Update. Even with mitigation, however, the City Council recognizes that the implementation of the Project carries with it certain unavoidable adverse environmental effects as identified in the MEIR. The City Council specifically finds that, to the extent the identified adverse or potentially adverse impacts from the Project cannot be mitigated to acceptable levels, there are specific economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, land use, and other considerations that support approval of the Project. 2. Unavoidable Si2:nificant Adverse Impacts. The following significant and unavoidable environmental impacts have been identified in the Master Environmental Impact Report for Genentech Corporate Facilities Research and Development Overlay District Expansion and Master Plan Update: Impact 4.3-4: Operational emissions generated by both stationary and mobile sources would result from normal day-to-day activity within the MEIR Study Area. These would potentially exceed air quality standards, contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation or result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions that exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors). Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures. Finding: As there is no feasible mitigation to reduce these emissions, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. Impact 4.4-6: Operation of the proposed Project would generate increased local traffic volumes that would cause a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity. This is considered a significant impact. Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures. Finding: As no feasible mitigation is available to reduce this impact, this impact would be significant and unavoidable. Impact 4.7-1: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in LOS F conditions at Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection during the P.M. peak hour. After implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the impact would be reduced, but the Oyster Point BoulevardlUS 101 NB On-Ramp intersection would still operate at an unacceptable level during the P.M. peak hour. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-1(a): Create additional westbound right-turn lane. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-1(b): Add an additional lane on northbound Dubuque Avenue between the U.S.101 Ramps intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. Reconfigure the northbound approach to Oyster Point Boulevard to provide two exclusive left turn lanes, an exclusive through lane and two exclusive right turn lanes. As part of this widening, eliminate the left turn lane on the southbound Dubuque Avenue approach to the U.S.1 01 Ramps intersection (which serves mini warehouse facilities) and allow southbound left turns from the southbound through lane. This will allow provision of five full northbound travel lanes on Dubuque Avenue between the northbound Off- Ramp intersection and Oyster Point Boulevard. Adjust signal timing. Finding: While MM 4.7-1(a) and (b) would reduce this impact, even after implementation of the mitigation measures, this intersection would still operate at an unacceptable level of service (LOS E). Therefore, this is considered a significant and unavoidable impact. Impact 4.7-5: Implementation of the proposed project would result in LOS E conditions at Airport Boulevard/Grand Avenue intersection during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-5: Re-stripe southbound Airport Boulevard right turn to a shared through-right lane and southbound shared through/left lane to a left turn lane. Widen eastbound Grand Avenue to add two left lanes; re-stripe the eastbound through/left shared lane to a through lane and eastbound right turn lane to a shared through/right lane. Provide a third left-turn in the westbound approach and restrict truck traffic on westbound Grand Avenue. Existing signal modification. Finding: Implementation of the identified mitigation measure would reduce the impact to a less-than-significant level. However, construction of additional lanes along Grand Avenue, as identified in MM 4.7-5, would require expanding the right of way, which in addition to the expense associated with such an expansion, would have a negative effect on adjacent businesses. In light of these specific economic and technological concerns, to the extent MM 4.7-5 requires a widening of Grand Avenue, the mitigation measure is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the lead agency (here, the City) has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic and technological concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic or technological concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, only the improvements to Airport Boulevard are feasible. Because there exist no additional feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than- significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Impact 4.7-12: Implementation of the proposed Project would result in a volume- to-capacity increase of 0.05 or more along the already deficient (LOS F) U.S. 101 segment north of Oyster Point Boulevard in the southbound direction during the A.M. peak hour, and in the northbound direction during the P.M. peak hour. Mitigation Measure: No feasible mitigation measures. Finding: There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less than significant level. In order to sufficiently mitigate the significant volume-to- capacity ratios for the U.S. 101 mainline, the freeway would need to be widened or a new freeway would need to be constructed. Given the location of this segment of the U.S. 101, and its close proximity to the surrounding development, such widening or new construction is not possible. Additionally, this mitigation would be prohibitively expensive in relation to the type of land uses that it would benefit. For these reasons, mitigation ofImpact 4.7-12 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA S 21061.1, which states that "economic. . . and technological factors" are to be taken into account when determining feasibility. Additionally, potential mitigation measures to reduce this impact would require approval from outside agencies. The South San Francisco's General Plan Guiding Policy 4.2-G-9 states that the City should "[a]ccept LOS E or F after finding that: There is no practical and feasible way to mitigate the lower level of service; and The uses resulting in the lower level of service are of clear, overall public benefit." Therefore, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Impact 4.7-15: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase traffic at the already unacceptable Oyster Point Boulevard/Dubuque AvenuelU.S. 101 NB On- Ramp by more than two percent. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15: Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the addition of a second exclusive right turn lane on the westbound Oyster Point Boulevard approach. Implement MM 4.7-1(b). Adjust signal timing. Finding: While implementation of Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-15 would reduce this impact, it would not reduce it to a less-than-significant level. The increase in traffic volume would still be significant after mitigation, therefore this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Impact 4.7-18: Implementation of the proposed Project would increase baseline traffic on the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque Avenue from 1,500 vehicles up to 1,674 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation measure MM 4.7-18 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, however, because MM 4.7-18 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-18: Provide a fair-share contribution, as determined by City Engineer, to provision of a second northbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Dubuque Avenue off-ramp. Finding: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the northbound off-ramp to Dubuque A venue would not increase past unacceptable levels. However, as MM 4.7-18 would require a widening of the freeway, as well as shifting Dubuque A venue east of its current location, implementation of the mitigation measure would require an expansion ofthe right of way, and have a substantial adverse effect on adjacent businesses. Given these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7- 18 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic and technological concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic and technological concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Impact 4.7-19: Implementation of the proposed project would increase baseline traffic on the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard from 1,128 vehicles up to 1,664 vehicles during the A.M. peak hour. This would be a significant impact. Mitigation measure MM 4.7-19 would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level; however, because MM 4.7-19 cannot be feasibly implemented, this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measure MM 4.7-19: Provide fair share contribution (as determined by the City Engineer) towards the construction of a second southbound off-ramp lane connection to the U.S. 101 mainline at the Oyster Point Boulevard off-ramp. Finding: After implementation of the proposed mitigation measure, traffic at the southbound fly-over off-ramp to Oyster Point Boulevard/Gateway Boulevard would not increase past unacceptable levels. However, implementation ofMM 4.7-19 would require the relocation of at least one support column for the Oyster Point flyover ramp. Such relocation is not feasible given the expense and geometrics of the rights of way. In light of these specific economic and technological concerns, MM 4.7-19 is not feasible, as defined by CEQA. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21 061.1 (defining "feasible" as "capable of being accomplished. . . taking into account economic. . . and technological factors.").) Under CEQA, the City has an obligation to balance public objectives, including specific economic concerns, against the benefits of the Project. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3); CEQA Guidelines, S 15021, subd. (d).) Where economic concerns render a particular mitigation measure infeasible, the lead agency may reject the measure. (See Pub. Resources Code S 21081, subd. (a)(3).) Therefore, because there exist no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less-than-significant level, this impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. 3. Overridin2 Considerations. The City Council now balances the unavoidable impacts that will result from future development of the Project, against its benefits, and hereby determines that such unavoidable impacts are outweighed by the benefits ofthe Project, as further set forth below. The following specific economic, legal, social, technological, environmental, land use, and other considerations support approval of the Project: A. Genentech anticipates paying more than $100 million to South San Francisco and its school districts in property taxes. Furthermore, at full build out, the Project is expected to employ approximately 6,700 additional employees. Many ofthese new positions will be filled by residents of local communities. B. The existing physical environment in which the Project will be developed consists primarily of industrial development, with wide roadways, limited sidewalks, and minimal site improvements. Additionally, current development lacks amenities and connections to the shoreline. The Project, including the expansion of the Overlay District, will convert several of these properties to uses consistent with campus- style development (pursuant to General Plan Guiding Policy 3.5-G-3), including additional amenities and improvements, as well as increased access to the shoreline. C. The Project is consistent with the General Plan Guiding Policies for the East of 101 Area, which provide appropriate settings for a diverse range of non- residential uses and promotes campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research and development uses. Specifically, the Project complies with the following Guiding Policies: i. GP 3.5-G-1 (Provide appropriate settings for a diverse range of non-residential uses). The Project complies with this policy because it will provide a campus setting for non-residential uses, including manufacturing, research and development, and office uses, as well as amenities space. ii. GP 3.5-G-3 (Promote campus-style biotechnology, high- technology, and research and development uses). The Project complies with this policy because it provides for the expansion of an existing campus-style biotechnology and research and development use. iii. GP 4.3-G-1 (develop a comprehensive and integrated system of bikeways that promote bicycle riding for transportation and recreation). The Project complies with this policy because, pending city approvals, Genentech will develop bike lanes along Forbes Boulevard from the intersection of Forbes at Allerton to the terminus of Forbes Boulevard, and DNA Way/Grandview Drive from the terminus of Forbes to East Grand Boulevard by maintaining the corporate headquarters for one of the biotechnology industry founders in South San Francisco. D. The Project is consistent with General Plan Implementing Policies, including: 1. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-3 (do not permit any residential uses in the East of 101 area). The Project complies with this policy because it will not entail any residential use. ii. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-7 (signage and streetscape plans for Business Commercial and Business and Technology Park). The Project complies with this policy because Genentech has a comprehensive signage plan that has been reviewed and approved by the City. 111. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-8 (development of employee- serving amenities). The Project complies with this policy because it includes space for campus amenities such as cafeterias and Grab-and-Go facilities for food. Further, Genentech has developed a fitness center, various amenities and services that allow Genentech employees to attend to personal and family needs (such as dry cleaning) without having to leave the Campus, as well as a robust childcare program. iv. Implementing Policy 3.5-1-13 (waterfront enhancements). The Project complies with this policy because Genentech has committed to developing approximately one mile of the San Francisco Bay Trail along its entire bay frontage. v. Implementing Policy 5.1-1-2 (parkland standards). The Project complies with this policy because Genentech will develop an open green space for public use of approximately 0.8 acres. This will also include a food concession with inside seating area and public restrooms. E. The Project is consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan Policies, including Policy LU-16 (encouraging development of campus settings and planned growth for multiple parcel developments, and promoting the development of facility "Master Plan"). The Project complies with this policy because it entails the development of a master planned campus, which supports a diverse range of R&D facilities. F. The Project is designed to take advantage of and promote the use of public transit by adopting a Transportation Demand Management Plan that provides incentives for employees to use alternative modes of transportation, promotes parking cash-out incentives, and uses a lower parking ratio to increase ridership on BART and the East of 101 shuttle service, as well as constructing pedestrian walkways linking the Project to the adjacent shuttle stops and bikepaths. G. The Project will contribute to the City's reputation as a premier biotechnology and research and development center by maintaining the corporate headquarters of one of the biotechnology industry founders in South San Francisco. H. The Project will provide stability and predictability for the possible development of future facilities, encouraging Genentech to continue its growth within the City. Demonstrating the City's support for such facilities will enhance the City's reputation as the "birthplace of biotechnology", and will attract other biotech companies to the area. I. In the past, Genentech's practice has been to conduct business with more than 200 local South San Francisco businesses and vendors, spending approximately $15 million on an annual basis. The Project will enable Genentech to continue and expand this practice. J. The Project will enable Genentech to continue its practice of supporting many local organizations and non-profit groups, as well as its encouragement of employee spending at South San Francisco local businesses, which it has promoted for the past 14 years through the Genentech Goes To Town program. K. With the company's growth and expansion, Genentech has incurred approximately $800 million in construction costs alone in South San Francisco in the past five years. The Project will result in the growth of this expenditure by approximately $600 million over the next five years. This additional Project-related growth will result in the employment of an average of 800 to 1000 people per year to support Project-related construction projects. L. Over the past five years, Genentech has contributed to numerous local organizations and non-profit groups. Last year the company provided funds to various South San Francisco nonprofit organizations like Day in the Park, South San Francisco Fun Run, the Fire Department's Fire Safety Week, Police Department events and to various science programs in the South San Francisco School District. The Project will allow Genentech to continue and expand this practice of contribution. M. Genentech has to date spent approximately $6 million on public trail development. Implementation of the Project will allow Genentech to continue its commitment to developing the Bay Trail as an amenity for members of the community and the company's employees. 923489_3; 405.1027 EXHIBIT G Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GENENTECH RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT OVERLAY DISTRICT EXPANSION/CORPORATE FACI LITI ES MASTER PLAN UPDATE Volume 18 Final Master Environmental Impact Report SCH No. 2005072165 Prepared for City of South San Francisco 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, California 94080 Prepared by EIP Associates 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 February 9, 2007 Contents Volume IB: Final Environmental Impact Report o-IAPTER 7 Introduction..............................................................................,...................... 7-1 7.1 Overview... ................................................... ................. ..................7-1 7.2 Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report-Revised Section 4. 7 (Transportation and Circulation).............................................. 7-1 7.3 Use of the Final MEIR . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 - 2 o-IAPTER 8 Response to Comments..................................................................................... 8-1 8.1 Overview........... ...... ...................... ... ............. ............................... ... 8-1 8.1.1 Partial Revision of the Draft MEIR-Section 4.7 (Transportation and Circulation) ........................................................................... 8-1 8.2 Individual Response to Comments........................................................... 8 - 2 o-IAPTER 9 Text Changes..................................................................................................... 9-1 9.1 Format of Text changes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . ... ..... .......... . . . . . . .. 9-1 9.2 Text Changes.. ......................................................................... ..........9-1 9.2.1 Executive Summary ................................................................. 9-1 9.2.2 Project Description. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 9-4 9.2.3 Biological Resources................................................................. 9-5 9. 2 .4 Air Quality ............................................................................ 9 - 5 9.2.5 Noise and Vibration ................................................................. 9-6 9.2.6 Geology and Soils.................................................................... 9-6 9.2.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials................................................. 9-7 9.2.8 Transportation and Circulation... ............................... .... ..............9-7 9.2.9 Land Use ............................................................................... 9-7 9.2.10 Aesthetics.............................................................................. 9-8 9.2.11 Cultural Resources............ ................................... ....................9-8 9.2.12 Population, Employment, and Housing.. . .. .. .. . .. ... ..... .. .. .. ....... .. .. .... 9-9 9.2.13 Public Services............................................. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... .. .. 9-9 9.2. 14 Utilities and Service Systems....................................................... 9- 9 9.2.15 Other CEQA Considerations..................................................... 9-10 o-IAPTER 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ............................................10-1 10. 1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1 10. 2 Purpose. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1 10.3 Responsibili ties and Duties. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10-1 10.4 List of Mitigation Measures............................................................... ....10-2 o-IAPTER 11 Updated Report Preparers ..............................................................................11-1 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update iii Contents Tables Table 8-1 Table 10-1 List of Agencies and Persons Submitting Comments.............................................. 8-2 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Matrix.......................................... 