Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout07-17-2008 PC e-packetCITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE July 17, 2008 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 by a-mail at web- ecd(c~ssf.net. Mary Giusti Marc C. Teglia Chairperson Vice-Chairperson Wallace M. Moore Stacey Oborne John Prouty Commissioner Commissioner Commissioner Eugene Sim William Zemke Commissioner Commissioner Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Secretary to the Planning Commission Steve Carlson Gerry Beaudin Senior Planner Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar Clerk Please Turn Cellular Phones And Pagers 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. In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open session agenda item, and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection at the Planning Division counter in the City Hall Annex. If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates, then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda. The address of the City Hall Annex is 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080. PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING 33 ARROYO DRIVE July 17, 2008 Time 7:30 P.M. CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL /CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Approval of regular meeting minutes of October 18, November 1, November 15, 2007, and June 5 and June 19, 2008. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Nora Barrientos/applicant Ramirez Arturo/owner 309 Baden Avenue P08-0047: UP08-0007 8~ DR08-0020 Use Permit application to allow the conversion of a vacant ground floor retail space into a Beauty Salon within 200 feet of a residential district, located at 309 Baden Avenue, in the Downtown Commercial (D-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.26, 20.81 & 20.85 3. Spark of Creation Studio/applicant Ella H. Yamas/owner 1 S Linden Avenue P08-0045: UP08-0006 Use Permit allowing an indoor sports and recreation dance studio generating 100 average daily vehicle trips, situated at 1 South Linden Avenue Unit #1 in the (P-I) Planned Industrial Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC 20.32.030(c), 20.32.060, & 20.81. 4. Myers Development Co., LLC/applicant Myers Peninsula-Shepherd Heery/owner San Bruno Mnt / Bayshore Blvd P06-0073: SPM08-0002, PPM08-0002 and ZA08-0004 Public Hearing to consider the request by Myers Development Company for a Precise Plan, Specific Plan and Zoning Text Amendment (PPM08-0002; SPM08-0002; and ZA08-0004) to permit the conversion of 2,500 square feet of office to lobby and circulation for the proposed addition of a 15,007 square foot product design studio as an ancillary use to the approved phase III north office tower. The product design studio is proposed to be located above the approved retail promenade attached to the north office tower. The project is located at 1200 Airport Boulevard, north of the intersection of Sister Planning Commission Agenda - Cont'd Page 3 of 4 July 17, 2008 Cities and Airport Boulevards. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 5. One Year Review Billy Ket Chau/applicant Kelly-Moore Paint Co/owner 107 Hickey Blvd P06-0040: UP06-0013 One year review of a Use Permit allowing a cocktail lounge with daily hours of operation from 3 PM to 2 AM and allowing karaoke and limited live entertainment consisting of piano playing, within 200 feet of a residential zoning district at 107 Hickey Boulevard in the Commercial (C-1) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 & 20.81. 6. One Year Review -Federal Express Use Permit Fed-Ex Ground/Pat Esquino/applicant A-M-J ASSOCIATES/owner 222 Littlefield Ave P06-0056: UP06-0017, DR06-0044 8~ TDM06-0005 One year review of a Use Permit to legalize a commercial postal facility with 24 hour daily operations and generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, and off-site parking at 222 Littlefield Avenue; Design Review of a new open at-grade parking lot and landscaping upgrades; Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic associated with the development located at 222 Littlefield in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.74, 20.81, 20.85 ~ 20.120.outdoor overnight storage of up to five (5) tractor trailers, and three (30 foot long loading docks, generating in excess of one hundred (100) average daily vehicle trips, and twenty-four (24) hour operation; Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic associated with the development located at 202 Littlefield Avenue in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.71, 20.74, 20.81 & 20.85 & 20.120. 7. One Year Review -Federal Express Use Permit Fed-Ex Ground/Jim Bowman/applicant WELL ENTERPISES/owner 202 Littlefield Ave. P06-0054: UP06-0016, DR06-0043 ~ TDM06-0004 One Year review of a Use Permit and Design Review allowing a two tenant building comprised of a 10,228 square foot industrial use and a 17,600 square foot commercial mail distribution center with a 32,000 square foot indoor garage for occupants of 202 and 222 Littlefield Avenue, outdoor parking for twenty-five (25) vehicles and indoor parking garage for up to eighty-two (82) vehicles, outdoor overnight storage of up to five (5) tractor trailers, and three (30 foot long loading docks, generating in excess of one hundred (100) average daily vehicle trips, and twenty-four (24) hour operation; Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic associated with the development located at 202 Littlefield Avenue in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.71, 20.74, 20.81 & 20.85 & 20.120. s:~tgewdas~plAwwCwg cow~v~~ssCow~2oog\o~-i~-og rzpc Rgev,.da.doc Planning Commission Agenda - Cont'd Page 4 of 4 July 17, 2008 ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT Susy Kal Secreta to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco NEXT MEETING: Regular Meeting August 7, 2008, Municipal Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, CA. Staff Reports can now be accessed online at: htta:Nwww.ssf.net/deals/comms/plannins~/as~enda minutes.asa or via http: /Iwe bl i n k. ssf. net SK/bla s:~lgewdas\Flav~.w%wg Coruw~Css%ow~2ooS~o~-s~-o8 RpC Rgev~.da.doc MINUTES ~~ October 18, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke and Vice Chairperson Giusti ABSENT: Chairperson Prouty STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Chadrick Smalley, Associate Planner Patricia Cotla, Planning Technician Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II City Manager: Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager Building Division: Jim Kirkman, Chief Building Official City Attorney: Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer Police Department: Sergeant Jon Callas, Planning Liaison Lieutenant AI Normandy Fire Prevention: Tom Carney, Code Enforcement Officer CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR i. Park & Fly -Use Permit Mod. Park NFly/Owner Park NFly/Applicant 101 Terminal Ct P06-0064: UPM06-0004, PUD07-0002 , SIGNS07-0045 & DR06-0050 (Continue to November 1, 2007) No Changes None None Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing 20,500 square feet of off-site landscaping on an abutting portion of US Highway 101 in addition to providing 17,776 square feet of on-site landscaping in-lieu of providing all of the minimum required on-site landscaping; Use Permit and Design Review allowing an existing commercial parking facility with a total of 1,232 parking spaces in an open at-grade on-site parking lot to add new one-story parking carport canopies covering 596 parking spaces equaling an area of 91,044 square feet, a new one-story 1,632 square foot office building, a new 20 foot tall 140 square foot entry canopy, and new on-site and off-site landscaping, including the project frontage within a portion of US Highway 101; Type C Sign Permit allowing three flag poles 35 feet in height located at Address: 101 Terminal Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 Court (APN 015-113-240) in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.81. 20.84 & 20.85. 2. Parc Place HOA Quality Management, LLC/applicant SSF Parc Place HOA/owner Corner N. Canal & Orange Ave P07-0090: Signs07-0033 Type "C" Sign Permit to allow a new monument sign to be installed in the common area at the corner of N. Canal and Orange Avenue for the Parc Place Subdivision in the Medium Density Residential (R-2-H) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.18 & 20.86. Motion Teglia /Second Zemke to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by majority vote. Chairperson Prouty -absent. PUBLIC HEARING 3. New Single Family Residence 7avier &Elvira Valencia/Owner 7avier &Elvira Valencia/Applicant 648 Commercial Ave. PUD07-0001 (Continued from September 20, 2007) Planned Unit Development application to allow the construction of a new single-family house on a 7,000 square-foot lot located at 648 Commercial Avenue, with a 9'4" front yard setback within the R-3 Multiple Family Residential Zone District (R-3) in accordance with SSFMC Sections 20.20 & 20.84. Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report and gave a PowerPoint presentation. David Silverman, representing the Valencia Family, submitted photographs into the record for the Commission to review. He noted that the Valencia home is nearing completion. All structural framing, windows, roof and sheer walls are in. He pointed out that the problem with the front setback was discovered when Mr. Valencia inquired about the size of the driveway. He stated that construction began in 2006 and several inspections were conducted. He pointed out that a year later in September 2007 the setback issue was discovered. The Valencia family wants to cooperate with the city and met with staff on October 4"' and they came to an agreement on how to address the situation. He pointed out that in light of the advanced stage of the construction, staff agreed that a combination of a redesign of the front facade by changing the front extension to a bay window, reducing the front balcony, and demolishing 3/4 of the building in the rear of the property that is currently a music room for the Valencia's handicap child. He added that the architect submitted the revised plan as required and was surprised that the staff report was written without any consideration of the agreed upon resolution. Mr. Silverman continued by stating that condition of approval #9 could cause a significant safety hazard for the Valencia family because it requires the front wall of the third floor be demolished and rebuilt three feet back from its current location. He noted that tearing out the front bearing wall would compromise the seismic safety of the building and create a safety hazard for the Valencia family. He further noted that the shear walls are calculated by size and placement by the building engineer to meet safety requirements. He also stated that reconstruction of the wall and setting it back three feet does not make sense from a design standpoint. He pointed out that the roof overhang would block out light to the third floor and present an awkward appearance to the street. He added that the last minute change is overly aggressive and fails to take into account the seismic safety and engineering s:~riCwutesV_o-i8-off izPC n~Cwutes.doc page z of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 aspects with respect to the sheer walls. He felt that if staff would have consulted with the applicant or architect they could have been informed of the technical and engineering problems that would have caused. He pointed out that staff acknowledges that the condition of approval is proposed for visual impacts only and not to satisfy the FAR requirement. Mr. Silverman also submitted additional photographs of the neighborhood that have little or no front setback. He questioned condition of approval #7 which proposes elimination of the front bay window. Mr. Sullivan felt that the area of the bay windows can be met by the demolition of the rear building and the depth can be reduced by three feet as discussed with staff. He emphasized that staff has done a good job despite the difficult situation. He concluded that the Valencia family is prepared to move forward with modifications to the proposed conditions of approval. He added there currently is a stop work notice and asked that it be removed because they would like to weatherproof the building. He asked that all the members in the public who were in favor of the project stand up and be recognized. Mark Bucarelli, new project architect, noted that the residence has been overbuilt in terms of setbacks and FAR. He added that the total footprint area of the three structures on the site is within the 65% lot coverage threshold and that the setback error occurs on A2.0 of the original construction document package that was approved by Planning, Engineering and Building Divisions. He pointed out that the preparer assumed that the back of sidewalk along Commercial was also the front property line and the survey produced by Carlos Dominguez clearly shows the property line five feet in from the back of sidewalk. He added that Mr. Valencia, while acting as his own contractor, unknowingly used the erroneous print setback and the 12 foot 6 inch setback from the existing residence on the site as his working points. He noted that it was not the Valencia's intention to add approximately 600 extra square feet and build too close to the right of way. He pointed out that they want to comply with the requirements pertinent to the construction. Mr. Bucarelli noted that the initial friction between the City and the Valencia's has been over the substantial level of completion versus a set of City approved documents that has a gross error and have been informed by their counsel that there is case law supporting the owners right to complete the work as is. He pointed out that they have also been advised to pursue an area reduction solution with planning because of the timing issues. He pointed out that over 75% of the music /storage room attached to the garage would be removed and additional square footage would be taken out of the street facing second floor rooms of the house under construction. He added that the second floor will be pulled back to the line of the third floor. He noted that it would be cost prohibitive to move the two steel frame lines and the Building and Planning Divisions suggested that the partitioning be placed relative to the steel frame lines. Mr. Bucarelli added that all areas applied to the FAR would add up to 8,750 square feet which is exactly the maximum entitled area fora 7,000 square foot lot with R-3-L zoning and understands that a PUD cannot move forward if the FAR exceeds the maximum for the lot. He pointed out that the bow effect on the front elevation is being maintained per the Design Review Boards suggestion, however, the staff report states that not enough of an effort has been made to reduce 94 ft from the main residence and therefore he is proposing that the second floor facade be pushed back to the line of steel frame. He also noted that the staff report calls for the third floor to be pushed back a minimum of three feet and cutting the balconies back by two feet which would make the house more suitable for the site. He added that the reduction will make a small master bedroom. He further noted that it would be difficult to move the third floor wall because it is a bearing wall and there are two sheer walls framing into it, and by reducing the length of these the lateral resisting system will be impacted. He added that a three feet roof overhang would darken the two front rooms. Commissioner Teglia was initially concerned with how the aesthetics of the home would be impacted by pushing back the front. He pointed out that the Commission needs to see this and the architect needs to produce the intended drawings with two options which would be staff's option and the applicant's option. Mr. Bucarelli noted that he asked if something similar should be produced and was not asked to do so. Associate Planner Beaudin noted that they discussed the materials needed for the Planning Commission to review and staff recommended a full set of plans needed to be submitted. He added that due to time constraints the decision was made to go through with the plans that were submitted, but it was made clear that the Commission expects complete plans with any application. Commissioner Teglia stated that he was sympathetic to the applicant's situation but needs to see complete plans. He pointed out that he was under the impression that both sides had negotiated an understanding and sees that this is not the case. He added that the request to weatherproof the house can be allowed, but it is difficult. 5:\M%wutCS\io-iB-D~ RPC MLvi.utPS.dOC Page s of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 Associate Planner Beaudin clarified that the stop work order has been issued for substantial construction work but the applicant has received permission to weatherproof the home pending a decision by the Commission. Mr. Bucarelli concluded that the issue is mainly on the third floor and asked if the Commission decides to go with Planning's recommendation the floor area reduction occur at the back building (storage/music) Commissioner Sim concurred with Commissioner Teglia and noted that the Commission needs to look at the entire project and to do so they need to see a visual representation of the elements that the applicant is trying to have approved. Rita Fontana noted that the item was agendized as a Planned Unit Development and the language is misleading because it sounds like there is no structure on lot. She pointed out that the home exceeds the density requirements. She noted that the there were no prior notices for hearings for the project when building permit B04-1839 was issued and notices were not sent for the Design Review Board's review of the project in 2003. She pointed out that the setback error is said to have been discovered in 2007 but she had made several visits to the Building Division and sent correspondence discussing the setback issue in 2006. She further noted that Mr. Valencia has a State contractor's license and a City business license and should be capable of reading blue prints and noting deficiencies, and regardless of staff's recommended changes, the site is overbuilt. She appreciated that Mr. Valencia was willing to reduce the size of the music room in the back but there was no permit for that building and she was unable to find one other than the original permit indicating a square footage of 150. She added that her father's property is affected by this project. Betty Reyes, Anita Arellano, Hector Huerta and Joseph Oates spoke in favor of the project. Their comments were: • The new construction is a beautiful building. • It is better to have a structure on the lot rather than it being empty. • The home is a display of what the future holds. • The approved permits and foundation are for the current floor plan of the house. Brenda Valencia noted that her parents own the home and added that the plans presented may not be correct but they are not familiar with the process and that can be intimidating to some residents. She pointed out that her father has been putting his heart and soul into the home and she feels that the foundation of her home is being taken down. Dianne Nide spoke against the project and noted that it is blocking light and air from entering her apartment. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Honan asked what the house would consist of once it is complete in terms of number of bedrooms. Associate Planner Beaudin replied that the house consists of 5 bedrooms, 5 bathrooms, an indoor pool and a 3 car garage. Commissioner Honan questioned if the components of the home will remain if the owner complies with staff's recommendation. Associate Planner Beaudin replied affirmatively and noted that the third floor rooms would be reduced in size but would still be functional. Commissioner Honan asked if the Design Review Board (DRB) approved this in 2003 with the additional 600 square feet. Associate Planner Beaudin replied that the DRB did not approve the additional square footage. He pointed out that the added square footage and design changes have not been reviewed by the City. He clarified that the aesthetics and design of the home were reviewed and approved by the DRB but the existing size, window locations and some of the smaller details have been changed. Associate Planner Beaudin pointed out that 600 square feet were added to the home without any additional review, and staff is not clear as to where this square footage was added to the floorplan. He added that staff does not have "as built" plans for the home at this time. Commissioner Sim pointed out that a topographic survey is usually required of certain projects and asked if a horizontal topographic survey prepared by a licensed surveyor is required for all residential projects as part of the application. He noted that the additional is 600 square feet, which Planning Staff does not have specific information about, should be identified by the Building Inspector who has a checklist to go through during the S:\M%wute5\IO-18-0~ RAC M%wuteS.GIDG page-4 of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 construction process. He pointed out that the building inspector checks to see if the project has been executed according to the building permitted drawings. He questioned if this is done in South San Francisco in order to catch this type of issue. Associate Planner Beaudin replied that a topographic survey is not required for every residential project and if there are questions it is within the City Engineers purview to require a survey for a residential project. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck added that it is not a requirement to have a registered surveyor lay out the site and added that if it is a typical single family home on a flat lot they would not require it. He pointed out that they are currently considering it, but it will add a substantial cost to a homeowner for improvements such as adding a room or building a new house. Commissioner Sim pointed out that with this project the Commission is working backwards and are trying to find a fair resolution to the matter and it would have been beneficial to have a survey. Commissioner Teglia noted that a surveyor does not really need to be out on the site and a tape measure can be used from the edge of the sidewalk to know where the foundation should go. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck stated that there are subdivision plans that show where the property line is in relationship to the sidewalk, but this would not reflect any changes after the subdivision map was finalized. He agreed that a tape measure could be used from the center of the road and get within 6 inches of the properly line. Commissioner Teglia noted that this has been an issue before and wondered why a survey was not a requirement. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff stated that these are natural questions for the Commission to want answers to, but the issue before the Commission is the PUD application and if the findings can be supported. He added that the Commission is within its purview to questions, but suggested that the focus return to the application before the Commission rather than the how the mistakes or construction occurred. Commissioner Sim felt that it is relevant to the overall context to be fair and look at both sides of the story. Commissioner Teglia noted his frustration by having the Commission look at the project, and his frustration with the fact that the Valencia family and Mr. Fontana have to go through this process. He pointed out that the Fontana's have been writing letters since 2006. He recalled Park Way, the Giorgi Building and Fairfield having the same issues and was concerned with the job being done right. He added that if foundations are poured and are 5 feet off, it should be noticeable. He is discontent with things not being caught before they are built and with the fact that the Planning Commission has to make a decision that is difficult. He noted that this is a problem that he is tired of. He pointed out that Mr. Valencia needs to seriously consider his consultants and needs to work with staff to give the Commission some simple drawings of the options. He added that the Commission is fair, follows the law and wants to be respectful of properly rights, but that the Commission cannot make any decisions on the item at this point. Chief Building Official Kirkman explained that the Building Division has been to the site to inspect the foundation eight times because it was done in segments due to the terrain and depth of the footings. He further explained that the rear of the structure was measured off of the existing building and the inspector used the information on the plans to confirm the front yard setback. He added that the Division usually measures from the front to the back of the entire foundation, but because of the terrain, this did not occur. He pointed out that Mr. Valencia was aware the building was 5 feet larger during the construction when those that were doing the framing brought it to his attention. He further added that Mr. Valencia did not inform him directly, but did informed one of his inspectors and this came to light when he inquired about the driveway approach with the Planning Division. He stated that when the setback was identified as incorrect, the Building Division measured from the center of the street to determine the properly line and it was determined it was not sitting in the right spot. He continued by stating that the building is not sitting in the right location because pulling from the minimum setback at front and rear of property does not necessarily leave the approved building dimensions. Commissioner Teglia asked when the Building Division found out about the problem. Chief Building Official Kirkman stated that this was done just recently and the earlier mentioned letters from the Fontana's were with regard to the rear structure and an enclosed porch. He added that the Building Division did make site inspections and require the applicant to provide a survey verifying that he was on his property relative to those improvements. He further added that there were encroachment issues with scaffolding on the neighbors property because he could not access his house to apply stucco but the building is entirely set on the applicant's property. As far as the storage room, the Building Division directed the applicant to remove the electrical and plumbing so it could be used s:~n~Cwutesv_o-i8-off RPC M~wutes.doc Pagesof io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 as storage. He pointed out that aerial photographs from 1964 show a structure behind the existing single story garage. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the correct setback is in front of the house at this moment. Chief Building Official Kirkman stated that it is not per the Planning Division's requirements. Commission Teglia noted that this problem has occurred on Park Way and with the Giorgi Brothers building and the Commission has been putting the City on notice to fix the problem and hire the experts. He added that as a resident he wants to hear from City Manager Barry Nagel, to see what he plans to do about this problem. Chief Building Official Kirkman stated that the City Engineer is implementing some procedural measures because they need to check setbacks, easements and other items. He clarified that the building inspector is there to ensure that what is on the plans is correct because the building code allows a building to be built on property line. He added that the Engineering Division has not made site inspections in the past but is now changing this because of the recent problems. Commissioner Teglia reiterated that he would like to hear from City Manager Nagel about whether or not if there is enough staff, experts and if the proper systems are in place to know where the properly lines are. Chief Building Official Kirkman clarified that when the plans were submitted in 2003 the setbacks were shown correctly and during the plan check process the properly line information changed on the drawings. Commissioner Honan found it difficult to understand how the owner, who must know how to apply to the City for the proper permits, did not go back to the City when he noticed the additional square feet. She was bothered that the owner could do this because it meant that other residents could also do this. She noted the Planning Division is taking this through as a Planned Unit Development and found it difficult to approve it as such even with staff's recommended changes. She added that is wrong and needs to be corrected. She pointed out that the house was designed beautifully, but for the City's safety and all citizens everyone has to be treated equally. She stated that she could not support the application and noted her frustration because the Commission is being put in the ~~bad guy" position. Commissioner Sim stated that a professional licensed contractor in the State would know what the rules and regulations are. He concurred with Commissioner Honan with regards to setting a precedent. He was concerned with the neighbor's views being blocked and has seen how the building projects out. He added that the applicant needs to show adjacent context in the application. He also noted his frustration with the current situation. Commissioner Moore noted that there is frustration on all sides. He pointed out that the Commission sets standards and most of the time concurrence is reached, but in this situation there are different points of view. He pointed out that the house is huge and if he were the owner, he would be worried about economical impacts if the house were to be sold in the future. He pointed out that things should be done the right way and at this point there is confusion throughout and the Commission is not happy. He urged the applicant to work with the City. Commissioner Zemke shared the Commission's frustration and felt that they do not have the level of detail necessary to make a decision on the project. He was concerned about whether or not a PUD is the right approach to take. He added that the building has a good design and felt that the projection of it out on the street changes the character of the neighborhood and really need to see some visual representation of what it will look like to meet staff's and owner's concerns. Commissioner Teglia concurred and noted that he is still open to helping the Valencia's because it is not clear where the problem occurred. He added that the Commission directs Mr. Valencia, Planning, Building and Engineering staff to meet and try to reach a solution. He also suggested that the architect provide the plans that the Commission needs. He pointed out that a solution needs to found to build the home as legally and easily as possible. Motion Teglia /Second Moore To continue the item to a date set by the Chief Planner and directing staff to work with the applicant to find a mutual solution. On the question: Commissioner Honan asked if 400 square feet were being removed from the storage area and 200 square feet s:\rilwutes~o-i8-off Rpc Mtv~,utes.doc page 6 of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 would be removed from the house. Associate Planner Beaudin replied that there will be approximately 200 square feet that will come off the front of the second story of the house. Commissioner Honan asked if the entire 600 square feet could come off the house since it was not approved there. Associate Planner Beaudin pointed out that this is the conversation that has occurred during the meetings with the applicant. Staff's concern is that the home got bigger and that the impact of the reduced front yard setback is on Commercial Avenue and the front of the house is where square footage modifications should be made. He pointed out that there are implications, such as the steel framing and that they are trying to work out a solution that will not cost the applicant a significant amount of money, but at the same time are trying to meet the City's needs in terms of design. He added that staff's intent was to get as much of the square footage removed from the front of the new home as possible. Commissioner Honan reiterated that 600 square feet should be removed from the house. Vice Chairperson Giusti noted that the shed is attached to the garage. Associate Planner Beaudin clarified that the reason why the square footage was taken from the storage room is due to the total site square footage which is considered for FAR General Plan consistency. He pointed out that the applicant feels they have met the maximum floor area set in the General Plan with what they have done, but this is contrary to staff's direction to remove the floor area based on physical suitability concerns for the building related to the Planned Unit Development required findings. Commissioner Honan clarified that the applicant is allowed a certain amount of square footage for the lot and to achieve this they have taken it off of the storage area. She was not satisfied with this solution and felt that the square footage should come off the house and stay the way it was approved. She stated that when the item returns to the Commission she would like to see the 600 square feet removed from the house. Roll call: Ayes: Commissioner Honan*, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke and Vice Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: Chairperson Prouty Absent: None * During roll call -Commissioner Honan requested the Design Review action from 2003. Approved by roll call vote. 4. Luminous Day Spa Alice Kwong/Owner Dee Scharff/Applicant 204 Grand Ave P07-0107: UP07-0018 Use Permit to allow Massage Therapy at Luminous Day Spa at 204 Grand Avenue in the Downtown Commercial (D-C-L) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 10.16, 20.26 & 20.81 Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Smalley presented the staff report. Dee Scharff-Popielak, noted that she has been a 10 year resident of the City and decided to open her business in South San Francisco. She pointed out that her business has been welcomed into the community and read some comments given by her clients to the Commission. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Honan was pleased to hear that a business of this type is in the downtown area. Commissioner Teglia and Commissioner Zemke echoed Commissioner Honan's comments. Motion Teglia /Second Sim to approve P07-0107: UP07-0018 subject to the Findings and Conditions of s:\r~tCwutes\to-is-off RpC M~wutes.doc pRge~of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 Approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote with Chairperson Prouty being absent. 5. Access Properties, LLC/applicant Penna, john R/owner 435 Grand Ave P07-0093: AP07-0002 Appeal of the Chief Planner's determination to disallow an outpatient medical surgery center at 435 Grand Avenue due to inconsistency with the General Plan in accordance with SSFMC chapter 20.90. Public Hearing opened. Chief Planner Kalkin presented the staff report. John Penna, building owner, noted that business owner Cynthia Jensen and David Berman the project architect were present to answer any questions the Commission might have. He pointed out that they are appealing the Chief Planner's decision because this is an out patient facility and that the proposed project provides incentives for Grand Avenue by having people come to the downtown area. He pointed out that there currently is over 20 thousand square feet of empty space in downtown South San Francisco. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Teglia noted that the building's layout does not allow for a restaurant or retail. He pointed out that it looks like a dental office. He added that there is another medical service facility in the downtown and questioned if the City is trying to discourage this type of use in the downtown area. Chief Planner Kalkin pointed out that staff would similarly find these other uses inconsistent with the General Plan and would recommend that they be on upper levels. She added that the entry could be modified to install a storefront system in place of the existing front window to allow for a retail store at the front with offices in the back. Commissioner Teglia stated that Grand Avenue is deteriorating and wondered if this type of use could be considered a transitional use and thought that those individuals accompanying the patient might shop and eat on Grand Avenue. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that type of use provides very little opportunity to promote the type of multiple stop activity that is envisioned in the General Plan. Commissioner Honan felt that Grand Avenue is not in a demise and if she were the accompanying someone for a procedure her mind would not be on shopping but on the patient. She concluded that they should uphold the Chief Planner's decision. Commissioner Sim pointed out that the applicant has a compelling reason for wanting this use but it is clear in the General Plan that retail is encouraged in the downtown area. Motion Honan /Second Sim to deny appeal AP07-0002 and uphold the Chief Planner's determination. On the question Commissioner Teglia noted that the General Plan encourages retail, restaurants but it also allows office and banks. He pointed out that the City is looking at rehabilitating the downtown and the parking garage is a step towards that but it is not there at this time. Commissioner Sim pointed out that Comerica is a good example of giving a bank a store front and if this application had something to engage the street in that manner, he would be more open to the use. Roll call: Ayes: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke and Vice Chairperson Giusti Noes: Commissioner Teglia s:\Mi~.utes\10-i8-off RpC MLwutes.doc page g of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 Abstain: Chairperson Prouty Absent: None Approved by majority roll call vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 6. Fumio Suda/applicant Timmy Kan/owner 390 Swift Ave. #10 P05-0041: UP05-0013 6 Month Review -Use Permit to allow a seafood processing business to operate in a 5,512 sq. ft. tenant space in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32 and 20.81. Associate Planner Smalley present the staff report, noting there had been no issues with the use during the review period. Motion Teglia /Second Moore to accept the 6 month review as fulfillment of the condition of approval. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Chairperson Prouty -absent 7. Study Session Founders Research Center III (FRC III) GENENTECH INC/applicant GENENTECH INC/owner 330 Point San Bruno Blvd P07-0091: UP07-0015 & DR07-0057 Study Session to discuss a new five story, 275,000-square-foot research and development building (FRC III) located at 330 Point San Bruno Boulevard. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. Shar Zamanpour and the Genentech development team presented the project to the Commission. Commissioner Teglia noted that the building design was nice and appreciated that Genentech kept the building low. He questioned where the cast concrete would be placed. Ms. Zamanpour noted that it would be at the base of the building and would range from 34-36 inches in height. Commissioner Teglia suggested painting the cast concrete. He suggested that in the future the parking be hidden or tucked under the building similar to what was done with FRCI. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore felt that he building was nice and the landscaping was beautiful. Commissioner Zemke noted that the service entrance was along the Bay Trail and questioned how it would be screened or softened in order to make the public on the trail more comfortable. Michael Painter, Landscape Architect, noted that there will be a berming around the service yard. Commissioner Teglia noted that screening the service yard is beneficial to the City and Genentech and asked to see a view of the yard with the proposed landscaping. Associate Planner Beaudin asked if the Commission is comfortable with the building design returning to the Commission without additional Design Review Board input. s:~MCwutes~io-i8-off RPC MCv~utes.doc Paget' of io Planning Commission Meeting of October 18, 2007 Consensus of the Commission to review the avv/ication without fu~the~ invut by the Design Review Board. ITEMS FROM STAFF None ITEMS FROM COMMISSION Commissioner Zemke complemented South San Francisco High School and the Westborough Middle School for the large presence they had during the Bay Trail cleanup. He added that the warehouses along Haskins Way have a landscape contractor that blows the trash into the Bay Trail and asked that the City make it clear in requirements for landscaping maintenance for the uses in the area that the trash is not to be blown into the Bay Trail. Commissioner Teglia added that there are rules on cleaning and maintenance of the Bay Trail and there are businesses that have received clean up notices from the City. He pointed out that clean up only takes place when a notice is received and suggested implementing fines on subsequent notices. He added that this could fund an additional employee to monitor the clean up. Commissioner Zemke stated that some companies like Genentech take ownership of their portion of the Bay Trail but where there are multi tenant warehouses there isn't one specific person who takes ownership for the Bay Trail portion they are responsible for. Chief Planner Kalkin acknowledged the Commission's comments and stated that she would have Code Enforcement follow up on the clean up issue. Vice Chairperson Teglia recalled that Parc Place paid for a section of Colma Creek which was well maintained for several years but has then deteriorated and there is a sink hole around the area. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that she would have the Public Works Department follow up on this request. Vice Chairperson Giusti wished Commissioner Moore a safe trip to see the Pope. Commissioner Honan formally resigned from the Planning Commission effective December 31, 2007. She thanked the City Council for allowing her to serve on the Commission for 11 years. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC None AD7OURNMENT 9:40 P.M. Motion Honan /Second Sim to adjourn the meeting. Adjourned by unanimous voice vote. Susy Kalkin John Prouty, Chairperson Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning Commission City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco SK/bla s:\M%v~utes~lo-i8-off Rpc MCv~utes.doc page io of io MINUTES November 1, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TOORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 u.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Commissioner Honan Planning Division Building Division: City Attorney: Engineering Division Police Department: City Manager ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Residential Care Facility Eugene Gonzalez/applicant Kiss Enterprises/owner 637 Grand Ave. PCA07-0005: P05-0081 None One Year Time Extension of an approved Use Permit to allow a construction of a 15 bed Residential Care Facility for the Elderly in the Multi-Family Residential (R-3-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters. 20.20.030 and 20.81. Motion Zemke /Second Teglia to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan -absent PUBLIC HEARING 2. Park & Fly -Use Permit Mod. Park NFly/Owner Park NFly/Applicant 101 Terminal Ct P06-0064: UPM06-0004, PUD07-0002, SIGNS07-0045 & DR06-0050 Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Barry Mammini, Senior Building Inspector Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Sam Bautista, Senior Civil Engineer Lieutenant AI Normandy Sergeant John Kallas, Planning Liaison Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager No Changes (Continue from October 18, 2007) Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2007 Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing 20,500 square feet of off-site landscaping on an abutting portion of US Highway 101 in addition to providing 17,776 square feet of on-site landscaping in-lieu of providing all of the minimum required on-site landscaping; Use Permit and Design Review allowing an existing commercial parking facility with a total of 1,232 parking spaces in an open at-grade on-site parking lot to add new one-story parking carport canopies covering 596 parking spaces equaling an area of 91,044 square feet, a new one-story 1,632 square foot office building, a new 20 foot tall 140 square foot entry canopy, and new on-site and off-site landscaping, including the project frontage within a portion of US Highway 101; Type C Sign Permit allowing three flag poles 35 feet in height located at Address: 101 Terminal Court (APN 015-113-240) in the Planned Industrial (P- I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.81. 20.84 & 20.85. Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the Staff Report. Leon Lawson, Studio 7, gave a presentation of the proposed project. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Sim questioned if their will be an impact on the freeway from higher elevations. He pointed out that the mechanical units would be visible despite the parapet on the roof. Mr. Lawson replied that the mechanical units are attached to the front side of the building and are screened. Commissioner Sim pointed out that the building is 72 feet tall and the freeway gets higher making the roof more visible. He suggested fully stealthing the facade to conceal the mechanical equipment. Mr. Lawson noted the parapets are 4 feet tall which will cover the roof and with the site lines the roof structures will not be visible from any direction because of the elevation of the structure. Commissioner Sim reiterated his concern with being able to see the mechanical equipment from the freeway and it becoming a blight. Mr. Lawson added that there is a green strip along the fence line that will be landscaped and felt that the majority of the views were covered along the freeway. Commissioner Teglia was concerned with debris going into the slough or the bay and questioned whether the applicants have been required by BCDC to put up slats or netting because litter is dumped into the slough. Senior Planner Carlson added that the applicant will be obtaining a permit from BCDC. Chairperson Prouty asked about the type of material being proposed and the potential to cause problems on the freeway if the material was reflective. Mr. Lawson pointed out that it is a non reflective painted material. Commissioner Sim asked the Commission for direction on which version of the landscape plan they prefer. The Commissioners preferred the elongated plan from Studio 7. Commissioner Sim reiterated that the project needs to be fully landscaped and stealthed as much as possible. Chairperson Prouty was concerned that the landscaping is often not maintained on new projects and wanted to make sure this did not occur with this project. Senior Planner Carlson pointed out that there is a Condition of Approval that requires the landscaping to be maintained. Motion Sim /Second Moore to approve P06-0064: UPM06-0004, PUD07-0002 , SIGNS07-0045 & DR06-0050 in accordance with the Findings and Conditions of Approval with additional embellishment on the freeway side elevation and landscape coverage of the area per Studio 7 landscape plan. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan -absent. 3. Auto Repair & Sales Use Permit Richard Haskins/applicant Richard Haskins/owner 69 S Linden Ave P07-0074: UP07-0010 & DR07-0047 5:\Miwutes\ii-0i-O~ RPC M%vi.utes.doc Page 2 of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2007 Use Permit and Design Review allowing reuse of three existing buildings for an auto repair facility accommodating a maximum of 16 work bays, a new car wash, and auto sales with outdoor display, 111 at-grade open parking spaces for employees and customers vehicles, tandem parking, outdoor overnight parking, off-site parking, new site improvements and landscaping, upgrades to the existing buildings, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, and allowing fencing up to eight feet in height in the minimum required setbacks, situated at 69 and 103 South Linden Avenue, in the Industrial Zoning District (M-1), in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.30, 20.74, 20.81, and 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the Staff Report. Antonio Brandi, architect, presented the project to the Commission. Geraldo Kelly stated that he has had an auto repair business at 48 South Linden since 1975 which the City shut down. He stated that he complied with all the City's requirements but felt that he was denied his right to keep his shop open. He added that it was not fair to allow the current application to open at this site. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that this is an issue between Code Enforcement and the business owner at 48 South Linden Avenue and noted she would be available to answer Mr. Kelly's questions after the meeting with regards to his site. Mr. Kelly felt this was unfair especially since he has complied with the City's requests and added that he should have his shop opened before the one at 69 South Linden is allowed to be opened. Chief Planner Kalkin recommended that Mr. Kelly set up a meeting with the Fire Department with regards to his location. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Teglia questioned how long it has been since the site has not been used. Senior Planner Carlson replied that there was a significant Code Enforcement issue and there were a number of uses at the site. Commissioner Teglia stated that the site needs a new fresh look. He added that they need to look at setbacks such as the fence and remove the sheds. Mr. Brandi noted that there is an economic factor involved but will try to make the building look better by adding improvements such as breaking up the metal look by adding plaster. He noted they are providing the setbacks and landscaping the front of the street but they cannot move the PG&E poles and requested that the Commission allow him to create a sidewalk that goes around the poles. He added that there are two other sites in the area where this has been done and felt that it should be allowed at this site. Senior Planner Carlson stated that one of the major concerns on the previous Budget Rent-a-Car application that had been processed on the site was moving the poles back. He noted that the cost of meeting all the obligations caused Budget to back out of the project. He added that the same conditions of approval were drafted for this application so that the site was not looked at differently than the other use. Chairperson Prouty reiterated Commissioner Teglia's comments with regard to the sheds. He added that the area needs to be upgraded and questioned what the life safety issues were with regards to the use and the PG&E pole. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff noted that he would have to return with information as to what is considered to be a legal nonconforming use on the site. He added that there are conditions of approval required to re-establish a use. He pointed out that if there are life safety issues, they would have been addressed with conditions by the Police and Fire Departments. Senior Planner Carlson informed the Commission that staff has been upfront with the applicant with regard to the power poles and previous conditions being met. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff suggested that the Commission continue this item so that staff and the applicant can re-look at the power pole issues. Chairperson Prouty asked that the applicant also look at redressing the building and maybe return to the Design Review Board for comments on design or back to the Commission. Senior Planner Carlson suggested continuing the item to December 6"' or 20"' depending on how much time the architect and applicant need to respond to these issues. Mr. Brandi reemphasized that the issue is not whether the owner wants to move the poles or not, but it is time and cost prohibitive. Commissioner Teglia suggested continuing the item off calendar. s:\M%v~.utes~ll-oi-off Rpc n~Cwutes.doc page s of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2007 Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to continue P07-0074: UP07-0010 & DR07-0047 off calendar to allow staff to work with applicant to address the power pole and aesthetics issues and return to Design Review Board for comments. Approved by unanimous voice vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 4. Study Session Kaiser Permanente Expansion Kaiser Foundation/Owner Kaiser Foundation/Applicant 1330 EI Camino Real P07-0014: EIR07-0001, GPA07-0001, RZ07-0001, ZA07-0003, UP07-0001, & DR07-00071 Use Permit Modification allowing expansion of the 14.328 acre Kaiser Medical Center at 1200 EI Camino Real (APN 010-292-210) incorporating a former motel situated on an abutting 1.376 acre parcel at 1330 EI Camino Real (APN 010-292-130) and allowing off-site parking between the two sites; Design Review Design Review of the conversion of a motel into a medical facility and an at-grade parking lot with landscaping; General Plan Amendment changing the Land Use Element designation from Mixed High Density Residential and Community Commercial to Community Commercial.; Zoning Amendment adding SSFMC Chapter 20.52 Office (O) Zone District; Zoning Reclassification of the parcel situated at 1200 EI Camino Real (APN 010-292-0210) from Planned Commercial (P-C) Zone District to the Office (O) Zone District, and the parcel at 1330 EI Camino Real (APN 010-292-130) from Transit Village (TV-C) Zone District and to the Office (O) Zoning District; Environmental Impact Report assessing the environmental effects associated with the proposed project. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the top floor of the parking structure has been monitored to make sure that employees are parking there. Senior Planner Carlson pointed out that staff had not been particularly successful in gaining Kaiser's compliance in this regard, and thought that by eliminating the parking on EI Camino Real it would force the employees to start parking onsite. He added that there are enough parking spaces for their staff on site but he had not researched if staff is using the assigned parking. Chairperson Prouty noted that the proposed change in zoning results in loss of a hotel and Transit Occupancy Tax (TOT). He further pointed out that by making it an office complex, the Transit Village Zone is lost for the site and was concerned with an indefinite office complex if Kaiser decides they don't need the facility anymore. Senior Planner Carlson stated that it depends on how the office district language is drafted and whether it allows other uses that are consistent with the General Plan's vision for this area. Chairperson Prouty stated that it could be a hospital or keep it the current zones and land use. Senior Planner Carlson added that Kaiser is required to retrofit the hospital or build a new one by 2030. Commissioner Teglia discussed the purpose of the study session. He noted that the Council and Planning Commission need to determine whether there is interest in such a project and felt that the expansion of the Kaiser footprint is bad for the City. He felt that the project needs to be designed correctly and felt that Kaiser can have temporary uses to aid them. He noted that the temporary trailers took up parking stalls and they have not improved the facility in years. He added that issues such as these need to be discussed between the City Council and Planning Commission in a study session. Commissioner Sim noted that he would like to see the possibility of the site relative to the frontages on the EI Camino corridor. He stated that Solaire and Summerhill developments are working towards a transit village and questioned what staff's and the City's vision is for the Kaiser site. He pointed out that Kaiser could be designed to look like a campus. Chairperson Prouty agreed with Commissioner Sim and pointed out that the condominium land and this site can be looked at together rather than separate and work towards making it more transit oriented. Vice Chairperson Giusti agreed with Commissioner Sim's comments. Chairperson Prouty noted that staff needs to coordinate a meeting between the Planning Commission and Council to determine what is the best use for this site. Commissioner Teglia noted that the City should look at the EI Camino corridor to create design guidelines and rezone the area to mixed use. Chairperson Prouty stated that this s:\M~vtiutes\ii-oi-off rzpc NtCwutes.doc Page 4 0{ ~ Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2007 site all the way to Chestnut has great potential. Commissioner Teglia noted that the City has purchased property in the area and have envisioned a library in this area. He added that with a joint focus on the corridor there can be consistent guidelines in place. Senior Planner Carlson stated that the Council has created a moratorium to look at upgrading the specific plan for the area. Chairperson Prouty stated that the direction to staff can be to schedule a joint meeting with City Council and talk about the specific area from the condominiums to Chestnut Avenue. He added that this could give applicants an idea of what the City is looking for. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that staff will follow up on this item. Martha Gilmore, Kaiser Medical Group Administrator noted that there has not been a major expansion or renovation at Kaiser for 20 years. She added that there has been a lot of change in medical care practices and needs since then. She pointed out that the hospital needs to update and expand its medical care facility. She stated that the hotel property can serve as additional parking and office space during renovations. Charles Ackerly, project architect, gave a PowerPoint presentation of the proposal. He noted that they are looking at adding 90 additional parking spaces, seismic upgrading, remodeling the existing facility's landscaping and exterior for non clinical functions and removing the car canopy in the front of the building. Commissioner Teglia questioned if Kaiser has considered demolishing and reconstructing the facility. He suggested that Kaiser take a fresh look at the project and redesign it so that the City has a project they can be proud of. He added that the current easements could create some opportunities to expand into them . Commissioner Sim asked if a feasibility study and a phasing study had been conducted for this project. Mr. Ackerly noted that their scope was limited to the project at 1330 EI Camino Real. Commissioner Sim noted that there is a lack of information and because of it he cannot understand the vision of the project. Staff was directed to schedu/e a joint meeting with City Counci/ to discuss the ,n/an for the surroundin4 area induding Kaiser Permanente. 5. 6 Month Review Genentech/applicant Genentech,/owner 1 DNA Way P05-0141: MP05-0001, TDM05-0006, RZ05-0003, ZA05-0001 and MPEIR05-0004 6 month review of the Genentech Master Plan Implementation Program. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the staff report. Shar Zamanpour noted that they are on schedule and gave the following update: • Bay Trail designation and employee signs -Completed in August • Design concepts and landscaping enhancements for Central Spine and North Campus - to be completed and implemented with B50 which has been approved by the Commission. • DNA Way and Grandview Drive public art and lighting enhancements -schedule was submitted in ]uly for Staff review. • DNA Way and Grandview Drive street parking -Parking has been removed and striping for bike lanes and shuttle pullouts are in progress which will be completed in December. Commissioner Teglia noted that parking is still occurring along DNA Way and he has not seen "no parking" signs. He questioned if Genentech has informed their employees that parking is not allowed. Ms. Zamanpour replied that they have informed the employees and have recently installed "no parking" signs. She added that they have informed the employees that as of November 1~ there will be no parking allowed on DNA Way. Commissioner Teglia suggested that Genentech security put notices on these cars to let them know parking is no longer allowed in that area. Commissioner Teglia noted that he has not seen turnouts for the buses and that it is important for them to be out of the thoroughfare. Ms. Zamanpour replied that this is in progress and with the striping of the street it will S:\M%wutes\ii-01-O~ RPC M%v~.utes.doC Pagesof ~ Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2007 be apparent where the pullouts are located. Commissioner Teglia stated that the pullouts will be actual curb cuts where the shuttle will be able to pull out of the street. Ms. Zamanpour clarified that they are created through striping and not a landscaped island. Ms. Zamanpour continued her presentation by showing the Commission the campus entry, signs and greenspace options. • Enhancement and addition of campus crosswalks -some are completed and others will be at the end of the year. • Campus entries, green space and adjacent parking -two options have been submitted to the Commission for consideration. Commissioner Sim stated that he is intrigued by option 2 for the open space. Ms. Zamanpour noted that option 2 creates a feeling of being in a small private space away from other groups. Commissioner Zemke asked that additional features such as benches and picnic tables be shielded from the wind. Commissioner Teglia stated that the undulating grass is a good feature and agrees with Commissioner Sim that option 2 is the better of the two. He added that the roundabout is a good feature. He added that they will need to look at this and the road details. He noted his concern with the buses stopping in the bike lane. Ms. Zamanpour informed the Commission that during their studies for the bus turnouts, it was found that the width of Grandview Drive allows one 12 foot lane on each side and an additional 11 feet on each side for a bike lane or shuttle pull out. She pointed out that there is no need for a turnout because the street is too wide and it encourages faster traffic. Commissioner Teglia stated that this was discussed previously and the Commission specified that bus turnouts should be installed. He added that traffic calming can be achieved by other measures such as trees, medians and roundabouts in order to allow the shuttle turnouts. Chairperson Prouty stated that he was pleased to see the improvements and suggested an art feature in the center of the turnabout. He also recalled requesting bus turnouts and added that the campus entry concepts are headed in the right direction. He also noted that he prefers option 2 for the open amenities site. He specified that boulders should not be used for the roundabout and prefers another form of art. He questioned if the surface was to be asphalt pavement. Ms. Zamanpour noted that they have not determined the material but it could be colored or stamped concrete. Commissioner Teglia echoed Chairperson Prouty's comments and reiterated his concern with the shuttle turnouts. He added that the Commission has not seen concepts of what the concession is going to be and noted that the potential vendor is dependant on how well it is planned. He stated that details such as eliminating the second parking lot and phasing of parking in conjunction with the landscaping need to be discussed. He suggested having a design study session to discuss the details. Commissioner Moore concurred with the Commission's comments. Commissioner Sim questioned if the meandering path by the parking area has landscaping on each side such as berms. Ms. Zamanpour stated that there is a berm near the parking for stealthing purposes and near the sidewalk that is closest to the street. Commissioner Sim suggested placing landscaping on either side to give a meandering path feel and look to it. He stated that the circular node has two options and asked if Genentech preferred one over the other. Ms. Zamanpour noted that they had 9 or 10 options and it came down to putting in public art or not while eliminating elements that would attract individuals from walking in the middle of the street. She pointed out that if the piece of art does not go in this location, landscaping could be installed in way that large trucks cannot drive over it but around it. Commissioner Sim noted that there is lighting at night but seems that it is much lower for the pedestrian walkways. Ms. Zamanpour stated that Engineering staff was looking at lighting along Forbes Boulevard and Genentech prefers that the lighting in the green space be kept low so that it is with the scale of the intimacy of the location. She added in response to Commissioner Teglia's comments with regard to a vendor that they have been waiting to determine what type of business it will be to determine the footprint of the building or additional s:~r~Lwutes~i-oi-off RpC M~wutes.doc page 6 of ~ Planning Commission Meeting of November 1, 2007 possibilities for the area. She stated that they could return in 6 months with more details for the area. Commissioner Teglia asked Ms. Zamanpour why the sign on East Grand Avenue could not be done. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that this could not be done in the median because it is a public right of way, but they could install it on property owned by Genentech. Commissioner Teglia questioned if it was still a possibility if the Commission decided the signs could go in the public right of way. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that it would be a departure because it is a public street but is still possible. Commissioner Teglia noted that he is open to making Grandview a great entrance. ITEMS FROM STAFF None ITEMS FROM COMMISSION Vice Chairperson Giusti commended the Pacific Market for screening the roof equipment. Commissioner Zemke noted that a letter from Mr. Flaherty, in the Commission's mail, that states his concern with dilapidated neighborhoods, specifically cars parking in front yards. He questioned if front yard parking is restricted in terms of number of cars allowed or amount of concrete in the front yard. Chief Planner Kalkin replied that parking in the front yard is allowed only in a bonafide driveway. Commissioner Sim added that Mr. Flaherty lives in the Westborough area and he has also noticed that trees and landscaping are being taken down. He noted that the General Plan can include policies to improve front yards. Commissioner Teglia added that many businesses do not put in the required landscaping and pointed out that Code Enforcement needs to be proactive in having these businesses maintain their landscaping. He added that the Code Enforcement Officer position could be funded similarly to the Parking Enforcement Officer position and Code Enforcement could hire additional officers to go out and cite the businesses that are not in compliance with the Use Permit Conditions of Approval. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC Ricardo Saucedo noted he is with the CERT (Citizen's Emergency Response Team) that works with the Fire Department and volunteers to walk the streets to bring code violations to their attention. He noted that will relate the Commission's concerns with regards to parking to the Fire Department for follow up. ADJOURNMENT Motion Zemke /Second Giusti to adjourn the meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla S:\M%wutES\ii-0i-D~ RPC M%wutes.doc 10:18 P.M. Page~af ~ John Prouty, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco MINUTES November 15, 2007 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE i CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 ~.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty ABSENT: Commissioner Honan, Commissioner Moore and Commissioner Teglia* STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Girard Beaudin, Associate Planner Allison Knapp, Consultant Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II Building Division: Barry Mammini, Senior Building Inspector City Attorney: Brian Grossman, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Sam Bautista, Senior Civil Engineer Police Department: Sergeant John Kallas, Planning Liaison Fire Prevention: Dave Scardigli, Assistant Fire Marshall CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Chief Planner Kalkin presented Sergeant John Kallas and Acting Fire Marshall Dave Scardigli to the Commission. • Commissioner Teglia arrived at 7:33 p.m. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None CONSENT CALENDAR i. Myers Development Co. LLC/applicant Myers Peninsula -Shepherd Heery/owner San Bruno Mnt / Bayshore Blvd Signs07-0044 Type "C" Sign Permit allowing two (2) new temporary advertising signs consisting of one 40 square foot freestanding sign and one 300 square foot vinyl sign emplaced upon a construction trailer at 1200 Airport Boulevard in the Terrabay Specific Plan District Zone in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.76.170 and 20.86.060 2. Parking Comp of America/applicant Hannna, Elias/owners 160 Produce Avenue P06-0088: UP06-0020, DR06-0072 81 PUD07-0003 (Continue to December 6, 2007) Commercial Planned Unit Development Permit allowing a combined on-site and off-site landscape area of 12,884 square feet instead of the minimum requirement of 47,350 square feet. Planning Commission Meeting of November 15, 2007 Use Permit and Design Review allowing a new canopy entry and landscaping, with 24 hour operation, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips vehicles, fences greater than 3 feet in height within the minimum required street setbacks, and expanding the existing commercial parking use on several lots adjacent to San Mateo Drive in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.30, 20.32, 20.73, 20.81, 20.84 & 20.85 Motion Sim /Second Teglia to approve the Consent Calendar. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore -absent. PUBLIC HEARING 3. Ken Mark/applicant Oik Sierra Point LLC/owner 4000-7000 Shoreline Court P07-0101: Signs07-0043 Modification of a Type "C" Sign Permit allowing an increase in sign height and area of a Master Sign Program at 4000-7000 Shoreline Court in the Planned Commercial (P-C-L) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.24, 20.85 & 20.86 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Commissioner Teglia questioned if Senior Planner Carlson had a preferred recommendation for the Commission. Senior Planner Carlson noted that there are currently 3 signs in which the logos, height and letters exceed the design height established by the Commission for this sign program. He noted that the proposed sign is approximately the same height as the other existing signs. He stated that the new signs work with the other signs and the applicant is asking to follow the same format. He recommended that the Commission take a look at limiting the total number of signs or sign area to be consistent with the 940 square feet of facade sign the Commission had previously approved for the sign program. He added that the site has changed from one owner to several owners and that the Property Owners Association needs to weigh in on the Sign Program. Commissioner Teglia recalled that a hotel was projected for the site but it was moved into Brisbane which resulted in more office space for South San Francisco. Gerry Lee Perkins, CA Wiley Technology, gave a PowerPoint presentation of the proposed sign program. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Sim noted that he would like to see the overall elevation relative to the proportion of the signs. Commissioner Teglia noted that regardless of the number of owners the signage needs to get back to the original plan. He noted that the site is a gateway to the peninsula and does not want to see many logos on a site. He pointed out that the Commission needs to look at the sign program as a campus wide program. Although he was not opposed to the proposed sign program he would like to see the overall context of the sign from the freeway vantage point. He asked that staff enforce s:~MCwutes\ii-is-off izpc r~Cwutes.doc PAge 2 0{ s Planning Commission Meeting of November 15, 2007 the original sign program. Commissioner Zemke and Vice Chairperson Giusti agreed with Commissioner Teglia and felt that the Commission needs to stay within the master sign program. Chairperson Prouty pointed out that it is better to go back to the original sign program. He noted that the Commission is adhering to the set standards and that they should give the property owners in the development a set timeframe to comply with the previously approved sign program. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the applicant also has the option to return with a program that could either lower the signage size or limit the amount of signs. Commissioner Teglia asked to see the original sign program. Senior Planner Carlson noted that the sign program was given to the Commission with the staff report is not as detailed as the sign programs the Commission has currently reviewed. He noted that there are no dimensions on the original sign program and that it was not requested by the Commission at that time. He added that staff needs to define the height and length of each of the signs and return to the Commission with the signs in context with the buildings. Commissioner Teglia added that staff needs to notify the association that the signs have increased and in future applications, the Commission will be returning to standards set in the original sign program. Motion Teglia /Second Giusti to continue P07-0101: Signs07-0043 off calendar to allow the applicant the applicant and staff sufficient time to survey the site with a recommendation on how to more appropriately administer the sign program in light of the original approvals. Roll Call: Ayes: Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Teglia, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Giusti and Chairperson Prouty Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore Approved by majority voice vote. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore -absent. 4. Robert Simms/applicant Rest Investments/owner 195 N. Access Rd P04-0067: UPM04-0001 Use Permit modification to allow the expansion of an off-site airport parking facility including: 166 new surface parking spaces and landscape improvements in the P-I Planned Industrial Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC 20.32.030 (c). Public Hearing opened. Associate Planner Beaudin presented the Staff Report and added that Fire Prevention condition #2 was being removed and Engineering condition #2 would be revised. Chairperson Prouty questioned if the site was once part of the Water Quality Control Plant property. Associate Planner Beaudin replied that this is City owned property that is being leased to the s:~Mtv~utes~ii-is-off izpc r~Cwutes.doc Pages of s Planning Commission Meeting of November 15, 2007 applicant. Chairperson Prouty asked if the City can use the land when it is needed in the future. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that the Council has determined that this is surplus property and this is along term lease. Robert Simms, applicant, noted he was available to answer any questions the Commission could have. There being no speakers the Public Hearing was closed. Commissioner Teglia questioned if the permit was for expansion of the parking company that is already at the site. Chief Planner Kalkin replied affirmatively. Commissioner Teglia stated that there are sign violations at the site. He added that there are constantly banners on the site. He pointed out that there needs to be maintenance of the existing landscaping and more landscape should be included. Commissioner Zemke stated that the site is adjacent to the Bay Trail and is difficult to develop. Chief Planner Kalkin added that the Bay Trail was addressed with the original parking structure application and the trail deviates from the property. Commissioner Zemke asked if staff reviewed the project to make sure that the Categorical Exemption was a correct determination. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that the site has been used for storage of sludge from the treatment plant and it is not close to the bay. Assistant City Manager Van Duyn informed the Commission that the applicant has paid for improvements on the Trail. Commissioner Teglia asked if the deep water channel and the ship yard piers were filled in with silt and questioned how deep it currently is. Assistant City Manager Van Duyn stated that it is very shallow and is filled with silt; but that the silt has been purposely left in that condition per the direction of BCDC. Motion Zemke /Second Teglia to approve P04-0067: UPM04-0001. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore -absent. Commissioner Teglia stated that there is debris collecting around the fencing of bay fronting parcels and questioned if the applicant will be required to clean up debris around the perimeter including the fingers site. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the applicant is required to manage the debris that emerges from their site. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS ITEMS FROM STAFF Chief Planner Kalkin stated that the Joint Study Session on the EI Camino Corridor and Kaiser is tentatively scheduled for January. She added that Council extended a the moratorium in the area to incorporate a broader area. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION New information to Commission -Commissioner Teglia questioned if the revised conditions given for one of the items to the Commission had been submitted on a timely basis to Planning Staff. Chief Planner Kalkin stated that the conditions are essentially the same as the ones in the staff report and only underlined condition is the one that changed. Commissioner Teglia noted that the policy is to have everything to the Commission on the Friday prior to the meeting and if the public is not allowed to present new items staff needs to be informed that they need to have everything to the Commission within the same timeframe. s:~r~~wutes~ii-is-off rzpc M%wutes.doc Page 4 of s Planning Commission Meeting of November 15, 2007 • Arroyo Drive upgrades -Commissioner Teglia noted that there are upgrades on Arroyo drive that are causing backups and would like a report from Engineering staff on it. • Illegal signs -Vice Chairperson Giusti noted that there are signs along Grand Avenue from Sunridge Homes and asked if it was permitted. • Crab traps -Chairperson Prouty noted that there is a house on Miller Avenue with crab traps in it and noted that it is a blight. Pacific Market -Chairperson Prouty noted that the roof screening on the building was not aesthetically pleasing. Chief Planner Kalkin noted that this was an item that was designed by committee. Commissioner Teglia questioned if it was going to be painted to ease its visual impact. Assistant City Manager Van Duyn noted that he would look into this. Absence -Commissioner Zemke noted he would not be in attendance on December 6th as he would be traveling to meet his son who is returning to his base in Alaska and he will be there to meet the plane. Meeting cancellation -Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the second meeting in December has been cancelled at times and questioned if the Commission would like to cancel the meeting of December 20cn Motion Teglia /Second Sim to cancel the December 20`h meeting. Approved by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore absent. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC ADJOURNMENT None 8:26 P.M. Motion Giusti /Second Sim to adjourn the meeting. Adjourned by unanimous voice vote. Commissioner Honan and Commissioner Moore absent. Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla s:~rtCwutes~i-is-off RpC r~iwutes.doc John Prouty, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco pagesaf s MINUTES lone 5, 2008 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TOORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:30 n.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: None Planning Division: Economic & Community Development: City Attorney: Engineering Division: Engineering Division: Police Department: Fire Prevention: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Patti Cabano, Admin. Asst. I Marty Van Duyn, Assistant City Manager Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Dennis Chuck, Senior Engineer Tracy Scramaglia, Traffic Engineer Sergeant Jon Kallas, Planning Liaison Tom Carney, Acting Fire Marshal CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR No Changes None Commissioner Teglia commented on the absence of minutes on the agenda. Chief Planner Kalkin responded that there were several sets in draft form and they would be coming forward in the next few meetings. Commissioner Teglia asked to agendize a discussion on the minutes. He stated that throughout his tenure it has been an issue, and it had been brought up during the update of the Commission's the by-laws. He stressed the importance of the minutes in that they are the lasting work product of the Commission, and stand as the official record. He further emphasized that when there is an appeal of a decision the minutes are crucial to the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING 1. Wong, Steven H/applicant Wong, Steven H/owner 132.7ames Court P08-0013: PUDM08-0002 & DR07-0077 PUD Modification application to allow a 600 sq ft addition to the rear of an existing dwelling in a Planned Unit Development at 132 James Court in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.78, 20.84 & 20.85 Public Hearing opened. Chief Planner Kalkin gave the staff report. Public Hearing closed. Commissioner Prouty noted he had driven by the property and sees no problem with the proposal as it conforms Planning Commission Meeting June 5, 2008 with the area. He noted his support for the requirement that the roofline on the addition match that of the main structure. Motion- Commissioner Teglia /Second- Commissioner Prouty Ayes: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by unanimous vote. 2. Rosanna Olsen-Donio/applicant Donio, Rosanna & Pascal B./owner 848 Kipling Ave P08-0032: UP08-003 Use Permit allowing the conversion of a small day care facility accommodating 8 children into a large family day care facility accommodating up to 12 children in an existing dwelling within 500 feet of another large family day care facility, and a 4 foot tall fence in the 15 foot required front setback and the public-right-of way, situated at 848 Kipling Avenue (APN 010-153-070), in the (R-1-E) Single Family Residential Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Section 20.11.060 and Chapters 20.16 & 20.81.. Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. Rosanna Olsen-Donio, applicant, addressed the Commission noting she had been operating the home day care use for 5 years. She informed the Commission that four (4) neighbors had come by to give support, but they were unable to attend either this meeting or the neighborhood meeting she had held. She reported that the adjacent neighbors on either side were in favor as well. She explained her pre-school program and noted she was available to answer any questions. Commissioner Moore inquired about the ages of children and whether the operator had CPR training. Ms. Olsen- Donio replied that the age range was from 2.5 -5 years and affirmed that she was trained in CPR. She further noted that she employed an assistant because the day care home is operated like apre-school, and clarified that she had teaching credits that qualified her as apre-school teacher. Commissioner Prouty mentioned the house was quite small and questioned where the children would be. She explained that the living room served also as the pre-school room and that the children utilized two bedrooms for naps. She stated that starting in September she would be caring for children until 4pm, noting that presently the program ends at 2pm. She explained that daycare would be from gam to 4pm with structured time and music time, noting they would spend at least 45 minutes per day outdoors. During the summer, she will have an assistant. Commissioner Prouty asked whether the children were taken to the park. The applicant stated she does not take the children off the property, which is secured with fences and locks. Commissioner Prouty expressed his support for the project, but noted concern with the adequacy of the white picket fence, since parts appeared to be in disrepair. The applicant clarified that she would be repairing that fence once they have finished with the back fences. Commissioner Teglia asked that landscaping be installed in front of the fence along the street frontage, which was agreeable to the applicant. Public Hearing closed. Motion- Commissioner Moore /Second-Commissioner Prouty - to approve the subject use permit application. c:~pocuw~evi.ts av~.d sett%v~.gs~bagutlar~l~cal settCwgs~rew~povar~ iwterv~.et ~Cles~o~rci2p2~o6-os-og r~pc pva f~ n~Cwutes.doc Page 2 of s Planning Commission Meeting June 5, 2008 On the question Commissioner Teglia requested to amend the motion to include a condition of approval to require installation and maintenance of the landscaping on the corner and to repair the fence within 3 months. The Commission was agreeable to adding this condition. Ayes: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by unanimous vote. 3. Thomas Lefort/applicant Todd Magaline/owner 320 Shaw Rd P07-0129: UP07-0023 & DR07-0077 Use Permit and Design Review allowing a production bakery (food preparation facility) in an existing industrial building, with 24 hour operation, outside overnight storage of up to 6 vans, an outdoor utility yard, and generating over 100 average daily vehicle trips, situated at 320 Shaw Road Unit #B, in the Industrial (M-1) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.30, 20.81 & 20.85. Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report. The applicant made a brief PowerPoint presentation outlining the proposed operations. Commissioner Giusti questioned whether they would continue to operate at their other site at East Harris. The applicant responded they had a need for two production facilities; the sliced bread would continue to be produced out of the East Harris facility, while artisan bread, pastries and desserts would be made at the Shaw Road facility. Commissioner Prouty asked about the potential for grease to enter into the sewer system. The applicant explained that facility would have a 1500 gal capacity grease interceptor, but noted that the facility would not generate a lot of grease. Commissioner Prouty also questioned the adequacy of the water system to accommodate the proposed use. Senior Planner Carlson responded there was no capacity problem. Commissioner Oborne questioned what the prior uses of the building had been. Senior Planner Carlson responded that it had been used for warehousing and/or freight forwarding. The applicant mentioned it had also been used for clothing/t-shirt production. The applicant further noted they had spent the last 1 ~/z years reconditioning the building and adding ADA improvements. Commissioner Oborne asked if there were any issues resulting for the previous silk screening operations. The applicant stated that it had been 20 years since they had been mixing inks in the facility. Commissioner Moore asked about the trash pick up. The applicant stated that they will be working with the Scavengers and they intend to take advantage of recyclable compost opportunities. The applicant confirmed to Commissioner Moore that their operation is affiliated with Le Boulanger in San Francisco. Commissioner Moore asked if the left over bread was given to less fortunate people in the area. The applicant informed Commissioner Moore that the left over bread is picked up from the eight stores everyday. There is very little waste from the factories because all product was delivered to the stores daily. Commissioner Moore asked if they would consider giving priority to hiring South San Francisco residents first. Commissioner Teglia questioned whether the applicants had considered including a retail outlet use. The applicant noted that they had not considered this site for an outlet since Shaw Road was not well situated for the volume of foot traffic needed to support a retail site. c:\AOCUw+ev~ts ctwd settCwgs~baguClav~t~cal settCv~gs~rev~povAV~ iwtev~.et ~~les~o~~2n2~o6-os-oa Rpc pva f~ r~Cv~utes.doc page s of s Planning Commission Meeting June 5, 2008 Cheryl Ringleman, tenant at 340 Shaw Road, noted she had just received the notice tonight from her landlord and her only concern was that the street parking would not be impeded during the day. She stated that it would be great to have better smells in the area. Commissioner Teglia asked Senior Planner Carlson if there was a condition of approval for parking on site. Senior Planner Carlson responded there was and that there was a requirement for aone-year review so the Commission can see how effective the measure has been. Public Hearing closed. Motion- Commissioner Prouty /Second- Commissioner Sim: to approve P07-0129: UP07-0023 & DR07- 0077 Ayes: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by unanimous vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 4. Kathleen Keppinger/applicant Nancy ). Scott/owner 1373 Lowrie Ave P05-0126: UP05-0026 & DR05-0071) One Year Review -Use Permit and Design Review allowing a food production and a limousine service, with landscape upgrades and open at-grade parking accommodating up to 23 parking spaces, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips and 24 hour operation, situated at 1369 and 1373 Lowrie Avenue (APN 015-115- 430) in the Industrial (M-1) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters: 20.81 and 20.85 Senior Planner Carlson gave annual review report. The applicant provided the Commission with current pictures to depict the improvement of area. Commissioner Giusti stated it was quite an improvement. Motion-Teglia /Second- Zemke - to accept the report as fulfillment of the one-year review requirement Ayes: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None Approved by unanimous vote. 5. A Resolution determining that the Proposed Capital Improvement Program 11=Y 2008-2009 is consistent with the City's General Plan. Tracy Scramaglia, Associate Civil Engineer, gave the staff report on the Capital Improvement Program. Commissioner Teglia stated that there was not enough information to make a decision. He felt the CIP deserved a study session. He was particularly concerned that a sidewalk project on Hillside Avenue in front of the Hillside c:~POCUw~.ewts awd settiwgs~baguClav~wcal settCwgs~revuporav~ iwtevwet pLles\o~K.i2p2~o6-os-og rzpc pva ft r~Cwutes.doc page ~ o f s Planning Commission Meeting June 5, 2008 Church that he had mentioned previously had not been included in the upcoming year project list. He noted that for years the church has been trying to work with the City to improve this area; they repaved their parking lot but there is no sidewalk. He felt the Hillside School and Church had done their part but not the City. He stressed that since the General Plan calls for sidewalks in the City, sidewalks should be a high priority. Regarding traffic calming measures, he requested that additional information be provided as to what specifically would be included. He noted he would like to see a much more detailed presentation on the CIP - with a particular focus on streets. Associate Civil Engineer Scramaglia responded that the sidewalk on Hillside was addressed in Item 12, and was identified for completion in fiscal year 2009-2010. Commissioner Teglia felt strongly that it should be moved forward. Commissioner Prouty reiterated his concern with safety of the children at this location and wanted additional consideration of the matter before approval. Assistant City Manager Van Duyn explained that the Commission's responsibility was to determine whether the overall CIP was consistent with the General Plan, noting specific details are not typically considered. However, he noted he would bring the Commission's concerns back to the City Council's budget subcommittee for review. There was general discussion about various components of the CIP resulting in direction from the Commission that staff provide a more detailed overview of the major projects contained in the program. Staff agreed to bring such information forward at the Commission's next meeting. Motion- Teglia /Second-Prouty : To continue the matter to the June 19, 2008 Planning Commission meeting. Ayes: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: None ITEMS FROM STAFF ITEMS FROM COMMISSION None Commissioner Teglia commented that a construction yard appears to have been created on the PUC property at EI Camino and Chestnut. He stated the dust mitigation measures were completely inadequate. He asked that staff talk to contractor to get this under control. Commissioner Prouty thanked Assistant City Manager VanDuyn for developing the joint City Council/Planning Commission trip to view the recently acquired PUC properties and surrounding area. He stated it was great planning on his and staffs' behalf. Commissioner Oborne noted her appreciation as well, noting how beneficial the entire trip had been, especially due to her being a new commissioner. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC AD70URNMENT Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/pac None 9:02 PM Mary Giusti, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco c:\nocuw~ev~ts awd sett~wgs~bAguClav~wcal settLwgs~revuporav~ w~tervLet ~Lles\o~rci2p2~o6-os-og izpc pva ft n~t~wutes.doc page s of s MINUTES June 19, 2008 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION TAPE 1 CALL TO ORDER /PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 7:31 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Sim, Vice Chairperson Teglia, Commissioner Zemke, Chair Giusti and Commissioner Prouty ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Division: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Steve Carlson, Senior Planner Bertha Aguilar, Admin. Asst. II City Attorney: Sky Woodruff, Assistant City Attorney Engineering Division: Dennis Chuck, Senior Civil Engineer Tracy Scramaglia, Contract Engineer Public Works Terry White, Director of Public Works Police Department: Sergeant Alan Normandy, Planning Liaison Fire Prevention. Brian Niswonger, Assistant Fire Marshall CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW Chief Planner Kalkin requested that item # 5 be heard after the consent calendar. Chairperson Giusti agreed to do so. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS CONSENT CALENDAR i. Approval of Planning Commission minutes of January 17, February 21, March 6, March 20, April 3, May 1 and May 15, 2008. Motion Prouty /Second Teglia to approve the Consent Calendar. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS -moved after Consent Ca/endar under Agenda Review. 5. Park Station Lofts -1488 EI Camino Real. Discussion of proposed paint color changes Chief Planner Kalkin noted that the applicant contacted staff to modify their paint scheme to richen the accent colors to which staff sent a memo to the Planning Commission and City Council inviting them to go out and look at the mock up and provide comments by May 27~'. She stated that after the deadline staff approved the changes since there were no comments at that time. She noted that this item was agendized when a Commissioner contacted staff with this request. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the rendition that is posted out on the site is different than what was originally approved. He explained that it was a white washed color versus a tri-color rendition that was originally approved. He noted that the change has been posted on the site without approval. Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 2008 Elaine Breeze, SummerHill Homes, submitted a letter to the Commission outlining the process they followed with regards to the colors and photographs of the building as it currently stands. She noted that the conditions of approval required a mock up to address color concerns and added that when the scaffolding was removed they saw that the armature needed to be darker. She added that staff requested them to paint the armature with the applicant's preferred color for review by the Planning Commission and City Council. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that this color issue was first noticed when the City Council and Planning Commission had a tour around the area. He was concerned with the change because the approval looks much darker and the new colors look very bland. Ms. Breeze noted that the artistic rendition is a water color rendition and the colors are not representative of the actual paint color. She added that the new color scheme is going to be very nice and they are excited with the final landscaping. Vice Chairperson Teglia was concerned with the color hues being different and added that the picture that was published in Summerhill's annual report looked much warmer. Ms. Breeze stated that the originally approved color was brown which felt flat, and Summerhill requested a slight change of the colors during the mock up review. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the color on the rendition at the site is very bland and questioned if the final product will look like the water color rendition or how the buildings are now. Ms. Breeze clarified that they are going to use the paint chip color samples that are before the Commission. Commissioner Zemke noted that the color does not look very different to him and felt that the landscaping is very important. He questioned if there will be shrubbery in planter boxes around the building. Ms. Breeze replied affirmatively and added that the trees on EI Camino Real will be 36 inch box trees. Commissioner Prouty noted that the darker color on the corner building that looks like an arch is the one he prefers and added that when this is completed there will be a definition in the shadows to break up the massing of the buildings. He added that the brochure rendition, specifically the shadowed area below the windows, looks like there is a third color that accents the window insets and balconies. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the reveals are darkened in the rendering and it looks like a third color. Ms. Breeze noted that this is a shadow on the rendition but not a third color. Commissioner Sim noted that the picture is incomplete and the Commission has a desire for consistency although the colors are different. He added that the railing and lighting fixtures have not been installed yet. He stated that better communication was needed to inform the Commission that the colors were going to change. He noted that he would be amenable to the change depending on how the articulation is. Ms. Breeze noted that they painted the building three different colors and the darker hues jumped out at a distance, so they chose the most comfortable color. Commissioner Sim noted that the reverse reveals around the window trims are nice because they become more apparent due to the subtlety of the colors and explained to the Commission that if there were a lot of colors the details would have been lost, but because the colors are subtle the details on the reveals are more visible. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the base color has changed and would like to see a realistic rendition from SummerHill on what the final color scheme is going to be. He added that the s:~M~wutes\o6-i_y-o8 rzpC n-tCwutes.doc Page2of~ Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 2008 Commission should see the entire mock up. Ms. Breeze noted that she followed the process according to the Conditions of approval. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the change was not brought to their attention until they started inquiring about it and were not aware that a mock up had been in place. Ms. Breeze stated that the building is painted and Summerhill is ready to repaint the armature as soon as possible. Commissioner Prouty noted that the color is important and would like to see a paint chip or rendering of some sort. Ms. Breeze noted that the mock up is on the photographs submitted to them and the mock up was painted with the new colors from May 16~n through the 27~n Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that he does not have an issue with the colors on the buildings with the additional accents. He asked if another mock up could be painted for the Commission to look at it because they want to see what the total package is. He noted that it seems bland and that this is a good opportunity to accent the reveals. Ms. Breeze noted that she could paint the base color below the armature and because they are on a tight deadline the mock up could be painted by Monday so that the Commission can look at it and provide a quick response. She stated that she would like to have the issue resolved as soon as possible. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that this could be done and the item does not have to return to the Commission if there aren't any issues with the mock up. Consensus of the Commission to individually visit fhe site and inspect the repainted mock Ms. Breeze requested that if someone objects they meet her at the site to discuss their concerns. Commissioner Moore was concerned with the paint not matching the paint chip and the color not reflecting the color the Commission is reviewing. Ms. Breeze noted that they will purchase a Benjamin Moore product which is where the paint sample is from. Chief Planner Kalkin requested that the Commission call to inform staff that they have looked at the mock up and if there are issues they can also contact Elaine Breeze directly. PUBLIC HEARING 2. Park NFly/applicant Park NFly/owner 101 Terminal Ct P06-0064: UPM08-0001 8~ DR08-0012 Modification of a Condition of Approval associated with a Commercial Planned Unit Development, Use Permit and Design Review of an airport parking facility allowing trees to be planted off-site along the easterly property perimeter instead of the interior of the site, situated at 101 Terminal Court (APN 015-113-240), in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.84, 20.85 and 20.91. PUD07-0002, UP06-0004 & DR06-0050- Approved by the Planning Commission on November 2007 Public Hearing opened. Senior Planner Carlson presented the staff report and noted that condition of approval #3 was modified to increase the landscape along the frontage of the property. s:\M~wutes\o6-z9-o8 RPC n-t~wutes.doc Pagesof~ Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 2008 Steve Kapeche, landscape architect, noted that they will be installing new trees and shrubs in the Caltrans right of way. He gave a PowerPoint presentation showing how the landscaping would look once it is installed and when it had reached 5 years of age. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned which trees were being removed. Mr. Kapeche noted that they are deleting trees from inside the parking lot. Commissioner Zemke questioned if the tree species were wind resistant. Mr. Kapeche noted that they are wind and drought tolerant. Commissioner Prouty questioned if there was going to be an irrigation system installed. Mr. Kapeche noted that in order to get the plants established they have to install a watering system and once the plants are established the irrigation system may be reduced. Chairperson Giusti asked if there will be some sort of ground coverage while the plants are growing. Mr. Kapeche noted that they will mulch the ground and are proposing not to install ground cover because it becomes a maintenance issue. He noted that groundcover would be installed near Terminal Court, but it does not make sense to do it along the freeway on-ramp due to the high speed of vehicles. Commissioner Moore questioned how the maintenance of the landscaping would be monitored. Mr. Kapeche noted that the applicant has signed a maintenance agreement to ensure that the plants and irrigation system are maintained. Michael Valencia, representing the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, noted his concern with the produce terminal sign, which was installed several years ago, being blocked by the trees being installed once they reach maturity. He noted that the sign has become a beacon and aids truck drivers in the a.m. hours when they come into the site. He suggested that the landscape agreement restrict the trees in front of the Golden Gate Terminal canopy to not block the sign. Commissioner Prouty asked how high the sign was. Mr. Valencia noted that the canopy is about 18 feet tall. He added that a cypress tree seems like it will be a problem but the bushes seem that they will not get higher than the existing 6 foot fence. Mr. Kapeche noted that the trees can reach 15 feet in height but the species that are being installed can be pruned to limit the height of the tree. Commissioner Prouty suggested including this limitation in the landscape agreement. Public Hearing closed. Motion Teglia /Second Prouty to approve P06-0064: UPM08-0001 & DR08-0012 with the additional condition that the trees not obscure the Golden Gate produce canopy sign. Approved by unanimous voice vote. ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 3. A Resolution determining that the Proposed Capital Improvement Program (CIP) FY 2008- 2009 is consistent with the City's General Plan. Public Works Director White gave a brief review of the CIP process. Senior Civil Engineer Dennis Chuck and Consulting Engineer Tracy Scramaglia gave a detailed presentation of the CIP. Some of the Commission comments and questions were: Lindenvi//e Storm Dra/n Proiect- A question was asked with regards to the separators on North Canal that are preventing the creek from collapsing and if they were part of this project (Commissioner Prouty). Public Works Director White noted that the area in question is part of the County Flood Control District and that body is responsible for addressing the issues on the creek. Forbes B/vd, sewerimvrovements-Goncern was expressed regarding the upgrades and if they will allow enough capacity for all the projects currently underway (Commissioner Prouty) to which Public Works Director White noted that he is confident that there is enough capacity. He added that there is new technology that will allow for upgrades that allow extra capacity in the field which will allow sufficient 5:\M%wute5\06-19-08 RPC M%wutes.dDc Page ~ Df ~ Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 2008 capacity through 2020. He pointed out that changes such as added regulation or additional water intensive businesses could change this in the long term future. E1O1 imoactfee fundedvroiecls/numnstation #4- A concern was raised with City projects lacking design screening through landscaping that is required from developers (Dice Chairperson Teg/ia). Senior Civil Engineer Chuck noted that he will provide the Commission with a copy of the landscape plan for pump station #4. Ca/train Station- Commissioner Prouty noted that the Lowes site looks very nice and wondered if the train station could be moved closer to the Lowes/West Marine site. Public Works Director White noted that the design is complete and Caltrain has 50 million dollars in funding to build it. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck added that they are reaching 100% design and showed additional renderings of the proposed station. Public Works Director White further added that the city has allocated funds to improve landscaping above and beyond what Caltrains is providing. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that there needs to be some level of review of the station. Public Works Director White noted that the City is working closely with the project architect so that the project matches what is in the downtown area. The Commission was concerned with the existing parking lot being used as the parking lot for the new station and questioned if upgrades were going to be made to the lot. Staff noted that the City will be maintaining the lot and any future improvements will be based on ridership numbers. Vice Chairperson Teglia inquired what would happen to the loading dock ramp and if it was abandoned. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck noted that the City will have to work with Union Pacific to relocate it to another location because it is still active. Centennial War Ph 11 & Ill- A question was raised with regards to the BART chain link fence and having them change it to something more aesthetic while still securing their equipment. Public Works Director noted that the City protested the chain link fence and managed to get a vinyl clad fence but noted that once time shows Bart will not have security issues there, Bart may be more amenable to a change. Tra>fc Ca/mina- Commissioner Prouty stated that he has seen traffic calming measures in other cities such as Sacramento where they have traffic blocked in one direction and traffic circles for residential areas. Consulting Engineer Scramaglia noted that traffic circles are a good traffic calming measure, but one that requires neighborhood input and buy-in. Vice Chairperson Teglia questioned if there were any traffic calming projects since the program was started. Consulting Engineer Scramaglia noted that there are not any plans currently underway. However, she noted that they did have neighborhood complaints on Arroyo Drive and instead of installing the one stop sign that was requested staff decided to look at the street as a whole to implement several traffic calming strategies. Vice Chairperson Teglia added that there were traffic calming ideas on Sunshine Gardens during the BART Station review and that No. Spruce Avenue is impacted by noise where there is a big dip in the road. Consulting Engineer Scramaglia stated that the Technical Advisory Committee, which is made up of staff members, looks into these issues to determine what traffic calming measures can be incorporated in the area. Vice Chairperson Teglia noted that the sidewalk on Hillside at the church is not a preference, but a priority. He suggested a provisional approval to ensure that the sidewalk on Hillside Boulevard be moved up in priority to next fiscal year's cycle in CIP. Motion Teglia /Second Moore to approve resolution 2671-2008 with the provision that the Hillside Boulevard sidewalk improvement be moved higher in priority for FY 08-09. On the question: Commissioner Zemke questioned what would occur if the City Council does not agree with the Commission's recommendation. Assistant City Attorney Woodruff noted that the Commission is providing a consistency finding and it is up to the Council if they want to prioritize the project. Roll Call: s:\NtCwutes\o6-i9-og Rpc M%v~utes.doc page sof ~ Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 2008 Ayes: Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Zemke, Vice Chairperson Teglia and Chairperson Giusti Noes: Absent: None Abstain: None Approved by roll call vote. Commissioner Moore asked Public Works Director White what the City's thoughts on the apple moth spraying were. Public Works Director White noted that the Council saw a presentation on this and did not have a position on whether to do it or not. He added that he is not aware of any twist ties or stations within the City. He further noted that the spraying is in abeyance pending CEQA implications. Recess taken at 9:25 p.m. Recalled to order at 9:33 p.m. 4. ARE-SF No 21 L.P./applicant ARE-SF No 21 L.P./owner 213 Sz 217 E. Grand Avenue P07-0106: UP07-0017, DR07-0065, DA07-0001 & EIR07-0001 Study Session -Use Permit, Design Review &TDM plan to construct anine-story 291,000 sf R&D /Office Building and aMulti-level parking garage on a 6.2 acre site located at the NE corner of East Grand Avenue & Forbes Blvd in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.32.060, 20.81, 20.85 & 20.120 Public Hearing opened. Chief Planner Kalkin presented the Staff Report. Kevin Kullen, LamphierGregory, gave a presentation on the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Theresa Nemiath -Alexandria Real Estate, Nial Malcolmson - Dowler Gruman Architects and Richard Sharp - Studio 5 design presented the project to the Commission. Commissioner Zemke questioned what the estimated number of employees was once the building is fully occupied. Mr. Malcolmson noted that the EIR states it is between 729-1000 employees. Commission comments: • Concern was raised with regards to the turn off of Forbes Boulevard (Vice Chairperson Teg/ia) • Request of more views from Forbes (Vice Chairperson Teg/ia) • Increase design detail on parking structure and follow some examples of parking structures that mimic the building (Vice Chairperson Teg/ia) • Staggering trees at the meandering sidewalk rather than lumping them together (Vice Chairperson Teg/ia) • Concern on how the roof parking will look being that it will be visible from other buildings. • The applicant was commended for maximizing the garage parking rather than the surface parking and constructing a multi story building (Commissioner Prouty and Commissioner Zemke) • Concern was raised with regard to traffic increasing with the amount of employees increasing as well (Commissioner Zemke) • A comment was made that mass transit and the new train station underpass will help alleviate some traffic (I/ice Chairperson Teg/ia and Chief P/anner Ka/kin) • The applicant can offer incentives to mitigate traffic through their TDM plan. (Commissioner Prouty) • The applicant was commended for pursuing a LEED certification for this project and other projects in the City (Commissioner Sim) 5:\M%wutes\o6-19-08 R'PC Miwutes.doc Page6of~ Planning Commission Meeting of June 19, 2008 Commissioner Sim requested to see how the elevation of Forbes Boulevard is going to be handled. Mr. Malcolmson noted that they had a wind study prepared for which their consultant prepared some videos to show the wind impacted areas and showed them to the Commission. Public Hearing closed. 5. Park Station Lofts -1488 EI Camino Real. Discussion of proposed paint color changes Moved after Consent Ca/endar under Agenda Review. ITEMS FROM STAFF None • Appointment of a Kaiser Subcommittee -Chairperson Giusti appointed Vice Chairperson Teglia and Commissioner Prouty to the subcommittee. ITEMS FROM COMMISSION • Discussion of minutes -Vice Chairperson Teglia asked that staff make every effort to have the minutes ready for approval by the next regularly scheduled meeting. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC AD7OURNMENT Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco SK/bla S:\M%v~utCS\06-19-08 R'PC Mw~,utCS.dOC None 10:00 P.M. Mary Giusti, Chairperson Planning Commission City of South San Francisco page ~ of ~ ~o~~x„~~ Planning Commission o -~ o Staff Report c'~LIFOR~1~ DATE: July 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Use Permit to allow the conversion of a vacant ground floor retail space, located at 309 Baden Avenue, into a beauty salon within 200 feet of a residential district in the Downtown Commercial (D-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.26 & 20.81 Owner: Arturo Ramirez Applicant: Nora Barrientos Case Nos.: P08-0047: DR08-0020 & UP08-0008 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit application UP08- 0008 based on the attached draft Findings and subject to the attached draft Conditions of Approval. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: A use permit is required for this project because: • It includes a request for a change of use on a site that is within 200 feet of the residential district (SSFMC Section 20.26.025); and • General Plan Land Use Policies require a use permit to allow non-residential service- oriented establishments on the first floor of downtown tenant spaces. The project site is improved with two buildings: a residential building fronting Second Lane, which is not part of this application, and aoommercial/office building fronting Baden Avenue. The 309 Baden Avenue commercial/office building is two stories and is approximately 3,300 square feet in size. City records indicate that the commercial/office building was constructed new in 2000-01 and the owner was issued a certificate of occupancy in April of 2001. No changes are proposed for the exterior of the building with this application -after approximately six years of use, the building is in a state of good repair. In February of 2007, the owner submitted an application to allow an office use on the ground floor of 309 Baden Avenue. At that time, the Planning Commission approved the use permit based on the fact that retail tenants at 309 Baden Avenue have not been successful. The owner's records confirmed that there has been a history of bi-annual tenant turnover which results in the ground floor space being vacant for extended periods of time. The office tenants on the second floor have been stable during this same time. Since the 2007 Use Permit approval, the office use Page 2 of 3 P08-0047: DR08-0020 & UP08-0008 Use Permit 309 Baden Avenue that was approved has closed. Current Application At this time, the applicant is proposing a Beauty Salon for the ground floor tenant space. Minor interior modifications, including the installation of shampoo bowls are proposed, as well as new sign is proposed for the facade of the building. The total area of the space is approximately 1,230 square feet. The applicant will open the business with two staff people, with hopes that the space could accommodate up to four staff people total. The proposed business hours are Monday through Saturday 10:00 am to 7:00 pm and Sunday 10:00 am to 4:00 pm. General Plan Consistency The General Plan Land Use designation for the site is Downtown Commercial. The proposed personal service use for the first floor tenant space conforms to the General Plan policies. Specifically, allowing a beauty salon at this location continue to provide an active use along the street front. The Downtown Plan Area Land Use Policies allow ground floor offices, subject to an approved Use Permit by the Planning Commission (General Plan Table 3.1.2). Sign Application The application also includes a new sign for the business (sign design attached to plans). The sign was reviewed by the Design Review Board at their June meeting. The Board felt that the proposed green painted sign "Hair by Trini" is consistent is terms of style and size with the existing signage in the vicinity of the site. Staff concurs with the Design Review Board. P king A parking exception was granted for the previous use on January 9, 2007. The previous exception provides the parking relief necessary to accommodate the retail/personal service use at 309 Baden Avenue. Furthermore, there are several public parking lots available in the vicinity of the subject site, including lots 2, 5, and 12 which all have entrances within one block of the project. CEQA: The proposed development is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act in accordance with Section 15301 -Class 1: Leasing of existing commercial spaces with negligible changes. CONCLUSION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve application P08-0047 for Use Permit application number UP08-0008 based on the attached draft Findings and subject to the attached draft Conditions of Approval. The proposed beauty salon use meets the intent of the General Plan and complies with all the development standards outlined in the Municipal Code. Page 3 of 3 P08-0047: DR08-0020 & UP08-0008 Use Permit 309 Baden Avenue Gerry B udin Senior Planner TMS/ghb Attachments: Draft Findings of Approval Draft Conditions of Approval DRB Minutes -dated June 17, 2008 Plans (including Sign Drawing) -dated, 5.23.08 DRAFT FINDINGS OF APPROVAL P08-0047: DR08-0020 & UP08-0008 USE PERMIT 309 BADEN AVENUE (As recommended by City Staff July 17, 2008) As required by the "Use Permit Procedures" (SSFMC Chapter 20.81) the following findings are made in support of allowing a beauty salon on the ground floor in the D-C Downtown Commercial District in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.81 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 Site Plan prepared by HNQ Drafting Services, dated 5.23.08; Planning Commission staff report, dated July 17, 2008; and Planning Commission meeting of July 17, 2008: 1. A beauty salon use at 309 Baden Avenue will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community, or detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. A personal service use will occupy a currently vacant tenant space at this location. 2. The proposed project complies with the General Plan Land Use Element designation of "Downtown Commercial" by introducing a personal service use to a currently vacant ground floor tenant space in the downtown. 3. The proposed project complies with the standards and requirements of the D-C Zone District. The personal service use will occupy an existing tenant space within an existing building and the required Use Permit application has been filed for the Planning Commission's review. DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P08-0047: DR08-0020 & UP08-0008 USE PERMIT 309 BADEN AVENUE (As recommended by City Staff July 17, 2008) A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: 1. 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 HNQ Drafting Services, dated 5.23.08 and the sign graphics included in the package. Planning Division contact Gerry Beaudin, Senior Planner, (650) 877-8353 B. Police Department conditions of approval are as follows: 1. Municipal 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 conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed /revised building plans. Police Department contact, Sgt. Jon J. Kallas, (650) 877-8927 C. Fire Department conditions of approval are as follows: 1. The building requires fire extinguishers. 2. Provide adequate premise identification (address) on the building per the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code, Section 15.24.100. Fire Department contact, Luis Da Silva, 650/829-6670 D. Engineering Division conditions of approval are as follows: 1. The building permit application plans shall conform to the standards of the Engineering Division's "Building Permit Typical Plan Check Submittals" requirements, copies of which are available from the Engineering Division. 2. The owner shall, at his/her expense, repair any broken sidewalk, curb and gutter fronting the property. The new driveway shall comply with the City Standard Detail. 3. Any work performed in the City's right-of--way shall require an encroachment from the P08-0047: DR08-0020 & UP08-0008 Use Permit 309 Baden Avenue Engineering Division. The owner shall apply and pay all fees and deposits for the encroachment permit. Engineering Division contact, Sam Bautista, 650/829-6652 ~lN~`C~5 -- SS%- (~ ~1~ N ~,~ u tr; ~v ~o/m.,/~ r-~ ~ (r . - Sv~nlr ~ ~ ~ ZU~~ The rd had the following comments: 1. onsider eliminating the bay window and adding a balcony to re ce the assing in the front elevation. 2. DRB m bers are concerned with a second side entry t is being proposed t was not on the orignal set of approv plans. The new side entry cou a creating a side yard encroa ment. Verify that the side property line setback are accurat 3. Consider designing th ont section b educing or pulling back the walls and wrapping the ste 4. The proposed 15 gallon stree es will not work for this site, consider a taller specifies that will ac mo e a 40 ft building height, ex - London Plane T rees. 5. The dwelling nee more articulation - co 'der adding planter boxes or seat walls & re street trees to help soften massing on the site. 6. Consider aming out the driveway with add'I Ian aping or incorporate the I scaping into the columns in the front section the dwelling. 7. rify that the driveway will work for backing out. B~Visually lighten up the railings as much as possible. 9. Provide a color board . Re-Submittal Required. 7. OWNER Arturo Ramirez APPLICANT Nora Barrientos ADDRESS 309 Baden Avenue PROJECT NUMBER P08-0047, UP08-0007 & DR08-0020 PROJECT NAME Use Permit -Beauty Salon (Case Planner: Gerry Beaudin) DESCRIPTION Use Permit application to allow the conversion of a vacant ground floor retail space into a Beauty Salon within 200 feet of a residential district, located at 309 Baden Avenue, in the Downtown Commercial (D-C-L) Zoning District in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.26, 20.81 & 20.85 Approved as submitted. OWNER SummerHill Homes A CANT Marketshare, Inc ADD 1410 El Camino Real PROJECT NU Signs08-0028 & P03-0092 PROJECT NAME e "C" Sign Perm~t~-Su OConnell) Type "C" Master Sign Pe or Summerhill Homes to install temporary on-site marketing signs 488 El Camino Real in the Transit Village Zone District. ~~`' . ~® nin~e,cn. ~ ~"- ~ ~, Front Facade Mr Frorfi lfoar ;.f.. ~ ~ ~ ~r~hUENId , i~~ .,..--~ _..d _ uF' ~: ~ ~,_ ' ~ienefadiacem6uilding . ___ _ , _ - --~ ' - Nair ByTrini .~, -' ~ , 309 Baden Ave Ste 101 ~~--~ ~/ South San Francisco A''~~flQr Ope11S t0laner COUM ...-~ c ,t. ~~. ~~~ Icy` ~~. .. ' ~ ' . _a. -- '~'. .. .. Futi tAe~W from across street ..~ Restaurant next door at 319 Baden ~ `~~, Inver Court ~~ ~~~- 8ti TRtr~l ~ ~o~ cJa, ~„~ ~ %ow,c..~ SGT ~a ~~~ dpi (~ rr ~ , ----• _:~ sAaKts SIGNS 435 Linden Ave Sough San Francisco, CA 9408f~ 650-589-7690 ~~~~ ~ ~=~~~ ~~ k ~ ~_ x /O~ ~~'''~ ~ s ~ ~ ~a ~ '> ~; ~ a 2 I ~r~~?~;9 ~~ ~ ~ ~~i r ~~. i s ., r 8 _ ~~ ~~ ~ ~: ~ :. " ~ - ~ F S ~ S g g ,~ ~ r ~ ~ ` u x ~ ~ t .. G ~~ ~s -~ x ~ ~ Q ~ ~, .. ~ R y, t ~ fir. €~ ~s T~ Y P ~ $ 2 ,~ ~ ~ x ~ i ~ ~ ~ t~ ~ 1 ki_ .ss;~£ ~ - -. -~ k ~~ 5 €~ ~r ~,~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ -. 7~.... _ r _ 3 `~ ~ ~j w n a ~ ~ - ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ - '-' # Y k Y t - 'f• S 5 F y, t~ ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ ~ C 31 .T ~_ ~ ; ~ Y - R [ ., ., e R 5 ,s~= a ~ ~ ~ $ L r- ~ m € s ~~y-~~g 3a' ~ s 5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ K ~ ~ s u ~ ~~'F;a ~~ ~m ~~. ~~ ~~_ ~ ~ ~ R ~. z ~ x ~~ ~~~~_ ~£ ~. £~~gF:= r ~ ~' a i r I j s i ~ t r i _ II ~, s e c o n d s t r e e t ~ i :I (E) walkway - I - ~ - I _ I ~ I n 0 I ~ I ~ o I I m x I I ~ ~ I mi 2 I < ~ i m ' m m i N ~ I m m ~ I I . . ~ I » ~ ~ yi D r SI I I O i ~ I I I I ~~ I I ----I ------ m y v ~- I ~ ,~. O m A 0 7 c z z m ~ x I D I ~ ~ ° ~ I 3 ~ 3 I ~ ~ ~ I n n ~ ~ ~ ~ O I r O I ~ I ~ I ~E) walkway ~~I l~ 3 0 9 b a d '~ ~^ p.