10- 3 iv Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update CHAPTER 7 Introduction 7.1 OVERVIEW Before approving a project, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the Lead Agency to prepare and certify a Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR). The contents of a Final EIR are specified in Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines, which states that: The Final ErR shall consist of: a. The Draft ErR or a revision of the Draft. b. Comments and recommendations received on the Draft ErR either verbatim or in summary. c. A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft ErR. d. The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process. e. Any other information added by the Lead Agency. In summary, this Final Master EIR (MEIR) consists of three volumes, including: . Volume 1- Draft MEIR for Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update . Volume 1A- Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report (PRDMEIR) Revised Section 4.7 - Traffic and Circulation . Volume 1B-Final MEIR Text Changes, Responses to Comments, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and Updated Report Preparers . Volume 2-Technical Appendices to the Draft MEIR The determination that the City of South San Francisco ("City") is the "lead agency" is made in accordance with Sections 15051 and 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, which define the lead agency as the public agency that has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project. The Lead Agency must provide each agency that commented on the Draft MEIR with a copy of the Lead Agency' proposed response at least 10 days before certifying the Final EIR. 7.2 PARTIALLY REVISED DRAFT MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT-REVISED SECTION 4.7 (TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION) In the course of preparing responses to comments, and in discussions with agencies, it became apparent that it was necessary to clarify the traffic and circulation impacts. As a result of discussions with the California Department of Transportation ("Caltrans"), as well as a comment letter from Caltrans dated October 6, 2006, the City determined that a clarification of the traffic-related impacts was necessary to be consistent with other regional projects. To this end, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5(c), on December Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 7-1 Chapter 7 Introduction 11, 2006 the City recirculated a Partially Revised Draft Master Environmental Impact Report Revised Section 4.7 - Traffic and Circulation (PRDMEIR) for public review and comment. Comments received regarding the PRDMEIR, and responses to those comments, are included in this Final MEIR. 7.3 USE OF THE FINAL MEIR The Final MEIR allows the public and the City an opportunity to review revisions to the Draft MEIR, the response to comments, and other components of the MEIR, such as the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, prior to approval of the project. The Final MEIR serves as the environmental document to support approval of the proposed project, either in whole or in part, if the project is approved. After completing the Final MEIR, and before approving the project, the Lead Agency must make the following three certifications, as required by Section 15090 of the CEQA Guidelines: . The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA . The Final EIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency, and that the decision- making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR prior to approving the project . The Final EIR reflects the Lead Agency's independent judgment and analysis As required by Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings (Findings of Fact) for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding supported by substantial evidence in the record. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final ErR. 2. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technolOgical, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. These certifications and the Findings of Fact are included in a separate Findings document. Both the Final EIR and the Findings are submitted to the City for consideration of the proposed project. 7-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update CHAPTER 8 Response to Comments 8.1 OVERVIEW The Draft Master EIR for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update was circulated for review and comment by the public and other interested parties, agencies, and organizations for a 45-day public review period that began on August 28, 2006, and concluded on October 11, 2006. During the public review period, four written comment letters on the Draft MEIR and the proposed project were received by the City, in addition to oral comments received during the October 5, 2006 public hearing. During the public review period, copies of the Draft MEIR were distributed to public agencies through the State of California, Office of Planning and Research. In addition, the Draft MEIR was available for public review during normal business hours at the City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department and the South San Francisco Main Library. A public hearing was held on October 5, 2006, in the Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA 94080, during which the public was given the opportunity to provide comments on the Draft MEIR. One member of the public provided oral comments. In addition, several City of South San Francisco Planning Commissioners presented oral comments on the proposed project and the Draft MEIR during the public hearing. 8.1.1 PARTIAL REVISION OF THE DRAFT MEIR-SECTION 4.7 (TRANSPORT A TION AND CIRCULATION) As a means of providing clarification and in response to comments received on the Draft MEIR, the City determined that a partial revision of the Draft MEIR (PRDMEIR) was warranted, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. As such the City circulated for public review and comments a new and revised analysis of Section 4.7, Traffic and Circulation on December 11, 2006 for a 45-day public review period, which closed on January 25, 2007. During public review, two comment letters were received on the PRDMEIR, which are incorporated into this FMEIR as letter R-A and R-B, as described below. Table 8-1 provides the following information: (1) the reference code used to identify the commenter; and (2) a comprehensive list of commenters. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-1 Chapter 8 Response to Comments Table 8-1 List of Agencies and Persons Submitting Comments Comment Rtiference Co . A2encv,.p~on Date ofCo1t/m(!1/J TvoeofCo1t/m(!1/J . A California Department of Fish and Game 09/19/06 L B California Public Utilities Commission 09/19/06 L C City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County 09/22/06 L D California Department of Transportation 10/06/06 L E Planning Commissioner T eglia 10/05/06 0 F Planning Commissioner Prouty 10/05/06 0 G Planning Commissioner Zemke 10/05/06 0 H Jackie Williams, Resident City of South San Francisco 10/05/06 0 COMMENTS ON THE PRDMEIR R-A California Department of Transportation 01/24/07 L R-B California Department of Transportation 01/25/07 L L = Letter; 0 = Oral The complete text of the written and oral comments-and the City's response to environmental issues raised in those comments-is presented in this chapter. A copy of each comment letter is followed by its response( s). 8.2 INDIVIDUAL RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The following section contains all of the responses to individual comments received on the Draft MEIR, isolated by individual commenter. All of the original comment letters, in their entirety, are provided before the responses. Pursuant to CEQA, the purpose of the Draft MEIR is to evaluate the significance of physical changes in the environment resulting from approval of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update. See, for example, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064( d). See also CEQA Guidelines Section 1535 8(b) (impacts analyzed in an EIR must be "related to a physical change" in the environment). Therefore, consistent with Sections 15088(a) and 15088(b) of the CEQA Guidelines, comments that raise significant environmental issues are provided with responses. No responses to comments that do not address a physical change in the environment that could result from approval of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update are provided. See CEQA Guidelines Section 15088 (lead agency shall prepare responses to comments on "environmental issues"). Comments that are outside of the scope of CEQA review but include anecdotal evidence or opinion will be forwarded for consideration to the decision-makers as part of the project approval process. All comments will be considered by the decision-makers of the City when making a decision on the project. 8-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Comment Letter A 1 of 1 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-3 Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment Letter A Letter from Robert W. Floerke, Reaiona1 Manaaer, Central Coast Reaion, California Department if Fish and Game, received September 19, 2006 A-l The comment is acknowledged. The City will comply with California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Section 753.5(d)(1)(A)-(G), and an environmental filing fee as required under Fish and Game Code Section 711.4(d) will be paid to the San Mateo County Clerk on or before filing the Notice of Determination for the proposed project. A-2 Comment noted and no further response is required. 8-4 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Comment Letter B 1 of 1 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-5 Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment Letter B Letter from Kevin Boles, Utilities Engineer, Rail Crossings Engeneering Section, Consumer Protection and S4'ety Division, California Public Utilities Commission, received September 19, 2006 B-1 This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information, and is not a direct comment on the content or adequacy of the Draft Master EIR for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion! Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update. Therefore, no further response is required. B-2 As no active railway right-of-ways will be impacted or affected by the proposed project, these safety measures would not apply to the proposed project. The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project. B-3 Please refer to response to B-2. The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the decision- makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project. 8-6 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Comment Letter C 1 of 1 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-7 Chapter 8 Response to Comments Response to Comment Letter C Letter from David F. Carbone, Seinor Planner / ALUC StcifJ, City/County Association if Governments if San Mateo County, received September 22, 2006 C-l This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information, and establishes a time for the C/ CAG Board to review and/ or take action as its role as the Airport Land Use Commission. This comment does not address the adequacy of the Draft Master EIR for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update; therefore, no further comment is required. C-2 The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project. 8-8 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments Comment Letter D 1 of 3 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-9 Chapter 8 Response to Comments 2 of 3 8-10 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments 3 of 3 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-11 Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment Letter D Letter from Timothy C. Sable, District Branch Chiif, lGR/ CEQ;.4, California Department if Transportation, received October 6, 2006 Comments received in this letter mostly concern those topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for Traffic and Circulation (except Comments D-lO and D-11 identified below). As the issues raised in these comments have been addressed in the recirculated chapter, the remainder of these comments require no further response. (Cat Code Regs., tit. 14, S 15088.5, subd. (f)(2).) CEQA Guidelines state that lead agencies need only respond to "(i) comments received during the initial circulation period that relate to chapters or portions of the document that were not revised and recirculated, and (ii) comments received during the recirculation period that relate to the chapters or portions of t~e..eatlierEIRthat were revised and recirculated." (Id (emphasis added).) While all. comments received on the DMEIRare pattof the administrative record and will be considered in evaluatil1.gtheproposedproject, theCiWhas limited its response to comments according to the CEQA Guidelines. Those comments relating to the traffic and circulation analysis that were received during the comment period for the .recirculated PRDMEIR are addressed in. thisFMEIR. D-10 Comment acknowledged. In response to this comment the text of mitigation measure MM4.10-1(c), on page 4. 10-10 of the Draft MEIR, and as shown in Chapter 8 (Text Changes), has been changed to reflect Caltrans requirements regarding the inadvertent discovery of cultural resources during project related construction within the State Right of Way. MM 4.10-1 (a) if an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a qualified archaeologist approved by the project applicant shall conduct further archival and field study to identify the presence if archaeological resources in the area surrounding the discovery. Field study may include, but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, auguring, and monitoring construction activities as well as other common methods used to identify the presence if archaeological resources in a fully developed urban area. if an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during pro.iect related construction in a State Right cf Wc:v. all construction within 50 feet i?r the site shall cease. and Caltrans District 4 Cultural Resources Stu~v Office shall be immediate{v contacted and a Caltrans stgff archaeologist shall evaluate the Finds within one business dc:v qfter the Cultural Resources Stu~v Office is contacted. D-11 In the event that project related construction would encroach on a State right of way, the City and the applicant shall submit a completed encroachment permit application, including the appropriate environmental documentation and plans. The comment is acknowledged and will be forwarded to the decision-makers for their consideration prior to taking action on the proposed project. 8-12 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment E: Public Hearing Oral Comments Oral comments from Marc Tealia City if South San Francisco Plannina Commissioner, submitted durina Public Hearina on the Dr#: EIR October 5, 2006. E-1 Commissioner Teglia suggested that the MEIR should investigate the feasibility of constructing a new flyover from the intersection of Oyster Point Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard to the US 101 SB Ramps. The feasibility should be examined both as part of the Genentech MEIR and future East of 101 traffic studies. As such the remainder of this comment concern topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for Traffic and Circulation. As the issues raised in these comments have been addressed in the recirculated chapter, these comments require no further response. E-2 Commissioner Teglia commented as to whether the MEIR evaluated Genentech's compliance with the 1999 General Plan Open Space policies. In Section 4.8 (Land Use), pages 4.8-19 through 4.8-20 under the subheading Consistency Analysis, the MEIR states: Park and open space areas are located within the MEIR Study Area. Existing facilities within the project site include the Bay Trail and the Wind Harp Park. The Genentech open space network as identified in the 2006 FMPU, consists of multiple open space designations including public spaces (Bay Trail), passive (non-developable bluffs), connective spaces (landscaped pedestrian connections between major open spaces), and neighborhood-oriented spaces (plazas, courtyards). The main public open space area is adjacent to the Central Campus that includes the Genentech waterfront areas, the Bay Trail and the Wind Harp Sculpture and Park. Internal connections will be provided to the public open space areas, views will be preserved, and public access will be preserved and enhanced. No facilities would be built on the existing Bay Trail or public open park areas. Physical and visual access to the Bay Trail or public parks would not be hindered or altered by the proposed project... The proposed project would not impede or block access to the proposed network of park or trail linkages proposed in the General Plan. In addition, Genentech recently purchased the abandoned UP Rail right of way parcel near Allerton A venue which offers the opportunity to connect the Genentech Campus with the Caltrain Station and Downtown South San Francisco. The proposed project is therefore consistent with Policy 5.I-G-3. As such, the MEIR has evaluated the proposed project's consistency with the Open Space policies of the 1999 General Plan and determined that the project is consistent with the General Plan's park and open space guiding policies. In addition and as described in Response to Comment No. B-2, Genentech is currently in the permitting process of a "rails to trails" for the abandoned UP rail right-of-way, which would further the opportunities for open space accessibility within the project area. Comment noted, no further response required. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-13 Chapter 8 Response to Comments E-3 Commissioner Teglia noted that the MEIR should evaluate the projects consistency with the City policies for the protection of views, specifically the views to the Wind Harp as identified in the East of 101 Area Plan. As stated in Section 4.9 (Aesthetics), on pages 4.9-17: The 2006 FMPU also specifically identifies the need to limit the higher elevations within the West Campus neighborhood to not only comply with FAA regulations but also maintain a view corridor to the Wind Harp sculpture. Policy DE-S of the East of 101 Area Plan, and incorporated in the MEIR as PR 4.9-1, also directs development in the East of 101 Area to be designed to take advantage of views of Point San Bruno Hill with its "Windchime." Project Requirement 4.9-1 would ensure that future development within the West Campus would retain views of the Wind Harp. . . PR 4.9-1 Future development within the West Campus shall be constructed so as not to obstruct existing views if San Francisco Bay and Point San Bruno Hill and the associated "Wind Chimes" sculpture, from areas west if the Genentech Campus, including US 101. Open space areas and new roadways shall be designed to provide views if these resources. PR 4.9-1 incorporates the East of 101 Policy DE-5 regarding preservation of views of the Wind Harp Park into the MEIR to ensure that implementation of the proposed project would not obstruct existing views of both the San Francisco Bay and Point San Bruno Hill, as well as Wind Harp Park. As such, the MEIR has evaluated the projects consistency with preserving views of the Wind Harp Park and ensures that such views are preserved. 8-14 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment F: Public Hearing Oral Comments Oral comments from John Prouty, City if South San Francisco Planning Commissioner, submitted during Public Hearing on the Drift EIR October 5, 2006. F-l Commissioner Prouty concurred with Commissioner Teglia regarding traffic impacts at Oyster Point and Gateway Boulevard. Please refer to response to comment E-1 for further information regarding the construction of a flyover to reduce traffic impacts at the Oyster Point and Gateway Boulevard intersection. As such the remainder of this comment concern topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for Traffic and Circulation. As the issues raised in these comments have been addressed in the recirculated chapter, these comments require no further response. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-15 Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment G: Public Hearing Oral Comments Oral comments from Bill Zemke, City if South San Francisco Plannin8 Commissioner, submitted durin8 Public Hearin8 on the Drcift EIR October 5, 2006. G-1 Commissioner Zemke concurred with Commissioners Teglia and Prouty. Please refer to response to comment E-1 for further information regarding the traffic impacts at the Oyster Point and Gateway Boulevard intersection. As such the remainder of this comment concern topics discussed in the recirculated PRDMEIR for Traffic and Circulation. As the issues raised in these comments have been addressed in the recirculated chapter, these comments require no further response. 8-16 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments Response to Comment H: Public Hearing Oral Comments Oral comments from Jackie Williams, resident if the City if South San Francisco, submitted durina Public Hearina on the Drcift EIR October 5, 2006. H-1 Mrs. Williams questioned whether the City was considering construction of a new ferry terminal in the East of 101 Area. Comment noted. This comment is not a direct comment on the content or adequacy of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Draft MEIR or any environmental issue raised by the proposed project. Therefore, no further response is required. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-17 Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Comment Letter R-A 1 of 1 8-18 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments Response to Comment Letter R-A Letter from Timothy C. Sable, District Branch Chiif', IGR/ CE@., California Department l' Transportation, received january 24, 2007 R-Al This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information and acknowledges that the Lead Agency included the commenter throughout the Recirculation of the DMEIR for the project. No further response is required. R-A2 Caltrans expressed concerns regarding the projected future traffic volumes along US 101. Overall, it was felt that the 0.5 percent per year growth rate was too conservative, given the plans for Genentech and the other biotechnology companies in the area. Caltrans's recommendations were to assume a higher growth rate and apply unconstrained volume. Future Without Project traffic volumes were developed in a two step process, as described on page 34 of the PRDMEIR. First, a background growth rate of 0.5% per year (5.1% in total for the 10 years between Existing and 2015) was applied to the existing volumes to account for the increase in through traffic along the freeway. Second, the vehicle trips associated with all the approved projects in the East of 101 area of South San Francisco were assigned to the freeway. These included the recently-approved Home Depot, Lowe's, and Terrabay projects, plus anticipated future developments in office and biotechnology space in the area. Table 5-1 of the PRDMEIR presented the total future square footages assumed for the East of 101 Area, and Table 4.7-9 ofthe PRDMEIR presented the vehicle trip generation of these uses. Future With Project traffic volumes were developed by adding the Project vehicle trips on top of the Future Without Project volumes. The following table presents the Existing, Future Without Project, and Future With Project traffic volumes at the study segments along US 101. As the table shows, the 0.5% per year background growth rate plus the traffic associated with the East of 101 land uses would result in an annual growth rate of between 0.8% to 2.2% per year and a total growth rate of between 8.3% and 24.0%. With the high existing mainline traffic volumes, these growth rates equate to an increase of between 593 and 1460 vehicles per hour. The addition of Genentech traffic for the 2015 With Project scenario, would add about 88 to 797 vehicles per hour, increasing the annual growth rate to between 0.9% and 3.3% per year, and the total growth rate to between 9.6% and 38.8%. It should be noted that the background growth rate of 0.5% per year (5.1% total) was obtained from other approved studies in the area, and the traffic projections and assignments for each project in the East of 101 area and for the Genentech project were not constrained (the conditions on the freeway were not taken into account when determining on which roads vehicles would travel). Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-19 Chapter 8 Response to Comments AMPeuk Hour PMPeokHour NoffhofI"380 North Qf{}P Noffh..ii-3Iio Noffhof"()P ElRAlIalysis NB SB NB SB NB SB NB SB Existing 5366 6567 7129 8246 5484 6294 8374 6802 Background Growth 274 336 365 422 280 322 428 348 East of 101 Growth 1012 377 228 612 552 1138 688 394 Future Without Project 6652 7280 7722 9280 6316 7754 9490 7544 Total Growth 1286 713 593 1034 832 1460 1116 742 Total Growth % 24.0% 10.9% 8.3% 12.5% 15.2% 23.2% 13.3% 10.9% Annual Growth % 2.2% 1.0% 0.8% 1.2% 1.4% 2.1% 1.3% 1.0% Genentech 797 96 88 728 129 661 603 118 Future With Project 7449 7376 7810 10008 6445 8415 10093 7662 Total Growth from Existing 2083 809 681 1762 961 2121 1719 860 Total Growth % 38.8% 12.3% 9.6% 21.4% 17.5% 33.7% 20.5% 12.6% Annual Growth % 3.3% 1.2% 0.9% 2.0% . 1.6% 2.9% 1.9% 1.2% 8-20 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Comment Letter R-B 1 of 1 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 8-21 Chapter 8 Response to Comments . Response to Comment Letter R-B Letter from Timothy C. Sable, District Branch Chiif', IGR/ CEQj, California Department if Transportation, received january 25, 2007 R-Bl This comment is acknowledged. This comment contains introductory information and acknowledges that the Lead Agency included the commenter throughout the Recirculation of the DMEIR for the project. No further response is required. R-B2 As stated on page 51 of the PRDMEIR, and as provided in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program of the FMEIR and presented below, implementation of mitigation measure MM 4.7-1(a) shall be undertaken prior to the City issuing a building permit. With regards to MM4. 7 -1 (b), Genentech will pay its "fair share" contribution, as determined by City Engineer, prior to issuance of building permits for 1,000,000 cumulative square feet of new development approved pursuant to the 2006 Master Plan Update. As such, Genentech shall be responsible for funding its fair share of the implementation (including design, approval, and construction), and shall do so prior to complete implementation of the FMPU. 8-22 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update CHAPTER 9 Text Changes 9.1 FORMAT OF TEXT CHANGES Text changes are intended to clarify or correct information in the Draft MEIR in response to comments received on the document or as initiated by Lead Agency (City) staff. Revisions are shown in Volume la, Chapter 8 (Text Changes), as excerpts from the Draft MEIR text, with a line through deleted text and a double underline beneath inserted text. The text changes appear in order of their location in the Draft MEIR. 9.2 TEXT CHANGES 9.2.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Page 1-1, the first sentence of the last paragraph has been modified to state: Additionally, Genentech currently owns approximately 16 acres of the Bay West Cove property, which in its entirety encompasses approximately 47 acres. Page 1-4 paragraph after bullets, the third sentence: After expansion the Genentech R&D Overlay District will encompass approximately 160 acres-=Fhe Cenentccft R&D OvCdll) District encompllsses approximll:tdy 160 llaes, which is an increase from the 72 acres adopted in the 1995 Master Plan. Page 1-6, the following bullet point has been added for clarification: . Reclassification and zoning map change of the parcels in the Planned Industrial zone into the Genentech R&D Overlay District . Zoning text changes to SSFMC Chapters 20.39 and 20.40 . Adoption of the TDM Plan . All future developments will be subject to a separate permit approval and CEQA review as established in SSFMC Chapter 20.39 . The General Plan will not require an amendment as part of approval of the Master Plan. However. if the Master Plan is adopted and an alternate rails to trails routing is accepted the City would initiate a General Plan amendment so as to modify Figure 4-3 of the General Plan Bicycle Facilities. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-1 Chapter 9 Text Changes Table 1-2 (Summary of Environmental Effects and Project Requirements/Mitigation Measures), pages viii through xxii has been clarified to state: Table ES-l Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 1hreshold Impact 4.4-1 Construction activities associated with the proposed project would generate noise levels that exceed the noise standards established by the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code. This is considered a potentially significant impact. Compliance with the project requirement PR 4.4-1 and mitigation measures MM 4.4-1 (a) through MM 4.4-1 (c) would reduce this impact, but noise levels could still be substantial. However, the project's construction noise impacts would be temporary, would not occur during recognized sleep hours, and would be consistent with the exemption for construction noise that exists in Section 8.32.050(d) of the Municipal Code. Therefore, this impact would be considered less than significant. LeVelof Signijiauu:e Prior to MlIigotion LTS-Less Than Significant PS-Potentially Si LeVel of Signijiauu:e AjterMlIigotion LTS-Less Than Significant PS-Potentially Si LTS NOISE AND VIBRATION PS PR 4.4.1 Consistent with the Citv's Municioal Code. Section 8.32.050Id), all construction activity within the City shall be limited to between the hours of 8:00 AM. to 8:00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 AM. to 8:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 10:00 AM. to 6:00 P.M. on Sundays and holidays. or at such other hours as mav be authorized bv the oermit. if thev meet at least one of the followina noise limitations: · (1) No individual oiece of eauioment shall oroduce a noise level exceedina ninetv dB at a distance of twentv-five feet. If the device is housed within a structure or trailer on the orooertv. the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to twentv-five feet from the eauioment as oossible. · (2) The noise level at anv coint outside of the orooertv DIane of the oroiect shall not exceed ninetv dB. MM 4.4-1 (a) The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that the following construction best management practices (BMPs) be implemented by contractors to reduce construction noise levels: · Two weeks prior to the commencement of construction, notification must be provided to surrounding land uses disclosing the construction schedule, including the various types of activities that would be occurring throughout the duration of the construction period · Ensure that construction equipment is properly muffled according to industry standards · Place noise-generating construction equipment and locate construction staging areas away from sensitive uses, where feasible · Schedule high noise-producing activities between the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. to minimize disruption on sensitive uses · Implement noise attenuation measures to the extent feasible, which may include, but are not limited to, noise barriers or noise blankets MM 4.4-1 (b) The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that construction staging areas along with the operation of earthmoving equipment within 9-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 9 Text Changes Table ES-l Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold Impact 4.5-1 Implementation of the proposed project would not expose people andlor structures to potentially substantial adverse effects resulting from rupture of a known earthquake fault, strong seismic groundshaking, seismic-related ground failure (Le., liquefaction), or landsliding. Implementation of project requirements, PR 4.5-1 (a) through PR 4.5-1 (d) would ensure the impact would remain less than significant. Level of Sigtrijiconce Prior to Mlligation LTS-Less Than Sign#icant PS-Potentially Si . LTS ationMeJ1sUr: s or Pro led R'lIif&nents the MEIR Study Area would be located as far away from vibration and noise sensitive sites as possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. MM 4.4-1 (c) The project applicant shall require by contract specifications that heavily loaded trucks used during construction would be routed away from noise- and vibration-sensitive uses, to the extent possible. Contract specifications shall be included in the construction documents, which shall be reviewed by the City prior to issuance of a grading permit. GEOLOGY AND SOILS PR 4.5-1 (a) Development within the preliminary boundary of the Coyote Point hazard area, as depicted on Figure 150f the East of 101 Area Plan and referred to as Figure 4.5-6 in this MEIR, shall be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Fault trenching may be required on individual development sites where feasible and determined necessary by the engineer. No structure for human occupancy shall occur within 50 feet of identified active faults identified as Earthauake Fault Zones on maos oreoared oursuant to the Alauist-Priolo Earthauake Fault Zonina Act or the Seismic Hazards Maooina Act. unless a geotechnical investigation and report determine that no active branches of that fault underlie the surface. LeveliJf Sigtrijiconce After Mitigation LTS-Less Than Sighificant PS-P6tentially Si . LTS Impact 4.10.2 Implementation ofthe proposed project could affect the significance of a previously unidentified archaeological resource as defined in 36 CFR 800, CEQA Section 15064.5, and PRC Section 21083.2. This impact would be potentially significant. However, implementation of identified mitigation measures MM 4.10-1(a) and MM 4.10-1(b) would reduce this impact to less-than-significant. CULTURAL RESOURCES PS MM 4.10.1 (a) If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a qualified archaeologist approved by the project applicant shall conduct further archival and field study to identify the presence of archaeological resources in the area surrounding the discovery. Field study may include, but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, auguring, and monitoring construction activities as well as other common methods used to identify the presence of archaeological resources in a fully developed urban area. If an unidentified archaeoloaical resource is uncovered durina oroiect related construction in a State Riaht of Wav. all construction within 50 feet of the site shall cease. and Caltrans District 4 Cultural Resources Studv Office shall be immediatelv contacted and a Caltrans staff archaeoloaist shall evaluate the finds within one business dav after the Cultural Resources Studv Office is contacted. LTS Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-3 Chapter 9 Text Changes Table ES-l Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold Level of Signijk:ance Prior to MlIigation LTS-Less Than Significant Ps--:Potentially Si . Impact 4.13-1 Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere with groundwater recharge. Implementation of mitigation measures MM 4.13- 1 (a) through (c) would ensure that the proposed project would have a less-than- significant groundwater impact. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS PS MM 4.13-1 (a):The project applicant shall include methods of water conservation in the proposed project's buildings and landscaping. These methods shall include, but not be limited, to the following {This Mitiaation Measure would not applv to process development or research development laboratorv eauipment. or to biopharmaceutical manufacturina processes conducted pursuant to U.S. Food and Drua Administration's current Good Manufacturina Practices {cGMPs\.\: · Install water-conserving dishwashers and washing machines, and water-efficient centralized cooling systems in all new buildings (this method would not apply to process development or research development laboratory equipment) · Install water-conserving irrigation systems (e.g., drip irrigation and Evapotranspiration-based irrigation controllers) · Gray water irrigation system (as detailed in General Plan Policy PF-7, but other elements of that policy do not apply here, such as wastewater treatment facilities)) . Design landscaping with drought-resistant and other low-water-use plants · Install water-saving devices such as water-efficient toilets, faucets, and showerheads 9.2.2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Page 3-6, the third sentence of the last paragraph has been modified to state: The Proiect Area has been defined as a 220-acre MEIR Study Area. within which Genentech proposes to expand the Genentech R&D Overlay District to 160 acres The: ploposed project area encompasses apploxin.atdy 160 acns, which is an increase from the 72 acres approved in the 1995 Master Plan. Page 3-8, the second sentence of the first paragraph has been modified to state: Currently, it has approximately 6;65-& ~ employees in the South San Francisco Campus. 9-4 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 9 Text Changes Page 3-12, Table 3-1, the footnote has been modified to state: Table 3-1 Existing and Proposed Genentech Land Uses Existing Genentech R&D Overlay ProposetlGenentech R&D Overlay Net 11U:Teose District (sf) District (sf) (sf) Land Area (acres) 124 160 36 Office 1,008,801 2,629,395 1,620,594 Laboratory 970,173 2,002,482 1,032,309 Manufacturing* 779,892 1,041,668 261,776 Amenity 69,500 322,000 252,000 Total Building Area** 2,828,366 5,995,545 3,167,179 · Includes manufacturing, warehousinl! distribution, and fill finish. .. Assumes all new Genentech land uses, non-Genentech existing uses not included 9.2.3 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Page 4.1-1, the last sentence of the fourth paragraph has been changed to state: The NOP and commEnt IEtterJ ftl'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. 9.2.4 AIR QUALITY Page 4.3-1, the last sentence of the fourth paragraph has been changed to state: The NOP and commEnt letters ftl'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. The last paragraph on Page 43.-21 has been modified to state: The analysis of daily operational emissions was prepared utilizing the URBEMIS 2002 (Version 8.7) computer model recommended by the BAAQMD data supplied from Genentech staff regarding operational emissions and the project daily motor vehicle trip generation data for total daily trips contained in traffic study (see Appendix E). Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-5 Chapter 9 Text Changes Table 4.3-5 on Page 4.3-22 has been modified to state: EmissiOn SOlIrce Stationary Mobile Maximum Daily Emissions BAAQMD Thresholds Significant Impact? SOURCE: Genentech 2006' EIP Associates 2006; based on year2015 emission factors, which is the expected year ofprqject buildout. NT=No threshold ROO PM/o ~ 41.26 ~163.67 ~ 288.27 MO 8.22 Q,G4. 54.19 212.54 256.92 2,110.75 2.09 316.10 m.44~ m.84 ~ 2,128.332399.02 2.09-~ JU.A4-~ 80.00 80.00 NT NT 80.00 Yes Yes NT NT Yes 9.2.5 NOISE AND VIBRATION Page 4.4-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been changed to state: The NOP and comment lettErS ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. Page 4.4-15, PR 4.4-1 has been modified for clarification to state: PR 4.4-1 Consistent with the Ci~v'~ Municipal Code. Section 8.32.050(d) all construction activity within the City shall be limited to between the hours if 8:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on weekdays, 9:00 A.M. to 8:00 P.M. on Saturdays, and 10:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. on Sundays and holidays:-. or at such other hours as m~v be authorized ~v the permit. ~r construction meets 1ea5t one or the following noise limitations: . (]) No individual piece if' equipment shall produce a noise level exceeding nine~v dB at a distance if'twentv-five (25) feet. if the device is housed within a structure or trailer on the proper~v. the measurement shall be made outside the structure at a distance as close to twen~v- five (25) feet From the equipment as possible. . (2) The noise level at a~v point outside qf the prQpeTt;.v plane if'the pro,iect shall not exceed nine~v (90) dB. 9.2.6 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Page 4.5-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and commEnt leuo S ftf'e ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. 9-6 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 9 Text Changes Page 4.5-20, PR 4.5-1(a) has been modified to state: PR4.5-1(a) Development within the preliminary boundary if the Coyote Point hazard area, as depicted on Figure 15if the East if 101 Area Plan and riferred to as Figure 4.5-6 in this MEIR, shall be reviewed by a geotechnical engineer. Fault trenching may be required on individual development sites where feasible and determined necessary by the engineer. No structure for human occupancy shall occur within 50 feet if idwtpeJ active faults identjfied as Earthquake Fault Zones on maps prepared pursuant to the Alqui~t-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act or the Sei~mic Hazards Mapping Act. unless a geotechnical investigation and report determine that no active branches if that fault underlie the suiface. 9.2.7 HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Page 4.6-1, the last sentence of the fourth paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment kttug are ~ included in Appendix A of this MEIR. Page 4.6-29, the third sentence under Impact 4.6-7 has been modified to state: In addition to FAA standards, the 2006 FMPU keeps a maximum building height limitation of 150 feet above ground level on buildings within the MEIR Study Area, n hich ig in compliance n ith the F /'u^. standards. This height limitation is both subiect to. and consistent with. Federal Aviation Regulations. Part 77. as well as the City's General Plan Implementing Policy 3.5-1-4 addressing building heights. 9.2.8 TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Due to the substantial changes to .section 4.7 (Tfansportationand.GWculation),the.Gityrecirculated the PRDMEIR, as such all text changes relating to Section. 4.7 Transportation and Circulation have been addressed in the PRDMEIR. The following, including page number, refer to the changes made to the PRDMEIR, not the DMEIR. Page 59 (PRDMEIR), the first sentence of the full paragraph has been modified to state: As shown in Table 4.7-17, Genentech would be solely responsible for paying for improvements at the Oyster Point Boulevard/Catc~..vay Boulevard and Gull Drive/Forbes Boulevard and East Grand Avenue/Grandview Drive intersections. 9.2.9 LAND USE Page 4.8-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment kttug are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-7 Chapter 9 Text Changes Page 4.8-16, the first sentence under Impact 4.8-2 has been modified to state: Although the majority of the Genentech Campug ig located ..ithin the Gencntech R&D O,nla) Digtrict, a portion of the Campus is located within the P-I zoning district, and within the area for which R&D Overlay Zones are authorized. Page 4.8-27, the second sentence under Building Heights has been modified to state: The 2006 FMPU requires that new and existing buildings in the Genentech Campus have a maximum height limit of 150 feet above ground. This height limit complies with and is subiect to. Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77 and the standards set forth within the Genentech R&D Overlay District. 9.2.10 AESTHETICS Page 4.9-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment lctterg ftre ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. 9.2.11 CUL TURAL RESOURCES Page 4.10-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment lcttng ftre ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. Page 4.10-10, Mitigation Measure MM 4.10-1(a) has been modified to state: MM 4.10-1 (a) if an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during construction, a qualified archaeologist approved by the project applicant shall conduct further archival and field study to identifj the presence if archaeological resources in the area surrounding the discovery. Field study may include, but is not limited to, pedestrian survey, auguring, and monitoring construction activities as well as other common methods used to identifj the presence if archaeological resources in a fully developed urban area. If an unidentified archaeological resource is uncovered during project related construction in a State Right if' Wav. all construction within 50 feet if' the site shall cease. and Caltrans District 4 Cultural Resources Stu~v Office shall be immediate~v contacted and a Caltrans stqff archaeologist 5hall evaluate the And5 within one busine5s dav c:fter the Cultural Resources Stu~y Office is contacted. 9-8 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 9 Text Changes 9.2.12 POPULATION, EMPLOYMENT, AND HOUSING Page 4.11-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment ktteI s are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. Page 4.11-6, the last sentence of the first paragraph has been deleted: Although Cenentech is pnsently the 1ft"! gcst employer in thc City, because the anticipated employment gr 0 vfth cxceeds the existing forecasts for the City, C enentech' s anticipated employ-wcnt gr 0 nth is considered substantial and exceeds the Ceneul Plan. 9.2.13 PUBLIC SERVICES Page 4.12-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment leuo s are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. 9.2.14 UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Page 4.13-1, the last sentence of the third paragraph has been modified to state: The NOP and comment kuo s are ~ included in Appendix A of this FMEIR. Page 4.13-3, the following text has been added to the third paragraph for clarification: Based on the 2002 Carollo East of Highway 101 Sewer System Master Plan for the City's wastewater system, Pump Station 8, located in the Lower Campus, has an existing firm capacity of 990 gallons per minute (gpm) and currently does not meet the existing peak sewer discharge of 1,100 gpm (Dyett & Bhatia 2005). While two pumps at this station were recently replaced according to WOCP the wet well is still inadeqpate for the new pumps. Therefore. Pump Station 8 still reqpires additional improvements In addition, Pump Station 4 needs to be upgraded to improve reliability. This station upgrade has been previously identified as a system-wide requirement that the City is undertaking to provide redundancy to service both existing uses and future growth. The upgrade of Pump Station 4 is critical to serving the proposed growth under the East of 101 Area Plan, and has been included in the Downtown/ Central Redevelopment plan for funding. Necessary system improvements, including Pump Station 4, are identified in the Sewer Master Plan (Carollo 2002), which also establishes a program for implementing the improvements. The Sewer Master Plan estimates cost share of the improvements, with respect to how they relate to existing users and future users. Costs from existing users are recovered through rates. Impact fees, collected prior to the issuance of a building permit, fund the improvements as they relate to future users. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-9 Chapter 9 Text Changes Page 4.13-17, the last sentence of the second paragraph has been modified to state: To minimize the amount of solid waste that must be disposed of by transformation and land disposal, the State Legislature passed Assembly Bill 939, the California Intearated Waste Manaaement Act if 1989 (AB 939), effective January 1990. According to AB 939, all cities and counties in California are required to divert 25 percent of all solid waste to recycling facilities from landfill or transformation facilities by January 1, 1995, and 50 percent by January 1, 2000. The City of South San Francisco has not yet met this goal. Between 2001 and 2004, the City has achieved a diversion of rate ranging between 40 and 48 percent. The City has submitted an application for a time extension with the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) until December 2005 to meet the 50 percent goal, but the CIWMB's review of the City's application has been delayed. The CIWMB has not taken further action on the City's application at the time of publication of this FMEIR. Page 4.13-26, Mitigation Measure MM 4.13-1(a) has been modified to state: MM 4.13-1 (a) The project applicant shall include methods if water conservation in the proposed project's buildinas and landscapina. These methods shall include, but not be limited, to the Jollowina (This Mitigation Measure would not qFP~V to process development or research development laborator.v equipment. or to biopharmaceutical manrtfacturing proce5ses conducted pursuant to U.S. Food and Drug Admini5tration's current Good Manrtfacturing Practice5 (cGMPsU: . Install water-conservina dishwashers and washina machines, and water-1ficient centralized coolina systems in all new buildinas (this method t'lotsld not apply to process Jetd!7pmet1t (J1 I cswuh dn el"Pment laboratory eql1ipllle11t) . Install water-conservina irriaation systems (e.a., drip irriaation and Evaportranspiration- based irriaation controllers) . Gray water irriaation system (as detailed in General Plan Policy PF-7, but other elements if that policy do not apply here, such as wastewater treatment facilities)) . Desian landscapina with drouaht-resistant and other low-water-use plants . Install water-savina devices such as water-1ficient tOilets,Jaucets, and showerheads 9.2.15 OTHER CEQA CONSIDERATIONS Pages 5-5 and 5-6, the last paragraph on page 5-5 through 5-6, and Table 5-1 (Background Growth-2015 Future Without Project Conditions) have been modified to state: The East of 101 Planning Area has undergone substantial development during the past decade Through that period the City has developed and updated proiections of anticipated cumulative growth and development for purposes of overall planning. and for environmental review and planning approvals for individual projects A "Summary of Cumulative Growth Projects for the East of 101 Planning Area" (Summary) was prepared by the City of South San Francisco Planning Division in 2006. That Summary and the text below. explains the 9-10 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 9 Text Changes manner in which the City has made such cumulative growth proiections and reviewed them periodically to ensure that they remain reliable and valid The City has used two approaches both of which are authorized by the California Environmental Ouality Act CEOA Guidelines section 15130(b)(l) states that an EIR must include either "(A) a list of past. present and probably future prqjects producing related or cumulative impacts or (m A summary of proiections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document or in a prior environmental document which has been adopted or certified. which described or evaluated regional or area wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact. Any such planning document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency." For larger scale planning proposals (such as General Plan Amendments and zoning area amendments). the City has relied principally on the " f"" h Th C' h d th "I' f ." h fr tl. summary 0 projections approac. e Ity as use e 1st 0 prOJects approac more equen y III considering individual proposals to construct the growth resulting from growth proiections In 2006 the City again reviewed the cumulative grown projections it uses for overall planning in the East of 101 Area and pro]ects located in that Area as follows. . The analysis began with the data contained in the 1999 City of South San Francisco General Plan and related Environmental Impact Report rFor example see General Plan Table 3.5-2. East of 101 Existing and Proiected Building Area and Employrnentl . The East of 101 Area cumulative growth projections were updated and revised in 2000 using both a revised maior proiects list and buildout proiections These data were used for the purpose of determining the anticipated traffic and thus revising the traffic impact fees for the East of 101 area. The 2000 Update methodology and results are described in a November 30 2000 City Planning Department staff report titled "Proiected Land Uses" ("2000 Update") . In 2001 the City recognized the pace of development in the East of 101 area was exceeding the 1999 General Plan proiections. Several new projects representing nearly two million square feet had been approved since the adoption of the 1999 General Plan. The new development was concentrated in the East of 101. Gateway and Oyster Point planning sub areas and comprised the conversion of older industrial properties to Office/R&D uses Specifically. the majority of the Office/R&D projects were within the Genentech campus and Bay West Cove proiect at Oyster Point . In April 2001 the City prepared a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) titled "South San Francisco General Plan Amendment and Transportation Demand Management Ordinance" (2001 G P A) The General Plan Amendment consists of policies to implement the results of the traffic and fee study and policies to implement the TDM Ordinance The City incorporated the updated cumulative growth proiects in the SEIR Implementing these policies would enhance capacity. ease congestion. and increase mobility in the East of 101 area . In 2005. as part of a General Plan Amendment and related Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ("2001 GPA") the City prepared an update to the Transportation Improvement Plan. The 2000 Update cumulative growth projections for the East of 101 Area again were reviewed and updated (For example. see Traffic Impact Fee Study Update City of South San Francisco May 6 2005). Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-11 Chapter 9 Text Changes . Finally. in 2006. as a check of the continuing reliability prior projections the Planning Department tested the cumulative growth projections in the 2005 GPA against a major projects list updated to reflect actual and proposed building activity in the East of 101 Area Based on this final review the Planning Division determined that the growth prqjections (set forth in Table 5-1 as well as the City's 2006 Major Projects List and the East of 101 Area-Projected Cumulative Growth- 2015 Future documents. attached to the Summary). based on the prior certified Environmental Impact Reports and planning studies as tested against the most recent major project list fairly present reasonable projections for cumulative growth in the East of 101 Area A summa!) of the grovvth resulting from all the approved and plOpose:d developmEnt projects in the: ~ e:ater East of 101 Area (as pro'vided by the City of South San r~ Itndsco) is idEntified in Table 5 1 (Back~ ound Grovvth 2015 Future Without PlOje:ct Conditions). Table: 5 1 is based on the City's plOposed project list developed in Dece:mber 2005, and vv as updated in March 2006 hased on the: City's verbal comments. Figm e 5 1 ide:ntifies the specific cumulati've duelopment plOje:cts that ItI e: included in the sUlilfi1aI) of Table 5 1 and sno vv s the location of net gro vv th of de velopment in the East of 101 /'.1 ea. It is important to note that Terra Ba), vv nile not included in the East of 10 1 ,"d ea, is included in the cumulative proje:cts list becltuse it snares an on I amp vv ith the: MEIR Stud) ,".rea and thus, pro .ides a fiLm e: accUl ate representation of cumulati ve traffic gro vv th fm futm e de: v dopme:nt. Tne Traffic Report, '.XI ater Supply Asse:ssment, and 200G East of IIigftvva) 101 SUver Master Plan AddEndum plCpltle:d fm the project all rely on this cumulative ~ 0 vv th table: for their respecti v e projections and anal) sis of the pI opose:d pIoject. Overall, there is anticipated to be grovvth of over 1.6 million sf b) year 2015, primarily office and R&D space. It should be noted that these: values do not include Itn) planned or plO~ Itmme:d projects vv ithin Genentech. Bay Wost Cove ~ ggg,aoo GatO'....ay m,ooQ ~ Oyster Point ~ 12 4-e4,779 4-e4,779 R ~ ~ South Campus 7W;OOG 7W;OOG Term Bay 49;+9a ~ ~ 997,4W \J ~ 4-2,-149 ~ Upper Campus outside Overlay ~ ~ '!{. ~ ~ ~ m,ooo m,ooo Grand rob! 336,514 460,398 3,572,672 -3-1,006 309,m- 4,646,799 9-12 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Chapter 9 Text Changes . -- -..... !.-... - -. . ..-. -. ...................................................................................... .... ....-... .... .................- .. .-. ....... - . .. -- ..- --..--- ....... -..- .-..- .... - .... --- - - - -..- ---- . . * . .~ lloIi!l .... . . .. ResidenJiiiJ . :['otiiJ SOURCE: Korye EngiHeering 200(3, aata eomflilea as of Dee_ber 2005 · Refer ta Legena 00 figure 5 1 far it:lentifieatian af ]3areels ana sfleeifie flrejecls. ~ * l.nmn1PJ'cinl lJIitd Resi.dP.ntinl TfJ1Dl Bay West Coye - 157.500 742.000 - 899.500 Gateway 121.000 65.250 = - 186.250 Oyster Point - 237.648 = - 237.648 E 164.779 - = = 164.779 B = = 315.000 - 315.000 South Camous - - 789.000 = 789.000 Terra Bay 25.000 665.000 = 690.000 U = = 890,573 12.149 902,722 Uooer Camous outside Oyerlay = = - -43.215 -43.215 Y.. = - 283.867 - 283.867 Z = - 133.000 = 133.000 Grand Total ~ 460.398 3.818.440 -31.066 D. 4.558.551 SOORCE' Korve Enl!ineerim! 2006 data comoiled a~ of December 2005 · Refer to Lel!end on Fil!1lfe 5-1 for identification ofoarcels and soedfic oroiect~ Page 5-30, the second paragraph has been modified to state: CWSC has committed to reducing demand in all service areas (the service areas include the City east of 1- 280. where the MEIR Study Area is located. as well as the cities of San Carlos and San Mateo) in 2030 by 2.36 mgd,l which will allow CWSC to meet average, but not single dry year demands (to.8 percent probability of a shortage). A 10.8 percent probability of mandated reduction of normal year demand is considered a significant impact. As analyzed in the cumulative effects on groundwater, the proposed project would represent 20 percent of the projected growth for the CWSC's three peninsula districts; as such the proposed project impact on supply is cumulatively considerable. 1 Personal Communication with Nicole Sandkulla, Monday, March 6,2006. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 9-13 CHAPTER 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 10.1 INTRODUCTION The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the adoption of feasible mitigation measures to reduce the severity and magnitude of potentially significant environmental impacts associated with project development. The Final Master Environmental Impact Report (Final MEIR) for the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update (the proposed project), SCH No. 2005072165, dated February 9,2007, recommends that the City of South San Francisco (the City) adopt a range of mitigation measures that will mitigate to the extent feasible the environmental effects that could result from the implementation of the proposed project. Monitoring of the implementation of adopted mitigation measures is required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6. This document identifies mitigation measures (MMs) and project requirements2 (PRs) of the Final MEIR, and describes the process whereby the MMs and PRs would be monitored following certification of the Final MEIR and adoption of this Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) by the City. 10.2 PURPOSE The purpose of the proposed Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/ Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update Final MEIR MMRP is to ensure compliance with all mitigation measures to mitigate or avoid potentially significant adverse environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project that were identified in the Final MEIR. Implementation of this MMRP shall be accomplished by the City. Project-specific mitigation measures will be implemented (1) as part of design development of the proposed project, (2) during proposed project construction, or (3) as part of proposed project operations. 10.3 RESPONSIBILITIES AND DUTIES In general, monitoring will consist of demonstrating that mitigation measures were implemented, and that the responsible unit monitored the implementation of the measures. The responsible unit for determining compliance with all mitigation measures will be the City. Monitoring will consist of determining whether: . The specific issues identified in the mitigation measures were considered in the design development phase . Construction contracts included the provisions specified in the mitigation measures . The required actions specified in the mitigation measures occurred prior to or during construction 2 Project Requirements are applicable local, state, and federal laws and regulations that are considered part of the Project Description. Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 10-1 Chapter 10 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program . Ongoing administrative activities included the provisions identified in the mitigation measures Any concerns between monitors and construction personnel shall be addressed by the City of South San Francisco. The contractor shall prepare a construction schedule subject to review and approval by the City of South San Francisco Building Department. 10.4 LIST OF MITIGATION MEASURES All project-specific mitigation measures and project requirements included in the Final MEIR for this proposed project would be monitored as described above. These measures are listed in Table 10-1. The mitigation monitoring matrix on the following pages is formatted to parallel the format of the Executive Summary table contained in the Final MEIR. The matrix identifies the required mitigation measures, the time frame for monitoring, and the responsible monitoring agencies. 10-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update ~ ~ ~ ~ I:.() .S 1: ~ & i:c: ~ ::: ~ I:.() .S .. ~ .1::: ::: ~ ::: ~ '';:: ~ .~ .1::: ~ ~ .... .. ~ ~ e r'l , = - c:: co (/) .c ::; o 0 (/)U '0"5 ~ffi GLi: c:: co (/) .c ::; o 8 ~ .13 ~ffi .- .... ()u. c:: co (/) .c ::; o 0 ~.~ ~ffi GLi: co >. 0> 0> :5~ "0- en 0> co en ~ 8. IS e ::> 0. en .!a ro o>.c c:: en :~ Q> -eg- O> - - 0> .5. [; ~"O -g -.; 0 co .E _ -- as '-=.."'~c: - .9 Q) ro 0 "00 0 2-0 ~~..- Q)U a5 '~.5 ffi ffi :5 .s E >.;g 0.. ~ g ~ ~:=: =:J. - 0..- 0 (6' () .0 a5 o...!a U C::O>O>EEO>O> CO.c.co>o>~:5 E ~ ~ C') CD .- ~ CO""" 0 co.c.o 0 ~=~ffi~~E ~ -E ffi E -g = Q> 0> .0 ::> 0> "C:5~ ~ c.. ~ .~ ~ .5 5- ~ - o ~ ~ uffi .;:;: 0>::> o 0>.2' ~ c...5 c....- -:1:0>.9 ro~.clo- ~rn-o... '- c ~ .~ "E ~~ ~ jB Q> OCOQ)C::O. -......uQ)o> ~ a5 ffi E c:: Q) E .- Q) 32.-_ "'C ::J a..!::: 0> U E ::> ::> ~.g 8 ~~ >.0> Q) 5~ :5cua>= u):t==.5 o>Eoco .~ -g ~ 15 o.enCOQ) en=o..u ffi~c ffi _enQ)::> o.Q>E~ Q) 0. 0> .- ~.Q g>.s..... .~ ~ c:: C5 .~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ;'-E- en :5L.Q) .3: ~ ~ :g ~ g>~ ~ 8''0 ~ ~ :Q'5ffi~ .0.0_> "OCO-Q) 0>- "0 !EOgQ) ~~_:5 C'".-"ro - co IS ~~ >.::> o.x .oencoQ) ~ co >._ .E '0 ~ ~ .oQ)::>U ::> U en c:: cnCQ).ga 10 ~ :5 .~ ~ .!a ~ ~ .....0> Q> .9 .E :5 8-CsQ5cn Q) .C 0. Q) > 0. 0>.5 ~ ~.5 E Q)2:;gB .c::>::>Q) I-cn.o"O Il.l .... ~ "0 c.. ~ = ~ ii: "'" Il.l .... '" ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ 0 ~ .9 ~ 15 g>~= oS .~ ~ :E; = ~ .~ S en ~"'C~ ~Q5 corneD -EctS~ g> ~ =a. -ci :0 "0 0 os ~...q ~ (; :Q ~ -5, g "S g' ~ c '- m tE ~ ~~ ~ j 8 : _Q)~C: 0..0 .~f ~ ~ : .E .~ m .:_ :g co co 0 >'Q) _Q) ~ co en E::>o. ~Q) ......15 2:2:orog>$ ro ~ ~ ~ ~ -= CD "S; "5 (J) Q) x 0 .~ ~ :g ~ ~ :5 Q) c:: co.. 8'g A2 ~ ~ "0 ~ "0" 15 :Q .- -5. Q) ~ .~ .9 l.~ ~ ~ j j .9 ro m 0> g>~ ~ :1: c~~:E~3:a;-ct5~ Q) en..,- en 0>"0 2: ~ 8' .1i ~ .$ ~ c:: ~ ~ : ~ "* :2'fi!C::Q)Q)roCO:5 "0 ..v '-' :::J :5 :5 :::Ii Q) Q) >-. -g ~ E. 0>:2 0- Co '0 :5 ~ ~ .Q "0.5 ~ co Q) en >. ::> c:: 15 .2 ::; ro ~.= .~..c en OE moo . co-cs ~ en 0..-0 ..9 ~ .~-g ~ en ..... 8 0> ~ ~ U .E; 15.E .5 ..,f .5 8. ~ -5 ""9 .0 Q> :1: :E:5cnococQ)Q)"-.Q :!: .3: ~ 5. ~ 8 =a.:5 ~ :E Q) en .~ 0> .c ..,- ON .... ~.E ~ co "0 ~"'CQ)O s~:5C: :0 8.. 16 .~ ~1i):5Pl Q) 0"0 0> ..c c.. Q) :5 Q) c:: .9 .0 .~ -g ~roBCO ~1i5~-o COO>en-{ll ~-~~ ~ .5 ~ ]? : "0 Q) 0>.- Q)=a.~en ~ cn:O ~ 8 .~ J!2 Q) :6~'€i:5 c:: = - en .~ is == :g- a en.oco~1B ~g'EQ)~ <D13::t=e>> .~ 2 0 ~ c:: ~cncn~~ c::g~:;~ CO UQ) 0>"0 ro'O:1:.g>g .c......OQ)u -Q)1;[f:::~ EJ!2.........Q)'f- Q)oen>O iD~~~~ ~C:rog>a5 ;S r..... :;):2 E .3:.E ~ [; '" IJJ U i:l: ~ 1 ~ -< u c:s o ...:l o S '" .S:! :5 ';;j ~ r.. Il.l .... ~ "'" o c.. "'" o U -... = .9 '" = ~ c.. ~ ~ .... CJ .~ .... '" Q ..... ~ 1: Il.l ~ o ~ o Q) .c e ..... M ..... ..,f a::: D- "0 c:: co ~ ..... M ..... ..,f a::: D- Q) 0> (/) ~ o Q) .c e ..... M ..... ..,f a::: D- "0 c:: co ~ ..... M ..... ..,f a::: D- Q) Q) (/) .... = Il.l S c.. o ~ ~ Il.l Q "0 = ~ -= CJ "'" ~ Il.l '" Il.l ~ -= CJ Il.l .... = Il.l = Il.l ~ en"""'" ~ co Q)~~"o +:i .~ co Q) -;:;: e E E ts a. co co"O:g<c 0> en i~~ 0. ~ ro .!a Q) :t:: 0 :5 ~.c ~~ E~ .s~ "0.,2 JB:;:Jc co en 0 "(:5"0 E ~::;E en 0 0 CO U U CO:5 "0 .3: ~ Q) "0 "en c:: 8 en s:: ;s~ .. 0 ..,-0 ~-92 "0 Q) = ~ Q) ....- "0 Q).- > Q) :1: o I en Q) ~.5!2 ... Q) uf 32 ~ ~ :5 ~ U) ~0.:5 cQ) 5-92 os; '- "E :E == 15 0 CO I- .S _ E c:: CO c:: en 0 ~ .-::."(6 C::o ....._~ -g ~ ......... .~ ~ [3 ..'" en'- C Q) I r..... +:oC ~~ar.....~~ ;S Q)E :g li}!E ro . ::; - -~~c Va ~ "*.. 8 c .~, Q) 1:5 g: :1: OE coenEQ) u () -- u 0.. ~ .0'"0 co :5 .~ Q) co E 5. ffi E ~ :7";: e.~ .- _'- <t] ...j. "C a..~ "0 ~.!!? ~ Q) ~ ~ Q)Q)"- w-"O ~ :5 .~ U ~ U) "0 > ~ ~ ~ "Ci) l'I:I 0 8. u .en ~ 'E -.i ::> s:: ~~ ~~ 8~~g:~:s ~ Q) '0 CD -_co- cD 13 ~ Ja- _:Sene ~ro-c::: .;:;: _ Q) :0 ::> Cl.. Q) 15 0 .9 ~ ~ .~ _ E co a "'0 .9 ..c ~ C 0 .~ c::~~ enQ)~c::O- .Q C ~ Co 1; ~ 0 ~ ~ I ~ i:.~ .~~ c::o.u enenco~u 8 .s uQ) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ =:; (i) E Ci ! -~ "[ -af ~ ~ ~ .- ..,f"O :5Uo.C:: B "0 .......S 8 _coO>c::c:: :il .(3 19 .Q ~ 32 .!a Q.O 0. en co::> cJ) E~~~:g~~ oq:.s Q)::2; :S::2; c:: o 1:5 2 en c:: o () "0 Q) u ::> :Et3o~~ I-~ ~Q) .EC::Q).o ;;::.- 0 E"O g ~ s ~~13 g ~~ .gE~u.g g>.c "*..g> ~.c:: o .Ql E .- E .!i2> en en__ E._ 0 :S ~ .3: ..... ..,f ':"0 Q) 0> >t;::: Q).- ;;::"E o Q) I:2 - U l'I:I Q. E t ct tl() .5 'l:: I::> e. I:l:: ~ ~ tl() .5 ... .s .~ ~ ::: I::> ... .... l::I .~ ~ ~ ..... tl i e "01:5 c:: ro ro ~ 1:! -"- (\) ~.!Q .g ~ :5 "2: C") ~.~ -.i=:le: 0::"'C\] a...~:S c:: ro CJ) .J::. "'5 o 0 CJ)U '- .!:Q o U .?:-ffi .- ..... ()LL - o w U ~ 1:5ffi .5O .!!2. =:I oo>e~ c...S c..'- =~w.8 ~-'=~o-.; '" "'.J::.;o-- Oi::._ ..... c:: a. E 2i,g3:.l!3Q; orowc::o. --OQ)e> ~ ~ ffi E c:: w E .- w .:g_ -0 ::J 15...!::: W U E =:I =:I ~.g8PI~ ,: o Q) .c e ..... rJ, ..... .,j- 0:: Q.. "0 c:: ro ~ ..... rJ, ..... .,j- 0:: Q.. w w CJ) CI) CI) ..!!1 Q):5"'C :5 .;: ~ "t- .~ o~:o c::~~ 2Q)Q) .s~o c:: '" w :!2 w E =:I'u wow CiUo. .s1:5~ w 0 ~ '0' c: ~ c.. Q) .,j-"O~ ....,~E; ~ 8. E o..ow .5 a.:5 o ~ ~ ~ :cf.ffi ~ ~ w .e- E =:I "!Q ~ a. -g ~ W.J::.I~ro:!2 "01- <0= =:I 2i ......::;::;ro~ E~~~~_ "en 0.:2 cv) g <5 >.E w..... a. .....-"- .J::. -.i E en ~ ...... :: a::: .- <5-C::oa...'" "O=:Iro :s .;:: c::.g .5_ 8 ~ "2 -- ~.. ~ "'C e>-S c:: ::J ~ ~ "en ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ro ~ .~ :!2 C) ~ 15.. 0"" :::s "E g? ~ .s ~ ~ c:: ro CJ) .J::. "'5 o 0 CJ)U 'O.~ .?:-ffi .- ..... ()LL wo> :5 c:: :g i-E ~~~~~ .g ~ ~ ';: w ~ '0 "'ffiw~g-~~ "'ffi::J:5Q)a>E .J::."'~~-;;:wffi en.sa . -... <D C) ::J ..... -ro"Oro'" CD .9 "E :5 Q) c: .~ Q.l.....l..... .r:.ro .Q .g 2i ~ - E .8 ~ a. 0>.;: -g ro <5 ~ iJ).;: ~ > ~ .~:!=! wc:;g2~..o.?:-~ ~~i5~~~o2i ro 0:: -8 ~'O w ~ ~ W ro 'c 0..0 ro :C::2W2~ro.l!3 10 :S ~ ~ ~ ~ "E 1i5c:OOQ5:!:CD c:.ca>""ffia..ECJ.. ~j:5E;jgW~ 'a~~~~i~ g- ~ C >.~ I- .0 ...... '+- co ..a Q) . Q) ~ 0 .2 ~ :e U 0 .0' ~ Ci - I- ::2 Q5 a.Wg-~Q;LL..o w C: a. a. CJ) "0 :5 ~ ~ .~ :!: ~ ~ c::" c:: .0' 2=- ~ w 0 o .Q a. 1:5 8:. -g a. 15 g w .~ () g- 2J::J:5"'C~-Q) ~ ~ ~! ~ :~ ~ .:: ~ roE .;: ~ 5 =:I o a. _ 0>::2 E t 1:5 ro jg.;: 0 "0 ~.g~:;2~~ w 5 '5O ~ a... .u .?:- :5ue+=iQ)a3C3 o .9 a.. a5 ~ LL..... -_"0"01- w .Q .~ ffi .~ co ffi :5 0:..8 "~w CJ) .8 ~ m ~ :; "5 :5 "'C ~-g<(.sa ~5~ .,j- ~ i;' .M _ CJ) .E :::!!:t =:I 0 row..o :::!!:~Ci5a.~:5~ 1:! C\] U 10:: .c:: .!2> CI) e: C\] :S ~ ..!!1 ww"'.....-"O"'e: :5:5~~~~~ '+-:5 ;:c o ";: ~ 0 w N ~ C:uffiI:-Q~Jl2 ~~:5cj~~.9 co.....~-:2"O wuOE_:2~ E:!25:""'c::-o -~ w =:1._ c:: W ~ -a8Cti~g::;~ .s1:5~~19~w w",c::c::w..o ~ "5' ~ .!2> w E "0 .....a.a..."'E ::; .,j-~~i!5~~ ~ ~ I- "0 .- 1i5 1:5 ~ 0.. a. ro ::; ~.!2>!Q e: p~ ~-~ E a.Q ~ j 'E .s .~ "0 W =:I '" .!Q () :2 LL CJ) CJ) .;: .J::. t .E CD '" '" ro "0 W c:: .~ 2 w "0 W ..0 ro .J::. '" '" w ~g o cg Wcv> E..... w c:: ~.Q 15..-0 w w O::CJ) ~ .Q :E '" ro "0 w u ro Ci ~ w ..0 ro .J::. '" "0 W > o E ~ ~ ro ro :5 '" w w ~ "0 2 u w o ..... a. >. c:: <t: ~ .J::. U c:: ~ C") o ~ "0 c:: ro w N .en w ro 1:5 '6 .8 ro Q; ~ .c .....0 .8 Uro ~ :.o~ ~E ~.9 ..0 "0 w > .ro 3: c:: o ~ ~ 2i a.i '" o U .g is. ffi en w w.a .;: ..o:5o~ c: c: 10 o 0 c:: ~ c: .en w w '" "0 ~ '" a. ro w ~ "0 W 1:5 2 o .....- 0.0 ro w :5 C - w o E .l!3 w c:: U ~ .!!1 ~ ~ "5 ~ 0- ~ c w ~c ~.~ g-~ 0::", ~ v ~ .... ~ '0 C. ;;;J = ~ s:: '- ~ .... '" ~ :;E - o N '" .S:! := ';:j r: ~ .... ~ '- o c. '- o ~ = o ';) = ~ c. ~ roil .... CJ 'i: .... '" Q >. ~ 1: ~ ;.- o <5 ..0 .... = ~ e c. o Q:j ;.- ~ Q '0 = ~ -= CJ '- ~ ~ '" ~ ~ -= CJ ~ .... = ~ = ~ C en w jg ...,. I = - :: l: ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ & l:l::: '1:: =: l:::l ~ .... ... .s .... =: ~ =: ~ .~ l:::l .~ .'1:: ~ ~ ..... ~ ~ e oro-t3Qw, ......,g::Jc::o a3~CI)O<D ~ E :>. g-~ coJ!!