~. - ~ _ ~ o v e n u e a .. ' 00 _- r n A O O - 3 f,. ~ _... ~`~ tq . __ ~ m a ~ -~; - N G ».~ Id 0 3 r „ ~ n _ ~, ".. T r - O ° ~ - ~ ~ a!~~ .I {~ ~. i.. r .R+~ ~.- ' li "~ .-~ ¢ @~ -, rl`.~f~, ~ ~-- IRS ;~}~r; a O 0 0 0 a ~' 'a ~ z. a n-~ ~ n n "r r ~/ - ,,, ~ r r ~ ~,^. °g- ~t 0 P ~~ ion ° a a ,! ~ ~ ' ~,~ _~ ~~~; ',~, Jm Z ~ N _ _ - ^ Sr-- `~S O C V• w 2 ~ ` I Z • • V 'w v I' ~ J ~ ~ ~ ~ z T Z' ° ~ ~ ~ 'n a Z ~ ~ C ~ ~ a m a ~ m rn _ n ~ ~1 O N O Z O apn .............................. mrs. and mr, nora - 309 Baden avenue, south san francisco, California -commercial tenant improvement -permit application O° €;~~~~~~~o;m ~ - I ~, ~ - a a s f and ~i ~~~om~~~~~>~ y ~ [ ~ ~ m Qv r$ °J €~€ IW ~$~f0 m 73 x Rmi 3°m N• .-r 0 W O a x N v ` o 0 0 m ~.% y t I1 H O z Z c ° i l i ~ ' y ~ m ~ o~ O ~ O. ~ _ €rb'.,.~ ~. n ~ i ~ I m u> H r m m '~ _ -~?~ 1 zl si - C'f I mI O n n m, r ~® ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ; ti ~ Z - O r - S rZ'. ~~ m m - /~ -_ ~ c~ -~ ~ - 3 ,o ~~,~,~ _m..e.. ~ - - X '~ ~ ~ _; Y-; ., k 41 Q. r- _ I I > ~ R' ~~ ~: T. N rt ~ L , ~ - , -. -1 I .. G i -~ i - ~ I N '- ~ 1-i I i ~ i ~. ., m O 6 4 .. I I. !i l~, "..~ a ~ :, ~ ~,~ i_ w= ~ - - ~ -~~ a v ~ O a ~ f :D - 1{ '~ ~ - 5 x S' ~, . .. - f -. - _. -. ___..~ 3 I S f. ~ ~~ .. ~ ~ '~~ ' C _ 'Q .... ! ~ ~ ~ T _-- m I I - - N < 41 i~ - 'B i ~ _ - ~ _ -i 'a ~ In L O I °, ~~ O ~r-~_~{ ~ s C m .+ I rr o ~ { , r --- - ------ m rn ~~ , ~ ~ $ _ ~ ', ~I ~ N i.. 3 .* L` ~ m r a c ~ C_ 'Y; ~ 'a ~ O :. S ~ ~i C ~. C ~ ~ ~ A -~ a m 3 e ~ ,,.. ,.. - a ~ _ ~~ ~ ~z• cu+. . i ~ i .. ~ I~ Ifs. x < Q 'O < N r O m - a V N ~ i D _ ~ i ,~ _ ,. ... ~A. W, ~N .a s' L -- ------ ----=~Ej walkway ------- ----- --------- _. ___ -- - _~~ - T _. - I _ f .' ~ _3 III IJ J f~ ~~I ~ ~, I ~~ '~ ~I i_ ~~~ - pn. .. ..... mrs. and mr~ nora • 309 Baden avenue, south san Francisco, calif. ~ rcial tenant improvement • permit application e~ °~'~;'~ :'~`~ a .............-. ornia - comme fir, ~~ ~~ = oN oan s~$ ~Oi~~~ ~~m g ~~ _ ~ ~~~~~~ V'~ ~,' mss'', ~~,, ~~ 3g~ «« "'`mr~'* '~ i ~ ~ ~~~~ go QoAiS O ~ i'~ ~ ~ 3 N ~ OnDa I~ ~~ 11 ~~~ ~„ y~y"~ ~ ~~/~ C1 ~ c~ ~ ~ £ ~ 8 ly ~ y .e to w~ a 9 ~ A 7Y•5 ~ : x~ ~ 3~ S k~O~~.~~~.~A~ ~ ~ ~ Planning Commission J O c9lIFOR~~~ Sta f f Rego rt DATE: July 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Use Permit allowing an indoor sports and recreation dance studio generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, situated at 1 South Linden Avenue Unit #1 in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC Sections 20.32.030(c), 20.32.060, & Chapter 20.81. Owner: Ella H. Yamas Applicant: Spark of Creation Studio Case Nos: P08-0045 (UP08-0006) RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission approve a Use Permit UP08-0006, subject to making the findings and adopting the conditions of approval. BACKGROUND The site has been used as a multi-tenant mixed use facility for many years. The site consists of 2 buildings with a combined area of 51,265 square feet (comprised of 27,401 square feet of office and 23,864 square feet of warehouse) and an at-grade parking lot containing 148 parking spaces. The site is adjacent to townhome style dwellings on Village Way, other light industrial and commercial uses on Linden Avenue and the Caltrain main line. The proposed dance studio would convert a portion Unit #1 of Building #1 containing office and warehouse area to a performing arts use focusing on dance, theater and music appreciation. Hours of operation are proposed from 9 AM to 9 PM Monday through Saturdays. All activities will be conducted indoors. A complete description of the intended use, number of patrons and hours of operation is attached in the applicant's written narrative. The main site entry from South Linden Avenue was previously upgraded a year or two ago. The proposed project includes reconfiguring a portion of the interior floor space. No exterior building modifications are anticipated. DISCUSSION The project site's General Plan land use designation, Mixed Industrial, includes commercial recreation uses. The proposed use is consistent with Land Use Policy 3.2-G-4 (pg 79) (which encourages improving buffering between residential and industrial uses) in that commercial recreation uses are judged to be more compatible with residential uses than are industrial uses. Staff Report Subject: P08-0045 Page 2 of 2 Commercial recreation uses are allowed in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District subject to a Use Permit approved by the Planning Commission (SSFMC Section 20.32.030 (c)). Uses that generate in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips are allowed subject to an approved Use Permit by the City's Planning Commission (SSFMC Section 20.24.060). The proposed facility will provide a variety of classes in dance and musical theater that will be offered to both children as well as adults. The facility with be staffed with up to 6 part-time instructors, 4 part-time assistants and 2 part-time support staff. During most of the day the facility will be staffed with 3 employees. Peak staffing will occur from 4 PM to 8 PM. The 44,370 square foot multi-tenant complex provides a total of 148 parking spaces. The current uses are required to be provided with a minimum of 100 parking spaces. Parking for the proposed dance studio is based on a rate of 4 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area. Based on a floor area of 6,317 square feet the studio would be required to be provided a minimum of 25 parking spaces. The studio will be provided 30 parking spaces exceeding the city's minimum requirement and leaving a future surplus of 18 parking spaces. The applicants parking data for their dance studio at its current location in Pacifica, indicates that up to a maximum of 20 to 30 spaces are utilized by the dance studio patrons and employees, with the greatest use of the facilities anticipated to be weekdays from 4 PM to 9 PM and weekends from 9 AM to 9 PM. The businesses in the complex generally operate on weekdays from 8 AM to 5 PM. The surplus of on- siteparking spaces and the hours of operation will help ensure that the on-site parking supply will be adequate to meet the anticipated demand. To ensure that uses do not generate noise or parking impacts, a condition of approval has been added requiring asix-month review. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: Staff has determined that this proposed project is categorically exempt pursuant to the provisions of Class 3 New construction of minor facilities, Section 15303 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Because the project has been determined to be exempt, no environmental review is necessary. CONCLUSION: The conversion of a small portion of a light industrial multi-tenant facility to a commercial recreation use is consistent with the City's General Plan and with all applicable requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance. Conditions of approval are recommended to minimize the potential for off-site parking spillovers and noise. Therefore, it is recommended that the Planning Commission approve the Use Permit. teve Car son Senior Planner Attachments: Draft Findings of Approval Draft Conditions of Approval Applicant's Narrative Plans FINDINGS OF APPROVAL P08-0045 USE PERMIT UP08-0006 1 SOUTH LINDEN AVENUE (Recommended by City Staff on July 17, 2008) As required by the "Use Permit Procedures" (SSFMC Section 20.81.050), the following findings are made in approval of a Use Permit allowing a commercial recreation dance studio use generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission which include, but are not limited to: Plans submitted in association with P08-0045; Planning Commission staff report of July 17, 2008; and Planning Commission meeting of July 17, 2008: The conversion of a portion of a multi-tenant light industrial facility to a commercial recreation dance studio will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community, or detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. The studio will conduct all of the classes indoors in a building that is of a design that will ensure that noise associated with the performing arts classes will not be evident outside the building. Adequate on-site parking for all the use at the complex so that no spillover effects will occur to surrounding properties. The facility will be open Monday through Saturday between 9 AM and 9 PM. Conditions of approval are recommended to require a limit the hours of operation and asix-month review to ensure that the activities are not causing parking nor acoustic impacts to adjacent properties. 2. The conversion of a small portion of a light industrial multi-tenant building to a commercial recreation dance studio is consistent with the City's General Plan, and Land Use Policy 3.2- G-4 which encourages improving buffering between residential and industrial uses. Replacement of an industrial tenant with a commercial recreation use that is accessible to the community is judged to be more desirable and compatible with the adjacent residential dwellings. 3. The commercial recreation use generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips is consistent with the requirements of the South San Francisco Municipal Code Title 20 Zoning Regulations and in particular Sections 20.32.030(c) and 20.32.060 which require an approved Use Permit by the City's Planning Commission. The parking provided on-site is in excess of the minimum requirements in SSFMC Chapter 20.74. Conditions of approval are required including asix-month review to ensure that the proposed use operates in a fashion that is compatible with the adjacent residences. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P08-0045 USE PERMIT UP08-0006 1 SOUTH LINDEN AVENUE (As recommended by City staff on July 17, 2008) 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 submitted in association with P08-0045. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit, the owner shall pay any required Child Care Impact Fees applicable to the tenant with a credit for the previous use that occupied the same space in accordance with the SSFMC. For example, the conversion of Warehouse to Commercial would require a payment of $.10 per square feet based on the credit for previous use [$.60 - $.47 = $.13]. Based on a floor are of 6,317 square feet the estimated fee is $821.21 [6,317 SF x $.13/SF]. 4. The hours of operation of the use shall be limited to Monday through Saturday between 9 AM and 9 PM. Any expansion of the hours of operation shall first be approved by the South San Francisco Planning Commission. 5. The owner shall allocate a minimum of 30 on-site parking spaces for the approved use. The maximum total staff shall be 10 instructors and 2 support staff. Any expansion of the use either in staffing, class size, number of classes, or floor space shall first be approved by the South San Francisco Planning Commission. 6. The use shall be subject to a review by the Planning Commission six-months from the final inspection. At the time of review the Planning Commission may modify or add conditions of approval. 7. Prior to the final inspection of the tenant space, the applicant shall obtain and thereafter maintain a valid South San Francisco Business License for the duration of the tenancy. (Planning Division contact: Steve Carlson, 650/877-8535) B. POLICE DEPARTMENT A. Municipal 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 conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 8 B. Building Security Doors a. The jamb on all aluminum frame swinging doors shall be so constructed or protected to withstand 16001bs. of pressure in both a vertical 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 locks 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 locks with minimum throw of one (1) inch. Locking hardware shall be installed so that both deadbolt and deadlocking latch can be retracted by a single action of the inside knob, handle, or turnpiece. 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. 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 ofthree-fourths inch at head and foot and shall have no doorknob or surface-mounted hardware. Multiple point locks, cylinder activated from the active leaf and satisfying the requirements, may be used instead of flush bolts. 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/turnpiece. A double-cylinder deadbolt lock or asingle-cylinder deadbolt lock without a turnpiece maybe 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 that will be readily distinguishable as locked, and its use may be revoked by the Building Official for due cause. 25/16" security laminate, U4" polycarbonate, or approved security film treatment, minimum. Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 8 h. Any single or pair of doors requiring locking at the bottom or top rail shall 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 equivalent. 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.2 or: 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 fastened. 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 building 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 Marshal. 3) Outside hinges on all 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 walls 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 material, 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 Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 8 3) If the barrier is on the outside, it shall be secured with galvanized rounded head flush bolts of at least 3/8" diameter 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. d. Parking lot lights shall remain on anytime there are employees in the building. e. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan to be reviewed and approved by the Police Department. Lighting plans shall include photometric and distribution data attesting to the required illumination level. Numbering of Buildings a. The address number of every commercial building shall be illuminated during the hours of darkness 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 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. Conditions of Approval Page 5 of 8 8. Security Camera System a. Building entrances, lobbies and garage areas must be monitored by a closed circuit television camera system. Recordings must be maintained for a period of no less than 30 days. These cameras will be part of a digital surveillance system, which will be monitored on-site and accessible on the world wide web. This system must be of adequate resolution and color rendition to readily identify any person of vehicle in the event a crime is committed, anywhere on the premises. 9. Miscellaneous 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. Jon Kallas, 650/877-8927) C. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. This building requires fire sprinkler modification. Please submit separate plans. 2. Plans shall conform to NFPA 13 and City of South San Francisco Municipal Code, Section 15.24.110. 3. This building requires fire alarms. Please submit separate plans. 4. Provide ahorn/strobe at the front of the building, which will activate upon fire sprinkler or alarm notification. Plans shall conform to NFPA 72 and City of South San Francisco Municipal Code, Section 15.24.150. 5. This building requires fire extinguishers. 6. Provide adequate premise identification (address) on the building per the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code, Section 15.24.100. 7. Provide room names and description of use. (Fire Department contact: Luis DaSilva, Fire Marshal, 650/829-6645) D. BUILDING DIVISION 1. Provide a complete floor plan showing existing exiting of all tenant spaces. 2. Provide the total occupant load for the building and required pluming fixtures required for that load. 3. Provide the use of all areas on the mezzanine level. Conditions of Approval Page 6 of 8 (Building Division contact: Jim Kirkman, Building Official, 650/829-6670) E. WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION The onsite new catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo. 2. In accordance with the Municipal Code and Federal law, new stormwater pollution control devices stormceptor/CDS units are to be installed in any new drainage inlets. In addition, the applicant is required to submit a maintenance schedule for the stormceptor/CDS Units. Submit schedule to the Environmental Coordinator. 3. The subject property is more than 5.0 Acres. The applicant is required to submit a Stormwater Management Plan. 4. That the applicant pays a Sewer Connection Fee. 5. Separate water meters for landscape and building. 6. An Erosion Control Plan with winterization controls is required prior to the issuance of a grading permit. 7. Additional comments when building plans are received. (Water Quality contact: Cassie Prudhel, 650/877-3840) Spark of Creation Business Narrative May 29, 2008 Owners: Randy & Marilou Laf on Alvin & Marcia Ubaldo Page 2 of 11 I. Table of Contents I. Table of Contents 2 II. Executive Summary 3 III. General Company Description 4 IV. Management and Organization 5 V. Operational Procedures 6 VI. Scope of Remodeling 7 VII. Safety Plan 8 VIII. Parking and Traffic Impact 9 IX. Summary 10 2 Page 3 of 11 II. Executive Summary The concept of Spark of Creation Studio (BOGS) is to provide a much needed, culturally diverse, dance and theatrical education center in the downtown area of South San Francisco. This establishment will provide the community courses in many forms of dance and musical arts. SOCS is currently doing business in the city of Pacifica, Ca and proposes to relocate its operations to an approximately 7000 square foot facility located on 1 South Linden Blvd Unit #1, SSF. It is our belief that the Planning Commission's approval of our use will serve as a benefit to the community at large. SOCS expects to lease the abovementioned venue space in August of 2008, and have a one-month build-out of the space. We anticipate opening our doors to the public in mid-September with an expanded offering of courses and activities. The company Artistic Director is Marilou Ubaldo. Marilou has over 15 years of performing arts experience, both onstage and behind the scenes. As a graduate of UC Davis, with her degree in Education and Childhood Development, Marilou is dedicated to the self-esteem and character building of children through the performing arts. Her diverse background in Hula, Tahitian, voice, musical theatre, jazz, character, and ballet have an influence on her personal style of teaching. Marilou has worked extensively as a director, teacher, and choreographer for several award-winning competitive dance groups and soloists. She has been sharing her passion for dance, voice and theatre to children and adults in the San Francisco Bay Area for over 10 years. Her extensive background and experience definitely qualifies her to lead a facility such as this. 3 Page 4 of 11 III. General Company Description Spark of Creation Studio is a performing arts facility that opened its doors to the community of Pacifica and the Peninsula in June 2006. We offer a variety of classes in hula, Tahitian, hip-hop, jazz, tap, musical theatre, and voice to both children and adults. We strive to educate our students in the performing arts, focusing on building character and self-esteem. Spark of Creation Studio is committed first and foremost to fostering the love of dance and the performing arts in our students. We are passionate about dance, theater, music, and the education of the performing arts on the Peninsula. Our studio's primary focus is developing each student's talents by nurturing their individual abilities through the following: • Instilling self-esteem and an understanding and appreciation for dance and music. ~ Creating positive experiences that students can carry with them throughout their lives; no matter where their future takes them. ~ Providing the highest quality of professional instruction and building community in a safe and creative environment. 4 Page 5 of 11 IV. Management and Organization Spark of Creation Studio is a family owned and operated business. The four principals of SOCS manage and operate the day-to-day tasks of the business. Our staff currently consists of the following: 4-Part time instructors 2-Part time teacher's assistants 1-Part time front desk attendant Upon moving to the new location, we hope to increase our staff to the following regimen: 6 -Part-time instructors 4 -Part-time teacher's assistants 2 -Part-time front desk attendants At any given time, there are at least 3 members of our staff in house and during our peak hours of operation (4 pm to 8 pm), we increase our staffing levels to accommodate for the increase in classes offered. At Spark of Creation Studio, we also encourage the involvement of parents in their children's activities and development. A variety of adult classes are available covering the spectrum of dance genres to increase parent's familiarity with the activities of their children. Parents and children work together during annual recitals, picnics, and trips to local and state competitions. These activities provide much needed opportunities to bond and come together as a family and community. 5 Page 6 of 11 V. Operational Plan The following outlines our current business practices and protocol in our Pacifica, Ca facility. Hours of Operation: • Monday through Saturday 9 am to 9 pm. Current Schedule of Classes: • We currently offer a summer camp program focused on Musical Theater for ages 5-12 years old. This class consists of an average of 15 participants. • Our dance classes begin at 3 pm and run in one hour increments until our time of closing. • On Saturday mornings, we begin instruction at 9 am and continue until 3 pm. • Interlaced throughout the week, we conduct private lessons in voice and various dance genres. Proposed Programs/Classes: • We anticipate that the new space will give us the ability to conduct two classes at the same time. These classes will follow our current schedule. • We will also implement a new morning parent and toddler program that focuses on the development of motor skills in children form ages 0-5. • In our waiting area, we have reserved a room for quiet study. Students can use this area to do homework while they wait for their classes to begin or while waiting for their designated person to pick them up. 6 Page 7 of 11 VI. Scope of Remodeling of Facility Our proposed location was previously an office building consisting of many partitioned workspaces. It currently has the following amenities: • 2 ADA bathrooms on the first floor for primary use and 2 additional restroom facilities. • 9 foot drop ceiling • Carpet and linoleum flooring throughout. In our new facility, we propose to have the following: • 2 dance studios approximately 20'x35'. • 1 dance studio/assembly room approximately 35' x 45'. • 1 quiet study room (existing) • 2 private lesson rooms approximately 8' x 8'. • 2 Administrative offices • 1 reception area • 1 waiting area • 2~~~ floor to be used for storage and computer room. Materials to be used: • We are anticipating the use of energy saving fluorescent bulbs throughout the facility. • No exterior remodeling will be done. • Flooring will consist of hardwood, carpet and linoleum throughout. Upon approval of the Use Permit, our Landlord will file for the necessary permits to conduct the remodeling on the interior of the building. 7 Page 8 of 11 VII. Safety Plan Spark of Creation Studio makes every effort to provide a safe environment for its customers. Since many of our patrons are young children, we have acknowledged the special attention needed to ensure their safety before and after classes. The following protocol will be in place during normal business hours: • Our class schedule is arranged to offer younger children time slots during the early afternoon and early evening hours. Classes held after 7:30 pm are offered to teenagers and adults. • Our reception area is large enough to accommodate students and family members waiting for classes as well as waiting for their designated rides home. This will keep all members of our community within the walls of the building eliminating the need for children to be waiting outside of the front doors. • Contact phone numbers of parents/guardians are kept on file for each student in the event of an emergency. • In the even that a child has not been picked up by their designated person by closing time, SOCS has staff members that remain onsite until the students ride arrives. In the event that a student has no transportation home due to unforeseen circumstances, an assigned SOCS representative will provide that student with a ride to their home. • Each teacher and staff member is trained in emergency response (earthquakes, fire evacuation procedures, etc.) and students are given an orientation at the beginning of the year to show them the evacuation procedures in case of an emergency. • The parking lot is well lit and self-contained to assure the safety of our customers after dark. 8 Page 9 of 11 VIII. Parking and Traffic Impact The nature of our business involves persons visiting our facility throughout the day. The following summarizes the expected in/out flow of staff and clients broken down by shift/time of day: Weekdays 9 am to 3 pm: -41-hour classes consisting of parent and toddler programs -Classes will be held consecutively. -Each class will have up to 15 participants and their children. -Staff in house during these hours = 3 -Vehicles in lot per hour = 18 to 20 Weekdays 4 pm to 9 pm: -8 1-hour classes consisting of programs for 6 year olds to adults. -2 classes will be held each hour. -Each class will have up to 15 participants. -Staff in house during these hours = 6 -Vehicles in lot from 4 to 7 = 20 to 30 -Vehicles in lot from 7 to 9 =15 to 20 Saturdays 9 am to 9 pm -10 1 hour classes all ages. -Private lessons interlaced throughout the day. -2 classes will be held each hour. -Each class will have up to 15 participants. -Staff in house during these hours = 6 -Vehicles in lot during these hours = 20 to 30 We currently do not hold classes before 4 pm, but have planned to do so in the new facility. Since children will be present with their parent/guardian, we believe that the impact to the parking lot will be about 18 to 20 vehicles during these times. Fortunately, the 150+ space parking lot of this facility is self contained and located off the main street. Patrons to the facility would drive into the lot and park their vehicle in one of the 30+ spots allocated to SOCS. There will be no impact to public traffic and parking. 9 Page 10 of 11 A wide age range of students would attend our afternoon classes, which begin at 4 pm. As observed at our current Pacifica location, younger students are brought to class by their parents or guardians and they usually stay to observe the classes. Again, the size of the parking lot can more than accommodate the parking needs of these time slots. We have observed that during the class time slots that consist of teen aged children, parents are more likely to drop off their children and return to pick them up after classes end. These classes begin after normal business hours of the complex and many of the other tenants have left the parking lot at this time leaving more than enough room for these parents to maneuver through the lot to drop off their children. Upon their return, we have observed that at these times, the lot is almost completely empty and there is more than ample space for these parents to park. In conclusion, we believe Spark of Creation Studio will not impact the Parking and Traffic flow of the City of South San Francisco. 10 Page 11 of 11 IX. Summary In conclusion, we at Spark of Creation Studio hope that the Planning Commission sees that our business will have a positive impact to the community at large. The services that it will provide should benefit the downtown community, especially its children. We sincerely hope that a special "Use Permit" will be approved for our location and look forward to being able to serve the community beginning this fall. 11 Southeast Corner of Lot Railroad Ave & S. Linden Ave. Looking Eas# Entrance of Parking Lot . ~ T ~ .. 0 ~ ~ x RAILROAD Av{; r- z _ v L ~~ rn ~_~~ wept . ~ ~~ ti_ , i~ ~~ _~~ ~~~ ~Y ~- c ~. ~ ~ ~~~ ~~ @y U ~' y^ ~ ~''_ N ~ ~_ ~, r ~ O r ~~ ~~ r ~' Z 0 l -- ~ ~ ~ ~ w ~_~ to : A o- _ ,~ ~ 1a ~ ~ ~~_,~ Project Address: #1 South Linden gave. South San Francisco, Ca. 94080 A TMi S ~., ~ Owner: Etla H. Yamas / G.J. Yamas Trust 25 Genevra Rd. Hitisborough, Ca. 94010 Q ~ A 1 V+ a = ~ y L1 ~ ~ Z `1 ~ ~ ~ g Pt m ~ ~ ~ o ~! ll 11 ~ ; ~ ~ u' q r + ~ T ~ ~~~ y O A A ~ ~ n D = H C \ ~.. Z ~ N n ~ ~ ~~: O 3 ~ .~ ~ j p i~ c ~~ ~ I '•\ ~i A \ ¢Ao Cf 1 p5y ' ; 9 ~ }\, 2 ` ~ O x~ m ~ zo ~ ~ i ~ / /~. ~ ( , S ~ ,/ o c I ~ - i e O T J°t A ~Rr, / `~_ * iln 016156 ® '~ 12;1 con t t a n ELF C~UFC ~1 i i p x ~ 20'-0" o , 20' 0" m ~_ '~' ~ o ~~ m a n (~ Y ~ I m o~ z ~; m ~~ D y oz D i ~ r ,' ~ ~ ~ 1 G ~ T ~ - i ~ 1f ~ I ~ O 1 I^ ~ a ~ i.~ ---i ~ r ,N o c . O ~ ~ _._. v ~ I ~ ', Z i ~ I i _~ -~ i w i mD ~ ° "' D ~~ II D m ~>, X II ~~ , V / T_ T - 0 O D ~ __ _~ O z ~ - ~~ z T, ~~~ N 20'-0" O ~ ~ mD''' ~ DDZ°~ T Z ~ r S ~~ ~ Z~'. T r~mZN Z ~ ~ v D ~ O ao m ~ D~~~~ TO O (I' It, D ~ yv'oa T T T O n 7 L m O T T D Z D m c O r '~ r ~y°zo'm °~mm z _ '' D o > n f A C~i.~ ~1 -•. UPi U v ~ Y Do.~ ~~ ~ N O w O~fvA A yo°o~.~^^ D ~ ~ o, wlow a ,~ l J V ~'~ (n ~ N ~, N N y z C> /~l ~ T T ', T T !n S T " C m ~ ~ ~--~ „ r o o o ~ -~'+ p ~ ~n c o ~~~I~ + N N ~ ~ m o D c _ ti + ~ N c~rm~ ~_ V1 fn W T z ~ ~ o o ~ ~ ~NN W T N ~ ~ -~ N Z \ T ~O D r m ~ °~ 20' 0" 20'-0" 20'-0" 20'-0" __ ~ 1 ~' '_! -. ,- rl ~ f ' -h ~ rl - ' ~ ~ - ~'; ; ';,I mo ] N ~ ~ m ~ !m m D ry ~ ~ ~a m O~ Y__-=j O ~, F.P. 1.1 ~..9. ~ ~/ ? o ~ ~~ ~ ~~ PP +o_o ~'; ~ O / ~ r u ~ ~ , ~~ >: a Duo m`nm ~~ of ~~~ o --- ~ -- -© y , ° g ''~~`~~ -, , ` ~ n~ ~~ ,. ~Z x ~ { ' ' ~ ' Y ~, ~; ~ ~ I i~,,il~~,~',; m ~' I y~ r 1_. i. 8 =z y x~ mTy y`~ Sheet title Project N SPARK OF CREATION D~QDO~QOO~ - ~ y EXISTING PARTITION FLOOR PLANS ~ # 1 SOUTH LINDEN AVENUE, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA O ARISRUIZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. O x m N 20' 0" P 20' 0" J 0 ~' m ~ ~~ m ~ ~ ---- _-_- ----.-_O a ~ ~~ m N ~I o ~ z m D U ~ ~ ~ ~ _ h z N - D ~ '~ ~ z ~~ T m z ° m D ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ y~ oz y ~ ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ I r ~~ z ~ a ~ ~o ~~ j ~ ~~ ~ I ~ I ~ ~ ~x °° ~ O - - ~~~ ~,i ~ ~Ir '' h, ~ o z~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ,~° a ; ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~~ ~ ~ ° '~ .~ ~ o ~ - 'd yo °z _ , ~ or ,~ Z ~_ - ~~ J _ -yoOmc __ -~ _m ~, ~`^~ i ~ ~~ c-~y v r ~Nypno _ ~ ~~ n~~z ' z G7 - ~I , ~ ~ - C~ D ~ ~ ~~ Q 20'2` 1 1" 8" 20' 0" 20' 0" 20'-0" _ 20' 0" ~~ 20'-0` ~. , ~ T1 y ~ ~'~ 9 ~ I 1 _ _-__ _ _ __ - ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ o N ~ ~ + ~ i r ~ _ o - u, r o o _ ~z~ _ ~ y ~ ~.~; T ~ o ~ a~ c ~ ~ `~ o~ - ti T '~ r p D z~ ~r ------y--__ i ME77/1NINE OVER _______ ii - --- --- ~ ~ ~ -~--o O i ~ - T , ~ ^? _ v nDm Z I z ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ om~ c -. ~ f - z c ~ _ n o v N S O Z ' ~ ~ •-- + \ ~ ~ r ~ H /1 O i ~ ~ Z ~ ~ ~U , Z 1 O I - ~ T V o , I - / - z , ~ Z § ~ ~ r p $~ zo ~ m - TI - ~ o m 7 -~ i r O Z ~ m D - '~ ~ w N 4 O II ~ - ~ + _:D _ _ ~ ~ y - !~ n y,~ C _,,D T P w m a TWA _ ^ ` / ,D Nw [A N ~ ; T - .;~ - (~ ~ O , ,, ~ X C -' ~ ~ I~ + ~ ~ ~ O J~ ', X [> Z H /.