~c::-ci o..co:;:,- -- roO ~Q)Q)-o.. (1)-5~C1)8 g-l:i's..c~ 0.. "'0 .9.. Q)Q){g-ct J:::. .!: ro c ro ~ E E2.E:: o .$ Q) g>w, -cQ)..c ~Q) ~r::: . C~=~N ~ ~ ro ~ ~~ !so..:RenQ)"E a>,-U)~O ~:':;"E Q.)- g:5~:5 g> ffi '0 ffi .!: 'E U Q) Ci5 -c ro -:::J 20... ~ ~ ~ .~ -c .~ c .a g. ffi -Q)"S-cQ) & E.~ Q) en roQ)o..c~ enu..c U ro ~a.. ~ ro 5 7ii 0.. 0) g~"6~:R~ ~Q) c::..:::,~ ~:5.2="+Q) u ~ en Q).!!1 E = t .!!.! .~ g ~ -g ~ -5 -+-> en c.. c.._ 00 ~ ;S ~ Z o - E-< < ~ Z ;;J Z - ~ Z < ~ o o ..:l "" -c ~ .::; 0- ~ .!!.! c o ~ ::g> .E o Z -c c ro -c o o c;:: :S .3": -c Q) roen 'o~ ~ ~ ~~ ~g ~~ E~ .- c o ~ Z.E c .Q (3 2 en c c 0 ro U CI)-c :sffi o 8 Cl)en '0 "0 ~~ Ou.. o 1:5 ~ c o U enro ~- -co ro Q) _u .E ffi ..c ~ ~ en en.!!.! ro.9 ..c '- ~.g~ ~~E OroQ) ~a..~ {g e.E Q.>c;g ..co~ I-u..c >- E-< - ..:l < ;;J 0' ~ - -< l:i'€g~ -c:;:i3~ Q)>-~o- -g c.. J::; Q) Q) E en Eog~ E u u Oro S u J:::. .!: ~cnQ)~ ~~~~ :Soorn ~ 1:5 .~ en Q) ~ ~ Ecro~ ~~:I o Q) U U ocr lB 0 ~ 0.. a5 "'CQ)cJ9 $~~a3 ro. E .is.. ~ en.~ e Q)'~ ::J &..c g> ~ co "'C ro .......Q).....O) a5 ~ en .~ E"5-:;: Q)oe.Q "Q.(I)'E:E E ro 0 -OUQ) cu~......:5 -0 ~ ~~-c 'Ot'0)Q) :i:Q)~ :E:5:5 en CD (3 > ~u c& 8 Q) ro c -g .Cij roc c.Cij .Q E u,g 2 en <;;..>c:. c U 8.5 Q) J:::. en U o ~ .Qen [;ro :5~ 0.5 -Co- ffi ~ -c- 0 c - ro Q) en:=: _ en oQ)"E tJ):5 co g>E..8 .- 0 Q) "S~~ roen- ~~o g{gCi3 '- Q) - c""- rooo Q) ~ ~ >E1{j 8{g~ en ro ~ ro c o U 2 en c o U Q) > t5 ro .!: en Q) U .g ~ en c o m ~ :0 !9 m E o ~ m Ci3 ~ en -c Q) > ro 0.. S c o -c Q) .C ro U 1:: '6 -c c ro -c ~ E - o 0.. =? c ro Q) U ~ .Cij -c Q) -c .S: e (L $ .Ci) Q) :S S l!? Q) -c c: :0 .0 en U .x ~ c o c >- a.. 0.. ro od ~Ci3 .Cij - -c-g Q) ro U en ~-e Qj~ rom :;:~ ~i a_ u m <1i-g .2lB Uo.. c x UJQ) . en Q) a:5 E ~ LO Q) ....... E .80 l::l en c -c 0 ro U e c o .Ci) o [; '- Q) J:::. -0 -c Q) > ro 0.. c ~ C o en -c Q) Q) 0.. en U ~ jg - .E :::i . . ll= o c 2 :!:= .Ci) - c Q) > ~ 0.. S o~ en ro g>:;: ..c-C -cro c e rng ..c 19::J m a.. ES en ..>c:. U jg o en ~ Q) :0 Q) "c;; :5 en o 0.. en ro >- 32 U .5 0- en ro m ro ~ ro -c Q) -e ~ en '6 .E ll= o ..c en ro :;: '- o m- Q) ..x:: :::' U en 2 Q) -J:::. 0)- ~g. .!!.! .S: x ro Q)~ c o 15 Ci3 0) Q) > c ro a.. Q) 0:: roc '- Q) .8E en .9- [;~ i)jQ) ro-c :;: ffi <Den Q)..>c:. ..c u :;:.5 . .0 en -c Q) -e ~ en '6 '- o -c ~ Q).- en ro O-c a..Q) x u Q).- ~ 0) c .0, ro en -c c ro .~ ~ 0" ~ .x ~ ~ c: c: :s2 o ro ..s a.. >- en -c a.. roQ) Q) 0.. '- > ro ro ~ og>ro >:.0, en 16 ~ ..... -c en Q) en -c 0.. Q) C Q) E ro ~ :p ~ cn CD ~ Q; ~roro :SO):;: ~ ~ :5 ~~~ >--c ~ a..Q)ro o..>-c ro_ ~ 0.. ~5 :R~ ro :;: ~ (LroCl)ro . ro= - ro m_ Ea . . ro '- m $1R ro- 3:ro . . . Q) Q) c::......:- >....... Ci;'5 ,---0"'0 Q) :5-cocn~Jg;:..c~~ffi..c :::Jt5-5~ co co (1):+:; "6.g_ 2 c E E ~:;: c (il32 (j)a>$ ~o~;:::"'5 c: c: ~ 8.."* ~ 8.:C .- ~ 3: ~ ~ -c 8 :g ~ a a 15 t5 _ v ""'.~__ - S "'0 Q) -.. .- 1:: -.. co 0 ~ u a3 ~ c: 0) 0 i ro ro ~ :2 ~.~ E ro -c - 0.. 0.. Q) .- c: E Ci) Q) ... "S ~ '+- '+- ..0 - 0 (J).- c:: a..(3 g>o g-o O-c 16~ ~ en ro E .!!1.. '6 U Q) ~ ~ "S .g C ~:c :S o ro..c a.. U c 0.1:: Q) ro - Ci) M 5.. o,.~ 0) & ~:;: 0> E Q) _ ~ M j .!: Q) 0 en .Ci) ~ E::c- """-c g lB >-E~~~c~S .... Q) +:; ~ ~ = co ..5!;!'- g M ~ u lB~:;:::; Q)ro Q) 0)1:: ro-. CIS i: ~ .. o - = ~ e c.. o ~ .. ~ Q "0 = CIS -= CJ "'" CIS ~ '" ~ ~ -= CJ ~ - = ~ = ~ ~ :: ~ ~ I:l.e .5 1:: ~ ~ I:r::: ~ ~ I:l.e .5 .. $: .~ ~ ::: ~ .... .... '::l .~ ~ ~ ..... .. ~ ~ e <n ::::> g ~ ffi 0 cE ~o <n-c ~.Q <n W -c 0. .!: a> =="5 c:: c:: ~ .E ==6 >-.M ~~ 't5~ (IJ 0 0').... ~ 5 (IJ.J::: L- L- O')a> -co. ffi ~ gE :.olO ~N (IJ-c ~ :B a> C,) "g~ ro ~ en u.; ~ en cU)5, <n (IJ a> ffi c:: o :.;::l C,) 2 en c:: o C,) - o en Q) -c .00 -c ffi 3: -c c .;: a> .s -ro <n ..><: (IJ ~ .0 -c c:: .;: . . -c c (IJ c; c '0 (IJ 0, c:: o 13 2 en c c (IJ 0 U)~ .J::: c:: "5ro o 0 L- U)fA~ 0.0 ~ ~ffic ou:8 enro ::::>- -C 0 ro a> .....C,) .E ffi .0 ::::> ::::> <n <n.!!? =ffi.9 .J::: L- <no~ w .~E g-~Q; (i)-o. >0.0') ~ e.!: Q)c;g ~8i5 ro$~O 7J5ro<n(i) cnC--'c:: $.~.~ g '00 ~ 0.. ~ grog~ 15'00 2 .9 en c:: o C,) c:: a> o E CO:.;::; > a> ro c:: ~o<(_ a>>-' .9 ffi .....: .8 t) co co :*'~ ~ ::J.~ 0 cnt:) 0 ro ro C,) ~ c co 0 ~ ~ 15 5 ...... 2 u ~~ = 0 . C,) ..5!20') .0 c:: "00 :.;::; <n ~ 8.~ ca> a> 9' xu; a> ::::> a>-C :503 0.J::: t-o ro c o "'C :.;::; g'O g.-g a> 0') .... c '0 .S; e 0. W .0 E ::::> c a> c o .J:::ffi ~C,) c:: 0 ro..c: a> 3: 0 E ro c:: a> .s .... <n ~~ c"S; :013 (; ro 80') -= e'~~ e c-sc 8 e 8 9-00 ~-6 -c .... C)~ .!: c -ca> c E ~.Q. <n ::::> ::::> c- <n a> . ..... c ~.Q -c-ro ro~ a> ro~ .2> g <n C,) en ~ .g.~ ..age: -C,).Q "'7 rot> ~c::2 "llO:t "- en :::a:<ne: :::a: 8. 8 e: o t3 ::::> L- en e: e: 0 ro C,) U)-c .se: ::::> ro 000 ~.~~ ~ffic ou:8 ro ...; ..... .E .E.8 w -g.....Q. In.Q 0') C5.. .S; roe:;g 7J5(IJ::::> .... 0...0 ~o~ Ol:>o IDea> ii) 8 g -Ca>ro a> In ::::> ~.g.~ ~ 00 o z 100Ur(j;Q) -.::. ~ ~:E fS ~5"Eo1i5 g.J:::2-5~ oa>ro::::> ~:E~CI)16 oOa5~mm g~~o~ ua>Q..<nc:: a> .0 C> 1U' 0 U)0~32't5 ai; co (5 2 -g~.9..c::1i) o .E ~ "g g ~~<{:~ :~ ~ g ~:=: 5roCri"gE ~7J5u)::::>~ .In .?;- 1U' U) (]J >-..- -c c:: .J::: :!:O,,><:o::'in Oa>a> .~c:: a>..c:a>~.oo .J::: ..... 3: .-C ...... .S: c a.. Q) ~ € :5 0 0 .~ E ==.- . C> 0.- .....==~cD.sa; m ~ Q.. .8 15.~ en .::: 0 . a> e: .00 1:5 ~ ~ .0 i c: g ro ~ <{ ~ .!: o .~ ..... c> E 15 :;:g~~l{l~ ~J::; ~CI)Q) o::~g-c5.s o...8ciOffi~o ~t5m .-. .~:5 os; e :.0 a. en ro-c(i) ~ ii) 0- 0. ~.~ o a> c:: .s -C a> ..c: .!!? :0 .s In a> In "E ro -c c:: ro en a> a> :51000 ..... .;: w.o ..d- c:C q:-C a> a> lB 0)= ro -c .0 -c a> o '"S a> ~ 0 ~ ro == a> c:: o u 2 en e: o o t) l'\I C. .E .!Q a> a> > oct+=: os; Q) >.. ~Ec (i)a>~~ > ,f; ::::> """ ..5!2~!aQ .~ ~ CD Q; oLOE:g C:~~C3 co1D........~ ~~>-. ::::>a>ta> -g~ ~g 5.:>..oro c o..~ roa>a>-Caj 7J5~.sro:o ............. c: 10 "00 moo~:g Ea>w::::>o. C-g~t) tI) "5 jg ~ 2 co O""CJ)'-"(;)c 2'00a>a> oro~.s[ ~ co .a OJ os .~ CO g -c c- o... "C J::; "00 Q) ->.U>"S<D ~1Dcoo:5 -ce:e:a>E .S; "c :c: -g 0 'g g>~ E -l= .0 '0 -c a> in z:B~.o~ -~5ro1D :'S..Q)..c::~~ . 8conog-g, .~ -g ~.~ 16 5 ffi ID .S; 0.. ~ :5 u: ~ .E e: o C,) .!!? c:: ro U) a>-C :5ffi~~ ..- ::::> ~~~ """"""".... """~32 g:~5 == c ro C,) <0::: 'c ..c C)~ .00 3: .sin 5:C U)I- -aj O-c o .?;- 0 a> ..... .- C,) e: ()ro~ffi~ a> o..~._ a> ,... '(3 -e: a.. L- ;J.c a> E.5 li'~ "8.8 ~ ...... a> C,) .0 ro 0. .~ In<n ;S -c '"S o C,) In (i) > ..5!2 Ua> en :;:::"'.~ ~.J.g In""" m~"5 E~.o e: o i3 S In e: c:: 0 ro C,) U)-c .J::: e: "5ro o 0 U)C,) o.~ ~~ Ou.. ro ...; ..... .E .E.B w ~,-c.. <n.Q 0') b.. .~ roe:;g 7J5ro::::> ,-15....0 ~o~ o ~ 0 'Q)CQ) ii) 8 g -Ca>ro a> <n ::::> ~'g .~ a> .s - o a> e: ro 0.. ~ a> 0. e 0. a> .s - o ~ai .00 -c ~s ;:~ .5 >-. 0..... o.~ ~.c ro-c .....a> ro a> _ C,) ~ ~ a> ..... -0 a> e: <n .0 ro e: .J::: a> In .=~ _'5" ~a. In a> e: .0 .Q roCi)' C,)Q.. <o:::~ .0 CO ~- en en en 1:5~(i) ~u~ cro 8 5..~ >-...... 0 .om~ ~~,g .5 0') U C"co2 ~ffiU) E g C,) a> C,) ::::> -c ~ .8 ro ~Ui a> .0 . c ro ,gg a.. :.;:J 0. C,) co 2 ~ (:)Ui(:) .~g ~ oC,)..... Q.C)5 a> c:: C,) .J:::.- >-. 1-15.0 _- -c !!,J2JB ..... e: . a> a> ""':.sE ..... a> :::a:-roo.. :::a:.s .~ <n a> t>.o .~-c es 0. 0 == 0') a> c:: .0 .~ ::2 -C::::> o 3: .... ::::> C,)-C C,) c:: o ro ~.$ ..... U ro '-~Eo~~ ~.- c:: 5 ~ ~m:2..c- 0'0 ::] g.:5 I e: ~ a> .- ;> en 3: c:: ~ ~ ~-g c C 2 ~ .~ $ ~ rn 8. g>'~ .ggEC,)g enu.s~u .... .8 C,) ~ c o C,) en ::::> E e: o ~6 gt5~ ~.E~-g ~- ~ ~ .~ .- ~ c:: (:)Q)=o 2:5 en 1:5 ~ ~2 2 o'oo"S;; U5 c.>o_C o~~8 - .- '+- Q) a5~ ~:5 Ea>w_ a><n~o C,)::::>>-.e: c:: ~;;.Q ~~5~ g g>.~ ~ i~i~ o 0>::::> ..9t:co .2 ~ '5 -5, 0....9 -5 e en ~ .~ :5 "><:-c -0') :B .S; "* .!: ;:e"Ct: oo.a>::::> 3:a>-58 t-.o In 0 . .e .!: ~~ .(3 -0 . c '"S :::l 0 ~3:~ Q.) (:) ~ :5 ~:t:: _.g.& o en Ci) m:c;Eas '0 0" cD :5 C t.O L.. CI) ~.g~ eN ~- o M a> -C t5cci.c~ ::::>c::t-a> ~ga5~ c::C,)-gc:: 8iJ5o 8 c::.$ o rn ~'x ~a> a> ~ro .s .8 0') c:: ~ 8 ro -c a> a:: ::::> E >-. -.::: a> 0.. e 0.. .!Q c a> E 0.. .5 c- a> c:: o U 2 en c:: 8 -ro .s ~ ::::> rn c:: UJ c:: o t5 2 <n c:: o C,) $ ro C,) .Q -c c:: ro c a> E .Q.. ::::> c- a> c:: o 1:5 2 en e: o C,) g> ~ L- a> c:: ~ cb In .0 e: a> C,) ro a::: In -c ffi -c e: ro en ~ <n ::::> -c .!: . ~ .... ~ "'0 c.. ~ = ~ Q:; lo. ~ .... '" ~ ~ '" .~ := 'C:; ~ ~ ~ .... ~ 1. o c.. lo. o U -- = o 'r;; = ~ c.. il'i ~ .... C.l 'i: .... '" Q >. ~ i: ~ ;.- o .... = ~ l3 c.. o QS ;.- ~ Q "'0 = ~ .:: C.l lo. ~ ~ '" ~ ~ .:: C.l ~ .... = ~ = ~ o . \C I o - liE ::: ~ ~ ~ .5 l:: ~ ~ 1:1::: "l:: ::: <::l ~ .5 ... .sa 'i:: ~ ::: ~ ... .... <::l .~ .1::: ~ ~ ..... ... ~ E} e ~ ..: o o co - o ~ ::J o .s::; 0> ~ ::5rn c ::J 0> 0> 0> > ~~ 0> c .00> rn- ~ ~ m ....... 0 =' os c: Q) U 0 >caa :.;:::; C)::J .~ "B.~ 0> ::J'O rn '0 0> EON g 9-:~ >. ffioS: ro .- E 3: g 0 ro _ rJ ~~ ~ .s::; a: ro.!!2o Cl.g<? .s: 0> l.C) Cl.s::;'O ~b3ffi . c o 13 .E rn c ffi 8 en'O .s::; c -sro 00..... en~~ 00(3 ~ ~ffic Gu:8 ro -' - OE oE.2 ffi -g.....o.. rnoQ Cl ro a.~ ~c::= rn ro ::J L...Q....c :!5..o2 .Q~o ~ 5 ~ .{g~ffi 0> rn ::J ~.g o~ >. ro E .s::; u :c 3: 0>" "* :0-"" 000 c ro ro ~~ em ~.g ~ 0 5~ .9 o~ rn ro ~.o ::J 0> rn rn roOo ~ c c::B 0'0 ~$ ~~ ~o 0> c rn 0> "0 ro c cE 0> E 0>- 0>'0 0...2 .s o~ g o~ ~ :g ~ ~~~cn>. uE>.rn.o t;::.s::;roc'O 0(3 1:: 16,g 0> 0> ro ro 3: O"O>.....uo> en '+- ~ ~ os; t5orn~~ ~croo..o> cO-c(J)..c o~.S3o uffir5~:g 1l g...Q "E rn 0> 0>8i3 0:: ~ .0 ~, :c ::J-'O~3: g.s::;"S:O .~ ~.~ .2i :g g>ffi..... 8.~~ rn..Q<(~i3ffi ~ro>.rnOo.. .2 en -g JB "'0 g> 0.. ffi..... U5 000 5 '0 a. Q):';:::;ctS roroO::~2C, <.) g>UJ U) ...... ro .~06>:2: ~ ~ '0 K-ffi~ en 8 ~ -ffio>c c: '0 :5 ~ j ~ oS: o~ cffi-g.s O>c'Oo E .Q -5 oc 15 .~ ~ .~ ~ ::5 g~ 15 G . 0> c .s::;o ~:.;:::; u -::J ..0..... :;:"1i5 . c oq-o ..,fU :::E :::E c o 13 2 en c c 0 ro u en'O .s::; c -sro 00..... en~~ '0'0 ~ ~~c c..>LL8 ro - - .E oE.2 ffi -g1....C1. rnoQ Cl a..~ roc;g -vsro::J 0...0 O>_ro .Q-go 0> c 0> iD 8 g 'Oo>ro ~05 iil f- c.!Q ~ ~~ co 03:......s::; 1UttSc'" ~-g8~ u- .s::; :!5..ea.i3: rn :02" -u 15 .~ c om...; ~ '0 0.. E OE "E"S.......:::J..... 8~~g:!5.. >.c:X"'Cc) .oo0>5c 0>.....13Q) ~ ._ :::J..c: 13 ~ ::J l::; - 2 0> g~.9cn~ .....00050 rouo>uo> .s::;g>~o>g .:.~ Q) :5 ~ ffi '0 1; o!:: o~ u '0 000 '0 '5..ffi~.{g.2 ~::Jcr::Jo 11 ~ g ~ .~ .., ::J :.;:::; .2:' oe- J:> E 15 G 0.. -g 'S; ro 0> ~~-g-vs::5 f-..Qrornll ~~ cb g ~ ......>rn'E3: ~ ffi .0 U 0> ..,f.s::; c t;:: os; ~ ~ ~ o~ ~ c o 13 2 en c c ro 0 en~ .s::; c "Sco..... o Ou 0 enrnt5 0'(3 ~ ~ffic Gu:8 Cl c :!2 0::; .0 ro - o 0> U c ro ::J rn .!Q .2- o .E lt~ cnCJ.)c:S o>::5o>uc ~ ffi ~g~ 13 .c 'S 32 .$ ro]?o-::Jo> ~3:O>o.o ~, 0> 3: '0 .s: 0> ~ U 0> 53 .S: -- Q) 0> E '00 ~ c Uffi~Ec _ rno- 0 -g.{gcgU ::J OoQ ro e;:.~m~ ~~~;1:: O::J o>.;:! _ rn UoS: 0 ~5~E~ EUEO>c ~2~~~ ~ ~ g 0!Q o~ E03:-.o ~~~~ro uc..:.;:;~ii.i 0> ro:2: c rn :5t5t5:2~ ::J roo::; os; .9-g~..ct5 ..... 0 u c ro o u .~ 0> c oc = 0 u 0 c... ~ c...~u -cnc:16::J !!.....r:: 0 .b ~ ~ 13 .E: ~ 'V-:::J-CO -.:i-a3l::;Q)u :::E~~r3~ :::E(98..Q::5 c o 13 2 en c c ro 0 en~ .s::; c -sro 000 en~t5 0"0 ~ ~ffic Gu:8 Cl c :!2 .::; .0 ro - o ~ c ro ::J rn 0!Q .2 o oc n. - OE ffi 0.. ~ro ~15 :+:::i..c: :.;:::; 000 rn os; ~"EU rn ro ro co5:2 c o~,g ~cog ..c't)'::' os; 0> ~ 1O'~ 8 ::50.. o>ro :5= (5 c '0 "S o 3: "E ro 0> 05:2 .0 0..0 0.. - ro_ ro ~~ .~.S3 e 0 0.. 0.. ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ ~ ~ m ~ e ~ 00' 0 w rn E ..... ::J N 0.. ;""u2: a. ~ ~ - ffi 0.. <( ~ ..J: oS :!5.. ~ ~ -€; 0::; 0> oq- ro -g 0> 0> 0> ro g >. E :2: 0!Q 5:g:g0~>' 25:2:::5 U g-~-:c ~ ~en= ~ 2o..Q)JBc ~ ~ -5 en Q) 0 'Ci) 0 ~ c 0:: ~ -c e:! c; 5.c:$ ~:+::i ~w ffi-c co c..> - ro tI:: 15 os; :2: - "S .g _ ::5 ffi 0 os; U c 0 !ii2 o~ ~ 0- c ro 0 5 ::>~, ~ 3: :g, ~ ~ c ~ 0> 'E ro_rnllo~ ...;.-co.aOO..o~cNTI~ .... "* c goO U os; 0> ..J- $ _ U '0 '- -0 2 E. c en ca 0 32 en 5 en 13 .!: Q) ~ co ~ _o..E ~ g e 5 ~ ::5 o..E :2: ~ - ro 3: 0 Cl u ro .3: _ :2: (9 .2 c ro en .s::; -S o 0 en~ 00(3 ~ffi Gu: c o co ~ -.,J .2 oE 0>::5 0.. ~~0~2 ro >.oQ oE ~ -g "5 Co Q;eno~ 0.. ro Cl_ o u c 0 ~~Ci;ro couco~ '0 $ oS: E 0> 0 Cl.o ~ :g,Ji iil r.n ...;j o rF.J. Q Z -< ;;.. ~ o ...;j o f;;;l e,:l $os15-g5~ W c u ro i'5' a:: 1U' OE g E c..>roE2roc O>~ 0>.s::;0 ::5 <( g> '0 rn ~ oC;~-g ~5 ~::: ~ ro ffi ~ co 0 J=; co g.s -O-.,J ::cuco 3 ~ "S 000 g LL oUJroro 0> .oo>LL~ffita ~::5 0> E ~ co,+-<BCi;::1.c: oS: ,g ~ .s::; -= 1:: oS ..- 06> 3: .E .fl ~e:!a5~~en 0- .2> ro ~ ::1 ~ O>LLU t50> ~ c "2 C 2 ~ coi3~enc ;s-oJB O-O~ 03: ~ g ~ z .l!3 _ 00. Cl iD a5 "S a5~co"O~~ ~ ~ 1l ~ 06> ~ o a5 u ID ro- '0 ~ 0> ro >~~'O::5'O c3 ro 0> .s: '0 os; 0> -='m ~ c~; .:::.. N 0 ~o ~~~@mLO ..,f :5 ro 0::; ~ :E lfd:-vs ~~~ ~ffi~g>~cr. --- 0 co :.;::; co .~ '+- O-~"S =:J~ O~$~g~ -08......1ij~ rn 0> c c.913c5 'Orn~3:a "S~o>o O::J 12 .5:2 3:t50> E U .E [5 co 'as o>rn.;:::ocn "0" '- - a...!2 ro 0> a: -g-ro.35 -c co :+::i a.. J=; co c 2 en ~~.!9 g- g- .2 ..... 0> ::J 0.. 0.. rn c o 16 "E 0> E 0> 0.. .s ...... .n ..,f .... u ns Q. .5 E:g ~~ r-- I = .... ~ ..... ~ 'e c.. ~ = ~ i5::: I. ~ ..... V> ~ :; V> .~ :=; ';3 ~ r.. ~ ..... ~ I. o c.. I. o U -- = .~ V> = ~ c.. ~ >;o;l ..... ~ 'C ..... V> Q ~ ~ i: ~ > o ..... = ~ e c.. o 11 > ~ Q 'e = ~ .c ~ I. ~ ~ V> ~ ~ .c ~ ~ ..... = ~ = ~ I-' <Li g>~~ ~ .-= .- c: 0 ~ -;g~s:c:: ~ ~ ::com C::"--E ~ s-~ Q) ~ J, ..... __..q:"'C ~0:::"S '0' CL ~ o a...c: _O">u o ::> res c:: e 0.......; o.<::Et:: ~:.;:::; ...... .- ctJ 12cJ9mQ)~ ~ ,g a3 ~.s '1:: .~ ~ E .0 Q)..... .!;2> E-Q) .~II) enQ)-"<t~t:: "- ::> c..E 0::: ~ res 3lg_CLQ):E; is ~ ~ Q.; bI:J .S 'l:: ~ & c:r::: ~ ::: l::l bI:J .S ... .;: '=: ~ ::: ~ ... - l::l .~ .1::l ~ ~ ..... ~ ~ G -0 c:: res <Li o c: (.) ,g.g <(res::> 0"> en g>~ (],) "c Q) :5 ~.~ .~ ~ro~ rou-g LL 'c ::> Q)13=S ta.ga~ g.~m ..r::. 0>:5 1:: res- res 0 ll.Ienen o~~ ocu (t::>ffi ....!,.. -., '- .~ t) .c g.<( ~ <( 0"> = Q)'!: ~ .<:: c.. 0 - c.. c:: ~m en.s "E~ 'E ffi CD -0 1:: o c.. ~ c:: res (/) .<:: "5 o 0 (/)~ 0'13 .?:-ffi .- ..... ULL c:: o ro 15 ...... .2 'E Q) -E a.. ~~'~2 cu >..Q'E :~~ ~ g- ~ g>'O Q) "2 "C - >.<::Q)res Q)oQ)~ -0 2 .!: E Q) 0 0">.0 '<::Q)C::::> I- O">ll.I en ~roQ;~~O ~~-go=o c:: ::>aio13 .!: -g ~ g- T6 .m "5 g, rti c;; c...s u 'r.;; en Q) '0 ~ .....~o:5m c:r ~Q)o'O~~ "w .0 13 c.. E res ~.s~ffi 1::'"' ~ Q) Q) (J) ..... .~ en Iii :5 ~ S ..c:: co" a. 15 "S ~ .E: "C e"'O g ...x:: .ga c.. ~ '- ~ CDresfJ"resQ).<:: .1Q E c::a..g-u LO<<=res~en~ c:: Q) Q)- ID g>~.s:5~ :5 "0 .c .~ '0 (J) .....~~-cQ)ga3 fJ a. 0 ~ .9 :.;:::; .~ ~~~cu~~O"> O>-c-g 6::::~a3 ~jBro:eroC:m g- ~ ffi:g ~ 8 .~ cnumroro"O-E s: .~ ~ - 3l ~ Q)oc::cn~8..o z ~- Q) .!: ~ 0 Q) eg~-greso.~ -.r- '- "2 .Q g> ~ >. ab 0 13 .~ :.c ........ ~ '<ien2EC::Q)- tt:: = ~ 'a5 ~ ~ '* 0. ~ 0"> en Q) en en c:: o U 2 en c:: ffi 8 (/)-0 .sc:: ::> res 00..... (/)~~ o "13 ~ ~~c .- ..... 0 ULLU c:: o ca 15 ....... .2 "E Q) -E a.. ~~'~2 cu >..Q 'E ~~~ ~ g- ~ 0">_ CD "c 'E ~ a; "5 aU~ -0 2 .!: E Q) 0 0">.0 '<::Q)C::::> I- O">ll.I en c::en>'E o 2i.o 0 t5ott::J:: 2engll=<Li enc::~2ga.. ::> 0 8 o o 0::: en 0> "'5 u; Q) .~ (.) c: c: :5 5'O,g~E -OQ).EEO -g ~:9- Q) -;, ~~~:5~ c..enc..Ores ~ ~ .9 ~-g uJ- '-13 Q)cnQ)o~ .0 "!: .g 2i '5 CU.<:: OQ) .<:: g>5en.o en 0 ._ Q) _ ~en~.sjg c..o~ffic::en u 0 Q) en'EEffig- ~~~~Ci5 oQ)'O-o u~ Q)Q)- ~-g13~'O ,!::02resen ::J=f:eQ5i ~~ c..~c.. ..s:::::'=Q)>'- ~~.ores~ U ...... 0 g>o :;; ~ rn '0 0 I.O::>CU::> '<i-g -o-g tt::.....cue> D...s~E~ c:: o n 2 en c:: c:: res 0 (/).;; ~~ 00..... ~.~ ~ o u ~ ~ffic: oiL8 c:: o co 15 ...... .5:2 'E Q) .s a.. ~~'~2 cu >..Q'E 5 .c: -g .~ CD 13 : en Ci c..co 2 - en g- ~ g>'O c:: ~ ~ '~]j 8 Q) (.) Q):=: .9 -0 2 .!: E ..... Q) 0 0">.0 0 ~ ~JJ ~ (t a. Q) ~ Q) .0 :2 ::> o .<:: en 0"> c:: '5 co 0, -0 c:: co --Q) 00::0 en E Ow en Q) en Q) E 0 ~c..c.. Q)..Q"E .!: ~ ~ ~Q) en ~Q) com 1i)~ 0"> Q) .s Q) s: .o..Q cuJ2 ~-o "S Q) 0 ~~ 0"> en -Q) c::=: Q) en ~ Q) Q) -0 c.. 'r.;; 0;;: (V) .<:: en co ~ co Q) -0 ~~ :2.3 c..~.9 ~ .!:::: U5~ ~.s: :b~ '<iC:: tt:::E 0. ~ c:: res (/) .s ::> o 0 (/)~ o '13 .?:-ffi .- ..... ULL en r- en 5 J, 5 15-..i15 .2' ~ .2' ~.Q> i > LL > .!: c:: .!: 0.<:: c:: u s: ::> o en ~~ '5 0" ~ CU u 'c .<:: u 2 o Q)<;::: 0">_ ..... 0 J2~ -o~ ~ co c.s: Q) -E CU .<:: en -0 c:: co 83.-::. Cf)~1"'---- en en...... Q) c ~ ~ 0 ::> co en 0"> 'r.;; u: co .oc f!? ::> -@~ 8.!; 0"> .!: .!: E :mro ~.9 CU .<:: enu~ >.Q)CL (3 'e- co Q) c.. ~ .<:: >'<(-0 1--9~Q) -00""0 cuQ)......Q) N.<=>....... Q) .;, c.. 0 c: ~co1i)~ tt::c::Jl.<:: o.o_s: --g~~2f .e- .a ~ 53 c..u--o 2 ~.w ""00000..0 3lo~~ o en g-~-g o.g-~ Q) 2i2 .<:: Q)'r.;; I-entt!: (")8..0 .;,~o ~o~ ... c'({i ~:2 C::o Q.::> .E~.9 c:: o 13 ::> ~ c:: ffi 8 (/)-0 .<:: c:: -SCO'- 08.9 (/)wu o '13 ~ ~ffic oiL8 ~ ..... ell ~ c.. ~ = ell s::: l. ~ ..... '" ell ::.E c:: o 13 2 en c:: o u 0"> c:: 'C ::> -0 -0 c:: co .9 .2 a: '" .~ := '(3 ell r.. ~ ..... ell l. o c.. l. o U ....... = o 'r;; = ell c.. ~ ro.l ..... (j .~ ..... '" is .... ell i: ~ ... o 13 Q) '0' 0. ~ ::> 13 2 en cng -om Q) -0 en c:: o ::> c..o 0- c..2 .!:!1 res 0. o IDo.. -0 c.. c:: co ::>13 en ::> 'ffi~ E 8 ~"O c:: <<=~ 0"> ~"(j) Q) Q) .<:: "0 3:cu .<:: - en ..een Nc ~~ .., = tt::c.. 0.fJ" ..... = ~ E c.. o ~ ... ~ Q ~ = ell -= (j l. ell ~ '" ~ ~ -= (j ~ ..... = ~ = ~ ~ aj~~S::: en c:: ::> Cll Q.Q)OO:S ~Ea3 "8"~ -0 II) g."S II) ~~~ o::ci"oo Q)-c:: o 'eN "(8 c...o E o-.:i~ 5-g -15~~ ~C:......caa........: g>,g a3 NEt:: .- u E ' .- ~ -g.mQ)Lr.! <.:: ~ ~ a.. "<t en '1:: g. g ~ g: ~ .~ -0 c:: ::> o 0, QO I C .... ~ ~ ct i:.() .5 1:: <:::. & ~ ~ ~ i:.() .5 .. .s ... ::: ~ ::: .~ .... ~ .~ .1::: ~ ~ ..... .. ~ ~ e c:: o 13 2 en c:: c:: ro 0 U)~ .c c:: "5ro 00::; U)~13 '0"13 ~ .2:'ffi"E .- ~ 0 UU.u .9 ro c:: ro -ro- "E c.. ~ -gEt.) en Q) c:: E ~ roQ)en ~ g>_!!? c.9-.i Oa..Q; roE ::; .~ .C Q) CD "0 a.. a.. a; fij~g> "0 -€;' <..) 32 ~~~E irf~l~~:ilf!I~!~~i :~II~~~I;~B:l~:~~~ ~.~~~~~~.~~ac~~~u~~~~ ~~_b~m~ ~m~o c ~c~ ~"O ~Sc::g~~Ecgg-g_o~ '-ID~~~.Q~~'~c~~~~n~~.9 ~~~~~i~~S~;~~8~en~ oou2~enE-g~~~~~i~E; _.u__g~Q;g~~uQ) Q)Q)ro "O~~o~ o :.;:::; c .... U co \f- .J:: 0)- .. ___;: .. Q) _ $ro2~~~rouo_~c5"Oc~D3: ~~(j)Q)_o.~_~~c~.~_~~~~en~c:: E - ~a..Q)ro ~>o-c:: 0 c:: -~roE w>~roo g~8'a..~uQ)~ro.J::Q)~~_~~~~n~n c.....s::-C>co:j "-"'O-::J 2 ~~~K~~g'~~~8$~~S~-~~~ gmri~~-en~~c::en~~~~gc::~g .9~~Q)8~~E"O~~ggjg~~::;~ "'O"'O:~SQ).~~8~~~ ~c .J::2 c 2"O~~~_oomoE~"08~~en~8 ~~~~~ffi~~C::c::croffi'O rog~~ ~ - ~ .c <>=.u_ ~ Q) =c 0 "Q a.. ~ 2 u a.. 0 Q)g~'~wc'-E~~~~g~~~c..~ "'0 O~CD_m E.cQ)~~enSE~.cQ)~ 15 u C) -- c,- '- 0 CD > 0 Q) :.= -c .... S N c~b.~Q)~S~~~Eroc..- '-~ co ~ ~"OEroQ)ena..a..Q)u~u~Q~Q).c ~_Q)enQ)"O OQ)~X"O~-"Oenen.c ~ cEoowo~"'O~S Q),-Q~ccQ)o~ ~Q;roE~a..ffiffi "O~ oen~ro ~: ~~I~roQ)en~~~~Q)ffi:B~~~~~;~ ~~>ro ~~ro~riC::"OEroC::E~c::~ ~::J~~~ssc..::J~~Sro~_ororo=~ ~exiC::o'EroEro~~Q)~:_~_~= _~CD3en ~mQ)> a..ro"O~ roc:: "O>ro 00 ...;l ;:$ g:: r..:l E-o ~ 00 ;;;J o ~ < N ~ Q Z < 00 ~ ~ ~ ro155015 ~ 13 ~ ~ 2'0 u~~U> o ~8"O c::~~~ ro c:: '0 13.E Q)S ~ c:: ~~%8 ..... "O'.C E cb a.. Q).9 ~-ccTI Q) ro Q) ~~"E~ a.. -- Q) ~ 05,530 5.. "CiS (!) 3: Q) S - o c:: o 16 c Q)32 E ~ ~~ ~ - U n:I a.. E 32 c:: ~ Ct:l o:S 3: c:: ~ o~..9:'! f9~(I) c:: """ c:: ~~.ffi ~~15 a.. ~ ~ ~t) ~ ro ~a.. li5 ~.~ ror::;S~ 3: 0 Ct:l -g~~~ 5 g> ~"c c,"E ~ .~ c:: o 13 2 en c c:: ro 0 U)~ =5ffi o 0 '- ~.~ -8 o u ~ ~ffic Gu:8 mO ca~ca --~o .E c.. Q) ~cg en ~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~~.9-' ~ ro ~ .~ o E.g Q) CD "0 a.. a.. a; ffi ~ ~ "0 -€;' <..) 32 ~~~E a) > o ,g n:I .... cb ~ ::a: ::a: Q) Q) U) Q) .!:: 2 "0 :5 ....... "en ffi _:5 oenrori ~ co '53 ~ro E2 en ro ~ Q) o l3 "E roo ti'l c:: .c "0 m:5 c:: 0 .c 3: .ffi E~ 8:5 c:: c:: 000 16c: c en Q)32~ E5= ~3:~ ~ - u_ .~o <De cb c... c: ~ 0 ~t5 tscn2 ~ 8. en Ee8c:: _ a.. c ro u <0= .c m .CiS .....; ~ en 55 ~.ffi E""" E c:: ~ ~ J~ ~ E: ~ Q) ~ en ro Q) en ~;s ::; .~ :0 ::so1O 0.16 :5 ~~~ -E~ ..9 0> c: c:: Q) ~.~ :Q ti'l '5 5 .cu.3: 0\ I Q - Q,l - ~ '0 c.. ;;;l c ~ ~ 100 Q,l - '" ~ ~ '" .~ ::5 'ZZ ~ r.. Q,l - ~ 100 o c.. 100 o U -- c .5: '" c ~ c.. ~ ~ - CJ 'C - '" S ""' ~ "i: Q,l ;;. o 1:5 ro c.. .s - c Q,l e c.. o 'Z ~ Q '0 C ~ .J:: CJ 100 ~ Q,l '" Q,l ~ .J:: CJ Q,l - c Q,l c Q,l ~ 1:: Ct:l (.) li:: "c .~ c:: Ct:l :S ~ ~ =: l: ~ ct ~ .... t: c::l & ~ ~ ~ ~ .5 ... ~ .... == ~ == c::l -,;:: '=::l ~ ~ ~ ..... ~ :;. e C ro (/) = "5 c538 ~.~ o <.> ~ffi UW: ro>.O"> ~5~ ~S =,:5..0 (/).8~ mco =ro<l> ~Cig 0.. c: ro o ::l O:;El:l > <1>'- 0">.8 -oro~ ffi,Q ~E5.. ro ~ ~~ ~ .{g c: CtS ~ _~ -; "::; "co <( ...... -- .: e ~.,;li3$5-o.. E >. - ,!!1 ~ ~ro5..(/)m ;:> 0<1>= ~ ~ ~ o.:E en (/) 0 'S: 0.. > = c~emt5~ co~ a.~ ~c .5:2 en - ~o ~ Q) Ci<l>ro _c ~-5 ~ s- C,) Q) 02<.9 "t"::c..c -en CiSO~-~ .~ en ....... ~ 0 e Co ffi 0 <.> o..~c:(J)""", <.>Q3-: =~<.9g;~ -- '5 <Ii ro .Q ~..c:::c~t5 :9 (5 ~ aj-.~ ~ .0 '00 ,...: -0 J!?~ > - ..c: Q)ro~15 ~ ~ '~ '~ ~ ro <1>-0 c <'>0:;- ~~~~~o o ~ "C>.2>i ~ I- .0 .5 (/) 0 (/) o (/) _= 0 Cii"5romrou ~<l>>'6,.9 "! 5 c 'en (/) oq-_o<.>e :::i:~~~C: :E..92+:i.b8 Q).!::: >- ,s ~ 'ffi -.~ ,~ o >. = 00.. c c ,Q ro "E32 ::l li3 ~ Ci .s ~-o o a. o .,..:-0 o ro U en .~5 ch a. +:i = -.:i ro ';: ~]5<1> U (/) E '- nlO<l>~ a, o..Ci EeEc: _ 0..,_ ,_ -' 'E Q3 0.. >. c <.> 0 C+:; ro ~o E ~ (/) c '00 -oE .......c:~ ~orou ffi c~~ e>.Q N E Q.) co to, .- cEc:oq-(/) ro<l> ;S E::2: 0<1>::2: Ci .s ~gl c - ::l E e 0"><1> > (/).- ro >.c ro ~ 3:~ -0 ro roO"> e c 15 <.> '5 ,5 0"> ro c 0"> 'en ro .~ e 0.. 0.. ro (j) Ci E o <.> (/) c o . o..c (/) ro <1>- ~ 0.. c ro (/) = "5 c538 ....... .~ o <.> ~ffi OU::: ro>.O"> ~(3:5 ~S ::l=.o (f)B~ mcO =ro<l> ~Cig IDEm 8-::l O:;El:l > <1>'- Q)0>0_ -c ~ :: .~ ~ ro,Q I-E5..o.. C --0-0 ~~ffiffi 3: ~ ~ (/) en 0._ ~ <l>UD ::l 13 >.a... (/) ~~8.g > -0 ,!!l >. >.ro<'>ro <.> e ffi 3: ffi ~o U:::-O 0"> ro Q3 ~ ffi e li3~(/) 0 ~ ~~ J2~offi (/)o(/)- (/)o..~ ~ li3,s ~ --..co m .5 :!: c... $:::::E ro::J"'5~ ::l (/) (/) t:Tc<l> ~s-o~ ro32 <.>- ::l ro ~ ~~='5.,; ::l en ~~c.9~ ~ .~ g ~ i I- 5.. ~ ~~ -crot_ eo-co ~:g~g-~ f.C! 2'eo~ 0lII:;t1J)Q. E :::i:c<l>~$ :::i:8,sU:m 5el:l 16'"':'1~ 0"> co :e~ E ~ ::l en en ~ ffi ~-o lE:5 E ~ -E ro <.> <<= 'c 0"> 'en c ro ,s o ~ 'u @ ~ a <Zl ..c: :; o <Zl '- o .c- o :g ..... ...:. -.:i :::i: :::i: ~ ~ _ en .E~~ ~ .2 2i c 5..0"><1> <1>,5 ffi ~32<.9c c; E ~g ~ro+:i..s comE en ~ ';: 5 ro c <.> UJroi3<1> it;' ~ :c Co a... ,!!l 3: 175 en ~c Q)g> ~ en ro~_ 'E~.o32 ~~ 5 ~ O">~ o..co}gE ~,sm :s .5 :5 ::J ~ g en -c ..c_~ t:Ten -= :+-E- .0 0">= <.> -;;: N en - ~ ~UJC:~oQ)oco> OQ)-~ c ~_c-o- ~,>~:!:: ~ 0:>""" E c...,f:;, ....., - - ...... 8 ;E:' 0 C a; c >. 0.. ~ ro ';a 0"> ~ o~cc~roroo=::lEc ~~ffi~'O ~~~~en ~ ~~~ 175~ ~ ~(j) o..ffi ro ~~~..5 .: c: .~ ~ ~ ~ a: a ..c .2 8 ~ 12 ~ 'E .E ~ ~ ~ Q3 -.; 15 ci 3: B ->..$ 0 '~ ~ 5.. en -0 'E 8- g ~ 'E ~ .{g '~ ~ g g. ~ ~ ~ 5......... '0 ~ e ..... ...:. -.:i :::i: :::i: z o - Eo-< < ..:l ~ U ~ - u ~ z < z o - Eo-< < Eo-< ~ o ~ trJ. Z ~ ~ c; ...- - o en ro ~ 0.. E ro q: c o 00 oj ::~ o ...- en ;;2 "E ro -0 > c ~ 5 =>.0 o ii5 00 3: c: '0 m a... c o = '5 -0 ro c ro $ ro o Q3 en >. o :g ..... ...:. -.:i :::i: :::i: E ~ :E 0"> ';:: 0 :5::;~ 0"> ffi'E.{g 0 .- :;" <.> > -a5<1>e .0 0:: a, Q)~.s c..::lro-o E ffi a'; ro ro~:5> 0:: ....... 0 C: <l>OOS o 5-c: S 00 ..5 '0 Z ::la... ...-0 o ...- -0 c ::l o .0 = t o c 5 ::i ;:: E,g ~roro ~o:: > 'en ::l ~ o ~;;:en(j) ~~::j:_~ ~ w ~ ~ Q) -- :5 _'~ ~ C<l> = .!2ro.9 g> = ,5 = ~ e ~~ ~~,s ,s di5..~-g co..~5 'c ro ;:> .0 .{g 'c: ~ ';: ~ 'E 0 en ~ ~ 5<((/):5 CD 'O~~E ~ g~.g 0.. .0 en en6i:3E <{ :c:.o3 .,;-0;::;;: ~ 5-~ ~2c-o r:::.c~5 ....."Suo ..a 0 a>.,C (/)f!?..c ~Q)~"5 'c',s ,5 g -0 E c; ffi .03...- 0> c 'E = m c 0"> 'en en ::l :0- <{ . a>LL.-c ,s (/) '0 _0 a... O...J c .5 0- 15~ ~~ E~ ~o 0..3: .suro ~.~ -.:i 0.. en _~5 U~E ~ 0.. -0 _E e 5 0.. <.> o :::l =c ro > :5 o 00 c: '0 a... ~ $ en >. o c: '0 ~a.. en '-.~ 0'$ en (/) ::l -g 0'13 ro ~ c: .s c:: ,Q = ro c: t) U en- o ro Q) ~ e c:: ~ JB 8:~ .S; CO E ~ ::i -g .a ~~5;;: -oo::.o~ -g €~ c; O.C:;; ffi~ C::::s en<l>~ :g:::l,s<l> <{ . e ..... ...:. -.:i :::i: :::i: . 0.....: ~ 5 0::= c16 0<1> 0.. ~~ o..c eno~ro &a...q:ro o ~ c 5..,*0 <1>>' ,sooo _Z o,s ~ -00 ~Z o ::;;: 0.: C;=B ~ e>>:+::i ,5.E uj:Siji ::j-oE c ~.Q a. ~ ~.~ ~~ 5$ 00 ,5 ufo ~...- ::l en lEen E~ c"E o ro 1iia; ~~g <{Eoo ~en ro=-o <1>.... c 0.._ 0 ::;;: ro ~ <l>o.:~en ro roo Q;~Q)co 8--;'~~ .2 -g ~ :+::i ::sot:: x en -0 -0 - 0.. :5 ~ ,!!l ~ ~~,s 0 ~ 0"> 3: c.occ o ro .;:: 0 t5 0.. 8 13 ~ ~ U ....: f!? JBro::SQ) .~ 5 E ]; ro .~- u.. en(/) - >'0 ~~...J ~roc o x '00 -oi:i:E :5~~ 00:: 3: I- c ro o ~ 15m -g ~:::l $ .5 u..: (/) ,sO ...J -0 en ~ffi;S r-:.. -g g>:{l ,!!l ffi ::;;: ~ co"Ci) 10 :5 a.: ~a:::J~ mO) C:Oi3~5gQ):5 ~~::s~~~~ JB ~ -c ~ g{'~ ,5 ~ - 'E 0 -0 en ~ ;Sc::~ _,Q.:t= o~g g.~ :e =>.Eecc .~ ~ -0 i3 ~ 0 ~roQ)~Q)t5 E ~(/) "-roo. ~ ~OO<l>ro<l> co C"I c..:5 :5 :'5 c 3: -0 0 :5= o en 3:~ c o t5 en Q3 E UJ :5~U) ';: 0 ';: ...J :0 ro ~ 0.5 ~= <.>~ ro ro c ::lo.. ~ ... ~ 'e c.. :;;J = ~ ~ lo.. ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ .S:! == 'Cj ~ r.. ~ ... ~ lo.. o c.. lo.. o U ...... = .9 ~ = ~ c.. ;.< ~ ... Col 'i: ... ~ Q .... = "'i: ~ ;;- o ... = ~ 8 c.. o -a:; ;;- ~ Q 'e = = .::: Col lo.. = ~ ~ ~ ~ .::: Col ~ ... = ~ = ~ o o - I o - is ~ ~ ~ .S 'l::: '=> ~ l:'( ~ :: l:l ~ .S ... .s .... :: ~ :: '=> .... .... l:l .~ .1:: ~ ~ ...... ~ ~ e IDe g> Q) 18 > (I) 15 .- ~ ~ ..... 16E ;g (1)(1)_0 5- i g'"S 0.<.0 ro ::> Ci:i :5 ro ~ c:: .- E 0 C> ~ ..0 (I)::> ~ E .2> ~ 13 ~ ~ (/) ~ ~ g]l .~ ~w::o~.s~eQ)~~~~ o >- 0 0 "'" ~ E 0.0.:5 ..... ~ ~, ~ u~ (1)0 ~ ro >-~ c:: ro~ E~ c:~' '-'uoc::::>rowo.r=::> -~ >- c:: 0 _ ~ a... .r= (/) E a. '0 10..01000::> .u~2::>..Q= .r="O::>"':~o.ffiro(/)rou~E ~ ~ .~ J5 ~ "9- a:: ~ ~ 5 8 (I) ..... .- .- -- >....... L.... J:2 .- 0 -0 ..!5! __roEE~(I)..... ~t "'":;' ..... e 2 (I) .E-- 0 c:5 "'" u ->- 2 5 .~ ~ 0.0. ~ ~ 0.0 C> ~ :e ro Q) "i::: Q) CT ..v..'" Ci; '- 0_ "+- ct:S a... "0 a. a. (/) 10:2 E a. a....... 0 a. ~ 10 > (I) "S o co >- 10 ;;;: 2 10 Q "'E! 10 > (I) "S o co C .0 a... ~ en >- o N r:.. -.i :i: :i: -ci Ci:i > (I) "S o CO C '0 a... ~ en >- o "0 c:: ::> o :8 (/) (I) ;;;: c:: o (I) c: ~ .r= 0) ::> e :5 ro c:: o ~ :c "0 10 c:: 10 2 10 (I) o . Q)Wc~'--"": :5 Cf) .0 ~ 5 5 _oa...(I).r=.r= O-l "S~~ C::.!:: 0 ~ ~ .Q '3 ~ CO a. a. ro(/)en :2!:2! ~~~ <co..: E~o (I)(I)o~ J!2o ~:5a a.;;;: >-O)O)=~- E _ - ~ .!:: .!:: .rg ::> -~roJB::;:Sa3~C:: N .0' 10 "0 "0 E (I) .0 r:..a QC::LL(I)Ea... -.i"O~"'E!oCf)c..c:: (I) 0 10 15 0 .~ ,g ~~:eS:;~--l 10(1) 0.0.'"0-::; L.... 0)- E e 5 o"*-g~:e ~5 _ a. u CO ._ 10 <{ E 0 CO ~~ 1U'~~ (/)-;;;:..:u O_a> :::J o.roro(l)"O e_<9:5~ c..~=a ~ ~Ci:i - -- > ~ ::> o CO "'00:5 ~ 1:: .;: o u g.~ro .....Cf)oe 0.(1)- oe (/) - (I) O)ro .~~ ::> 5 c:: ~ !\3 ~~-o (I) ~ g !i5Ero ~ 0)(1) c::..o .~ :g "0 ::> o ;;;: c:: o t5~ (I) 5 ~.r= 2~ E~ a. C::Cf) 00 U....J (I) (I) ~:o 210 .= c.. (I) u U 10 (/) ;S roc:: c:: 10 .2.s ~"C (I) (I) o.u o ::> _ "0 5 ~- 5 ~ ~ca16Q) g>~ g>~ ~ g .E ~ ci o i;l "u ~ ~ g en ..c ;:; o en '- o o U ..... :e .......' _en E.E -f5 ..... (I) o 2i c .ts.. 0) ~ (I),g ~ . JE= c: C; E ~,g ~ro+:i..5 comE en ~.;: 5 10 c:: U UJro-f5(1) 1U'~:C Ci:i a....!a ;;;: ~ (I) c:: o "0 c:: 10 (/) (I) c:: ~ c:: ::; ~ ~g; O.E .!=: (I) 10 (1):25, > e ~ ~ a. ~ .s:g (1)"0 > c:: 8~ c:: "S~ (9"0 (I) -gro ::>.r= B.:f .r=.r= t.2l ~~ 0) c:: ::> ~e s::5 ;...:.. ...... C> ...... - o - (/) 10 !:!::!- "S Q "'E! 10 > ~ ::> o CO c:: o ~ u t;::: '0 o E ro c:: 0) .in 0) c:: ~ .x UJ c .0 a... ..... (I) en >- o M r:.. -.i :i: :i: . . ~ W E g> g'o :s C: og~~~2~~ c: .= a LL ~ ~ ~ o .....:.r5Cf)Q)(J) 16~2(1)OE~ro c~(/)~--l(l)E (I):20'2"O~c::E E::> .!:: ffi -.Q ~o (I) -1:5 a. ;;;: .=== ~ ~ ~ 10 E1:5roo~~:e~ M.!!2. - E.- r:..e ~~~"O(/) . a. '-' (I) (I) (I) .- "'=1"-0 cn=e a.a.~:5 '0 ~o~ ~:2!:2! g-(I) l\'l o."O~ <{ 0.: ag Eo.e55 (I) (1)(1)"0 _ o.uco:5:5:5 ~ .... .... I o .... ~ .... ~ 'C c.. ;J = ~ i5::: I- ~ .... '" ~ ~ '" .~ :5 'Cj ~ r.o. ~ .... ~ l- e c.. l- e U -- = e 'r;; = ~ c.. ~ roil .... ~ 'i: .... '" is .... ~ "i: ~ ~ 0 .... = ~ 8 c.. e QS ~ ~ Q 'C = ~ ..c ~ I- ~ QJ <i3 '" ~ > ~ ~ ..c c ~ 10 ~ U .... t;::: = .c ~ 0) = .in QJ \.:) =: i:! ~ ~ ~ .S 1: ~ & Cl::: "l::l ::: c:: ~ .S .. ~ .1::: ::: ~ ::: ~ '.::: c:: .~ .... ~ ~ .... .. ~ ~ e c:: ro en :5 ;::, o 0 en~ 0'(3 ~ffi .- '- Ou.. c: ~ ~l~~~~ Q) 0)- c: CD >. c:: E ro > a:: E .5 E Q) C> ~.Q ffi i5- ~ '- ~;:g ;::, K ~ 2 g ~ I/) 0.2 eB~.2.8Q).l=C::~~~ EO. '5 0 Q) ~ c. ~ '6 = 53 :2 oa;~Eo'5~ECD ;;: ~ o~" ;::, 8 ~ :: E a. 8 ~c::g'5~ 00;::,.2"1 0> ~ ~~ ~ 5. c::: c:: Q) U Q) 0 .ii) ~ '- Q) " ~ 0 U 0 a; ~ <D .- J2 J!2 Q.) a... :os ffi g "0 C ~.8~Q)i5ffi..o::> ~;:ro "0, 0 "E Co c.. en E ~ g CD ~ Cl) "t: Q; 5- c.. ro a .~ ~ ~ ::; lD 0.0.1/) ro:2 u~~ 0 a. g>~ ~ ;::, ::>1/)0) <9 .x 'E ..... Q) 0 ,.:. U ...,:~~ :!:I- :!: Q) u.. I/) :5enjg 0'- '5....J~ c:a; :;::> s8 I/) ~ c:: o ~ c: Q) E ~::> ~0<9 ~;: -~ro ......0' ....:..~ "":-01/) Q) a t)~:e ca a." I:1.Eea I:1.U Q) Q) ..0 :5 ro ..c: I/) Q) c:: ~ c:: .2 i: 0) '- ::c 0) ::> e :5 g[ro ~-fjj -o>"c Q)e Q) ro 0 E ~~ ~ -oi: E c:0) g'~ ,s I/) Q) Q)..o ;:.8 -0 c: ;::, o ..0 (;) ~ Q) ..c: I- . , c: ro :5 en I/) ~~ O)c::::> "5 0 I/) ro :S15m ~~E.8 o 1B c:: U 13 c..Q ro ~Eroo. ffi g.~ :g ....;.E ::> o ..c: ~Q)-O ~:5~ Q)-;: :50 -0 ro > Q) S o lD :5 .3: Q) I/) ro ..c: a. a. ro -g > o c:: ro Q) > ro ..c: :5 "3: Q) I/) ro ..c: a. a. ro -g > o c:: ro Q) > ro ..c: ro ..c: I/) c: Q) E Q) > cD o I/) E ro .c: EO. :Z~ :2>~ '-~ -0" c:: c:: ::> ;::, .2.2 ..c:~ ~ I/) ;::, ro o Q) I/) Q) Q).c: .c: ~ I- E -9 1:: 0) ..:: -g Q) E Q) > o E " c:: ;::, o ..0 :5 ;::, o I/) . . " Q) <;::: ~'E ~:?J w > I/)~ ~"E ro Q) U U <;::: ::J."c -00) ~'Ci) c:: ro en .c: "5 <538 '5.r3 c~ oil: .8 '- o ..:: a. Q) ~ c; .- - o (;) ro LLJ >. ro 0.. '- ~ _ I/) =efs '- Q) Q) ~ o.c: O)Q) .5 53 :2<9c: E ~,g ca~E o~E Q) c:: U.3: 8 ffi -5 ~ ~:E~ .!a ;: I/) .:-:.. c; .- - o ~ I/) ro !::!:!. Q) ;::, c:: Q) ~ -0 c: ro (5 -- "'E ro > Q) S o lD 1:: o e- <( L() ,.:. ...,: :!: :!: ro ro .9B Q) Q) c: c::~ ~<:= E~ .a-a, ;::, ..c:e .g>:5 "'E~ ro ro >..c: Q) I/) S" o c:: lD ;::, o 1::..0 o ..c: e-"S <(~ -0-0 5 ~ o Q) ..oc:: :5.f2 ;::,~ O..c: 1/)0) ..:: 0> ' c:..c: ~ C'> I/) ;::, Q) Ox e c: a.>:5..!2 Q) "'C E .9- ~ ..3 l::;ca~ %7Ji~ a:: c:: o ~ U <;::: '6 o E ro c:: 0) .ii) 0) c:: ~ .x LLJ . . ~~~~~~~~~~ _0(5 ;: ~ ~ o -l -.. Q) 15 <5 .- .;:. c::E:5 C(J)- 6:'=('0 ~-:c ~ ~;::'Q)O)a~ffil- Om - > .~ :e co Q)> _" ~ ~ So - 'u Q) ~- ;::,~ ;:Q) Q)E:2lD" 53 Eo> E ..c:~ ~~15 a~ a~-c: E ~ .g-:u c.. +=i ~ ~ c:: U <( Q) ~ ro a. <;::: .iij - Q) ~ g E .c E ~ .~ 15 .sa ....: "E .~ .~ ~ ...,: ~ 1/).5 5,,:E c:: Q)aQ)..c:Q)~ro -g:gE~.><:~~:5-o _e-eg<(~ 18 53-5 ~g o.u 0.:2~~;: ~ .... ~ '1:l c.. ;;;J = ~ ~ "" ~ .... '" ~ ~ '" .~ = '(j ~ r.. ~ .... ~ "" o c.. "" o ~ = o 'r;; = ~ c.. ~ ~ .... Col 'i: .... '" Q >. ~ i: ~ ;;. o .... = ~ e c.. o ~ ;;. ~ Q '1:l = ~ .c Col "" ~ ~ '" ~ ~ .c Col ~ .... = ~ = ~ "" 0) . .=: U ~.~ '- 0 gzCs.. OQ) :5 o~ " 2 .!a 53 g- -g1B-g co:rg~ Q)- en .Q :0 10 ~<DCD "g:5 ~ ro c:: 5.58 c: ro U <;::: .- Q) C::..c: .2> 1:: I/) ;::, - M ... I o ... ! ~ ~ .S 'l:: ~ & I:l:: '= ::: <::I ~ .S ... ~ .'1::1 ::: ~ ::: ~ ';:: <::I .~ .'1::1 ~ ~ ...... ... ~ ~ e e ro Cf) ..c "5 o 0 Cf)U 'O'G ~ffi UU:: "ii' (0 r-:.. ~ :iE :iE '- ~ _ en .9~i3 ,-(j).s3 o a. ~ .~ 0) c:: Q) ,!: Q) .g:!32<.ge C; E ~g -or-ro:+:::;E oomE ~ ~'~ 8 wffi"5Q) ~~:c ro a. ,!!? ;: 7i 1: ro > Q) "5 o CD en Q) .a o LL =a ro o 0::: '- 2 en ro ~ o .a 10 :c -- Q) ~ e Q) > 4:: -0 e ro <'3 en ro w -,.;-:.." ns ~ (O'~ r-:..- ~O en :iEro :iE!:!:!... Q)LL-o en :5Cf)ffi~ 'Og<'3.f c: .!: =a 0....... ~ :+::i"'5.......n:: J9cncn c: ~ CtS Q)32w2 E ~ rn ~ 0 ro a.;: ~ .sum c.o~ 0 ~"e -e .0. ro ~~~~ t)~~~ ~g--g~ .5 5. 8 .5: -0 e ro Q) e ~ ..c Ol ~ e :5 ro e o = '0 -0 ro Q) e o -0 -0 ro .9 Q) ~ e Q) > a5 4::e -o~ ffi E cD.3 -g~ ~- o ro .a e ~~ ;::g e ro Q) Q) :2e :s: 0 -0 e ro Q) Q) e e~ ~>- ..cC OlO ~ e e ~ ..c- -:E Q)Ol cot:: o ro -0.9 -g~ ..s~ :E -0 Ol Co "iT >..c ~Ol ~ ~ o 0 co~ en-o ~~ '- ro ~i75 -oOl e e ~~ O'x ~Q) "5Q) 0:5 en Q) eOl Q) e -oro ~"5 ~'O~c: <Cco~, ~g;:en _ca~CI) 0')1:: =:I~ ,!: ~ ~ ro 5 ~ Q) -oo.E.9 e E e 0-0 +==~:.;::;u ~ 5,~~ !B ~ ~ .5 :5ro~ Q) Q) 1: o.~ ~~~Q) -*a::2g o -g Q)-o!D CDro:5_ Ol Q) en <DC: <DC Jl> en ro .::= Q) .a :2 - ~ e ~ Ol]! !5.. CD ro '5 ~ Q) ..Q ~ .~ ~ E ~ g i75 ~Q) ~ C-en~ ~ ;E~ .a Ol= ~ > N en _ ~ ~ lTI .B ~ ~ .9 ~ g -,=_<D ~ ._~ ~Q) ~Ol o~'O<:);:c:E~ -w U .- <:) Q) ro >- a. ro E O~oe~roroeo..c"5 e Q) ~ <:) en a. ..c en E 0.'0 -10 El ffi It) '0 5 . ~ ~ 2 B ~ '5 i75~~~Q)o.ffiQ)~~o>.a .: c:: .~ 0 J!2 -g a: '- ..c 0 0 Q) '- ~ "E .9 ~ ~ > Q; ~ t 0 "0 ~ - '-'-Eroe-Q)~oci~B fO'"* .g .~ S- ~ ~ -g ~ e g_ .;: ~ a. -0 a. a. en ro ~ E a. o.~ 0 a. :c (0 r-:.. ~ :iE :iE EE .a.g> :Ero .g' .9 Q) Q) e e o~ We e '- ..!22 -g,:c 5.g> '- ' :5-B, ~ e 0:5 -0-0 -g~ .9jg >-en ro Ol :S:,S o'~ ~ .aQ)~ 10 Q) :C:5 ..c Ol ~ "'Cwe 5 g':5 ..8jgro €u.9 o-OQ) e e e ero~ ~~E ~~.a . . Q3 > en~ ;5c ro U <i= 'c Ol 'en e o ~ 19 en .!: ro e Ol 'en ;: Q) Z '- o .a 10 :c W ~ e Q) > 4:: e -0 o e U ro ~ <'3 5 en 2 ~ 2 .!: ro e Ol en e o f2 19 en .!: . . ;: 0 E ..Q:5.3 16 ...!.., .9~-5, -0 ::;1"t:: ~.g>-o ~g5 .~ ~..8 0).....:5 .aQ)~ .ao ro en 7ij.9 e '- 0 .sU en Q) ro rn :2 ~ .!: 1: ro > Q) "5 o CD en Q) .a o LL =a ro o 0::: -0 ~ ffi ~rn Q) e ~ E ~ .EE en .g>.a ;S::c..!. .9 o>-g, e"C S-g ro :c (0 r-:.. ~ :iE :iE ..c U ro o d.~ o.'-..c roroOl -o..c~ c: en e ~ Ol..c Oe- ~~Q)~ co 'x 10 co Q)Q)m-c: Q) Q) a. Q) ~:5~~ . t"l - I <:) - e ro Cf) :5 ~ o 0 Cf)U ,+-.f!! o U ~ffi uU:: '- ~ _ en .9~:n '- '- Q) o ~c .~.~~ Q) -0 <.9 . .g:!'5~g C;..oU):+::i ~Cts:';::;B oom:s _ Q) e ~ g'~ 8 wro"5~ fO' ~ :c ro a. .!!? ;: i75 ~ .... ~ "0 c.. ~ = ~ is:: '"' ~ .... ~ ~ ~ ...:..:.. ~ o ~ - o en ro !:!:!.. Q) ~ e Q) .5: e o t ~ ~ Q) ~ e Q) .5: -0 e ro <'3 en ro w r-- r-:.. ~ :iE :iE e o ~ 19 en .!: ro e Ol 'en ;: Q) Z e o ~ ro en .!: e o U Q) e e o 2 Q) ~ ro e Ol en ~ .~ :5 'Cj ~ ~ ~ .... ~ '"' o c.. '"' o U -- = o ';J = ~ c.. ~ ~ .... CJ 'j;; .... ~ is .... ~ i: ~ .. o . . .... = ~ e c.. o Qi .. ~ Q "0 = ~ ..c CJ '"' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..c CJ ~ .... = ~ = ~ ~ Q)LL""O e~-o :5Cf)ffig~~ O.....UO= 'O...J<.9~..c~~ c: .5 ~ -ffi :g ~ 0""'" CQ) ~ 16 ~ en .- 0.. c:~roQ)~ ~32w~a: ~ 5 ~-o'O ~!ro<(ffi - U e r-- ~ .9 .!"e '- ,- a. ~ ~-o~~ t) ~ ,Q Q) ns8.:g~ ~~8~ en ~ Q3 > ~ - e ro U <i= 'c Ol "Cf e ~ ro ~:5 ~ ,~ ~ ~ c(m~~ IDe co =<D5.9 c>E~t5 e~ Olro .c a.:+:::i a. ~ E'- E -0 - E ,_ Q)-o ="5 o :;J: IS ~ ~ tl.() .S 't: ~ & l:c: ~ =: l::l tl.() .S ... ~ '=: ~ =: ~ -ij .~ .'l:i ~ <;::, ..... S! ~ e o ..- '0 c: o 1Q "'ffi (j)cn ro .5 LU c;- ar ...:.. ~ :!E :!E Q)LL"O Eud6 'Og<'5 .5 c: ro C/) E :::J o 0 C/)U '+- .~ o U ~ffi OU: c;- ar ...:.. ~ :!E :!E .... ~ _ U) .9Ei3 .... Q) Q) - .2 a. a3 Q.e>r:: Q).5 Q) .2:!:2C>c: o E ~,g T-co+='E oo~E _Q) c: ~ u.3: 8 LUffii3Q) ~~:.c ffi o....!a :;:~ "'ffi c: 0) 'in :;: Q) z Q) Q) Q) c: c: c: o..!!! 0 "O~{g 16 0';;; o e aj'''- a. c:.><: ..!!!~.9 .oQ) E en::J 2.5 a3 e>Q) .;;: :E O)E"O 'C::~~ g ~~C>..!!! a5..cw..t:: > O)ro 0) <(:::JLUe e~..s:::: ~E5~ .;;; ~ .8 ~ -gc:cn"'C ~ ~ roQ) Q) <( ffi C> Q)= "0 ~ .g- ~ c: 3 os; -- c: 0 o"O~o:g ..0 r:: '- '"C Q) =ro C:c: "SC!51i)cog ~'"C~ ~ ~ Q)50..!!!2 c: 0 T- c: .c:_ o~T- '- 1::03.3 ~g'E~ . . U) ;S Q5 Q) > g~ ~~ U Q) "0 ti= ~ ,s g .~ a.: :;:'c:r '"C'+-cnC ffi 0 ~ ro ::J9 ~c:~~ <(0Q)~ ~E Q) "E ro :5 ID 6.9 O)E'Et> c:~ O)ro "C: c..:;:::::; a. :::J E'- E "0 _ E ._ . "0 ~Q) :::J ti= O+=' =c: Q) :2 .><: ro Q) a. c: ro C/) = "5 o 0 C/)u ........ .~ o U ~ffi OU: :a 00 ...:.. ~ :!E :!E .... i3 .g ~ m '"C c: m c..'- ~ Q) ~ t...... 25~~eo....E =a.~8:Q5{g ..E9 e>gcocn ro a3 .5 - ro E E;g~a3:::2:Q) Q):::J=E<.o.o Ci..o..!!! a.8"'ffi E'OE.QN= .- Q) :::J Q) 0 U) :2c..>oa;:::cn ,-f60'"CC:~ .E~g~~E ~.!a <:5 c: ~ ~ a... .9 ~ '0 5..0... c: o ~ "'ffi en .5 ro.9~~i3 .9Q)Q)~ro ~:g~~~ ~~='~!ij- 0) c: g ~ "Oc: ti=Q)U) :::J C..c: .90 8-U) .0 ~~cai3rn ~~"O~~ ~a.Q) 10 ~E g-= ..c~(J) 0 U) "0- -~ ~ ~ ~ .~ .!.. ..0- E~~~a5 .3'-(/)O~ ~"'C (/)0) =c:"O Q) .g' g c: Q) ::0 -..oca=~ -a, E Q) 'iij e 5 E ~ fii =U)2~Q) ...... CD " "O=:E:2E ~1- O):::J ~ a> .;:: ~ g> en U) _ffi Q)Q) ~ co'"C (J)~ LU 5 >,'::: 25 U .8gro~<Ji en E Q) ~.5 ~2Eti=- .!..ocr:: Q)=uOQ) =O)Q)UQ) ~ "C:: ..0 ~ C, a; > ~ :;: Q) .;;; "0 c: ro <'5 03 :::J c: ~ <( "0 c: ro <'5 "'ffi c: 0) i:7) :a 00 ...:.. ~ :!E :!E . -g~Q) en U)_Q) :;: ro 0""" Q).Q .o_~~:5ro ;t::: CD co co =-E- E = 5-= mcncn::::Ci5 a. 2 Q) c: a. g>~~~g> :2 .Q ~ a.:2 .5 15 E .Q .5 .og-:::J~.o ~ c..~ ~ ro e1?~~B a.-a c:t a. c: In _ ro roor-oa. c: ro C/) = "5 o 0 c/)u 'O'~ ~ffi OU: .9 " .~ Q) .2:! .... ~ _ U) Et5 .... Q) Q) - a.C: O)~ c: Q) :2C>c:: E ~,g ._ :::J ro-.o om:s c: ~'3: 8 as TI ~ ~:.c~ .!a :;: U) ..- o ..- - o en ro LU >, ro a... - o en ro ~ Q) :::J c: Q) > <( o 2 ro :::2: ~.9 ..!!!Q) c: E~ .3E '*:::J ~~ "'ffi~ c: o = '6 "0 ro Q) c: o "0 "0 ro .9 ro .9 Q) c: ..!!! "0 ~ ro = U) <:::: -eJg~ ro=c: 55 g'..!!! "SeE 0= :::J al-- 1:: g> '$ &.~Q) .!:::: 'x Q) <(Q)S "OQ)_ S:5 0 Eo>19 en .~.9 ~'?~ ~ c: ro C/) =c ffi > Q) "S o al 1:: o e- ~ Q) :::J c: Q) > <( Q) U :::J "0 e a... en ...:.. ~ :!Eo :!E..- . Q)LL EC/) _0 O....J c'!: 0- ~~ c~ ~:2 ~g a.:;: E_ - U en .~ co r-:..Ci ~"OU) - ~.~ ~ ~'5 Q.E e 25 a. U ,sQ) :::J :::J o c: C/)~ 03<( :::J c: 0 Q) Q) > - <(~ ~ :::J "0 e a... ~ a.: c: Q) ro,s ~ "Og> mOL:: > :::J Q)"O "S c: S 0 13 1::Q) ~~ ....2 <( .5 QJ ..... ~ "0 Co P c ~ is: \.0 QJ ..... '" ~ ~ .9.9"E ~g~ 13 "0 Q) "0 5 ~ 5 020 ~.5~ g Q) ~ U),s c: 1?coo - U) g> g-12 "C en ~ .0 0 .9.90 uO) Q) Ii: c: g ~.~ ~ Q) <("0:;: Q)ffi"O g~ ffi "0 :::J 000) c:alC: "e> 1::Q) e.E <(Q) ,s '" .~ :5 ';J ~ ~ QJ ..... ~ \.0 o Co \.0 o U ...... c .S '" c ~ Co ~ >.:l ..... C,/ 'i: ..... '" is >. ~ i: QJ ... o c: o ~ "'ffi en .5 ..... C QJ e Co o ~ ... QJ Q "0 C ~ .c C,/ \.0 ~ QJ '" QJ ~ .c C,/ QJ ..... C QJ C QJ ~ "0 c: :::J o .0 = 15"0 "E"'ffi ; j ~ ~ .~ '6 en :~ g :;: ~mQ5al~ . . ....; "0 :::J Q) Oti= ..c:~ '><:Q) ro"O Q)'- a. U) 5 Q5 Q) > g~ "0 ~ Q)"O :5"'5 o :;: "" .... I = .... =: ~ ( Q() .15 1:: <:l ~ l:l::: ~ == l:::l Q() .15 ... <:l .1:: == ~ == <:l ... .... l:::l .~ ~ ~ .... ~ ~ e c:: ro C/) = "5 o 8 ~.!!1 o u ~ffi OU: ..... ~ _ rn Ei3 ..... Q) ~c o>~ _S Q) 32<.9c E~g CQ+:iE oo~:s c:: ~-~ 8 ffi -8 ~ :::s:.c ro .~ 3: ~ B o a Q) ~ c; 00 ro UJ >. ro 0... CD c:: ~ E ~ ...!.Q) =c:: .g>~ ro " c:: ro rn Q) Cii = c:: c::o>~ ~5 ~:5 ~ro Q)B 5~~ :g ~ g ~l ~ "E..c: 0 rorn~ >4=:_ ..92~ :::s= 00> CO:::s t::e 0= 0.. ..... .:: C) <( .S "00 s'x o Q) .oQ) .....= rn ..... ro Q) Q)o.. c: "C ~cn ~~ . iU' ~ ffi ~a: ~ ro~ ~ (.9-- ~~ t 0> c:: :::s o c:: 0 rn ro ~:g~~B c:: Q) ;5oEco :::sn~oro o Q) 0.. = 0.. C/) rn .s ~.~ Q; ;; :E ...;'E :::s o = IL C/) o ....J c:.~ o~ 16=' ern Q) ~ E32 Q) :::s -0 ~3: -1:5 Q) "em 0.. "rn Q) 5 ~~:E 0. 0.. " E e 5 _o..u , E 0> .;:: Q) :5 Q) 0> c:: ro = u " c:: Q) ro c:: Q)~ c:: c:: 12.3 Ei; .30> -;:: = ..... 0> Q) "C ..c Q)e c:: c:: o ro "B ~~ ..9~ >.E roo> 3:-;:: JB..c ro 0> <.ge -g:5 :::s" E~ = ro "5= o rn rn 0> c:: c:: Q)~ " -x ~Q) = 0> :::s e :5 " " ro B Q) :::s c:: Q) > <( Q) = .8 ~~ c::~ ~E ~~ . . Q) " :5"5 o _3: o " Co > Q) "S o co Q) > rn~ ~c ro Q) u U <;::: ::l"c "0> ~-cn " Q) <;::: ~:.;:::::; ro c:: Q) Q) 0..32 c:: ro C/) = "5 o 0 C/)U I+- .~ o U ~~ UIL 0> Q5 rn ~eQ) Q)C:: ~ en ro .0 32 3: Q)..... ~ E ':::s- Q)..... Q) _0 c:: 0> ~ 0.. co Cii g ~ .S E 0 0 ~ .0 Q) ~ :5 ~ B 'o-,;g :::s ~ ~ rn ~ :: g- ~ 'E ~ J] E ~ ~ .8 ~ ~o..~ ~ Q).....o '->ro~ ~Q) ~ o~'Oo 3:..... E - u .- 0 Q) >. 0.. c:: ro -:::s E g> U ~ ci c:: ~ ro ~ 0 ~ E 0..:';::; -~ >. c:: 0 _ rn 0... ~ ~ ro.o roO 0 5 . ~~2 :::s.2'5 ~ ~ ~ ~~ Q5 0.. ffi Q) rn ro u ~ .0 10- c: .~ ~ ~ ~ 0:: '- 2 5 g (1) Co ~ 'E B ~ ~ ~ w ~ .,.j" t 0_ ~ "S ->. 2 0 E ~ a 00 " 'E g. g ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ g- g- ~ ~ ~ a......- '0 ~ c:: o ~ Cii 00 .S Cii c:: 0> 'Ci) 3: Q) z i:i. E ro 0:::: ~ o Q) :::s c:: Q) ~ " c:: ro Q "E ro > Q) "S o co t:: o e- <( M ...... ...:.. ~ :!!: :!!: .....Q)" m ~ ~ .S ~ jg g> <( rn UJ"ro ~~-g U<.9ro Q)"" :55~ >.0 .0 .0 ,,00 Q) ro c::UJ 'E Q) 03:5 Q5- ,,0 E E..3 .3~ -Q) -5,.2: "t:: ~ Q)(3 > x _'Ci) Q) ~~.2c: _::JUCO c::.g>~~ o c:: __ '58g>~ :g~'tia "E -'X 0 8~Q)-;;;~ "t:: c: C l2 Q)OOro~c:: ~@EE.3 rnQ).g.3E '-:5 4::::=0) ~(/)-8~:E Q)"ro== "Omeg>g> 'S; 3: 0.. 0 0 e ..9 g.:5 :5 0... . . Q)IL"Q) 0 :5(/)ffi:5l:: _O.....o>g O....J ~ c:: >. c: c: "'E .~ CJ) (5 ro o;;~"O ~ ~::JQ)c...~c:cn &5 ~ g ~ :!S! g ~ B E32coo:::::i5.EE Q)::I ~::IC: ~~150-~5 - T;: .g- <or- ~ Q)o.. ~ ~<(O 0- m MQ) =E= ~ "e-ro oj - "e en 1- c... ~ ;S ~"rn=>~.-:.." - 3l 5 Q) 0...!!1 Q) Q) ~ 0 E::J ~~ (.) o.g--g 53 ~Cii 53~ ..Ea8~ciffi32~ " Q) Co = rn ro " c:: ro " c:: ~ E Q) c:: o > ro ~.~ (/)- -5~~ ~Q)~ ~ -g E a.. co ..a Q)' ro= " 0> 4=: c:: Co:::s~~ > e Q) E ~ :5 .~ .a O~::JE co 'Ci) (3 0> t::..2~:.E: ~~0-5, .- Q) 1; :::s <( - e -g~~:5 ::1......>"'0 04=:0~ ;gJg aro "5 -6,.8 ~ S:::sc::ro 00" ~:5~ffi ':::"O~Q) ~~.g>ffi 5,jg 5 ~ 'E rn_ u 0> 8~ ~ e ~~~:5 ';;:EE~ .g-.~ .3 'gj (j)0>:E<3 I c: 0>)( & ro -;:: Q) . ~~~ ~~ 1:5 ~-= E ~ .- ~ e ro u <;::: 'c 0> 'Ci) c:: ro :5 en c:: 'E = Cii c:: 0> -Ci) 00 :::s ~ . >. IT: co C/) ...... o ...... crj => =0 ro > ~ :::s o co >. ro 3: Q) ro ~ "E ro > Q) "S o co e '0 0... w 00 >. c.. OE :!:& .~ ~o :!!:~ :!!:o c:: ro C/) = "5 o 0 C/)~ o'u ~ffi OU: 0> Q5 ~ ~&5 ~~ ~ ~ i o>:ffi ~co Cii '5 ~ Q) .2 ~C::Eoo~.o Q):::s:5~ '5> ~ :::s ~ ~ 2 ~ :5 g- ~ 'E UJC::B~$_oc::i5 'OQ).....w ~~ Q).....Q)Q)>.....c.. '0 g 3: e E 0..:5 Co 1\5 53 0> Q) ~Q)ro;;:;-g-c::="SEc:: u 0 c:: :::s wOrn E 0..'0 c::o_ ~o...=" :::s.2= rooo:::s .~Q)"*uQ):::s ~~Q) a.ffi 0)..... ~ 1::0 >..0 .!!1 .E ~ ~ a:: .0 0 0 Q) Co 0...... Q) > ......J2......-tO_~"'5 - .- ..... 0 Q) Q) .- 0 0 ::> U o E ~ a 00 " E c..o Q) t 'C Q) 0- a.. co co Q5 ~ 0_ ~ co 0.. c.. rn ro:2: E 0.. 0........ 0 0.. c:: o ~ .0 E c::~ 80 -~ >- ro.o = " rn Q) ..... c:: ~.~ >.2 ~~ 0> c:: 'E = N ~ -.i :2: :2: Cii c:: 0> -Ci) ..... rn :::s =0- <( e Q) E Q) -a. .s . . Q) UJ e crj ~ g''O ~ C: : 8 ~ ~ ~:~ c:: 0 ~ o ....J "E c:: :i5 .Q 3: c .~ ~ .~ ~:ffi ~ ~ .Q - Q) " rn 53 ~ ~ 10 "'5 Q) "'5 c.. '- co e~~S~55jQ)ro Q)E 0 o::::..c=-a.E B 32 .x:EC:: ~ 5 ~ ro .0 o..E 3: ;;:;-0 Q) .15 U ~ ..... c.. en _2> ~ = 1:5 ro Q) Q)> 'Ci) ~E E _Q) _ Q) _ ~ 2!::- .- ...... 'o.....~ ro 0 . ro " > ...:.. <.9 ..L a.. c:: Q).!!1 ~ CL -.....::::::' mti=.J:: "*<f-ccn--eu."'O :.e::;-- t)Q)5g;!coc::ec:: cv~:E~C/)ro=~~ 0. g- -g :::s C; ~ g -;;; ~ .E a8S...... ciJi:5 ~ e ro U !E c:: 0> 'Ci) Vl .... I o .... ~ .... = 'e C. ;J = = s::: .. ~ .... '" = ~ '" .~ :: 'y = r.. ~ .... = .. o c. .. o U ...... = o 'r;; = = C. i>'i ~ .... tJ '1: .... '" Q >. = i: ~ ;.. o .... = ~ 8 c. o Q:i ;.. ~ Q 'e = = -= tJ .. = ~ '" ~ ~ -= tJ Q,l .... = Q,l = Q,l ~ ~ ~ ct b.() .S 'l:: <::> & l:l::: "!::l ~ b.() .S ... <::> .1::; ::: ~ ::: <::> .... - I::l .~ .1::: ~ ~ ..... ~ ;} e . c ro en = "5 o 0 enu 'O'~ ~~ Ou.. +-J C) Q) ~ ~ 55 ~ .~ J!? ~ ....- - E 32 Q) c Q) 0) ~ ro '5 .... Q) ..Q .Q ~ C ::I g- ~ 7}5 .0 Q) ~ :5 ~ ~ 'g> ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .~ "ELU.oc-o-Q)eQ)Q)>"E~ Rb'Og... Q):S:5 E 8::5....::a; Q) 0) ~ 0 Q) 'u >- C ro - E c -Q) .0>- S g .:: ~ ~ ro 0 7}5 E 0.. '0 Co """qol- TI"'O..!B='o:= =-0::1 i5..c::ro~rouQ).o::l enQ)en......O)~~Q)rocc:>i'D I- c: .~ S JQ CD a.. '- ..0 .2 C> "'0 rn :,E .~ E =-E- ~ 1; .sa ~ ~ 15 g. :s: a >-20.... ~ 5..~-g E g-8 ~'E ~ ~ .~ ~ 55 g. ~ E ~ 5.. .....: '5 ~ en-o "Ec ro 5 :S:.,9 Een ~~ .~~ 0)- tTI15 ~Q) Offi >-- .oc ~-3 c:E .~ 0) Q)OC O)Q) -0> en'OO ro ::I -TI c x .Q Q) "5-0 .0 c :58 c Q) 8 en Q) ro COo ..r:: enc- .... 0 c ~~~ Q)-O -oro .;;; Q) e= 0..- = u ro e 0.. 0.. ro "E ro > Q) '"5 o 00 e ...... ~ ...t ~ ~ - c Q) E Q) c.. E .... 2 ~ o . ~a;uj~ jg ~~ ~ Q)O~~ ~Q)550 ,~ I ~ ~ 00 Q) ::I =.- 32 8 g~ ~ ~.g o~ ::I 0 E ro - >- 0 Q)~"E..cl:: '0' ro ro 0.. u 5..~i'DE~ -oro'"5,Sen Q) 0 LL. 0) enQ)OOcc 2-:5 E 0 ~ e_om~ o..roll..Z_ (ri ::I C Q) > <( -0 c ro Q "E ro > Q) '"5 o 00 t:: o 0.. .... <i: CD ...... ~ ..,f :!!: :!!: c ro en = "5 S8 '- .~ o u bffi uti: .... ~ _ en E'Ei3 0..... CD lB o..C .~.~~ ~;g(9c:: c; E ~g ~co+=JE oo~E (;) ~'S: 5 roc;>u LUroi3~ 1U'~:.c:ro ll.. .!!2 :s: 7}5 -.::- Q) Q)= Q)- .~ c g>o LU Q) b~ u C":i ...... ~ ...t ~ ~ "E Q) E Q) c.. E Q) E ~ :5.3a3 >-- > .0 :2>-:: ~I-Jg '~ .~ :2: ID:::J-B 1i)~i3 -oQ)~ en 5.. ~ffio.. ro o"E ro c > o Q) ng 200 rnt:: c 0 8e- <i: -0 c ::I en 0 ~"E~ os; m ~ o :s: 0 a:Een c o 5 .0 .;:: "E o u Q) ffi = en Q) ....:5 ~ . . ~~ro(1)= - ro ~ l!') oJ::;~g?O'> Q)~<( cenN Q) ~ ~:=. -g .E "Egc~~ Q) ,- ~ Q ~ E32 a;"E ~50..ro ~:S:Q)i'D -ug~ CD Q) 00 or- .~ ffi ,..:. o..=:; -e ..,f 0 ~~~ ...... en 0'- ~ 8..E<( c. ..5 e >- Q) c....c -:5 ~ g>o ~ C: ~:~ c: 0 ~ .O'~ .Q == en a. 2..]j ~ U) C::l~ >- Q)en m~.ffi~ro ...!:::::cc.. .9 ro~E 15 .~ . ~ ~ O)Q.)-O') .~ :is ,~ E ~ ~ .E ~ E .- ~ 5-5}~~en.!!2 c..>C'CSq::;S....... Q.~ ~ e ~ ffi E555=~~.g ~ 0 U .- :::J "2 II- cQ)"'O 15 ~ ro Ji':5 ~ '00 Q) a; = :s: (ri ::I C ~ <( Q) ::I CT ::I .0 ::I e .~ "E-o ro Q) > <;::: ~'E s~ "E '0 ll.. .... 2 en >- o ..... ...... ~ ..,f :!!: :!!: Q) :5 '5 c o ~ "E Q) E32 ~::I 0.. 0 E :s: -uu ......~ij:: ......oro ,..:. c.. J::; ..,f '0 ns c. ..5 c ro en = "5 o 0 en~ o'u bffi oti: 0) 0) en ~"E IDe: J!2 u) ro Q).o:2 :s: c ai 0) ~ E ro '5 ~ Q) ..Q .Q .~ .a E g- ~ 7}5 .0 Q) ~ :5 ~ E 0> =-= :::J ~ ~ CJ) ~ ~ g ~ "E ~LTIE~~.9~e~~~~Q; Rb'Og...:S:Q)5 E o.._....::a; Q) ~ ~ u Q) .u >- 0.. c ro '"5 E c -Q) .0>- S g.:: ~ ~ ~ 07}5 E 0..'0 ffi .uq,05 .u~Q)::I..Q= =-0 ::1......0) o..ffi m en~ u ~E ~ ~ .~ .Q J!? ~ 0:: 0 ~ ,Q 8 ~ ffi ~ .~ .9 -- ~ ~ 2 ~ -:-"E g. 3: ~ 1U' ~ .g .~ ~ 5.. ~ -g .~ g- 8 ~ 'E ll.. -0 0.. 0.. 55 g.~ E 0.. 5......: '0 ~ ~i3'$-g oro::::ro 0= en Q)5..~Q) :5 g.e 16 c..::5 E ~~~~ O:::ffi<t:: ll!::=~ ~oenQ) .~ 00 ~ .?: a;z~ ~ 1i3-r-~~ -0 ~ '00 Q) .20 ~~ Q) Q) 0)-0 c';;; tiie 'x 0.. Q)Eg CQ)~ ro c E~ E o ~ ~E cnQ)~Q).a:g, ~ ro+J ::J:E::E :::s .J::: (J) c::: O).s:::. ~ en"E ~"C 0> Q) ....~<(Q)5 E ~ .9 ~ .~ :5 ~ g~-o Q)Q).ox~ -OC::lQ)ro 'S: '6>0 -0 ,J;::. ~tTIEffi~ Lri ...... ~ ...t ~ ::I en ro Q) ~ c o 15 0) = :2: en0 ~:::> Q) = c - 0_ ;.e::::;O ::I .0 .;:: "E o u Q) 0.. .;:: li,i ~ "E Q) E Q) c.. E . . ~~ 00.: c""C ro 16 :5 cft >.= l!') ..cocO .0 - 0) c .;:: ::I -0 -oQ) Q) en en ro 8..~ o u a..~ "E ~1ij Q) Q) 0.. 0.. ~ - ~ "0 Q., ;;;;J C ~ ll::: loo ~ - '" ~ ~ '" .~ == 'y ~ r... ~ - ~ loo o Q., loo o U -- c o .~ c ~ Q., ~ ~ - CJ 'i: - '" is ..... ~ i: ~ ~ o - C ~ e Q., o QS ~ ~ Q "0 C ~ .c CJ loo ~ ~ '" ~ ~ .c CJ ~ - C ~ C ~ o \0 .... I <:> .... e l:: ~ rt ~ .15 'l::: Q & er:: "I:l ~ ~ .15 ... Q .1:: == ~ == Q ... .... I::t .~ .1:: ~ ~ ..... ~ ~ e o "'6 ~ a> "'0 c:: o ~ "E CI:l > a> "S o CO t o a.. ll:;;){ c:: CI:l C/) = "5 o 0 C/)U '+- .~ o U ~1ij (JU: '- ~ _ en E~ Q;~ a..1j5 O>c:: oS a> :E<9c C; :g ~,g -r-ro~..5 oo~E a> c:: u03:: 8 ffi 13 ~ :::::l :E CI:l .~ 3: ~ .9 o .~ a> .S:? rn CI:l UJ >. CI:l 0.. -g~o o.....t ~ 16 ~ a> en CI:l~ CI:l ~.!: ~ o CI:l E c:: E E 0...... CI:l :~ ~ 0, o e a.. 0 a.. a> ::J ~ ~~~E ~~ro~ ro --.~ e ~~~~ c:: a> CI:l a> .Q c:: a> E "55Eg; .oueno :s o):c 0.. R 1ij !:::-.5 ~ - ci.- a..E-S ~ 15 ~ og. ..s::'-~u :f:t!: 0 0- 0 to ~'"Co-r- ro 5 .g- '0 Q).8<(~ ~€=sw oooa> ~a:2C/):5 CI:l ....J . tl=ta> o 0 c:: a..CI:l -c .: -I 50:{ o .0 = t 0= 2"5 a> 0 :5C/) 0-"" c:: .....CI:lO g- ~$ c:: ~~a> C3<i~ :ga>l5.. >:5-5 ~o>a> oo_"E ~ ~='~ E"'O u-g o en oS = ~(l)~~ c:: ~ N a> o-a5-r-~ U>ro ~...... I ID 8 ~ ]; N- "g 0 a> a> ~~ -~ o u c::oS o 16-0 1::""5 a> 0 E 3: a> l5....... -5~5 <:)"e' c..