~ / V/ C N m R~ m t7 S - Sheei title Project D ~ n~ni~ii~<~~~~ c° SPARH OF CREATION D~QDaOQ~~O _ ~ y PROPOSED TENANT SPACE LAYOUT U U ~ # 1 SOUTH LINDEN AVENUE, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA ARISRUIZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. ~ r. laa,>n a,. .,~h~; ni r.,Gao ~~xs Planning Commission o Staff Report c"~LIFOR~IA DATE: July 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: An amendment to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phase III, Precise Plan and Zoning Text to allow the addition of a 15,007 square foot Product Design Studio above the North Tower retail concourse at Two Tower Place in the Terrabay Specific Plan Zone District. Owner/ Applicant: Myers Peninsula Venture, LLC Case No.: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0001, SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Env. Doc.: Addendum to the 2005 Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and 2006 Addendum pursuant to California Code of Regulations Title 14, Chapter 3 RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolution recommending to the City Council approval of a 15,007 square foot addition of a Product Design Studio (as defined herein) and adoption of the 2008 Addendum to the 2005 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and 2006 Addendum as the appropriate environmental document for the Project. BACKGROUND: The City approved what is known as the 2006 Plan for Terrabay Phase III on October 11, 2006 by Resolution 82-2006. The 2006 Plan approved the precise plan, specific plan and zoning text amendments that allow the construction of 665,000 square feet of Class A office in two towers on the Phase III Terrabay site. The entitlements also include up to 25,000 square feet of retail use with a minimum of one quality restaurant, a shared use 200-seat performing arts center, a 100-child day care facility and a public art program. The City also certified the 2005 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (2005 SEIR) and adopted its 2006 Addendum with the 2006 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) as the appropriate and legally adequate environmental documentation for the 2006 Project (Resolution 81-2006). As the Commission is aware, the 2006 Project is under construction. The majority of the site work is complete. The South Tower is under construction as is the parking garage. The South Tower contains approximately 300,000 square feet of office, 11,000 square feet of retail, the child care center and the performing arts facility. This phase of Project construction is anticipated to be complete in January 2009. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 2 of 10 Project Description The proposed amendment to the Terrabay Specific Plan, precise plan and zoning text would add as a permitted use a Product Design Studio, (Studio) as a support use to the approved office use on the site. As shown on the attached plans, the Studio is proposed above the approved ground floor retail concourse attached to the North Tower. The addition of the Studio would require the conversion of approximately 2,500 square feet of office space on the second floor of the North Tower to provide circulation area. Approximately 1,000 square feet of ground floor retail would also be converted to a lobby in support of the second floor Studio. There would be no net loss of retail use as these 1,000 square feet would be accounted for by moving the management company's ground floor office in the South Tower to the second floor, and using the vacated space as ground floor retail. The request requires a text amendment to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan to include the definition of Product Design Studio, to identify it as a permitted use and to include elevations of the Studio in the overall Project renderings in the Specific Plan. The Terrabay Precise Plan requires an amendment to include the Studio in the architectural drawings. The Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District (Chapter 20.63, Zoning) requires an amendment to include the definition of Product Design Studio, include the use as permitted and to modify the office square footage accordingly. Environmental review has been conducted on the application as described more fully below. DISCUSSION: The Studio would consist of approximately 15,010 square feet of floor area above the ground floor retail. The Studio would be designed with 16 foot tall ceilings and open areas for production. The overall height in this area would be 40 feet above grade, i.e., approximately 16 feet above the approved retail concourse. The proposed materials are the same as those approved for the Terrabay Phase III Project (see attached drawings). The rooftop mechanical equipment would be screened from view, as shown on the drawings. The addition of the Studio would involve grading in an area already graded for the garage and site infrastructure. The Studio would result in completely concealing one retaining wall and extending a sculpted retaining wall horizontally by approximately 1251inear feet. As a point of comparison, the Studio would follow the contour of this wa11200 feet which is in excess of the length of the wall. The Studio is proposed to be a support use to the office component. Based upon the Traffic Study prepared by Crane Transportation Group (see Environmental Review section, second paragraph, page 9) traffic as a result of the Proj ect could result in an average of three less trips to the site per day than that of the 2006 Project. Typically the City does not assign trip generation rates to office support uses, such as uses in the East of 101 Area. For these reasons and the fact that a TDM Program governs the site, no additional parking is recommended for the Studio use. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 3 of 10 Design Review The architects on the Design Review Board reviewed the proposal in June 2008. All three members stated that the design is an improvement over the approved 2006 Plan. The addition provides a stronger connection to the two towers on the site. The attached "2006 Approved Project" and the "View Looking West with Product Design Studio" illustrates this comparison, and both sets ofplans were included in this report to facilitate understanding of the Project delta. One comment, which is a recommended condition of approval, is to screen the rooftop mechanical units from view from the office towers. Another comment sought clarification on how deliveries would be accommodated to the Studio. Deliveries would be through the North Tower loading dock which directly connects to a service elevator and corridors. Another path for deliveries would be directly from the rear (west) door of the Studio near the garage. Additionally, a question arose about garbage disposal. The entire Project is proposing agreen- orientedtrash and recycling program. Maintenance workers would collect trash from the office and retail and convey it to the loading area. There the refuse would be sorted for various types of recycling. Amendments As noted above, the Terrabay documents require amendments in order to incorporate a Product Design Studio into the Project. The following outlines these amendments. Zoning Text Amendment The following language is recommended to accommodate the Product Design Studio in Chapter 20.63 of the Zoning Ordinance. 1) The following definition would be added to the "Definitions" section of the Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District text (20.63.010 Product Design Studio is permitted as an accesso or~pport use to the office component of the Ten'abay Phase III Project. The Product Design Studio shall serve as a support use to the anchor tenant of the office component of Terrabay and shall not add to the aggregate employee base of the Phase III commercial component in absence of environmental review. Uses may include the production of audio, video, design and performance arts and similar uses. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 4 of 10 2) The addition of a Product Design Studio as a permitted use: 20.63.030.(b)(14) Product Design Studio as a support use to the office component and as defined in the definition section contained herein consisting of approximately 15,010 square feet. 3) Modifications to the existing Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District text: Section 20.63.030 (b) (8) Class A office buildings for a gross square footage of proximately 665,000 square feet; 4) Modify Section 20.63.140 (e) (1) A parking capacity of one thousand nine hundred and fifty two cars in striped stalls is required based upon the parking requirements of ~)-2.74 spaces per one thousand gross square feet of floor area as set forth in the final Terrabay Specific Plan. Specific Plan Amendment Various pages of the Specific Plan would need to be amended to incorporate the Product Design Studio. Therefore, all three chapters of the 2006 Plan would require minor text amendments to incorporate the Product Design Studio definition and identify it as a permitted use. For example, the "Office/Commercial" section (Chapter 1), the Environmental Documentation (Chapter 1) ,The Development Description section (Chapter II), Land Use Table (Chapter II), Table C (Chapter II) and the Implementation Element (Chapter III) would require language incorporating the Studio. Precise Plan Amendment The drawings that attached to this staff report, and more detailed architectural drawings would be added to the approved precise plan. ANALYSIS Specific Plan Amendment State Law Requirements California Government Code Section 65451 governs the content of specific plans. The requirements include a text and diagram which specify all of the following in detail: Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 5 of 10 1. The distribution, location, and extent of the land uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. 2. The proposed distribution, location and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described in the plan. Standards and criteria by which the development will proceed and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. 4. A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2) and (3). 5. The specific plan shall contain a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the general plan. 2008 Specific Plan Amendment-Product Design Studio- State Law Analysis The approved 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan would be modified only to allow a product design studio as a support use for the approved office use on the site. Therefore, the distribution, location, and extent of land uses governed by the Terrabay Specific Plan would not be altered. The distribution, location, extent and intensity of major components of the public and private improvements including transportation, water, wastewater, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy and other essential facilities would not be altered as a result of the proposed 2008 Plan Amendment. The standards and criteria by which the Terrabay development has and will proceed and the standards and conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources would not be altered by the 2008 Plan Amendment. The proposed text amendment stipulates 15,010 square feet of product design studio use. Additionally, the proposed zoning text amendment stipulates the area shall be permitted as an accessory or support use to the office component of the Terrabay Phase III Project. The zoning amendment further stipulates that the product design studio shall serve as a support use to the anchor tenant of the office component of Terrabay and shall not add to the aggregate employee base of the Phase III commercial component in absence of environmental review; and, that the uses may include the production of audio, video, design and performance arts. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted by City Council Resolution No. 81-2006 would not be altered by the 2008 Plan Amendment and would remain in full force and effect. The conditions of approval adopted by Resolution No. 82-2006 would not be altered by the 2008 Plan Amendment and would be augmented as identified in the attached proposed conditions of project approval. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 6 of 10 The 2006 Plan Amendment complies with the General Plan as identified in City Council Resolution No. 82-2006 and the 2008 Plan Amendment complies with all the General Plan findings contained in Resolution 82-2006 and as noted below. 2008 Project Conformance with the General Plan The proposed precise plan, specific plan and zoning text amendment conforms with and implements the following General Plan policies. Chapter 2.6 Land Use Policies 2-G-1: Preserve the scale and character of established neighborhoods, and protect residents from changes in non-residential areas. Analysis: The proposed Project will be a part the approved 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would compliment the existing land uses on the project site, and the existing approved project compliments the land uses in the area and the City. 2-G-2: Maintain a balanced land use program that provides opportunities for continued economic growth and building intensities that reflect South San Francisco's prominent inner bay location and excellent regional access. Analysis: The approved Project has immediate access to Highway 101, San Francisco, the peninsula and the airport which provides local and area-wide clientele for the Project. Previous fiscal studies indicate that the approved 2006 Project will add to the City's tax base. The 2008 Project proposes a supporting use for the approved office component of the 2006 Project and enhances the Project's overall marketability. The existing FAR is 0.78 and the 2008 Project would increase that to a 0.84 FAR under the 1.0 FAR maximum for Business Commercial land use designations with structured parking. 2-I-4: Require all new developments seeking an FAR bonus setforth in Table 2.2-2 to achieve a progressively higher alternative mode usage. Analysis: The TDM measures identified in Schedule 20.120.030-B: Summary of Program Requirements (Zoning) of the City's TDM Ordinance is incorporated into the TDM program for the Project. The TDM Program is approved and the 2008 Project will be a part of the approved TDM Program. 2-I-13: As a part of development review in environmentally sensitive areas require specific environmental studies andlor review as stipulated in Section 7.1: Habitat and Biological Resources Conservation. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 7 of 10 Analysis: The 2006 Project avoids critical species habitat, wetlands, and the archaeological site. The 2008 Project does not change these conditions. The driving factor in clustering the 2006 Project was the protection of 26 acres (the Preservation Parcel) for species habitat preservation. Terrabay Phase III was approximately 47 acres in area prior to the designation of the Preservation Parcel as open space and the Buffer Parcel as a buffer zone. The Preservation Parcel contains over 1,000 Viola Pendunculata which is the food plant for the endangered Callippee silverspot butterfly. The Preservation Parcel also preserves the archaeological site and wetlands in perpetuity. The 2008 Project would not affect these conditions. Chapter 3: Planning Sub-Areas Element: Paradise Valley/Terrabay 3-8-G-2: Improve accessibility to neighborhood shopping opportunities. Analysis: The 2006 Project provides office, restaurant and retail land uses and a performing arts center. The 2008 Project does not alter these conditions and complies with this policy. Chapter 4: Transportation 4-2-G-7.• Provide a fair and equitable means for paying for future street improvements; and, 4-2- 1-6: Incorporate as part of the City's CIP needed intersection and roadway improvements including Bayshore (now Airport) Boulevard and U. S. 101 Hook Ramps. Analysis: The 2006 Project sponsor contributed land and $8.5 million to construct the hook ramps. The traffic improvements are in place and operational. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions and has complied with this policy. 4-3-G-2: Provide safe and direct pedestrian and bikeways between and through residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers. Analysis: The 2006 Project includes pedestrian walkways to Airport and Sister Cities Boulevard and to the bus stop on Airport Boulevard. The 2008 Project includes two direct links to the Product Design Studio; one from the second floor office and the second from the ground floor retail area. The 2008 Project would not impact pedestrian and bikeways and links to transit and complies with this policy. 4-3-G-3: In partnership with local employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle operations. Analysis: The Terrabay project implements a shuttle service for Peninsula Mandalay. The shuttle service will be expanded to cover the Phase III Project including the 2008 Project. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 8 of 10 4-3-I-4: Require provision of secure and covered bicycle parking. The approved TDM Program identifies bicycle facilities. The 2008 Project would not alter or affect these conditions. Chapter 5: Parks, Public Facilities and Services S-I-G-S: Develop linear parks in conjunction with major infrastructure improvements and along existing utility and transportation rights-of--ways. Analysis: Terrabay Phase I and II include a linear park. The park terminates within the Phase III site. The 2006 Project includes a trail to the western portion of the site for an overlook area. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. Chapter 6: Economic Development 6-G-1: In partnership with business and community groups, proactively participate in the City's economic development. Analysis: Terrabay has had a long (25 year plus) history that has been controversial. Beginning in 1999 through to the present, much of the controversy has been abated largely as a result of the following actions: • The Planning Commission and City Council designated the Preservation Parcel as permanent open space. Myers Development, City leaders and City staff worked with community groups to address the restoration and preservation of land and habitat. As a result of this effort, the results of the restoration are being used as examples of success by U.S. Fish and Wildlife, San Mateo County and Thomas Reid and Associates. San Bruno Mountain Watch, in a comment letter on the 2005 SEIR also lauded the restoration of the Preservation Parcel. The conveyance of the 6.22 acre Recreation Parcel to the City for open space and recreation. • Myers and the City, in particular the City Council and Planning Commission sub committee worked to develop a land plan that in the words of one sub committee member, "makes economic and land use sense". The 2006 Project includes office and retail land use that will bring tax revenues to the City, provide for police and fire services and pay for its own infrastructure. The 2008 Project will enhance these conditions. The addition of a product design studio will serve to enhance the marketability of the project. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 9 of 10 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Staff conducted environmental review on the 2008 Project. The Initial Study (IS), (Bound Attachment), evaluates the proposed 2008 Project in comparison to the approved Terrabay Phase III Project (2006 Project) environmental impacts and mitigation measures. The analysis includes updated traffic and air quality models incorporating a greenhouse gas analysis. Two traffic scenarios were modeled for the 2008 Project to identify the extremes in potential Project trip generation. One assumed that the Studio would be 100% support to the office use, thereby no trips were assigned to its use. The other assumed the Studio would function more like a research and development (R&D) use with trip generation factors. The 2008 Project, in all likelihood, would fall somewhere in between the addition of 58 daily round trips to/from the site and the reduction of 64 (100% support) daily round trips to/from the site. Just taking an average of the two extremes, the Project may result in a negative three trips to the site. The slight reduction in trips is the result of reassigning the 2,500 square feet of office to circulation area. The increase in trips is accounted to assessing an R&D trip generation factor to the new 15,007 square feet.l The 2008 Project would not result in any increases in identified impacts or new impacts from those identified in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum which supplements the 1998/99 SEIR,1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR Finding of Overriding Considerations would need to be re-adopted for four significant unavoidable impacts adopted by the City Council February 1999, 2000 and 2006 relating to air quality and traffic. The impacts include: 1. Impact 4.5.2 from the 1998/99 SEIR Changes in Long Term Air Quality. 2. Impact 4.4-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. 3. Impact 4.4-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. 4. Impact 4.4-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts. The Adopted 2006 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (City Council Resolution # 82- 2006) contains all the mitigation measures required of the Terrabay Phase III Project, including the 2008 Project increment. 1 The proposed zoning ordinance modification retains the permitted 665,000 square feet of office and adds as a modifier "approximately". This was done to retain the office square footage in the event that the Studio is not constructed. During the 2006 entitlement hearings this amount of Class A office space as well as the potential for 25,000 square feet of retail was encouraged. Square footages vary somewhat because the Performing Arts Facility was required to be larger and the day care center was increased in size to accommodate toddlers per state licensing requirements. Staff Report RE: PPM08-0002: SPM08-0002 and ZA08- 0004 Date: July 17, 2008 Page 10 of 10 CONCLUSION: The 2008 Plan amendment to allow a Product Design Studio to be located above the ground floor retail concourse associated with the North Tower conforms to state CEQA and Specific Plan law. The 2008 Project implements many policies of the City's General Plan. The 15,010 square foot office support use would not increase environmental impacts above those identified and analyzed in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum. Therefore staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the attached resolutions recommending to City Council acceptance of the 2008 Addendum as the appropriate environmental document for the 2008 Project and recommending approval of the Specific Pl re 'se Plan and Zoning Text Amendment for the 2008 Project. Allison Knapp, Planning Consultant to the City of South San Francisco Attachments: A resolution making findings and recommending adoption of the 2008 addendum to the 2005 SEIR and 2006 addendum, and recommending adoption of the statement of overriding considerations and mitigation monitoring and reporting program. II. A resolution recommending amendments to the 2006 final Terrabay specific plan, amendments to the precise plan, and a zoning text amendment to the South San Francisco municipal code, chapter 20.63, "Terrabay Specific Plan District", with attached conditions of approval and draft ordinance. III. Proposed zoning text language. IV. 2008 Initial Study, Addendum and MMRP in bound Initial Study document. V. Project Description from Applicant, Approved 2006 Project and Proposed 2008 Project Plans RESOLUTION NO. PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE 2008 ADDENDUM TO THE 2005 SEIR AND 2006 ADDENDUM, AND RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF THE RELATED STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM WHEREAS, the Terrabay lands have an extensive planning history dating to the early 1980s; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of South San Francisco, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), adopted the 2006 Addendum and certified the 2005 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), which build upon the certified 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and 1982 Environmental Impact Report, and adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for Terrabay Phase III by Resolution 81-2006, all of which remain in effect; and, WHEREAS, the City Council approved the 2006 Plan Amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, in October of 2006 by Resolution 82-2006; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to adoption of the 2006 Addendum and certification of the 2005 SEIR, for those impacts of the 2006 Plan Amendment and Final Terrabay Specific Plan that would remain significant and unavoidable, the City adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations, included as Exhibit B to this resolution and incorporated by reference; and WHEREAS, the applicant now requests an amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, precise plan, and a zoning text amendment, to allow as a permitted use, a Product Design Studio ("Studio") as a support use to the approved office use on the site, and to be located above the approved ground floor retail concourse attached to the site's North Tower ("2008 Project"); and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study, included as Exhibit A to this resolution and incorporated by reference, was prepared to determine if additional environmental review was required for the 2008 Project, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. Based on the Initial Study, the City determined that the potentially significant effects of the project were adequately addressed in the previous CEQA documents, including the 2006 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR, the 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and 1982 EIR. The project remains subject to all previously adopted mitigation measures applicable to the project and project site; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for the 2008 Project, as no substantial changes have been proposed to the project or the conditions under which the project will be carried out that require major revisions to the previous EIRs. No new significant environmental impacts have been identified and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified impacts has been discovered. The project remains subject to all previously adopted mitigation measures, as applicable; and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an Addendum, included as Exhibit A to this resolution and incorporated by reference ("2008 Addendum"), was prepared for the 2008 Project, which identifies the project changes and their relationship to the analysis in the previous Addendum, SEIRs, and EIR; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on July 17, 2008, at which time interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, to review the Initial Study and draft 2008 Addendum, as well as supporting documents, prior to making a recommendation on the 2008 Project; and WHEREAS, a Staff Report dated July 17, 2008, was submitted to the Planning Commission analyzing the 2008 Project and recommending approval of the 2008 Addendum and the project applications; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did use its independent judgment and analysis, and considered all reports, recommendations and testimony before taking action on the 2008 Addendum and the 2008 Project. NOW THEREFORE, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without limitation, (1) the South San Francisco General Plan, and General Plan Environmental Impact Report; (2) The Final Terrabay Specific Plan, as amended in 2000, 2006 and proposed in 2008; (3) The 2005 Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and 2006 Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, 1998-99 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, which includes the 1982 Certified Terrabay Environmental Impact Report, the Certified 1996 Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Addendum to the 1998-1999 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Addendum; (4) All public hearings on the project, including minutes and reports prepared for such hearings, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco, does hereby RESOLVE as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. 2. The Planning Commission finds that the proposed 2008 Project will not result in any of the conditions identified in CEQA Guidelines section 15162 because the addition of a Product 3. Design Studio will not create any new significant impacts or substantially more severe impacts as compared to those identified and analyzed in the 2006 Addendum and 2005 SEIR, which 2 build upon the 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and 1982 EIR. Nor is there in any new information of substantial importance that demonstrates new or substantially more severe significant effects, as compared to those identified in the prior CEQA documents. Nor are any new or additional mitigation measures required to mitigate any impacts of the 2008 Project. 4. The Planning Commission finds that some of the significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the Statement of Overriding Considerations would apply to the 2008 Project, but as detailed in the Statement, the benefits of the project continue to outweigh the adverse impacts. 5. Accordingly, the Planning Commission finds that CEQA Guidelines section 15162 does not require any further CEQA review, and that an addendum, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164, is the appropriate environmental document for approval of the 2008 Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission does hereby: 1. Recommend that the City Council of the City of South San Francisco adopt the 2008 Addendum, including the related Initial Study and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, as described in Exhibit A [included as Attachment IV to the Staff Report] and incorporated herein by reference. 