> ~ a..1ij ..... '- -.::;-c- _a>a> u ~oS III a.. W 0.0 en ~ 0..2 o "'6 u Q; "'0 c:: .9~ "'0 ro > a..~ 15 5 ,-co c:: CI:l C/) = "5 o 0 C/)U '+- .~ o U ~1ij (JU: en CI:l ,-" g; c:: Q) C) +:; o a> c:: CI:l oS '5 "S E 0>= E ELIjEB 5~'Oo u(Ja>g "a> >. u - ro.offi::5 ~-g~~ '- c:: .!:Q J2 ~ .~ .9 .- >. 2 0 oE &~O~~ Q)~ci. a> CI:l E c::- CI:l og> ~~ UJ ~ :;;. ~~ ::J ()01j5 > 0:{ "'0 c:: CI:l t5 OJ > 0;:: o a> > "'" :::::l U ~ UJ Iii :::::l c:: "'0 a> a> ~ c:: "'0 o~ c:: 2 ~ a> <9"'0 ..... en CI:l UJ .9 a.. E ~ :t!: o "'0 c:: :::::l o .0 = t o 2 a> "'0 ~3 ~.8 = t Om 2 CI:l UJ a> :5 16 a> oS C Offi E c Q)g> 1D en ~.o::2 .S:?a>~ ~~ ~ E Q) ~ ~ 10 ~~~~ =g.~E ~.8a5eQ)~:~Q; 3: "E E a..:5 ro > a> a.. a>CI:l>.arC::=""'Eg> c:: :::::l CI:l 0 en .g;J a......_- _eno..=~ ~o~ 0::; 0 u Ci5 2 E w os Q) a..1ij ~ en CI:l:::::l >.0 .S:? -g a: .E 2 o~ ~ ~ ro ~~$a>:!::!"15g3:~ ~ a.. en "'0 E g- c:> ~ 'E g- ar~ ~ ~ o..~ '0 ~ ~~15g;~~~~~w~~ '0 ~ -g B ~ <C 0 o~ "'0 ~ (5 ~ a> c:: oS 5 ~ g; ~ I- .S:? g "E c:: u :0 o ~~c.o o>a>~ 3:~ 1ij ~{g ~ ~ 15 ~ ~ o~ ffi 1ij u 5,: o~ -~ ~ ~ 2 ~ E "'0 o~ U ~ oif ')I ~ 5 a> ~ "'0 0 ~ N 05 1ij ':; -0 -g ~- c'+-c::L..C3~~ U)~ Q) ctS en - ~ 5 ,~ 0 :g N ..,f ~ ~ ~ 11 "E ~ w .... I~ '-' 15 > CI:l :2 ~ E ~ ~~ CI:l"Rj~~l:2"'OCI:l~"*-~ c.."j. J::; W Q) 0 ::J 10 ~ .9 L...-.~ .~ ~'O ~~.9EN"~~ ~-g g;~c:: !EO III a.. a> a.. a> .9 -"" c:: ~ g ~ __ Offi c:: a. e ~ E o~ ro 2 a.."'O 0 ~ E Oin ~ a...o ~ 0 g- ~ ~ 05 ~:c.S:? ~ "'0 c:: o u a> en en ~CI:l c::_ o 0 ~c: ;@oC; cU~ 02cn uCi)::> ~ c:: rooa> .r::.U=: tnQ).9 '- :5 c:: Ji;! 0 U>!5 N~'EQ) ...:. os; ~ ~ ~ e.9 8 :Eo.. :E . ~ C: :::::l CI:l ~~ a> en E~ c:: ro 0.9 fd g>~ 0- a.. E 05 a> u :::::l "'0 a> ~ :5~ o 3: rJ:J .... - U - ..:l o ~ Q Z -< r/J z -< ..:l ~ r.S rJ:J ~ Q Z -< ..::l "'0 ~ os 0- ~ o!a c:: o 16 g OE o 2 ai en :::::l "'0 c:: ~ :5 03:: "'0 a> 16 Ou o en en a> ~:Q "'6 .sa.. ~-g ~ro 0_ en c:: o CI:l 2l5.. c:: o 15 2 rn c:: c:: CI:l 0 C/)~ = c:: "5C1:l 000 C/)~t:5 o "(3 jg ~~ c:: (Ju:8 '- ro .E _ "'0 0 a>c::ro 3:0>> Q)"Ci) e os; a> a.. ~oa.. a> a> CI:l ..c~.s mEa = 3:0;:: en>.a.. UUU> a> c:: a> "e-* ~ a.. __ a> a>~:2 ~80 rJ:J U - r-- .... = r-- rJ:J .... -< "'0 2 u S1:: en 00 50.. U"'O a> c:: .0 CI:l ro1U' ~co en 0 :::::l U a.. _!a 15 g () ~ LL ii5 a> c:: 3:tlJ a>- :50 c:: ~ ~Q) -3:: os; "E en "'0 Q):sJB Eo!ao~ a..xu ..Qa>~ ~13~ $2a> ~rn ~..c~..c :::::lO"'Ou ~.9ffi~ T-gI~ en a> .,f~g<9 lf~~~ a> CI:l u :5 .=: "55 _.....u o"Sen en CI:l 5 ~ c: ~oo c:ct) a>"'O~ E"Sa> "*- ~ a> .st>[5 a> > d; 'e~ . a.._ ...,. "'0 o~ .....~c Uo-S III a.. en EO. e .g a.. en ..... oE '- a> a.. ~ CI:l c:: o ~ u en '5 1ij'O ~ C/)(j)c a> "'0 3: c:: en CI:l ro a> ro E .g ~ :::::l i5.. "S u en en ~ en ro ~ a> :::::l u 0 CI:l en a..~ en a> c:: en a> a> a.. = 0:: o ...... en 03: ...... a> oS; a> "'0 _~o~ -go.. 0.9 oS "'0 - a> en c:: :::::l0> a.. Oin E a> ro"'O ()a> .0 "en a> E :EC/) ()::J "'0 c:: ~ o.~ a> = .e;~ 0..::;(0 en (,) a> c:: Ii:: c:: :5 a> 0;::: 0 :Eo!2> ~ '- ::J CI) C o 0 t:: a> 3: m E 5~:5 ~ ~d>~ "E..,f~ a> 0:: en E 0.. c:: a> -ffi Ci.1j5E -5E~ .~ 13 S::JCt5 eno-a.. oS; ~ 05 ro = en en >. CI:l 3: "'0 CI:l e t-- .... I o .... c:: CI:l C/) = "5 o C/) - o ..... (J '- .E "'0 a> 3: a> os; ~ a> .0 ro = en t:5 a> e a> = I- ~ - = '0 c.. ;J = = Q::; ... ~ - '" = ~ E o ~ a> :0 Oin os; CI:l a> ro t:5 a> e '" .~ = 'y = r.. ~ - = ... o c.. ... o U -- = o .~ c = c.. :>< W a> :5 c:: ;S 03:: en "E a> E o w > a> o - ~ 'i: - '" Q >. = "i: ~ ... o N en .,f 0:: 0.. - = ~ 8 c.. o ~ ... ~ Q '0 = = .c ~ ... = ~ '" ~ c::: .c ~ ~ - = ~ = ~ C,,:) a> :5 - o -5 10 en .,f '0 III a. E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .S 1: ~ & i:c: ~ ~ ~ .S ... ~ ... ::: ~ ::: .~ l:::I .~ ~ ~ .... ~ fr e ro - o m > o a. 0. ro ...... .8 o~ ..... 0) oQ 0. a.~ en ro 0) c: .!: oQ CDQ5 320 :::l en (9'0 c: '0 .!: ;SQ)~ ";: g' ~ enEO) c'- Q) Q)-~ EgJO) g-"5 ~ Q)a>-:5 iD ~ 0;: -c ~ ~ :::l I..L (f) :::> E "'Cue 0)0)- 0~0e-a3 en 0. 0) 0) -c en -cO)en 0) en ro .ooro e~ o.ro-c 0) 0) c: ;S :5 "E ffi~~l~~i oS: 5 ~ oS a3 :;: oS ~;S :-Q"'c1:5 -oc~d>~ro uc:~o..f~~ 053 ; ~ 5 g: a>:;:: u ~ .2> ~ "c;; c:: tn ~cn"E >.~ c:ro 0)a3~!i:: o:;:>.EE=C:: o~ -5, ~ ~ ~ $ o~ e ~ I 'E ~'5 0 t!:: ~ 0. Q) E .$ 0- 0- 0. C\) c>> "'0 0 0 '-~ ~ ~ ~ "fIti- Q)Q)J:::C1.Q) -'''' enenO) >u~CJ) oa,:oroO)O) ~ g- > 000 ~ 00' -6 ro c... -g "s; .~ :c a.. ~ .9 c: ro (f) J::. "S o 0 (f)U '+- .~ o U >.c: ......ro GU: ..... ro .E _ -c 0 O)C:m :;: a> > 0)000 e oS; 0) 0. ~ 0 0. O)O)ro...... .0 ~ 0 oE ...... ..... ro;2'-Q) J::. :;: og 0. en>.o.~ uocnctS 0) c: 0) c: "e "* ~ g 0.000 ~ ~ 0) C:05 ~ F=8(9'O en -c -c c: o ro ~en o ~ ~.g a>:::l "m ~ c: 0 en 'C :::l 0) E~ 8~ ~~ ......0) = ~ c: o c: 5 en 000 0) os; "8 0) U > 0) 13:0 0) ro =o~ ~-a c:o. o ro C:m -c_ c: 0 ro en -c c: 1!3,g ro ro o,.g 0)"(3 :o~ 5 en -cO) a>~ c: ...... 'O~ -TIE .= en ui:::l 0) E 0. en ~~ ~o, ~o O)"C ~~ 13m ~<( ~ u) c: en o ro c:o, c: o en ~ :::l Om 2J::. en 15 -c..... 0) 0 en -c o 0) g-::; c...~ 0)...... :515 ~~ :::l aO) "00 :5 0) 0) O-c .... :::l mU ..; oS: :!Em :!Eii5 0) :;: -:5~ - o oS: c=s o en ~~ c: 0) -c E"S "*-~ .s -c -c 0) 0) ~ CD O):-Q .~g ~ 00- 0 a. '+- u o t) III 0. E -c 0) en en 0) o U 0. ..... o :::l ..... 0 0. en ~~Ci; ro ~ > 0>1:: ~ 0).$ 0 E 8.::r: ~ {gro tS~ ~~ _S .8 ~ :::l en ro 0) E 0) ~ 5:5~ 0- a> ~~O) =:::lE oE~~ ro -c 1:5 ro 0.. E- "_ 0 -c c:-S:5~ o ~o;: C\) 15 -c.g .~ ~ 55 ~ "* ~~ ~ !i5..f 0(3 CJ) ~ ao..:;a: ~ ~ I- 000 .s:;a: ~:S c: ro (f) J::. "S o 0 (f)U 'Oo~ >.c: ......ro -- ..... OI..L ..... ro .E _ -c 0 O)C:m :;: a> > Q) "en 0..... os; 0) 0.. 0)00. ;p 0) ro .0:5.9 mEo J::. :;:0;:: en >.0. uU(J) 0) c: 0) "e' ~ :E 0..0- 0) O)~:-Q F=80 cn:5 0)0- 0;:: :;: en cCQ) O)O)-C 000 a>o- U oS: ~ a> -coC: =u'O :::J__== .oJ::.:::l a>.o co "c -0 -roffi J::.enC: a> -c ro = roo.. 'O~~ enror5 CD o~ 0) > c... ~ ~-c::c: .$ffiM .~ ~ c: c.....Q ~ ea>O) 0. oS: (9 g- ~ oS: 0. -c c: .0) Oiij ~ 'ffi croCi) "iij >.-c :;a:ten 5CD ~uiD C':' g[, E c>>ro:::l ..; ~ _S :!E m oS: :!E :;: E c: ro (f) J::. "S o 0 (f)U ~.~ o U ~ffi OU: ...... "E a, 0. ~ ro c: o = ~ U en '0 ..... ro .E -c '0 O)C:m :;: a> > 0) "00 0..... os; 0) 0. ~ 0 0. 0) 0) ro...... .0 ~ .8 OE ro;2'-w J::.:;:.Q0.. U)>.c..~ uucnCO 0) c: 0) c: "e "* :E g 0.000 ~ ~ 0) C:05 ~ F=8(9'O en- ~ :::l ")( t;:: :E g - o 0) en :::l C .$ en -00 c: 8 ~ 0;: ~ ro ffi J::. U en :::l 0. E ro U ~ ffi ~ -E 0 LUg e-g Nro men ..;~ :!E -~ :!E~ O):;:-c 0) roJ::. ~ ~ ~ oS 0) j '+- U ~ ..c o oS: a> __ ro 'c 32 5"5:50.....5 ~~:E 3: c: -c g 0) en ~~-c:[~ o..:;:~{gCl:i .sum ~ a>UU(Q ..... oe-.s: ~ 0) m c.. '+-0 ro ~ ..; _ ~ en ~.s: ~~~f!?en 0.0.:::l~:;:0) E e 0 -c 0_ _o.enro> -c 0) ~ c 0) ~ -c 0)-- > 0) :;: 0) ~:5 c: ro (f) J::. "S c558 '- .~ o U ~ffi GU: J::. 0) a>.o :::l e-c :5:5 o :;: ~ C\) rot)~ N~C:: ~ E'~ '0"'<1"0- c:: :;a:enro ~;S~ c: CJ) o CJ) ~ e,;..92 C C c:- N .s ~~,gd>~ !E 0) ~..f U ao..:e:;a:-6 -oo"S E :;a: ~ 1:5 ro 0. .S ..... ro .E _ -c 0 ~ am 00)>_ '00 i:; 0) a. ~oo.. 0) 0) ro...... .0 :5 .9 .~ 18;2'-0) J::. :;: og 0. en>.o.~ uucnCO 0) c: 0) c: "e- "* ~ g 0. 0- 0) 0) Q)~:'2b F=80~ en 0) >. 00 a> c: -;: .Q :E 0) ~ .8 E .E c: o U m J::. en .l!3 J::. a> Om J::. -c c: ro en 0) 0.. ~ ~ :::l ")( u:: uQj N;Q men ..;m :!E- :!E~ -c>. 0) CD .5Q co ~.~ 5 e ~~ _ ro o _ 0.:E Nos;!> NO) c:J::. o-c ~~ ..... en ::].c xt+= ~J9 sB eio 0) N ~ :-Q -g 0- e ~ 0) o.x-c I 0) ~ CI) B 0 "'0 +J 0.. rooo.. oc:ro ~ ~o C:c: _ co +::; ~ .l!3g~ .Q~:O g>(j) ~ ~b~ ffi 5 "c Cl..Ut;:: . 0.. .8-c ...... 0) enJ::. o en o.Oc c: t;:: 0>. g-]a :0 .~ roo.. J::.e -g~ :::l ro e:E' 0) a> -c -m o~ J::. ..... -c 0.. 0) 1ii5 en 0- 13~ ~m ~~ c: I.C) ro..- ui-g iil~ :;: x ~O) ~.8 u,- -0 -"" c: men ~ ~ -c.3 U5~ . m :::l 0- 0) -c 0) > e 0. 0. ro o -""- U ro :0 N "'<I" -c 0) 0) U x 0) ,g (5 C:m ui:::l ~o- :::l 0) ")(-c t;::~ 0) 0 >.0.. cng. ~o '5~ .oro ~:o -s; -g eJ::. o._~ I~ g>~ +::; Q) -5,12 :'=0.. c: 0 roa. Eo.. ~ ro "O:E' ~a> c~ ~J9 ~,g ~ .... ~ "0 c.. ~ = ~ ~ .. ~ .... '" ~ ~ '" .S:! = 'y ~ r.. ~ .... ~ .. o c.. .. o U -- = o .~ = ~ c.. ~ ~ .... (,/ 'j:; .... '" Q ... ~ i: ~ ~ o .... = ~ e c.. o QS ~ ~ Q "0 = ~ ..c (,/ .. ~ ~ '" ~ ~ ..c (,/ ~ .... = ~ = ~ ~ ClO .... I C .... is l: ~ ct ~ .S 1:: <;) ~ ~ ~ =: l:::l ~ .S ... .s .... =: ~ =: .~ l:::l .~ ~ ~ ..... S! 1} e u Q) c'~ roo.. U)"O ..c:: C "5ro o 0 U)U o "r5 .?:-ffi .- .... OI..L. c ro S! l5.. 0.. ro 0).9 ro C - ro . E l5.. ..0 _ :::I C en Q) mE ..c:: en .... Q) 0.. o 0) > Q) "0 Q) ..c:: I- ro - o Q) U C ro :::I Q) en O).~ ~.9.....; ro .... .~ E.g Q) "0 0.. 0.. ~~g> -fi'032 ~~E rJJ r..:l U ~ ;;;;l o rJJ ~ ..:l ~ ;;;;l E-< ..:l ;;;;l U C:O.9-=m~ .~ Q) "0 == .0, l5..uQ)eno o..ffi-roo roen~enQ) 13 ~ ~~ .~ 0.. 15.s; e oQ)c:gro 0- ~ .!:Q co 15 Q)~_cQ) ..c::.e::;=,Oo --c:.ot5g >.Q)-:::Ien ..o32~11i~ ~.9.2co.. > ~ g 0 Q) e ..;::;'.- U..c: a.. - C'> ........ 0...3 1;'.s ~ roenEs'E en ::Q .- Q.) .- Q) -fi' g :2 8'= .3 E o-grn .9 ::8ro"O 13m 0) Co _~ u: ..c:: ~e~ !-E<tS~ roQ5:::J :::I ..c:: 5l 0" 1::: ~ <(.2 gg ...... "0 05 ""-:u ""'" :!:m :!:iii -g"O ro ~ _ :::I g'en .C 15 5>:5 :::I Q) ro E :>;c Q) 0 =2::E W :::I E .!:2 en 0 ~ffiU<ri O'C ~ Q) ~U).c~ ..cQ)o6 e~en~.... ro 0.. ro "oQ)Q)=en "*:5~~~ ~'Ooen5 >..~ ~ ucP ~ Q) ~ -g 8'0:: .e- 0 U5 ~ 0.. In en ro ~ O)CQ)..c:::El "E ~ ~ ~ ::J -5 .:;: 5lll:: 0 "OCQ)roQ) 0>00:::00= IDtS ~ ~~~~~ Ucn~~ro 5 g :::) 16 ~ .!Q U 0 0 "0 ~m::roen - U ~ 6 ~:s -g .cen- ~S:6ro:::l _ "0 ..0 ~~~~Q) .- ..c:: Ctl ro C g> .2> ~ C 0 o 0:: ro 0 .s Q)Q)ou..c:: ro .... "0 _>. OS; ..c::roc ;:> g U5 Ctl 2 \\,1 _.~ ~ "OroQ)"Oc ~ .s en Q) = ~ E Q) ~ g U .~ :5 "O:gmQ)Q) .~ ~ iii ..0 ~ _ro 5 ,.....en~}g > -u enQ) ~ ~ ~ .=: ~.. ~ ~ ~ 5 ~ ="0""'" o..Ctl= W 0.. 'E!E~E.gc-E Q) ~ In .- .- Q) ro .- 32 ~ or- UJ g, 32 ~ .~ c: "'0 c: :.E "en \+- 0 :5 :::I en .2 I- 0 ...... Q) ~ro~N >.c..,t g :::I Q)U)OOM= o€"O .Q ~ co :.e::;..:::: ~ >:::1<(~~~ 5 ~ 0 a"". JB Q) ~ ""C "V ~~~~g8.55~g~ ~ "[ '0 ~ c> ~ l5.. ~ ~.~ :;;; ~ .0, g U) ~ .~ E ~ as ~ffi~o::o ....-gO:5 oenuQ)I..L.O:: ~="""en nso=ro o.."OQ)ro..,tCl) c. o...c ..c:: 0 "S == 0) Q) _E e .2> e <0 -g 0 0 = ::a: - 0.. en ro M Ctl == I .E ::a: .9 - Ou c~ o ro ~ c"o Q)"S 55 8 l5.. .s u Q) c: .~ Ctlo.. U)"O ..c:: C "5ro o 0 U)U o'~ .?:-ffi OU: c ro .!:2 l5.. 0.. Ctl 0).9 ro C - ro . E l5.. ..0 :::I en m ..c:: en .... Q) 0.. o 0) > Q) "0 Q) ..c:: I- Ctl - o Q) cU Q) C E ~ Q) en 0) .!Q ~.9......; ro .... .~ E.g Q) "0 0.. 0.. ffi~g> -fi'032 ~~E -ci 2 U 19 C o U .!Q Q) U fE o >. "0 :::I U5 c: 15 10 .~ .~ ro o-.~ 0 ro .!:2 .!:2 :0 ..c:: C> -'" C .!:2 0) 0):::1 Q) en 00 .... ro 8:~~o..e1i5O::~l5.. ro Q) Q) .... 5.0, I..L. C Ctl ro...!2 en 0 0 N .2 ~~13"O~OCO(V)ro "O'ro to ffi ~MOO2' 5.. "0 - ~ 13 '0- ~ .E Q) ~ ~ .0, to en N ~ !E .2" (b ..Q Q) c Q) ro i-~ =5 ~ ~;5_ ~ 8 ~ "'C c:: co a i3 ~.!::: en:.e::; ~::J t5ro:sg~~ e z..!Q Q) 5l.... 5 E &~cU)~~~5l8 Ctl.20 - _ Q) >=<( Ctl en 0:: Q) en ~ Q a ~ .2 Q) :5 .8> 0.. ~ ~ N ~ ~ :8 ro ~CtlCo M~ro:::lQ) ~ c>~roeno..E ~03(.)oo.s:::."""'L-::J ~~ O)OON ~~~ ~ "0 ..c:: .E 0:: 5 ~ ffi ro 1;' . Q) == -5 t3 '-'U- 0"- = Q) .c 0.. ~ E ~ 'iij ~ "0 <0 U) =:::1 .2 (b -g 5 5-.~ ~ : ~ Ctl ~ ~ ~ ~ <(JB>"'" ~:+::i ..c:'- _ Q) 8 -g 8 .9 .E C - Q) e""C3:J "0 go.s ~__ ~Q)ro~~o ~ ~ ~ -2 ~ c: fJ en:~ ~ ..,f :::1:::1:::1 .~ "S <( .!:2 ~ ""'moo5l2EO>0 ..::; enenQ)Q)....wQ)u :!:iii~~O::"O.EO:5~ ro - U 'B,.~ ..QUi ~I ~~.~ :::ICtlg 5l Q) m . ~:50ID c -g~Q) Ctl.9';; a>EO E....~ ~.E E ~5J2 ~5 .~ "E 1i5 -"'8~ 160~..c:: :5==Q)1::: a>:5~ ~ ~ 55 ~ -g -en ~UJ>' "OW ~ ffi.~ .0, Q) ro ~'ii5E Q)Q).E ~:5E (.) ~ en ffi 8 ~ CJ.) Q) ~ 5-~~ ~.g ~ & 15 C .!Q m U "0, o (5 Q) Ctl ..c:: e Ctl Q) :5 en Q) C "~ 2 Q) "0 1i5 .0, o (5 Q) ro ..c:: U ffi Q) :5 "Oenu Q) Q) "C: C6 "5...9 ~ 0 en ~OI ~~ .~ ""C:+::iC .a~~ en '- .- ~c...m --= ffimO-* _ g Q) Q) o.en:5 0 enenoc S~.....,~ ene"OCtl ~o..cE Q)"O Ctl .... ..c:: Q) >..E ..................., c: '0 aro - t8Q)j 8.Ctl:5 == ~ g'.s=E ro .~ "0 ZO Q) ..Q Q) roO ~ E o.."""_E2 Q)c..oen 5..~ ~ J) - 0.. mcQ)c ~ .Q ..0 g _-+-oJ-co .!Q ~}g E g>:e en 0 (5E1:::E ::8 ~ 8. ~ ...c: 0 ~ (,) ~ t Q) ::s ~ ~:5 5l '=~o& c Ctl U) :5 :::I o 0 ~.~ .?:-ffi oU: 0)0 Ctl -;; ro ,.....E-~o o..Q) -g~g en E ~ mQ)en ..c:: O).!Q ~~.9.-i ~ Ctl.....~ ..Q E .g Q) Q)"O 0.. 0.. iD ffi~g' "0 -fi' 0 'i5 ~2~S I-en_..o o-go~ =.~= a>Q)eQ) C..c:: o....c:: 0- - -Oo~o ffia>"Oeu E ~ ffi C :::10 e ..c:: 0 "0- 0 ...~JB() ~C~.?:- ::J€C5 5 ..0 == 5.. 0 ro O)Q)O c..oo o~ro~ ~ o,iii ::a: ~ 0 -g ffi 8c=U) en 0 Q) Q) =015:5:5 Q) 1'Q'O~ :5~ro~ -0Q)~c:: =ro roQ)m ~ <<,-:5 ii5 iD 5 ~z. ..0 Q) Q) IDc:roro :5ca=o=O E Q) Q) E:::IEE ..c:: E E N "0 .- .- oQ)~-- -.r-ocoffi ..,f ~;; g ~~~~ g'm .- E "0 .... ~.E .s - 32 en- 0 :::I c 8.ro E ~ "Oc o~== ns 0 0 Q) c..o..Cen E e ~ 0 _ c..::s:5 0\ .... I o .... ~ .... ~ 'e c.. :;;;J = ~ s: l. ~ .... '" ~ ~ '" .~ = 'Cj ~ "" ~ .... ~ l. o c.. l. o U -- = .Sl '" = ~ c.. ~ ~ .... Co> 'i: .... '" is >. ~ i: ~ ;;. o .... = ~ e c.. o "a:i ;;. ~ Q 'e = ~ .c: Co> l. ~ ~ '" ~ ~ .c: Co> ~ .... = ~ = ~ C ..><: '- o :s: ~ ctl ~ ~ g-~-o ~ ~ ~ ~~ ro~ .~ .~ .0 >. ~-g .0 -g(]) ctl:5 '- _- 0 :: ~ ~ ~ b() .5 1: <;::, & I:l:::: "l::l ~ b() .5 ... .s ':: ~ ~ '';:: l::l .~ .'l::i ~ ~ .... ... ~ ~ 15 U 15 .$ e tn 0.. 6 Cii .!Q "(i) .~ ro .;; .0 (]) o '- o.c" : (])(]).<:: :5a3- :E>~ ;: ~ 6 >..5 ~ 0.. c :::I ~ ~ tn O"C: ~ -o(])>. c E ctl ctl <( E g~~ 000..-0 0::: "S u..'-o ()~;: <.Oc (")ctl .5 ~- c:: U) ~g:s (]) ctl (]) ~~g IE-g "'CL.....~ (]) -0 ctl ~~~ 'E c(]) "" 't: fI) ~ -0 "" .!2> :E ~ .- ~ C/J I-o>o~ffi .00 c..t :S g~~ >..E~~ 18m~.9 ~~~u $o..m~ &..S E .S u ctl 0.. .S coO om :+=,.....: um (])o C/)LO <(6 0= WU ()(}3 ~ Z - IJ:J ~ o := Q Z < Z o - ~ < ..:l ~ i:l.. o ~ -0 ~ "5 cr ~ .!Q c .Q ro 0> = "E o z: c .Q ro "S 0.. o 0.. :5 .;: -0 $ ctl .13 o tn fI) ctl -lB.S ~ ~ g-~ .- -0 o C z: ctl IJ:J r"'l U ~ r"'l rF.i. U - ..:l !Xl ~ ~ -0 ~ .5 cr ~ .!Q c .Q ro 0> = "E o z: .S2 :c :::I 0.. :5 .;: -0 (]) ro .13 o fI) fI) ctl -lB U ctl o..fI) .S ~ o .~ z:~ o U fI) .13 c ctl U: c ctl C/) .<:: "5 o C/) '- o .?:- G '- ctl S '- -0 0 ~ 6, Cii (]).oo 15 .;; (]) '- ~ 0 8: (])(])ctl_ .c -:5 .9 .~ 10:200> 115 ;:";:: 0.. >.o..~ uuU)co (]) c (]) c: '~*~g 0...00 ~ ~ (]) c.5 ~ ~8c.9'O rF.i. ~ ~ Eo-< rF.i. >- rF.i. ~ U ~ ~ rF.i. ~ ~~gc~-g ctl(])=(])fI)O ;: ~ :g, 8. ~ c.9 '+- ;.;=;00....... o rn~ 0> e c: c:: :>a.~ tn .g. ~ ~ 0>:::1 "8 U I- .<:: .E ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .a -c: E ffi.5 ~ U 0 -3:'u~~ Q)"'Co~c:- '"C c: = L..... co .~ i3 ctl s 0 E .5 .5 '" (]) "E Cii E ~:5 (]) ~ '0 0 8.,g ~'5-:.Qij$g> fI).o-g~~o "E"'~(])E-o ctlUE-o,-c U(])=tnjgctl :a"e' ~ ~ a.~:::: 0.. 0.. ~ .Q 0 fI) ctl _e.ooo.. ~&~~S~5 "0' &. :::I ;., '- -.; ~ '-0.0_0-,,,, c..a.ai8:....;-.9~ Q) "'CCOC: :.;:::; ...c:Q)~...-Q)c(,,) 1-:5'TIgEctl~ .5 -0 "~ ~ 0.. Cii "S cr:::l 0> .<:: 0 (]) 0...5 fI) :::= ~-o 5 (J)Q)o-Sat3 -g~~g~ :5ctlO-Oc: (])(]).o6ctl E:2~u:2 00 ~ ..... S ..... Eo- ~.5 -0 ~'5 :E.o ~ ~ :::= c: -gCii ctl.5 ~ tn ~E fI)$ ctl tn :::= >. .<::tn "'0> '0.5 0>0 c 0 .- (.) ~-o ~ "~ 9~ '- c: -*~ :::="E ctl.~ cnIE c (]) ~ :::I fI) '" ~ ffi ~"'O"'O m"S"S E ~ ~ . 1:5 ctl 0.. .S '- -* :::= "'0 c: :::I e 0> (]) rn :::I ~ -* :::= R"~ u..Q 0.. Q; >.:5 U 0 ch~ ~ ~c: a)~ 0.. ctl ';;;'e c: -c: E"E ctl (])OCL-* 1;) (.,) ro "00 ~5 CD ~ 6 ~ ~ i: ~ .g' Q. g> o>"!::: E e .~ ""0 Q) -0 .:: Q) ~ O)(/) ~= .5 ~ '" ";: c: ' c (]) 6 0 ~ ~ 15 16 "5- 9 "5- :~ B '-en ~ -* ffi Q; _ffi :::= t ro o :::= c: . Cii 0.. >." Q"l -E 1i5~~~ro cwc.9oa. "'0 C ctl C o ~ 0> .;:: .: 0.. :g . .. 8 fI) .13 c ~ u.. c ctl C/) .<:: "5 o C/) '- o .?:- G '- ctl S '- "'0 0 ~ .~~ .~ ~ e ~ 0 8: (]) (]) ctl .0-:5.9 16:20 .<:: :::=.;:: "'>.0.. ouUJ (]) c: (]) .~*~ 0...- (]) (])~32 ~8(9 "0 C ctl en Q) (.) :::I ~ en ]2 :g c (]) "13 IE (]) ~ ro :::= '" ctl .<:: (.) :::I fI) tn (]) U .;; (]) -0 0> C ";; ctl ~ en '- -0 -*m :::=-E (]) Cii:::= cnO c115 '--0 s(]) ro ~:~ Eli; ~g ctlO :::=c:i (])..- ~ffi ctl'<:: 0.. ..... (]) '- "'$ Ciim cno> .5 :5 Cii ";: .<:: '" tn ......0> c ~ .~ ~ 15.,- g.s C3~ .~.a e ~ o..tn (])-o ~~ :a-g :;::'"ctl Mtn ..... 0> ..,f "5 :E;gro ::EE~ . ~ - ~ '1:l c- ;;;J = ~ s:: 100 ~ - '" ~ ~ '" .~ := 'Cj ~ r.. ~ - ~ 100 o c- 100 o U ...... = o 'r;; = ~ c- ~ ~ - CJ 'i: - '" is .... ~ "i: ~ :> o - = ~ 8 C- o ~ :> ~ Q '1:l = ~ -= CJ 100 ~ ~ '" ~ ~ -= CJ ~ - = ~ = ~ Co:) o M , o - ~ ~ Q':: ~ .S 'l::: ~ & ~ ~ ::: ~ ~ .S ... ~ .1::: ::: ~ ::: .~ ~ .~ ~ ~ .... ... ~ ~ e ~g~05~~ ~ ~~~~m o "CO:::l 2 e~ c-c-o 8~ c..,S2 0""'-0 0"3g>Q)0Q)0 roo~~(..)..c:c.. 55 3:.x CD [i:; 1? C: E 0).......>--0 Q) _ Q) ro ~"3: ~ e: c...~:5 0 0-0 co 0 E "~o ..... Q)..c: 2 ~ - -'-Q).......i....~m(,)~ N a. ~ 0Ci) o~ "8 oS: 0Ci) M Q)'-fJ)"'O "If""" .g;. = '- en "'5 ..... -'"0 5ffi - oE ID a. ~ ro e: o ~ t3 en '0 ro ro ~o -g~ en c:: ro ro :::I ..c:en en 0!!2 Q5B a. ..... o 0 ~.~ ~8: Q):S: ~(/) ro -g .sf 7i5ro"O C g>~ ~o~.~ ="0 - 8:.?;-.25 roo- _me u :::I e: .~ :: => ~~ .0 Q):S:.g €'t):::s 00- jB og_ ~ "E e ";:: Q) 0.= ~ Eojge: ~-cno 'S 23 0- t5 ~t5a: 2 2~(j) (/)OO(/)5 LUe: u ~guQ) z .9 .~ ~ e ..... ,g c.. Q c.g~ ~ ro a. /- ..... ~ a... ~ ""'a...e:ro :::Ia...oQ) a...:s:t5E ~(/) E g> "':' ro ~ 03: Mo.OO .... 0 U = -<iQ3 .E O::>~Q) Q..~ro:5 .....; oE ID a. 0) e: :2 05 ..a e: ..... 0 Q~ ci>g' ~:B ~'OQ)roE .Q ~ ..c:o~_ -g g :::I en ro E 6 "0 U5 oS: :S:~0~15~ ~..c-;::; en Ci)"O~~:::S en e: en e: ::3 roroe:~g i3 g>~ _~ :::I 0- ro C> (1)16"'5<(= ::3 E g' a:l (/) :::I_.....<(m .~ g 1? ~ ~ ..c:C-CU) uO..c:Q)ro Q)u::::EQ) -e::S:e::::2: .~ .~ ~ Q; -_e -roe c: > ~Q).gc35 :.c en 0 ro () ro(j)UQ)_ (;)~~<a3 00 ..o.ffi oS: 1U'.~ ~ -ca:l~ ge~oU) gg~g-g ~u~1ij~ o 5 ..a 0(3 0 0Ci) 0Ci) ro ~ 0Ci) ee..c:cne LUQ)en<(LU . Us 05!2. 0Ci) e e o.Q) ..... Q) ..a i.i: mO) Q) e: a.":;; .Q O(j) en u ~~ "O~ ~ Q) 0) ..... -rom ~a3Q) o"O~ Q) ~ c g-~o~ Ci;o"O ~ 'E E o c...9 "O:s:en ~.g-g 21?e ~ ....... co 0- oS: "0 Q) "0 e: ~..92~ 'u 2 :s: ..c:eno ene:e;:::: .!!!. '0) "0 e..c.JB ~~~ ~~g 03: e g Qi't5rh :!:::'Q)-c- ~ oe--.i o 0."0 ffi en ;S U ro a. o~ em....... o-ro 16~:5 c~ Q) """ ~ E 0:: :::I ..92a...~ a. Q) E en .- 1:: "C Q)"3 ..;'EO ~ ~ :s: ~05_ ~ ~~ (/) LU OE a...ro z~ "000 2e: ~~ ';-"0 5.9 t5 2 00 e: o u ID ..c: o o~ Q) ro 0)0. Co :- ..c:Q) ~6 ~c: 1?~ -;,~ oS: ~ CQ) Q)"O ~ogJ 0...0 ..... en Q"E cn19~ a...:::I2 :::2:=ro a:l 8.. :s: . ~ ro u t;:::: Oc: 0!;2> en l::: Ctl :S ~ J;!2 en e: "(ij E ~ c..i (j) ai (j) t3 e: o u "0 "O~ ~~ Q) U o.Q) oS ..a Q)ro ..o7i5 roen ..c:~ en :::I enu ~2 "(3 en ~& Q) ro O)e: ro .(ij e:-o .~ "O~ ro~ -c"o Q) e: (j)ro -a-: E a3 oE~ U 0_ Q) 0!!2~ E c::UJ~ O"oQ) U.$cn 2~-g ~Ero o :::s.~ u8..o ..... ro Q) Q)....."O ~.E15 . o U en '(3 e: ~ LL e: ro (/) ..c: => o C/) - o .?;- o ro .....; =-E- ~ "E .2 Co ..0"",0. ~o.O) e: e: ro..!l:!'O ..c:a...= en _ :::I .....0..0 Q) .b co g.S15 Q3()Q) iD 5 g "0 "Ci) ro ~ J] o~ ~~~~~~~~ :5c<(Q):B:t::15 e 03: g Q)..c: :::I g a. cr:::a>:5I-.l::;:::s ,~ 0 "'0 -c_ enQ)" ~ :: g> '-' t5 -5 ..... 0 Q) 00, e: e: e: 03: ~ U -ro ro o~ .~ 0- Q) ro g> :s: 00 J] "~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ffiouffig.l::;.E2Ke Q) 0:: U 5 "Oe: 00 05 _(j) o!!2u ro 0 ro e:o c- e Q) o.E ~ E "e:~ C g> ~ "'0 - 0 Q)"i:: c: c: g LL () oQ E :::I ro ro e: __=> '0 "0 E roroe: Q)"O.....Q) ..c: (/) .~ 8.. (/) ~ .9 ~ ':~e"'O-g::JenQ) e: gLU ffi roc::.2515 > ~(/)Q) -00..015 ~ 15 ~ 5 0Ci) -;;; E en ro .?;- c:: 0Ci) e a... .E 5 - 0- 0 e LU :::2: O):;::l a3 0 1ij Q) 0 a:l oS: ~ 0(5'" ~ (,) ......;- ~ Q) == 0 c........:.a.~~~ ~-Q) Q) .9 0."0 ..... Q) Q) ..c:"O<( e:-.g:g~-g ~ Jg ~ oQ ffi U 0 U ..a 0- Q)"'" ro (/)...... ~ o_~ "~ -E : "0 .... ..a a... o~ 15 0 ~ -..c:ro ~ ~ 0)......_ en oS: oS: ~ ro e en -<i.25"O:S:e:roce: 0:: 0 ~ .P ro ..c: 0 a.....!l:! Q.._C>_:::2:enu en en Q) u u ro "0 Q) c:: e: ro 0.. "0 e: ro -gen ro ffi 0) 0.. e: 'O-g ~ ro O)Q) o)u e: e: Oi:: ro :::I e: "0'0 jBO "Ci) Q) :5 en ro Q) ro e: o 16 ~ :.c o E >. 2 ro '0 Q) g>E '0 o~ ......~"'O 0Ci) 0) Q) "S; Q) t) ..c:~ 16......0 .r=~{,) : "3: .25 Q) Q) >uro 16c.r= EJg~ ~ ~ u ~o:.c o.U:S: ~~cn o ~ 6 l!=e:1ij roQ)<5 en ..9 os: en >. .><:e:e: OoQ ro :s: 1:5 Q) 215 oS:? en c: ::Oe:"O :::I 0 e: a...uro en- E o g en ~ o u en 0(3 e: ro ..... LL e: ro (/) :5a:l :::10 c530 _:s: 00:: ~-g () ro ro .....; =-E- ~ oe oQ Co ..0.....0. :::10.0) en e: e: ro..!l:!'O ..c:a...= en<5E Q) J::; ro o.e:_ ~8o > e: ~ Q)oe: "0 0Ci) ro Q) 0 :::I ..c:.....en /- LU .!!2 &~.E a... oe- en :s: a. ~ (/)Q):::I ..c:en /-:g E ro e: o e: 1ij0 CD 13 g> a. :::I 03: o~.Q ffi5S o..~Q) .QQ)~ Q)<l::: ai ~.9 "'C~"'O ro~~ 7i5 c- E Ci5~ -roQ) :s:..o - e: ro 0S2 fr13g ro2 ......e::J a3 0...0 "e..9 Q)- o.e:"O Q)j5-5 ..c:ue: /- 20- (i'en16 - e:..c: Noen .nu .... 0 -<i- ~ ~ e: o 16 ID a. o U Q) "e- o. a... a... a... oQ :s: 5.(/) Q)l!= ~g _ :::I o ..... ro e: o :;::l Q)'O c:'5-g 0..0 ~~16 ~8~ a33200 o..g-g E u en -0"'0 ",,"Q)"O M"e- ro "'-.: c.. "0 <5 """~"3en t)~g~ n:s c........ _ Cooro:::l ~ 5.:5 ~ ~ .E Q) ID :5 ~- o e: 2 "0 2 ..::! <5 a. - N I o - ~ - e"l '0 c.. o C e"l 6: .. ~ - '" e"l ~ '" .~ :5 .~ e"l r.. ~ - e"l .. o c.. .. o U --- c o .;;; c e"l c.. ~ >.:l - CJ 'i: - '" Q >. e"l i: ~ .. o - c ~ 8 c.. o ~ .. ~ Q '0 C e"l .c CJ .. e"l ~ '" ~ g:: .c CJ ~ - c ~ c ~ '" ~ ~ ~ b.() .S 1:: ~ & Cl:: "::l ~ b.() .S ... ~ .... ::: ~ ::: ~ '::: <::l .~ .'l::: ~ ~ .... ~ ~ e "'~ a:::~'" u:i 'E E ~O)I-<= ~-5-c2 """-00).2 cc.oo E ~ '5 0- O)m~2 E .;:: -C C :.cJEa>jB 0) l1:l.o 0 '" Em 0. ""Cc:..c:"'C ~2 m ~ .~ 'g,~ :5 o'Cij >'"~ (0 -c ~ ~~.a~ 0l1:lU)0 ~~a:::<= ~=u:i ~ i5";;;; ~ (J) (J) u ~ ~ roctS~cn ~ ~ .=: ~ .$!1i)-c..c: 0::J 0) 0> 0.'0 '" "" ~ c::::l e 0-0)0 5~.o::5 'E.~~~cn '5 >. 8 '0 ~ cn""O-.,J::J- Q) ..a co C3 ::J o U) ::5 .S ~ . l1:l '0 '0 20) O)",,!E ~o~ ..r:: 0.'0 C'- '0 0 "'5130) oca:5 (,)0. 13E::5 "~~.~ e l1:l ....._ o..g 0) '0 'c a; 0) .2> 3: '" '" 0 8..~:c e12 o.<=~ 0) 0 ~oS _0...... __ I l1:l (,) c:: ?;::(~l1:l M.S :S -.i ch "'J!2 ~;Sl1:l en --0- ,g ~~""C ~ ~ ~ ill-.i-5 . E~~~ ~ J!2 c: Q) 1:: o .0 l1:l :.;::;.J::. (,,) l1:l 0>'0 !t:: .2' i5 "'5 c:: E :E ~ .~ -C 0) '" l1:l .0 l1:l <= ~ 0) <(:gE >.~ro -gg~ U)UJ:5 ~~.~ ~=a... O)o~ :5 ~CD .S jg 0 Cl= ~$C: -Coo 0) 0. (,) E"'C~ ~~:s ~~~ .- ~ c: 0)';;;; 0 ~~~ _l1:l(,) cr~~ ~1i)0) en "".0 ..... '0 O.S m c"'C..r:: o 0) (J) ~t+=(f) (,)-'Cij ~ .~~ c:-Q c.. 0) C E :2ow . e <= o (,) o ffi E 13 "'5~0)~0) g ~ "," ~ ~E .0 m ~ ~ c: ~ e- ~ ~ c: ~~-5i% ~:",cn m~ 'm.5 2 co "* 0 ffi E ~ 1i) .- co (,) ..... g~Q)~3:~~~ a. t5 '5 ~ c.5 ffi .S 0) a~o~~~~~ ~::'~0)l1:lca...2 ~ =- 0) E ~'m . c c"'5c~coE~~ ~ ~ ~ CO '0 0)- ~ l1:l 0) co 0) -0)0. ~ 0 9< E '"C..ut:) co~-......... .s ~ E ~- a. ~ e co VJ ~ L.... Q) 0..-:5 -g m .0 c ~ ::5 co .~ ro-t5 ~ ~o rnro.o 0>>.02-gi5m~ "2 g ~ .S: ro -e ~ 15 .9 0) 0> co ",l1:l0. 'c 5- 0>0 E (5 ~ .~ .~ o O)-..r::"'C~ Ejg~ g-g>0) 0).0 l1:l"'Co(,)~.o-g~ '0 ffi g>~ ffi iU'C3 "m ~ _'" .- C 0. E .5 '0 ~ ffi.!Q..... ol1:l a>cQ)cOcn......c K ~ C3 .Q g>~ ~ 0 o Q) -- 10 .- ....... "'0 a;.= e Q) g- en ~ ~ > 5-<= 0>0) E"'C l1:l ts~8~~.gE~ '0 0) '0 0) 0) C '" l1:l '" 0) '" "" . -C ,g 0) 'E :5 ...0 en roffi~~~ "'CU)"'C en ~~ffi~Q) ::J "'Ccn:5 "'Cc7.lO)a........ 5..... "E a... 0 (,)o8a...~ 0) .?;- 0) 3: "(3 .o<3;oU)~ ~o.o~5f ",=aml-~ E ffi -fi5 c..:.5 ~enO)a...>. 0>0 (,) a... C eaffi~CO 0.3: C U) ~ ~a:::,*0)~ fa ~ offi :5 :g ~-E::5co "E ll-g .~ .9 'm c CO c c::- E 0 o>.Q CO ""C g- 02 ~ ~ ffi~,g'E ~ g>~5g~ .;:: g>~ (,) '" .9 >. 0.5 CO 'c (,) (,) >.-0 ~ ~ "~"ffi 2 ::J g ::J ~ ~5f~2'O 1-.l=l.Ll1:ll1:l . o (,) '" "(3 c l1:l U: c CO U) ..r:: "5 o U) ..... o .?;- <3 '" 0) c::5 ~'O - c 'E 0 .g~ cn]9 ~"5 '" 0) 0)::5 0.0) ~~ '0 .5 ~ro 1-::5 .9_ o E 'C CD 0.0. 00> c...5 0)'0 (,)= ..... ::J 2.0 .5 l1:l c..... 'm ~ -0(,) E ffi o'~ 1i) .~ 0) >. t.>..9 c: c '" c CO C05~ON '0 . ""C:+:J~:.s: en "3 ::s - .."" "f.s c:: c: 0>.0 € E m .~ ~ 'm -g ~ en..E U c....c -0 l1:l 0 '0 .5 "E e :.c: E !J>(,)O)O)O)o.o..... --:=...0 _.J:: c..C5..o ::JCli ~C,,)co_1i) ~ "5 m E- g>-g """ .9 ~ '5 -fi5 "" "c co -g .5 o.cEl1:lo.co", ~ l!3 ,g :5 ~ :;> en ~ o '-E l1:l E m ffi ~ 'E ro .- E CO '(3 ~ .- 0) E .5 .E ;;:c (0 (,) E ..r:: o E.5 ro E (V) ~ ~ 'E .9 .~ E en (,) c .- ",..r:: ~ 0 - '0 l1:l ~a...I-<((,)r5ffi$ ~ ~ ~ -€J '0 'E $ "~ 0) en 0) ""-0) coO) Ci ~ E U5 ~ -5 "53 ro ~o.a:::o.o>-E mO)..Q_",c~"'" -fi5 E ~ w '0 '5. 0 "EEO)~""'r5~g> l1:l 0 -c 0) ~ '" 0'- g(,)~::5e-g"E~ a. -g (J) .5 0. CO ~ "" o.l1:l8..",-::co"'C l1:lmoO)"-o..r::-c ~:E n~~ ~o ffi "e- ~ ~ % ~ ~ 10 g> o.-g-E(,)O):g:.c: 0) .- E 0) mo.o. '" ..r:: c 0 _ ..r:: e .~ ~ I- o.l= l1:l '" 0.'0 :> B-g.9-9 0. l1:l ~.5 ~ $'- c Co "0 10 ~ c(J)~J9 .- > - Q) ~ r~ i .~ 0-:5 0 "'C E-;o~ffi ~ ~ g>-g Q5 l1:l C'N l1:l-g o"Cij c: E ro "C Q) ~ =g U)~:NO::J .!:: l- c.. c.. '- m ~ e .S % m ..r:: ~ 2t"~ 0) ..r:: "'~<(CO~ '" cCn.....:~.sa ~ := ~ to .s =OCOO)O) 0...... 3: 0>::5 g-~E~o> U ~.9'~'~ O)l1:l"'-co '0'1: E 0) ~ Ci'5e~(,) """'''Cc ~ffi~""O) I-",ro~~ :Q'ro"S~c NC (,).Q 0 . ~~ ~fil ~ c: a.. 2S. Q) -o:i~ ~"S~ ~"*~~5 ~_..r::_ (,) . 8 '" '(3 C l1:l U: C CO U) ..r:: "5 o U) ..... o .?;- <3 0) ::5 Q) '0 "" C3 .5 m ..r:: '" (0 0. o a; > 0) '0 0) ..r:: I- CI.I ... ~ ~ Co ~ = ~ s: r.. CI.I ... '" ~ ~ 0) CO C .~ -c 0) > co E 2 co '" .~ :5 'z:i ~ ~ CI.I ... ~ r.. o Co r.. o U ...... = o ';] = ~ Co ~ r.:l ... C.I 'i: ... '" Q .... ~ "i: CI.I > o 2 co o ... = CI.I E Co o ~ > CI.I Q ~ = ~ .c C.I r.. ~ CI.I '" CI.I ~ .c C.I CI.I ... = CI.I = CI.I ~ o (,) "~ U N M .... -o:i ~ ~ M M I Q - e ~ ~ ~ .5 l:: <:::. ~ =r::: 'l::l ::: ~ ~ .5 ... ~ '::: ~ ::: <:::. ... ... ~ .~ ~ '-=> ..... ... ~ ~ e 0-..,; '~'E en Q) 5c.. :sg> g~ ~.5 ro ro c_ '(6 0 -o~ <D c ro~ !ij .l8 1ij.s en ~ o .~ <D c.. .s 0"0 c ffi ~ r.n ro <D ~~ .0 .0 .g~ ~ ~ C3~ c ~ .- c 1U'~ Ec.. en en ro c ~ o ro :s (5C en 0 ~ 2 <D o :0 - o en ro ~ ro <D ~ ~ en "Oro c ~ o ro .r:: u ~ (1):.9 5~"O :s~~ (5~E u> en :..= o U <n '(3 c ~ u.. c ro C/) :5 ~ o C/) - o ~ <:3 <D ~ :5Q)U ~:5<D -5.9= .S.5.9 ro5~~~ of: 'E 'E- ~ E ~*.og~ c.......~5..~ .Q -S ...... c.. CO ~031ro5 ~g.c:.9~ <D ~ .~ 0 t; .r:: 0 <D .;:: .!!2 I- "0"0 c.."O cri "0 c o c.. "S o c.. en c ;: o "0 o c.. .g o e 2 ro o c.. o u .S: ro .r:: en "E ro "~ l5..cri c..c ro ro "t)cs.. <Do> "i5'.S: c..:B <D '5 .r::.o I-ro ::Co -~ N .S: MC ..... 0 --=tE :::i:2 :::i: ~ o U en '(3 C ro ..... u.. C ro C/) :5 ~ o C/) - o ~ <:3 <D ~ :5Q)U <D :5 <D -go= ~:S.9c oo"'Oco-.. ~ ~ ~ '0 "E en ~ 'E ro Q) Q)~.gE;c.. g-Een5..~ ~551g-5 Q) ~ O:.;::i "0 ro 5,~ <D (],) 2>"en 0 u ~ 'E ~ '~:6 ......Q)~O ~:5ti:~ C - "0 '(3 8 ~ ffi ~ ro '00 u.. .r::>-;:c <nrooro "Effiq:::C/) r3c~.r:: .- co t+= -S l5.. 0 g- ~ 5, C/) u g-:G~ .~ 5.. "0 ..... .9 c...9 ~ "'C Q) ......:: Q) :5 m g.~ ......c<DE "E '0, ..... .0 "E Q)JJ~~~ c.. <DE 0>5 <D.o 0 :6 15 .S: 16 u =<DE.r::-g :::I15<Dcnro ::.....Qit;: l!?Q..."OO<D l.l: ~ "0 g-.:;;: .9U:ffi~~ .Q ~ u ~ .E Q:tt=Q)tc _ 'E '0' <D <D ns<D.....uE - u c..<( t <'?C/) ro MUJ~c::c.. ""':UJeno<D .....00=0 :::i:zg-~~ :::i: ro 5.. -5 u: o u en "(3 c ~ u.. c ro C/) :5 ~ o C/) - o ~ <:3 <D ~ :5<D<:3 <D :5 <D "0 :5 U.s~ .5 .5 -- c: ro :G~~;+-'E- ..c'-:::::o en ~ "E ro Q) ~~~ ~~ Q3 c: Ci5 c.. c > 0 en ro 0 ~~ g,.s~ Q) E>"Ci) 0 t; ~ 'E ~ '~:6 ro ~~ ~ -g ~c75~~i ffio::ro~TI .2 W 1;) c: ~ ~~ g>,g 0 ro<D'ti~~ 0:50>:,;::;.0 <D - ~ 'E "e- ~ ~ .c_ ~ c.. Q) tE en jgJ!!c~"O -ooc:~ ::::E-g~'$ ~ .....co"O<D ~:E ~ ~ E ::::<(0)- g>;:<nq:::g :.0 en --c ~ .92 =="Eott=o .E~~JB~ ro-g,<D~"O g>.r:: ro g ~ .:;;: ro s: "0 <( .~ ~ ffi ~ -g ~ ~ ,~ ~ a; ffi .s ~ (u .~ ~ g- .....2~>ro8 .g ;: .9 .9 ~ 0 ~~cm~~ e <D ro g5 ~.Q <'? ti= ~ ~ "'t c.. M ::; <(- C"') "0 ..... E c..::>~ <D "":.gro~""'(j) :::i:<D~<(~2 :::i: c..<( _~ ~ Q)Q)U>Q)Q)~o-_ro~ . :5:5~~:5q::c:C?"'O~ O~ffi~5~g(V)S~ c ~ ID"S '5 ~:; ~ C\:l o t; :::: 8 16 g <D ~ ~ <;::.~_ 16cen c.......E""'~ "E'- <D U E <D ..Q2 ..::: ~ s., <D "0 :5 .~.- .r:: c.. E ';::; - '- 0 ...... :: E VJ ~ 5 0 5..ffi <D'- :G'~ ~ l5..;:~"O.g~~::;;S~ E ~ '00 3l 'c ~ ;> en - I 1O~a500>0 -~~~ '0'"0 c.."oo ~ Q) E C"') ..!!:l M,--e>.E> rhoo ,,",:c..a5c..162~ .0 ....."OE<D=~05.....~ ...., ~ 0..:5 ~ (J) :c :.;::; ..c ~ (,)0..2--'-00(00')0 ~ g- ~ "S 8.."* ;: "Q> 5 ~ ~ 5..~ ~ ro ;:.gE:5~ o u en '(3 c ro ..... u.. c ro C/) :5 ~ o C/) - o ~ <:3 <D ~ :5Q)o ~:5<D ::Jo:5 ~:S.9c cn"'OCO_ ~ ~ ~ '0 "E en ~ "E ro Q) ro .0 > c.. <DE~e~ c..ro ccuc..c oenroo 1ii g,.s ~ g"oo 0 t; 'E ~ '~:6 Q) c.. o Q) > <D "0 <D .r:: I- ..... ..... <D '0 .E .0 2:"0 3l ~'3: ~.5 ro gro ..c'-~ ~zjM 'Ea5:; ~.5<D o ..... ~16~ en ~ ~ >-c~ [~c E Q),Q oEro <..)<Do> ~-g~ .~ ro 83 ~ .S: .....o~ JB~~ ctSm~ s: c.. <D roO:-Q "2 '- u:i ......0; c <D ~:5oE 16 t5+:i 0-g2ro u~Kro MCD -c ~ ..0_ JB ~ ""': ~ ~]j "'<troc-c :::i: 0 <D '(6 :::i:(j)-gE o u en '(3 c ro ..... u.. c ro C/) :5 ~ o C/) - o ~ <:3 <D ~ :50)0 CD :5 Q) -g :5 (3B .=: .=: .9 c en -c ctS -.; co ~ ~ '0 "E iii ~ 'E ro Q) Q)ro.o>c.. c..~~e~ ~cQi~~ >oenroo CD~c:.s~ -c C) C) '- '- ~;e.~.g"~ I- E "0 c.."O cD > o .0 CO e: .s::: C) ~ e .r:: .... ~ ..... M ..... ...,: :::i: :::i: <D <D C/) <D.S: :5~ -"S o en ~ cri .9,! l5.. c.. ~ en c o ~g g c 16 Q)J2 g>~ ~ 5 2 'E ~ l5..;:~ a5 .su 0"0 .....<D c"S M'e- ,g ~ ~ c.. .s r- ...:j-cc c: I .... 3l "~ ~ ~ ~0lj:<D"'" c..c..~l5..~ E ~.s .s ~ ~ ~ d: ~ en C\:l eno:S ro c.. I <D e ~ E c....!!:l <D :5ro M ..- en -.i13ro CD ~ ~CctS <D<D.r:: E a5 en <D (!) .= > ~ K ..0- .= ECX?jg ~C"')-a; ~-.i~ ffi -g e ([ro oro~ u.. co iii c;) ..- 'l:I:: "E <D E <D > e c.. .s E ro I >- <D .!!l ~ 1!.i ~ c ~ <D .= E c <D 0 > t K~ .s <3: "0 <D c c ro ([ ~ co M ..- -.i "0 c <D 0 E<D15 ...: 0 ~ <D -6:~Q)o c..;:ou ~OC<D ~q::::2:5 J:g-C::J..s <Dro2~en 10;: ~~"E .r:: 5 '0' ~ <D O:"~ E "C~ e~ -c..QOQ...o 5EM~5.. ;: ~ :; :g .s ~ ~ t) g-~ .~ ~ ~ 5.. 2 ~.~ ~ ~ ~ tt'l N I <:> .... ~ ... ~ "0 Q., ;;;J = ~ c: 100 ~ ... '" ~ '" .~ = 'y ~ r.. ~ ... ~ 100 o Q., 100 o ~ = .5:1 '" = ~ Q., ~ i:..:l ... CJ 'i: ... '" is >> ~ "i: ~ ~ o ... = ~ e Q., o QS ~ ~ Q "0 = ~ -= CJ 100 ~ ~ '" ~ ~ -= CJ ~ ... = ~ = ~ I.:i is ~ ~ ~ .15 l:: ~ & ~ ~ :: '= ~ .15 ... ~ .1::: :: ~ :: .~ '= ~ ~ ~ ..... ... ~ ~ e Co c<o Q) Q) 0 c: EO "g> ~ c.. N LU<;::.2Q) .?;- Q) ~ :5 (5~~.9Q) <DOL-eel) :5~J2~~ ~c:t:::: ~J- ..0 roE::> . -ci7liDo..ffi ~ .ra 0.. ~ a::: .E .9 g> > iD Q;L...:e;eCi) CD .g s 8: co -c 0....0 ro ~ L() .,.... ~ "E Q) E Q) > e 0.. .s E ro :c >. Q) .!!2 ~ r:::- ~ "E Q) E Q) > e 0.. E E ro :c >. Q) .!!2 ~ 00 c: o 15 U5 0.. E ::> 0.. U 00 M .,.... - .,.... .,.... ~ "E Q) E ~ o 0. .s E ro :c >. Q) .!!2 ~ 00 c: o ~ U5 0.. E ::> 0.. .9 "<t c: c: 0 "co 16 ~ U5 Q) 0.. ~ E o ::> u... 0.. '0 00 M .,.... -c Q,).sa c ]2ro ==~ ~.g 0 ~ ~ 'Eo ::> 8 Q)O_'O o..c Q)()O--cro ..oro8lB~a::: roo~-~eL... .J:: Q) r..... ..... a..$! In u .E ro 0.. In 1nC: ::>roro "Ero~g"E~ Q)i7lffiQ)Q)8 E In 0...2: E 0 ~ .C; i3 ]i g-N O-u~-Q) 0.50 E~:5 .5 .i5. '0 i3 ~ .9 co ~ L() ~ "E Q) E Q) > e 0.. .s E ro :c >. Q) .!!2 ~ -"" c: 2 .15 ::> C/) >. ro 3: <( z o ::c- oo M .,.... - c: Q) E Q) > e 0.. E E -"" ro c: :c 2 >..15 Q) ::> .!!2 C/) ~ ~ c: Q) > <( -c c: ro <9 en ro LU c;::- OO M .,.... ~ 00 M .,.... ...t ...t ...t ...t ...t 1:5c: ~~ 1?E;' -.- UJ .5: 1? ~ .2='--:'- 'u~.~ ro ::> E fa-~~ uro~ g>1n1n ~~~ .~ ffi ~ -c 15..$ ffic~~ EQ)==~ Q)EQ)<;:: (;) 16 -5 "g, ~ ~ .9 Oe;; ~ .... ~ "0 Q, ;;J = ~ s:: 100 ~ .... '" ~ ~ ..c: >. 0> ..0 e "E "C -c..c:=~ ~ CD :=.. ~ .9 .~ ~~CI)Q) $ ..!2 ,..c:~Q)Q) a...~~1:::5""C g>~ C U) 0 ~ (ri .- - Q)"- C - Q) .5: .!!3 55 J2 0 .!!3 .5: ~ 55 <9 .15 15 55 g> ~E2:5"EELU Q)~oo~~~~ :5 e ch os; ~ e u 5 ~'"-: e ~ ~ 1? u... _ "<t 0..._ ._ _ '" .~ := 'y ~ r-. ~ .... ~ 100 o Q, 100 o U -- = o 'r;; = ~ Q, ~ r..il .... C,I 'C .... '" is ..... ~ i: ~ > o .... = ~ e Q, o Q:i > ~ Q "0 = ~ .c C,I 100 ~ ~ '" ~ ~ .c C,I ~ .... = ~ = ~ \.:) "" M I o .... CHAPTER 11 Updated Report Preparers City of South San Francisco Marty Van Duyn Assistant City Manager Susy Kalkin Acting Chief Planner Mike Lappen Senior Planner Dennis Chuck Senior Engineer Ray Razavi City Engineer CSG Consultants, Inc. Cyrus Kianpour Curt Luck PROJECT SPONSOR Vice President of Engineering Project Manager Genentech Lisa Sullivan Shar Zaman pour Meg Fitzgerald Mark Cuzner Minitier & Associates Jim Harnish Strategic Facilities Planning Principal Planner Senior Legal Counsel Project Engineering Consultant I Principal Dyett Bhatia Rajeev Bhatia Sarah Nurmela Principal Project Planner Wilsey Ham- Utilities Master Plan Kristin J. Parsons, P.E. Principal Ken Selby Senior Engineer Kevin Okada Project Engineer AEI Affiliated Engineers- Hydrology Modeling James N. Sharpe, P.E., LEED AP I Principal Fehr & Peers- Transportation Matt Haynes, P.E. I Transportation Engineer Nelson/Nygaard- Traffic Report Ria Hutabarat I Senior Associate T.Y. Lin International/CCS- Traffic Impact Analysis Shusuke Lida I Civil Engineer Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update 11-1 Chapter 11 Updated Report Preparers - . . EIP Associates Kim Avila, AICP Project Manager Daniel Kenny Deputy Project Manager Julian Capata Deputy Project Manager Linda Tatum Planning Lead Jordan Smith Water Resources Lead Sam Anderson Technical Analysis Jessie Barkley Technical Analysis Kevin Beauchamp Technical Analysis Demian Ebert Technical Analysis Erin Efner Technical Analysis Christina Erwin Technical Analysis Shannon Kimball Technical Analysis Ruta Kshirsagar Technical Analysis Fan Lau Technical Analysis Mav Ye Lau Technical Analvsis Shraddha Navalli Technical Analysis Sheldon Nylander Technical Analysis Seema Sairam Technical Analysis Marissa Staples Technical Analysis John Steere Technical Analysis Teresa Taoia Technical Analvsis T.J. Weule Technical Analysis Joel Miller Administrative Manager Christopher Perry Administrative Support Ron Arzaga Administrative Support Pedro Vitar Administrative Support James Songco Graphics/Cover Design Korve Engineers, Inc.-Traffic Report Tim Erney, AICP Principal Transportation Planner Ryan Niblock Traffic Engineer 11-2 Genentech Research and Development Overlay District Expansion/Corporate Facilities Master Plan Update EXHIBIT H Conditions of Approval CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM DATE: February 9, 2007 TO: Planning Commission FROM: Michael Lappen, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Conditions of Approval The Planning Commission Resolution includes the Conditions of Approval and The Implementation Plan. The Implementation Plan lists the appropriate construction phasing, by neighborhood, for the improvements under the Master Plan. The Planning Commission reviewed the draft Implementation Plan, dated February 1, 2007, at the February 1,2007 meeting. The applicant has submitted a revised draft Implementation Plan on Friday afternoon, February 6, 2007. This draft of the Implementation Plan includes the following changes that were not reviewed by the Planning Commission: · Changing the benchmark for the installation of directional signage from six months to December 2007. · Changing the construction benchmark for the food concession and open space area along the San Francisco Bay Trail from the construction of Building 50, which would occur within the next few years, to the construction of Building 4, which may occur toward the end of the planning period. Planning Staff had prepared Conditions of Approval based on the Planning Commission consensus at the February 1, 2007 public meeting and the draft Implementation Plan dated February 1, 2007. Since the revised Implementation Plan was not submitted to the City until Friday afternoon, Planning Staff has not completed the revisions to the Conditions of Approval. The revised Conditions of Approval will be presented to the Planning Commission at the February 15,2007 public hearing. DRAFT February 9,2007 GENENTECH MASTER FACILITIES PLAN 2007-2017 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM The Genentech campus is organized into neighborhoods to provide a sense of scale and support Genentech's diverse functional requirements. These neighborhoods are geographically defined as Lower, Mid, Upper & West campuses in Section 2.1 of the Master Plan. This Implementation Plan sets forth the improvements required by the proposed Master Plan, and those that have been proposed as Conditions of Approval by the Planning Commission, and City Planning Staff in each neighborhood, but does not include improvements identified by the MEIR in the MMRP DRAFT February 9, 2007 GENENTECH MASTER FACILITIES PLAN LOWER CAMPUS 2007~20 17 IMPLEMENTA TION PROGRAM This Implementation Plan sets forth the improvements required by the proposed Master Plan, and proposed as Conditions of Approval by the Planning Commission and City Planning Staff, but does not include improvements Identified by the MEIR in the MMRP IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION ~ TRIGGER Land Use And Structure Complete Bay Trail designation of public parking on Campus shoreline lots for evenmg and weekend use, as required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by the Planning Commission) 'i::j Z: ..... C'l ~~ >-t (l) ~ ::l 1-".1-"- ....... ...... ..... (l) rn ?P ~ ~ Install Bay Trail directional signage from intersection of Forbes & Allerton, Oyster Point & Gull Drive, and East Grand & Grandview Drive to the Bay Trail access points as required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by the Planning Commission) Construct Bay Trail improvements of food conceSSlOn & public restrooms (3000 SF), additional open space for public use, along Forbes Blvd (total of.8 acres including parking) Enhance landscaping at the Bay Trail by expanding the green space along the Lower Campus parking lot (adjacent to UPS facilities) through fe-striping the parking lot, as identified in section 3.6 of the Master Plan and required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by the Planning Commission) Enhance existing cross walk on DNA Way at B3 from type one (stripe only) to type two (controlled) as identified m Section 3. I of the Master Plan Within 3 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan & enactment of changes to the zonmg ordinance. December 31, 2007 In conjunction with issuance of C of 0 for the first new lab building at the Bay View site (redevelopment ofB4) In conjunction with issuance of C of 0 for redevelopment of the B4 building m Lower Campus December 3 1,2007 Add cross walk type one (stripe only) on DNA Way at B5 December 31, 2007 entry in proximity to the shuttle stops as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan Urban Design tr:ICl ::s ~ q 8 ...... "0 (t) ~ rJJ rJJ '"t:i ~~ ..... ...... () '"t:i (t) 0- (t) rJJ ..... ..... ~. Ro tt::J ~ (t) "0 a ::r rJJ Add class II bike lanes along Forbes Blvd, from intersection of Forbes and Allerton to terminus of Forbes Blvd by striping a 5 foot bike path on both sides of the street, adjusting the street median to 4 feet, and adjusting the outside traffic lane to 11 feet (the traffic lane adjustment reqUires and IS pending City Council approval). Alternate option: Add class III bike route along Forbes Blvd. from intersection of Forbes and Allerton to terminus of Forbes Blvd by striping a 4 foot fog line on both sides of the street and adjusting the street median to 4 feet, as identified In Section 3.1 & figure 4.6-1 ofthe Master Plan Add bike lanes along DNA Way/ GrandView Drive, from intersection of Forbes and DNA Way to intersection of grand view Drive and East grand Blvd by striping a 4 foot bike lane on both sides of the street as required by a proposed condition of approval (suggested by City Staff) Enhance landscape and pedestrian connectivity along the Lower Campus central spIne from the parking structure to Building 6, as required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by City Planning Staff) Connect the Lower and West Canlpuses by developing a pedestrian path! servIce road from the Lower Campus Central Spine to B29 at Allerton as identified In Section 3.4 of the Master Plan Create Campus entry at Forbes Boulevard and DNA Way, as identified In Section 3.2 ofthe Master Plan Provide public art at $1. OO/SF of net new development as identified In Section 3.2 of the Master Plan and required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by Planning Commission) In conjunction with Issuance of a C of 0 for the first new building In Lower Campus. In conjunction with issuance of a C of 0 for the first new building in Lower Campus. In conjunction with Issuance of a C of 0 for redevelopment of Building 9 In Lower Campus. Complete pnor to Issuance of a C of 0 for redevelopment of West Campus parcels at 301 East Grand and 342 Allerton (pending acquisition of remaining easement rights) In conjunction with the Issuance of a C of 0 of the first new lab or office building at the Bay View site (redevelopment ofB4) Implemented within the planned period. Schedule of installation to be submitted to EDC for approval, within 3 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan, and will be reviewed In the Annual Report Transportation And Parking Remove on-street parking along DNA Way, Grand View December 31, 2007 Drive, & Point San Bruno as required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by the Planning Commission) Enhance street lighting along DNA Way, Grand View Drive Implemented within the planned and Point San Bruno (on both sides of the street) as required period. Schedule of by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by City implementation should be Engineering Staff). submitted to the City Engineering Department for approval within 3 month of the Master Plan approval Install shuttle shelters (up to 2), & enhance the associated December 31, 2007 landscaping along DNA Way as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan, and required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by the Planning Commission) Replace existing shuttle shelter at tem1inus of Forbes Blvd as identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.2-3 ofthe Master December 31, 2007 Plan DRAFT February 9, 2007 GENENTECH MASTER FACILITIES PLAN MID CAMPUS 2007-2017 IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM This Implementation Plan sets forth the improvements required by the proposed Master Plan, and proposed as Conditions of Approval by the Planning Commission and City Planning Staff, but does not include improvements identified by the MEIR in the MMRP. I MPROVElVIENT IMPLEMENT A TION TRIGGER Land Use And Structure tl::J Complete Bay Trail Phase II improvements, as ~ ...., required by a proposed Condition of Approval Complete by March 2007 '"' (suggested by the Planning commission) ~ Urban Design :E'"O Create secondary pedestrian connection from In conjunction with issuance of C of a&. Upper Campus to the Mid and South Campuses as o for the first new building on Mid ~~ identified in section 3.4 of the Master Plan Campus p) ..... 'a g; Transportation And Parking VJ .... Install shuttle shelters along Point San Bruno (up In conjunction with issuance of C of '"' ro ro to 2) as identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.2-3 o for the first new building on Mid .... >-< ,g of the Master Plan Campus .., 0 -< ro S Moved: Street lighting enhancement moved to Refer to Lower Campus ro ::l .... Lower Campus Implementation Program DRAFT February 9, 2007 GENENTECH MASTER FACILITIES PLAN UPPER CAMPUS 2007~2017 IMPLEMENTA TION PROGRAM This Implementation Plan sets forth the improvements required by the proposed Master Plan, and proposed as Conditions of Approval by the Planning Commission and City Planning Staff, but does not include improvements identified by the MEIR in the MMRP IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION TRIGGER Land Use And Structure Add type-one (striping only) cross walk on Grand Prior to issuance of a C of 0 for B31 (a () View Dr. at B31 (one location), as identified in new office building on Upper Campus) end ..... [J) section 3.1 of the Master Plan o...[J) (1) ~ ~e?. Add type-two (controlled) cross walk at B21/Hilltop i:';"'i:';"' [J) [J) ?P Parking lot (one location), as identified in section 3.1 December 31, 2007 of the Master Plan Urban Design Add sidewalk on north side of Grandview Dr. from B2 to B39 to enhance Upper Campus pedestrian December 31, 2007 connectivity, as identified in Section 3.4 of the Master Plan Deleted: Side walk along B27 Transportation And Parking Moved: Street lighting enhancement moved to Lower Refer to Lower Campus Campus Implementation Program Moved: Removal of on street parking moved to Lower Refer to Lower Campus Campus Implementation Program Install shuttle shelters on Grandview Dr. at B24 & B21 (two locations), and enhance the associated landscaping as identified in Section 3.1 and figure December 3 1, 2007 4.2-3 of the Master Plan, and required by a proposed Condition of Approval (suggested by the Planning Commission) DRAFT February 9, 2007 GENENTECH MASTER FACILITIES PLAN WEST CAMPUS 2007-2017 IMPLEMENTA TION PROGRAM This Implementation Plan sets forth the improvements required by the proposed Master Plan, and proposed as Conditions of Approval by the Planning Commission and City Planning Staff, but does not include improvements identified by the MEIR in the MMRP. IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENT A TION TRIGGER Land Use And Structure Add sidewalk along south side of Allerton at 444 In conjunction with issuance of a C of Allerton (GNE new Child Care facility) and Building 29 as identified in Section 3.4 of the Master Plan o for the new Childcare Facility Add sidewalk along south side of Cabot Rd. from In conjunction with issuance of a C of intersection of Allerton to intersection of Grandview o for the West Campus Parking Drive, as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan Structure Install a new type-one cross walk at intersection of In conjunction with issuance of a C of Allerton & Cabot Road (south side of intersection), as o for the West Campus Parking identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan Structure Urban Design Construct a Campus entry at East Grand A venue and The Campus Entry shall be completed trJeJ Grandview Drive as identified in Section 3.2 of the prior to issuance of a C of 0 for the ::l P; q- :3 Master Plan West Campus third office building ....."0 ~ ~ (located at the comer of East Grand and Grandview Dr). Transportation and Parking (/) Install shuttle shelters (up to 2) on Grandview Dr. at Install prior to issuance of C of 0 for ..... West Campus, as identified in Section 3.1 and figure first new office building on West (6 (1) 4.2-3 of the Master Plan Campus ..... >-< ,g Install shuttle shelters (up to 2) on Cabot Road, as "1 Install prior to issuance of C of 0 for 0 -< identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.2-3 of the (1) West Campus first parking structure i3 Master Plan (1) a Moved: Street lighting enhancement moved to Lower Refer to Lower Campus en Campus Implementation Program OJ Add class II bike lane along Allerton A venue by In conjunction with issuance of a C of ~ (1) striping a Bike path on both sides of the street as o for the first new building in Lower '"C identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.6-1 of the Master Campus; e. en Plan