2. Recommend that the City Council adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations . I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on the day of , 2008, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTENTIONS: ABSENT: Attest: City Clerk 3 Exhibit A 2008 Addendum, Initial Study and MMRP [Included as a separate bound document - Attachment IV to the July 17, 2008 Planning Commission Staff Report] Exhibit B STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 1. General Pursuant to Public Resources Code § 21081 and CEQA Guidelines § 15093, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco makes the following Re-Statement of Overriding Considerations relating to its recommendation of approval of the proposed Product Design Studio ("2008 Project"). The 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum (supplementing the 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and 1982 EIR) analyzed Phase III impacts on a project EIR level which is a much greater level than required for cumulative impacts under CEQA. The City Council has balanced the benefits of the 2008 Project to the City against the one adverse impact identified in the 2005 SEIR pertaining to air quality which is a re-statement of the 1998/99 SEIR identified impact and the three adverse impacts identified in the 1998/99 SEIR pertaining to traffic as significant which have not been eliminated or mitigated to a level of insignificance. These impacts are: (1) Air Quality Impact 4.5-3 from the 1998/99 SEIR Changes in Regional Long-Term Air Quality; (2) Traffic Impact 4.4-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts; (2) Traffic Impact 4.4-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts; and (3) Traffic Impact 4.4-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts. The following significant unavoidable impacts identified in the 2005 SEIR do not apply to the 2008 Project as demonstrated by the 2008 traffic analysis prepared by Crane Transportation Group for the City of South San Francisco and incorporated into the 2008 Initial Study prepared for the 2008 Project: (1) Traffic Impact 3.1.5: Year 2010 Vehicle Queuing Impacts; (2) Traffic Impact 3.1.6: Year 2020 Intersection Level of Service Impacts; and (3) Traffic Impact 3.1.9: Year 2020 Vehicle Queuing Impacts. The City Council has carefully considered each environmental impact identified in the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum, and reviewed the 2008 Initial Study and 2008 Addendum in reaching its decision to approve the 2008 Project. The Project sponsor has made reasonable and good faith efforts to mitigate all potential impacts resulting from the 2008 Project. The City Council has imposed mitigation measures identified in the 2005 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and 1982 EIR as conditions of approval to eliminate or mitigate to a level of insignificance potential impacts. Although the City Council believes that the three unavoidable traffic environmental impacts identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and the one air quality impact identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and re-stated in the 2005 SEIR will be substantially lessened by the mitigation measures identified in the 2005 SEIR and incorporated into the 2008 Project as conditions of approval, it recognizes that the implementation of the 2008 Project carries with it these four potentially unavoidable adverse environmental impacts. 5 With regard to each of the four significant unavoidable impacts, the City Council specifically makes the following findings to the extent that the identified adverse impacts have not been mitigated to a level of insignificance: (1) specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the 2005, 1998/99 and 1996 SEIR's and the 1982 EIR which may reduce the significant unavoidable impacts to less than significant; and (2) there are specific economic, social, environmental, legal, land use and other benefits of the 2008 Proj ect which outweigh the four significant unavoidable effects on the environment. The City Council further finds that any one of the overriding considerations identified hereinafter in subsection 4 is a sufficient basis to approve the 2008 Project. 2. Unavoidable Significant Adverse Impacts and Required Mitigation Measures The following impacts cannot be fully mitigated by changes or alterations to the 2008 Project or the imposition of further mitigation measures. The impacts associated with the 2008 Project are similar to those associated with the approved 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would not increase the severity of any impacts identified in the 1998/99 SEIR or the 2005 SEIR. Three significant and unavoidable impacts relating to traffic and one air quality would continue with implementation of the 2008 Project. These impacts are: Traffic Impact 4.4.1: Year 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts: The 2006 Project would result in the same impact associated with the 2000 Project on certain segments of US 101 freeway by either increasing traffic volumes by more thanl% or changing the level of service from LOS E to F. Six of the eight identified impacted freeway segments are already operating at LOS F in the year 2000 without the 2006 Project. Phase II and Phase III Cumulative Impacts will result in an increase of vehicle trips along these segments of US 101 of approximately 1.25% to 2.76%. The 1998/99 SEIR established a standard that an increase in peak direction traffic on the roadway of 1 % or more due to the Project would be considered a significant impact. The Phase II and III Cumulative Impacts will result in an increase that is considered significant. The 2006 Project will contribute over a 1% increase in peak direction traffic on these segments of US 101 and the 2006 Project cumulative is considered significant. Feasible mitigation measures identified for the 2006 Project will be incorporated as part of the 2008 Project. The 2006 Project incorporates a bus stop and shelter along Airport Boulevard and a Transportation Demand Management Program. The City has constructed the Oyster Point Interchange Improvements and the Applicant has contributed $8.5 million to these improvements. The 1998/99 SEIR notes that either a 64% reduction in the size of the Project or widening of US 101 would reduce this impact to less than significant. Both of these measures are infeasible. 6 Traffic Impact 4.4.4: Year 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts: The 2006 Project would result in the same impact associated with the 2000 Project on certain segments of US 101 freeway by increasing traffic volumes by more thanl% at segments already operating at LOS F. Six of the eight identified impacted freeway segments are already operating at LOS F in the year 2000 without the 2006 Project. Phase II and Phase III Cumulative Impacts will result in an increase of vehicle trips along these segments of US 101 of approximately 1.10% to 2.41 %. The 1998/99 SEIR established a standard that an increase in peak direction traffic on the roadway of 1% or more due to the Project would be considered a significant impact. The Phase II and III Cumulative Impacts will result in an increase that is considered significant. The 2006 Project will contribute over a 1% increase in peak direction traffic on these segments of US 101 and the 2006 Project cumulative is considered significant. Feasible mitigation measures identified for the 2006 Project will be incorporated as part of the 2008 Project. The 2006 Project incorporates a bus stop and shelter along Airport Boulevard and a Transportation Demand Management Program. The City has constructed the Oyster Point Interchange Improvements and the Applicant has contributed $8.5 million to these improvements. The 1998/99 SEIR notes that either a 59% reduction in the size of the Project or widening of US101 would reduce this impact to less than significant. Both of these measures are infeasible. The 2006 Project was been reduced in size from that previously analyzed. Traffic Impact 4.4-5: 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts: Development of Phase II and III in the year 2010 would cause a significant adverse cumulative impact on the PM peak hour operation on the Northbound US 101 on-ramp from Oyster Point Boulevard. This on ramp would already be operating at over-capacity and unacceptable levels in 2010 without the 2006 Project. Phase II and III Cumulative Impacts will result in an increase of vehicle trips by approximately 6.8% on this on-ramp. The 1998/99 SEIR established a standard that an increase in peak directiontraffic onthe on-ramp of 1 % or more due to the Project would be considered a significant impact. The Phase II and III Cumulative Impacts will result in an increase that is considered significant. The 2006 Project will contribute over a 1% increase in peak direction traffic on this on-ramp and the 2006 Project cumulative is considered significant. Feasible mitigation measures identified for the 2006 Project will be incorporated as part of the 2008 Project. The 2006 Project has contributed $8.5 million to traffic improvements in the area. The 2006 Project includes a bus stop and shelter along Airport Boulevard as well as and a Transportation Demand Management Program. A 85% reduction in the size of the Project would be required to reduce this impact to less-than-significant which in light of the whole of the record and the objectives of the Project is infeasible. Air Quality Impact 3.2.3: Regional emission increase that would exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds for ozone precursors and PMIO. This is the same impact identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and remains the same for the 2006 Project. Measures identified in the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan incorporate the mitigation measures 7 identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and the 2005 SEIR. These impacts could be reduced by the mitigation measures identified but not to a level that is less than significant. Mitigation measure 4.5-3 identified in the 1998/99 SEIR shall be implemented. In addition, the following mitigation measures have been applied to the project: I) electric vehicle charging stations shall be provided, 2) the project will include sidewalks and/ or paths, connected to adjacent land uses, transit stops and/or acommunity-wide network, 3) provision of secure and conveniently located bicycle storage, 4) preferential parking for electric or alternatively-fueled vehicles. 5) implementation of feasible TDM measures including ride-sharing, coordination with regional ridesharing programs and provision of transit information, 6) the above-referenced bus turnouts and benches, and 7) direct, safe, attractive pedestrian access from project land uses to transit stops and adjacent development. 3. Findings of Infeasibility of Mitigation Measures and Alternatives For Unavoidable Impacts The 2008 Project will not create any significant and unavoidable impacts, however, significant and unavoidable impacts identified in connection with previously approved development, including the 2006 Project, will continue. Pursuant to approval of the 2006 Project, the City Council made the following findings, which are restated here for reference purposes: a. Infeasibility of Mitigation Measures Traffic Impacts 4.4.1 and 4: Year 2000 and 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts and Traffic Impact 4.4.5 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramps An overall reduction in project size between 64% to 85% would be required in order to reach a less than significant impact. A reduction of this nature would render the project economically infeasible. The economic benefit realized through a critical mass of office and commercial retail uses in order to capitalize the 2006 Project and the tax return to the City would not be realized. Reductions in the 2006 Project is infeasible because of the extensive and costly public amenities and infrastructure improvements required for the 2006 Project and those already built for Phase I and II, the need for a critical mass of office and retail to finance the project and provide a tax benefit to the City and the fixed cost of constructing infrastructure necessary to serve the 2006 Project. The development of the Terrabay Project, including the 2006 Project is subject to extensive conditions of approval under the HCP, Development Agreement and Specific Plan as amended. These documents require 1) the restoration and dedication of over 400 acres of property to the County and the City as open space; 2) funding HCP maintenance and monitoring; 3) construction of a fire station (built as part of Phase I); 4) construction of a recreation center (built as part of Phase I); 5) construction of a child-care facility; 6) construction of a 200 seat Performing Arts Center 7) construction of 32 moderate income housing units off-site 8 at 120% of the median; 8) completion of the Hillside Boulevard extension (built as part of Phase I); 9) a $8.5 million financial contribution to the construction of the hook ramps; 10) construction of the water tank and distribution lines and the Terrabay pump station as a part of Phase I; 11) construction of the sound wall along Sister Cities Boulevard; 12) construction of recreational improvements to Hillside School; and 13) and other improvements and fees. The costs of these improvements are spread throughout the entire project, including the 2006 Project. The construction of required infrastructure in the 2006 Project are fixed costs that must be spread over the amount of square footage constructed. A 60 -84% reduction in density to reduce impacts to a less than significant level could not support the development costs of the 2006 Project and would render the 2006 Project economically infeasible. Based on the foregoing and other information in the record, widening of US 101 or a reduction of the size of the 2006 Project are not feasible. (4) Air Quality Impact 3.2.3: Regional emission increase that would exceed the BAAQMD significance thresholds for ozone precursors and PM~o_ Reduction of the 2006 Project as identified above (approximately by 75%) could potentially reduce this impact to a less than significant level. The 2006 Project would be economically infeasible, as noted above, with such a reduction. The benefits of the 2006 Project would then not be realized. b. Infeasibility of Alternatives Which Would Reduce Impacts Since the significant unavoidable impacts will be caused by buildout of the 2006 Project, the only alternative identified in the 2005,1998/99,1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR that would reduce this impact to less than significant is the No Development Alternative. In light of the foregoing, the only alternative that would reduce the cumulative impacts of building out the project as proposed in the 2006 Project is the No Development Alternative for the remaining parcels of Phase III. This alternative is infeasible. The Terrabay Project already incorporates many of the alternatives proposed under the 1998-99 SEIR. First, the Project provides fora 25+ acre of preserve land (The Preservation Parcel) for the protection of endangered species habitat and a 6.3 acre parcel offered to the City for recreational purposes (The Recreation Parcel). Additionally, a buffer area is proposed to shield the archeological site from the proposed development. The project also incorporates more area into the HCP. The Project has contributed 8.5 million to transportation improvements the majority of which mitigates impacts associated with Phase III development. As a result of the foregoing, the developable footprint on the remaining parcel has been significantly reduced (from 47 to 10 acres). Moreover, the benefits of the Project to the City are derived from the Project as a whole. The goals and objectives of the Project may only be met if each phase is built 9 as proposed in the 2006 Project. Furthermore, the benefits under the HCP are based on the development of each phase. Therefore, since the No Development Alternative for Phase III does not accomplish most of the objectives of the Project, the City Council finds that this alternative is infeasible and, therefore, rejects this alternative as it relates to the remaining parcels of Phase III. 4. Statement of Overriding Considerations The City Council considered the public record of proceedings on the 2006 Project and found that the approval and implementation of the 2006 Project entitlements would result in the following substantial public benefits that outweigh the four significant, unavoidable cumulative impacts of the Terrabay 2006 Project: • Provide economic growth and employment opportunities in the City and surrounding region, by the creation of new jobs on the site and in the construction -related industries; • Provide a tax benefit to the City by increasing tax base and revenues to the City through property and sales tax revenues; • Provide below market rate housing; • Reduce overall environmental impacts and preserve open space by building on 10 acres of land out of the original 47 acres of Phase III most of which was previously disturbed by transportation and utility-related grading while preserving 26 plus acres as species habitat, wetlands and open space; • Further the goals of the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan by allowing the 2006 Project to be built within the developable area of the Mountain vested by the HCP, to continue to fund the HCP by the homeowner and commercial fees prescribed by the HCP, by the restoration and conveyance to the County of San Mateo the remainder parcels adjacent to the Phase III site, by the creation of a fire buffer around the perimeter of the site and the planting of a carefully planned landscape plan utilizing non-invasive and drought resistive plantings; • Develop the "Buffer Parcel" with roads and landscaping pursuant to the Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement between the City, Myers Development Company, San Bruno Mountain Watch and the Center for Biological Diversity; Create a transition area between the urbanized potion of the City and San Bruno Mountain Park; The City Council finds that the benefits of the 2006 Project continue to outweigh the project's significant and unavoidable impacts. The 2008 Project will enhance many of the benefits of the 2006 Project and make the overall commercial development more marketable. Additionally, as a support use for the adjoining office use, and because the Product Design io Studio will require conversion of some of the retail space to a circulation area, the 2008 Project may result in fewer vehicle trips to the site. In any case, any increase in vehicle trips to the site as a result of the 2008 Project will not be substantial. For the reasons stated, the City Council finds that the benefits of the 2008 Project, in conjunction with previously approved development of the site, outweigh the continuing significant and unavoidable impacts. 11 RESOLUTION NO. PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2006 FINAL TERRABAY SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDMENTS TO THE PRECISE PLAN, AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 20.63, "TERRABAY SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICT" WHEREAS, the Terrabay lands have an extensive planning history dating to the early 1980s; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of South San Francisco approved the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phase III of the Terrabay Development on November 21, 2000, and have since approved amendments, most recently in 2006, to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan, approved Precise Plan, and Chapter 20.63 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, "Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District"; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), environmental impacts of the project and various amendments have been analyzed, resulting in certification of a 1982 Environmental Impact Report (EIR), a 1996 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), a 1998/99 SEIR, a 2005 SEIR and a 2006 Addendum; and, WHEREAS, the applicant now requests an amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, Precise Plan, and a zoning text amendment, to allow as a permitted use, a Product Design Studio ("Studio") as a support use to the approved office use on the site, and to be located above the approved ground floor retail concourse attached to the site's North Tower ("2008 Project"); and, WHEREAS, together, the proposed amendments to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, the Precise Plan, and the zoning text amendments, are referred to as the "Amendments"; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, changes to projects for which an EIR has been certified do not require subsequent EIRs, unless the lead agency determines that the changes will result in new significant impacts or mitigation measures, or substantially more severe impacts than those analyzed in the previous EIR; and WHEREAS, the prior certified EIR, SEIRs and Addendum fully analyzed all potentially significant impacts and proposed mitigation for said impacts; and, WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project's significant and unavoidable impacts, both of which remain in full force and effect; and, WHEREAS, based on the foregoing and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no further environmental review is required, and the appropriate CEQA document for approval of the 2008 Project is an Addendum, as prepared and adopted by separate resolution; and, WHEREAS, on July 17, 2008, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Amendments to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan, the Precise Plan, and the Terrabay Specific Plan District Zoning Ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without limitation, (1) the South San Francisco General Plan, and General Plan Environmental Impact Report; (2) The Final Terrabay Specific Plan, as amended in 2000, 2006 and proposed in 2008; (3) The 2005 Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and 2006 Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, 1998-99 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, which includes the 1982 Certified Terrabay Environmental Impact Report, the Certified 1996 Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Addendum to the 1998-1999 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Addendum; (4) All public hearings on the project, including minutes and reports prepared for such hearings, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco, does hereby RESOLVE as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. 2. The Amendments are consistent with the South San Francisco General Plan. Amendments proposed relate only to the development of the Product Design Studio. All findings and analysis made in support of compliance of the project with the General Plan are unchanged. The approved 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan would be modified only to allow a product design studio as a support use for the approved office use on the site. Therefore, the distribution, location, and extent of land uses governed by the Terrabay Specific Plan would not be altered. Specific General Plan consistency findings are as follows: Chapter 2.6 Land Use Policies 2-G-1: Preserve the scale and character ofestablished neighborhoods, and protect residents from changes in non-residential areas. Analysis: The proposed Project will be a part the approved 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would compliment the existing land uses on the project site, and the existing approved project compliments the land uses in the area and the City. 2-G-2: Maintain a balanced land use program that provides opportunities for continued economic growth and building intensities that reflect South San Francisco 's prominent inner bay location and excellent regional access. 2 Analysis: The approved Project has immediate access to Highway 101, San Francisco, the peninsula and the airport which provides local and area-wide clientele for the Project. Previous fiscal studies indicate that the approved 2006 Project will add to the City's tax base. The 2008 Project proposes a supporting use for the approved office component of the 2006 Project and enhances the Project's overall marketability. The existing FAR is 0.78 and the 2008 Project would increase that to a 0.84 FAR under the 1.0 FAR maximum for Business Commercial land use designations with structured parking. 2-1-4: Require all new developments seeking an FAR bonus set forth in Table 2.2-2 to achieve a progressively higher alternative mode usage. Analysis: The TDM measures identified in Schedule 20.120.030-B: Summary of Program Requirements (Zoning) of the City's TDM Ordinance is incorporated into the TDM program for the Project. The TDM Program is approved and the 2008 Project will be a part of the approved TDM Program. 2-I-13: As a part of development review in environmentally sensitive areas require specific environmental studies andlor review as stipulated in Section 7.1: Habitat and Biological Resources Conservation. Analysis: The 2006 Project avoids critical species habitat, wetlands, and the archaeological site. The 2008 Project does not change these conditions. The driving factor in clustering the 2006 Project was the protection of 26 acres (the Preservation Parcel) for species habitat preservation. Terrabay Phase III was approximately 47 acres in area prior to the designation of the Preservation Parcel as open space and the Buffer Parcel as a buffer zone. The Preservation Parcel contains over 1,000 Viola Pendunculata which is the food plant for the endangered Callippee silverspot butterfly. The Preservation Parcel also preserves the archaeological site and wetlands in perpetuity. The 2008 Project would not affect these conditions. Chapter 3: Planning Sub-Areas Element: Paradise Valley/Terrabay 3-8-G-2: Improve accessibility to neighborhood shopping opportunities. Analysis: The 2006 Project provides office, restaurant and retail land uses and a performing arts center. The 2008 Project does not alter these conditions and complies with this policy. Chapter 4: Transportation 4-2-G-7: Provide a fair and equitable means for payingfor future street improvements; and, 4-2-I-6.• Incorporate as part of the City's CIP needed intersection and roadway improvements including Bayshore (now Airport) Boulevard and U. S. 101 Hook Ramps. Analysis: The 2006 Project sponsor contributed land and $8.5 million to construct the hook ramps. The traffic improvements are in place and operational. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions and has complied with this policy. 4-3-G-2: Provide safe and direct pedestrian and bikeways between and through residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers. Analysis: The 2006 Project includes pedestrian walkways to Airport and Sister Cities Boulevard and to the bus stop on Airport Boulevard. The 2008 Project includes two direct links to the Product Design Studio; one from the second floor office and the second from the ground floor retail area. The 2008 Project would not impact pedestrian and bikeways and links to transit and complies with this policy. 4-3-G-3: In partnership with local employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle operations. Analysis: The Terrabay project implements a shuttle service for Peninsula Mandalay. The shuttle service will be expanded to cover the Phase III Project including the 2008 Project. 4-3-1-4: Require provision of secure and covered bicycle parking. Analysis: The approved TDM Program identifies bicycle facilities. The 2008 Project would not alter or affect these conditions. Chapter 5: Parks, Public Facilities and Services S-I-G-S: Develop linear parks in conjunction with major infrastructure improvements and along existing utility and transportation rights-of--ways. Analysis: Terrabay Phase I and II include a linear park. The park terminates within the Phase III site. The 2006 Project includes a trail to the western portion of the site for an overlook area. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. Chapter 6: Economic Development 6-G-I.• In partnership with business and community groups, proactively participate in the City's economic development. Analysis: Terrabay has had a long (25 year plus) history that has been controversial. Beginning in 1999 through to the present, much of the controversy has been abated largely as a result of the following actions: • The Planning Commission and City Council designated the Preservation Parcel as permanent open space. 4 • Myers Development, City leaders and City staff worked with community groups to address the restoration and preservation of land and habitat. As a result of this effort, the results of the restoration are being used as examples of success by U.S. Fish and Wildlife, San Mateo County and Thomas Reid and Associates. San Bruno Mountain Watch, in a comment letter on the 2005 SEIR also lauded the restoration of the Preservation Parcel. The conveyance of the 6.22 acre Recreation Parcel to the City for open space and recreation. • Myers and the City, in particular the City Council and Planning Commission sub committee worked to develop a land plan that in the words of one sub committee member, "makes economic and land use sense". The 2006 Project includes office and retail land use that will bring tax revenues to the City, provide for police and fire services and pay for its own infrastructure. The 2008 Project will enhance these conditions. The addition of a product design studio will serve to enhance the marketability of the project. 3. The Amendments are consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. Dave Carbone, Staff Administrator of the C/CAG San Mateo County Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC) previously reviewed the Final Terrabay Specific Plan and found it complied with the ALUC requirements (letter of October 25, 2000). The proposed Amendments will allow for development of a second story above the retail concourse planned for the North Tower. At a height of 40 feet above mean sea level, this portion of the project, as proposed by the Amendments, will be well below the project site's height limit of 360 feet. Accordingly, the compliance letter of October 25, 2000 supports approval of the Amendments with the conditions imposed. 4. The Amendments are consistent with the Habitat Conservation Plan. (HCP) Victoria Harris, biologist with Thomas Reid Associates (The Plan Administrator) reviewed the previously approved Final Terrabay Specific Plan and found the Specific Plan complied with the HCP boundary and grading limits (letter of October 25, 2000) certified by the City of South San Francisco on May 12, 1999. The limits certified by the City on May 12, 1999, were used to verify HCP Compliance for Terrabay Phase II and Phase III. The proposed Amendments would allow development of the Studio on top of previously approved development. The Amendments would not result in any additional grading on the site and would remain well within the previously approved grading limits, therefore, the Amendments are consistent with the HCP. 5. Proper environmental documentation has been prepared for the Amendments in accordance with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: the Planning Commission's independent review of the proposed Amendments; the SEIR and relevant sections of the 1982 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR and the entire 1999 SEIR, and Addendum thereto, which demonstrate that any significant impacts from the proposed development have either been avoided or mitigated to a level of less than 5 significance or were addressed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. No further environmental analysis is required when a prior EIR has been prepared for a project unless new or substantially more severe significant impacts are identified. The Amendments do not result in any new or substantially more severe significant impacts or any require changes to existing mitigation measures. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no additional environmental review is required, and an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document for approval of the Amendments. 6. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and density of development. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: The site is suited for the type, density and location of commercial development in that all the mitigation measures applicable to the Phase III site identified in the 1982 EIR, 1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, and 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum, are incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. No changes to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are required as a result of the Amendments. 7. The design, improvements and constructions standards included within the Amendments are not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat and are designed to achieve compliance with the development and/or construction standards of the Terrabay Specific Plan. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: the 1982 EIR, 1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, and 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum analyze the anticipated environmental effects of the proposed Phase III development and together with the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program demonstrate that the project will either avoid or mitigate impacts of the project that are likely to cause serious public health problems, to cause substantial environmental damage, or to cause substantial and avoidable injuries to fish, wildlife or their habitat. 8. The design and type of improvements proposed in the Amendments do not conflict with public easements for access through or use of the property within the Phase III areas of the Terrabay development and conform to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and Chapter 19.48.080 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code as to design, drainage, utilities, road improvements and offers of dedication or deed. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: Planning Commission's independent review of the proposed Amendments and the reports of the city engineer and other appropriate department heads. 9. As previously determined by the City Council, Phase III of the Terrabay development provides, to the extent feasible, future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. No changes are proposed in the Amendments that would alter passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: the 1982 EIR, 1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, and 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum, analyze the energy impacts ofthe project and provide to the 6 extent feasible future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that subject to the Conditions of Approval, attached as Exhibit A to this resolution, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco does hereby: A. Recommend approval of an amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan to permit development of the Studio as proposed, and authorization for staff to make changes to the plan consistent with the City Council's approval of same. B. Recommend approval of an amendment to the Precise Plan for the project to permit development of the Studio as proposed. C. Recommend approval of a zoning text amendment to Chapter 20.63, "Terrabay Specific Plan District," as described in the draft ordinance attached as Exhibit B to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a meeting held on the day of , 2008 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk 1122051.1 7 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2008 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL TERRABAY PHASE III SPECIFIC PLAN, PRECISE PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT PO8-0002: SPM08-0002, ZA08-004 A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The Applicant/Project shall conform to all the conditions of approval identified in Resolution 82-2006 as well as the following conditions contained herein. 2. The Applicant/Project shall implement all the mitigation measures identified in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for Terrabay adopted by City Council Resolution 81-2006 and as readopted in 2008. 3. The Product Design Studio shall serve as a support use to the office use on the Project site. The Product Design Studio shall not generate more that 58 daily vehicle trips to the site in absence of additional environmental review. 4. The Product Design Studio shall not be used for industrial purposes or biotechnical research and development. The permitted use shall comply with the provisions of the Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District which allows the production of audio, visual and performance arts, and similar uses. 5. The rooftop mechanical units shall be screened from view from the office towers and said screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Chief Planner. Contact: Allison Knapp, Planning Consultant: (650) 829-6633. B. BUILDING DIVISION 1. Project construction shall comply with the 2007 California Building Code. 2. The permitted occupancy is retail and office. Any use more hazardous that these uses shall require additional review. 3. Detailed construction plans shall be provided and a building permit shall be issued prior to commencing construction. Contact: Jim Kirkman, Chief Building Official: (650) 8829-6670 C. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Install fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13 and The South San Francisco Fire Department (SSSFD) Municipal Code requirements. Permit shall be under a separate fire plan check and permit for overhead. 2. Install exterior listed horn/strobe alarm device. 3. This portion of the building is also required to have a fire alarm system per NFPA 72 and the SSSFD Municipal Code. 4. The fire sprinkler system shall be monitored by a central station per California Fire Code Section 1003.3. 5. This portion of the building is also required to have a smoke control system per Section 905 of the California Fire Code and the SSSFD Municipal Code. 6. The elevator shall not have shunt-trip. 7. The service/maintenance access road at the rear of the building leading to the catch basin shall be an all weather road (paved). 8. All the previous agreed to conditions of approval are still in effect and enforceable. Contact: Luis Da Silva, Fire Marshal: (650) 829 4320 DRAFT EXHIBIT B ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 20, CHAPTER 63 OF THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE TO DEFINE AND PERMIT "PRODUCT DESIGN STUDIO" USE WITHIN THE TERRABAY SPECIFIC PLAN ZONING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the existing Terrabay Specific Plans, Chapter 20.63 and the Terrabay Development Agreement allow development of the Terrabay Project (together, "the existing entitlements"), subject to further approvals and entitlements; and, WHEREAS, in November 2000, the City Council approved the Final Terrabay Specific Plan, which Plan was amended in 2006; and, WHEREAS, the applicant now requests an amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, Precise Plan, and a zoning text amendment, to allow as a permitted use, a Product Design Studio ("Studio") as a support use to the approved office use on the site, and to be located above the approved ground floor retail concourse attached to the site's North Tower ("2008 Project"); and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, by resolution dated , 2008, recommended approval of the amendment to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan, the Terrabay Precise Plan, and certain zoning amendments; and WHEREAS, certain amendments to the Terrabay Specific Plan District Zoning Ordinance are necessary to allow for the revised 2008 Plan land uses; and WHEREAS, Chapter 20.63 is proposed to be amended to reflect the changes approved in the Terrabay Phase III-Only Specific Plan; and, WHEREAS, an Initial Study was prepared for the proposed Studio, which concluded that the proposal would not result in any new or substantially more severe significant impacts than those identified and analyzed in the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (2005 SEIR) and addendum thereto (2206 Addendum), which together with the 1998/99 SEIR and Addendum, the 1996 Terrabay SEIR and the Environmental Impact Report prepared in 1982 (1982 EIR), analyze the anticipated environmental effects of the development o the Terrabay lands; and WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project in accordance with the EIRs, SEIRs and Addenda thereto; and, DRAFT WHEREAS, based on the foregoing and California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no further environmental review is required and an addendum was prepared for the 2008 Project (2008 Addendum); and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend Chapter 20.63, to reflect the Final Terrabay Specific Plan as amended; and, WHEREAS, on , 2008, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed amendment to Chapter 20.63. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby ORDAIN as follows: SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS The City Council hereby amends Chapter 63 of Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, as follows (deletions are in strikethrough; additions are in double-underline): A. The following is added to Section 20.63.010 as a definition: "Product Design Studio" is permitted as an accessory or supnork use to the office component of the Terrabav Phase III Proiect. The Product Design Studio shall serve as a support use to the anchor tenant of the office component of Terrabav and shall not add to the aggregate emplovee base of the Phase III commercial component in absence of environmental review. Uses may include the production of audio. video. design and performance arts. B. 20.63.030.(b)(14) is added as follows: (14) Product Design Studio as a support use to the office component and as defined in the definition section contained herein consisting of approximately 15 010 sauare feet C. Section 20.63.030(b)(8) is amended as follows: (8) Class A office buildings for a gross square footage of approximately 665,000 square feet; D. Section 20.63.140(e) is amended as follows: (1) A parking capacity of one thousand nine hundred and fifty two cars in striped stalls is required based upon the parking requirements of ~1-2.74 spaces per one thousand gross square feet of floor area as set forth in the final Terrabay Specific Plan. DRAFT SECTION 2. SEVERABILITY If any provision of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstance is held invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of this Ordinance, including the application of such part or provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby and shall continue in full force and effect. To this end, provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby declares that it would have passed each section, subsection, subdivision, paragraph, sentence, clause, or phrase hereof irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, subdivisions, paragraphs, sentences, clauses, or phrases be held unconstitutional, invalid, or unenforceable. SECTION 3. PUBLICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE This Ordinance shall be published once, with the names of those City Councilmembers voting for or against it, in the San Mateo Times, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of South San Francisco, as required by law, and shall become effective thirty (30) days from and after its adoption. Adopted as an Ordinance of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting of the City Council held the day of, , 2008 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk As Mayor of the City of South San Francisco, I do hereby approve the foregoing Ordinance this day of , 2008. Pedro Gonzalez, Mayor 1122104.1 ATTACHMENT III PROPOSED ZONING TEXT LANGUAGE The following language is recommended to accommodate the Product Design Studio in Chapter 20.63 of the Zoning Ordinance. 1) The following definition would be added to the "Definitions" section of the Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District text (20.63.010 Product Design Studio is permitted as an accessor~or support use to the office component of the Terrabay Phase III Proiect. The Product Design Studio shall serve as a support use to the anchor tenant of the office component of Terrabay and shall not add to the aggre atg_ a employee base of the Phase III commercial component in absence of environmental review. Uses may include the production of audio, video, design and performance arts and similar uses. 2) The addition of a Product Design Studio as a permitted use: 20.63.030.(b)(14) Product Des~n Studio as a support use to the office component and as defined in the definition section contained herein consisting of approximately 15,010 square feet. 3) Modifications to the existing Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District text: Section 20.63.030 (b) (8) Class A office buildings for a gross square footage of approximately 665,000 square feet; 4) Modify Section 20.63.140 (e) (1) A parking capacity of one thousand nine hundred and fifty two cars in striped stalls is required based upon the parking requirements of ~-2.74 spaces per one thousand gross square feet of floor area as set forth in the final Terrabay Specific Plan. TERRABAY PHASE III ONLY 2008 PROJECT INITIAL STUDY ADDENDUM TO THE 2005 SEIR AND 2006 ADDENDUM JULY 17, 2008 TERRABAY PHASE III ONLY 2008 PROJECT INITIAL STUDY AND ADDENDUM TO THE 2005 SEIR and 2006 ADDENDUM July 17, 2008 INTRODUCTION The attached Initial Study (IS) evaluates the proposed modification (2008 Project) to the approved Terrabay Phase III Project (2006 Project) environmental impacts and mitigation measures. The IS then compares the impacts and mitigation measures identified in the 2005 Terrabay Phase III Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (2005 SEIR) as restated in the 2006 Addendum to those potential impacts associated with the 2008 Project. The 2005 SEIR and its 2006 Addendum supplements, as permitted by law, the 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR. The 2005 SEIR was prepared for a Terrabay Phase III (only) application received by the City of South San Francisco in the same year. The 2005 SEIR is tiered upon and supplements the 1998/99 Terrabay Phase II and III Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (1998/99 SEIR). The original Terrabay Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified in 1982 (1982 EIR) and a supplemental to that document was prepared and certified in 1996 (1996 SEIR). Approved 2006 Project The 2006 Project, approved by City Council Resolution 82-2006 on October 11, 2006 is the construction of 665,000 square feet of office in two towers. Additionally, 24,000 square feet of commercial retail use and at a minimum one quality restaurant is approved along with, a shared use 200-seat performing arts center, a 100-child day care facility, and a public art program. Parking is provided in an eight level garage which includes 1,896 spaces and 56 additional surface parking spaces for a total of 1,952 spaces. A Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM Program) is approved for the project. The TDM Program targets a 30% mode shift. Table 1 identifies the land use by square footage of the approved 2006 Project and the land uses analyzed in the 2006 Addendum. The 2006 Addendum to the 2005 SEIR did however analyze 25,000 square feet of retail. The retail component was subsequently reduced to accommodate a larger shared use performing arts facility. Building permits have been issued and construction is underway for the approved 2006 Project. Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 1 TABLE 1 APPROVED 2006 TERRABAY PROJECT ANALYZED IN THE 2006 ADDENDUM Gross S uare Feet SOUTH TOWER Office 313,002 Commercial 11,544 Child Care 5,644 Performin Arts 4,433 Sub Total 334,623 Parkin 962 s aces NORTH TOWER Office 352,026 Commercial 12,465 Sub Total 364,482 Parkin 990 s aces TOTALS Office 665,028 Commercial 24.009 Child Care 5,644 Performin Arts 4,433 Total 699,114 Total Parkin 1,952 s aces Proposed 2008 Amendment-Project Description The Applicant has requested an amendment to the 2006 entitlements to permit the construction of a 15,007 square foot Product Design Studio (Studio) serving as an ancillary use to the office towers. The addition is proposed to be constructed on top of the approved retail concourse connected to the North Tower thereby creating a second floor in this area. In order to facilitate access to the Studio, 2,500 square feet of office use in the North Tower on the second floor would be converted to circulation area to connect the Studio with the second floor office. Table 2, below, identifies the 2008 Project that is analyzed in the attached IS. TABLE 2 2008AMENDMENT-PROPOSED PROJECT Land Use Gross S uare Feet Office 664,042 Commercial 24,009 Child Care 5,644 Performin Arts 4,433 Product Desi n Studio 15,007 Total 713,13 5 Total Parkin 1,952 s aces Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 2 BACKGROUND Previous Environmental Analysis The Terrabay project was first envisioned in 1980 and the land was within the County of San Mateo's jurisdiction. The project required annexation to the City of South San Francisco, the formation of a Habitat Conservation Plan and the evaluation of Project impacts on the three proposed phases of construction. The phasing is identified as: Phase I Village and Park residential, Phase II Woods, Pointe and Commons East and West residential and Phase III commercial. 1982 Environmental Analysis The following table outlines the development proposal analyzed in the 1982 EIR. TABLE 2 1982 TERRABAY EIR ANALYSIS Residential Phase I A roved 1982 As-Built 2005 Villa a 181 161 units Park 136 125 units Phase II Woods 200 135 units Commons East 57 0 Recreation Parcel for Ci Commons West 77 182 units (Commons West Point 99 and Point merged into one area in 2000 referred to as "The Pointe") Commercial Phase III 663,000 Sq. ft. office, health club, restaurants, hotel, seminar and high technolo center 0 The alternatives analyzed in the 1982 EIR include: • No project/no development of the site. • Mixed use consisting of 745 dwelling units, 200 room hotel inclusive of a 150 seat restaurant/bar, two additional restaurants consisting of 300 seats and 150 seats and a 210,000 square foot office. • 1,036 residential units and a 10.4 acre shopping center of undefined square footage. • 985 dwelling units including 30% for seniors and 20% for low and moderate income households. Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 3 1996 Terrabay Environmental Analysis The 1996 SEIR analyzed the impacts associated with extending the terms of the development agreement for the Terrabay Project. Phase I Terrabay was under construction at the time which includes the Village and Park residential subdivisions, the Terrabay Fire Station, Terrabay Recreation Center, Sister Cities Boulevard (completed), the Terrabay water tank (potable), linear park, grading improvements to Hillside School and construction of South San Francisco Drive. The 1996 SEIR analyzed Terrabay Phases II and III as shown in Table 2, above. The 1996 SEIR noted, but did not analyze the impacts to wetlands present on the Phase III site and noted but did not analyze the impacts to special species habitat and an historic resource (archaeological) on the Phase III lands. 1998/99 Terrabay Environmental Analysis The 1998/99 SEIR was prepared in response to an application from Sunchase, G.A.. The 1998/99 SEIR analyzed the following development proposal. TABLE 3 1998/99 SEIR ANALYSIS Residential Phase II Number of Units/T e of Units or S uare Foota e Woods 135 sin le famil (detached) Commons 32 du lex (attached) Pointe 181 du lex and tri lex attached TOTAL PHASE II 348 units Phase III Commercial Hotel 235,000-280,000 s . ft. Restaurant 12,000-18,000 s . ft. Retail 6,000-10,000 s . ft. Mixed Use 30,000-35,000 s . ft. TOTAL PHASE III 283,000-343,000 s . ft. In response to City of South San Francisco direction, the Final 1998/99 SEIR analyzed a "Mitigated Plan Alternative". The Mitigated Plan Alternative concentrated development on three "pads" (avoiding disturbance of a 5,000 year old archaeological site entirely), avoided some wetlands, special species habitat and consisted of the following: • A 4.9 acre development pad with 340,000 square feet of office and a five level parking garage (situated in front of the office tower); • A 1.8 acre development pad with a hotel, 7,500 square foot restaurant or office use and surface parking; and • A 2.9 acre development pad with up to a 150 room hotel. Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 4 The project analyzed would have disturbed approximately 12 acres of the 37 acre phase III site. Additionally the following alternatives were analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. • No Development -Analyzes the impacts of no development on the Terrabay Phase III and II sites. • Existing 1996 Specific Plan -Analyzes 432 residential units, 669,300 square feet commercial consisting of retail, office, hotel and restaurant. • Reduced Residential -Analyzes 316 residential units and no commercial. • Reduced Commercial -Analyzes 293,000 square feet of commercial consisting of retail, office, hotel and restaurant and no residential. • Permanent Open Space -Analyzes the impacts associated with dedicating Phase II and III parcels as permanent open space. The 1998/99 SEIR (State Clearinghouse #97-82077) was certified by South San Francisco City Council Resolution # 19-99. The 1998/99 SEIR analyzes geology, soils and seismicity, hydrology and drainage, traffic and circulation, air quality, noise, public services (police and fire) and hazards as well as the wetlands, biological and archaeological resources that were not analyzed previously. 2000 Environmental Analysis (Addendum) In 2000, Myers Development submitted an application to the City requesting entitlements and legislative approvals to develop a 665,000 square foot office in a single tower, 7,500 square feet support retail and 100 child day care center on the Phase III parcel. The application also included a request fora 96 unit condominium tower (later approved for 112 units) and 70 paired units on a portion of the Phase II site. A request for lot line reconfigurations and a change in the land use designation of the "Commons Parcel" to Open Space/Recreation and approximately 26 acres of the Phase III site to Open Space for conveyance to the County of San Mateo was also a part of the application. The conveyance to the County stipulates that the 26 acres shall be incorporated into San Bruno County and State Park. The open space request implemented biological and archaeological mitigation measures identified in the 1998/99 SEIR given that wetlands, special species habitat and an archaeological resource would be protected in perpetuity with the dedication of the property as permanent open space coupled with its conveyance to the County for inclusion in the Park. Specifically the mitigation measures are: • Biology Mitigation Measure 4.3.2 avoidance of take of callippee silverspot butterfly habitat. Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July I7, 2008 Page 5 • Biology Mitigation Measure 4.3.3 avoidance of take of wetlands. • Archaeology Mitigation Measure 4.9.1 avoidance of impacts to CA-SMA-40. • Archaeology Mitigation Measure 4.9.2 avoidance of impacts to CA-SMA-92. The IS analyzed the following Project and found that an addendum to the 1998/99SEIR was the appropriate environmental documentation. An addendum (2000 Addendum) was adopted by Resolution 147-2000. The 2000 Project had fewer impacts that those associated with the project analyzed in 1998/99, as proposed implemented mitigation measures identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and minor technical changes were all that was needed to the previously certified SEIR (Section 15164, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3). TABLE 4 2000 ADDENDUM PARCEL LAND USE ACRES Preservation Parcel O en S ace Preserve 25.73 Buffer Parcel Surface Parkin 2.69 Office Parcel 665,000/ Office (child care and performing arts theatre) 18.08 Residential Parcel 96Condominium/Apartments 70 sin le famil attached 14.96 Recreation Parcel 25,000-30,000 Recreation Center 6.48 TOTAL 67.94 PORTION DEVELOPABLE 35.73 PORTION OPEN SPACE 32.21 2005 Environmental Analysis In 2005 Myers Development submitted an application to the City for amixed-use development on the Phase III lands only. Phase II was built out in 2005 with a 112-unit condominium tower and 70 paired units. The 2005 Project application requested entitlements for 357,500 gross square feet of retail, a 295,500 gross square feet office building and 351 residential units. A Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (2005 SEIR) was prepared for the project. The 2005 SEIR analyzed two alternatives intended to build upon the alternatives analyzed in the previous environmental documents. The two alternatives analyzed are: • 357,500 gross square feet of retail, a 300-room hotel and 351 residential units. • 357,500 gross square feet of retail and 531 residential units. Tenabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 6 The 2005 SEIR (State Clearinghouse #1997082077) was certified by City Council by Resolution 81-2006. The Applicant, prior to the hearing before the City Council, withdrew the application stating that the project was too expensive to build. 2006 Environmental Analysis 2006 (Addendum) A 2006 IS evaluated the Project identified in Table 1, above. As a result a 2006 Addendum was adopted by City Council on October 11, 2006 (Resolution 81-2006) along with the certification of the 2005 SEIR. The 2006 Addendum took into account the changes in the environment identified below when evaluating the Project in the IS. Chances in Environment since the Preparation of the 1998/99 SEIR Environmental conditions as well as models used to predict project impacts have changed since the preparation of the 1998/99 SEIR. The changes include: • Hook ramps and Oyster Point Flyover are constructed and are in operation for 2005 analysis and were not for 1998 analysis. • Hickey Boulevard extension was completed in 2002 and its affect is analyzed in 2005 SEIR and not 1998 SEIR. • BART is in and included in analysis for 2005 SEIR and not for 1998 SEIR. • Hillside Boulevard and Chestnut Avenue signal was not in place in 1997 when the 1998 SEIR documentation was established and was in operational for the 2005 traffic analysis. • Home Depot and Lowes were not included in the cumulative assumptions in the 1998/99 SEIR and are included in the 2005 SEIR. • East of 101 cumulative traffic impact study was not complete or included in the background analysis for the 1998/99 SEIR and was complete, in place and used for the cumulative analysis in the 2005 SEIR. The 1998/99 SEIR analysis is dated using older traffic models and counts to identify project impacts. • The 1998 SEIR used 1994 Highway Capacity Manual for the traffic analysis • The 2005 SEIR used 2000 Highway Capacity Manual for the traffic analysis • The 1998 SEIR traffic counts were conducted in 1997 • The 2005 SEIR traffic counts were conducted in 2004 2008 Environmental Review The attached IS analyzes the proposed 2008 Project which is the conversion of 2,500 square feet of office to circulation area and the addition of a 15,007 square foot ancillary office use consisting of a product design studio. An IS was prepared because there were Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 7 changes to the regulatory environment since the adoption of the 2006 Addendum, and because of the addition of ancillary square footage. Re ulatorY Changes Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) and Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) require the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions. AB 32 establishes a state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emission (GHG) levels to 1990 levels by 2020. This amounts to a reduction of approximately 25 percent from forecasted levels with further reductions to follow. AB 32 requires the Air Resources Board to establish a program to track and report GHG emissions; approve a scoping plan for achieving the maximum technologically feasible and cost effective reductions from sources of GHG emissions; adopt early reduction measures to begin moving forward; and adopt and implement enforcement regulations. AB 32 did not amend the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) however, SB 97 does require amendments to CEQA top be adopted by January 1, 2010. SB 97 directs the state Office of Planning and Research to develop and draft CEQA Guidelines for the "mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions" by July 1, 2009. SB 97 also directs state Resources Agency to certify and adopt the CEQA Guidelines by January 1, 2010. Therefore, in light of the regulatory framework and the increase in 2008 Project size (1.8%) an IS has been prepared and is attached. An updated traffic and air quality analysis has been prepared and is discussed and analyzed in those sections of the attached IS, along with a more detailed discussion of greenhouse gas. The result of the analysis indicates that an Addendum is the appropriate environmental documentation for the 2008 Project. The 2008 Project will not result in any of the conditions listed in CEQA Guidelines section 15162 requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR, as the 2008 Project will not create any new impacts or any impacts that are substantially more severe than those identified and fully analyzed in previous CEQA documents. Nor is there new information of substantial importance to indicate that the 2008 Project will result in new or substantially more severe impacts, or require analysis of new mitigation measures or alternatives. 1120875.1 Terrabay Addendum to 2005 SEIR/2006 Addendum July 17, 2008 Page 8 INITIAL STUDY Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 1 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW -INITIAL STUDY 1. Project Title: Terrabay Phase III Only Specific, Precise Plan and Zoning Text Amendment-2008 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of South San Francisco Department of Economic and Community Development Planning Division City Hall Annex - 315 Maple Street South San Francisco, California 94080 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Allison Knapp Wollam, Consulting Planner 650. 877.8535 4. Project Location: Approximately 21 acres fronting Airport Boulevard beginning at Sister Cities Boulevard and ending at the boundary of the Preservation Parcel. The site is bounded by San Bruno State and County Park to the west and north (which includes the Preservation Parcel) and Terrabay Phases I and II to west. Highway 101 is located 150 feet east of the site. The approved 2006 Project is under construction on the site. APN: 007-650-100, 007-650-110, 007-650-120, 007-650-140, 007-650-150 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Myers Development Company 101 Second Street -Suite 555 San Francisco, California 94105 6. General Plan Designation: Business Commercial 7. Zoning Designation: Terrabay Specific Plan District 8. Description of Project: 2008 Project This Initial Study (IS) evaluates the difference between the approved Terrabay Phase III Project (2006 Project) which is now under construction and the proposed addition to the project (2008 Terxabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 2 Project). The 2008 Project is the amendment of the approved Final Terrabay Phase III Specific Plan, Precise Plan and Zoning Text Amendment to allow the construction of a 15,007 square foot product design studio (Studio) above the approved (in 2006) retail concourse connected to the North Tower. The 2008 Project also includes the conversion of 2,500 square feet of office space in the North Tower to circulation area to connect the second floor office with the Studio over the retail concourse. Table 1 identifies the square footage and land use approved by the 2006 Project entitlements and Table 2 compares the entitled 2006 Project to the proposed 2008 Project. The approved 2006 Project is the construction of 665,028 square feet of office in two towers, 24,009 square feet of commercial retail use and at a minimum one quality restaurant, a shared use 200-seat performing arts center, a 100-child day care facility and a public art program. See Figure 011 Current View Lookin~est. Therefore, the 2008 Project is the evaluation of the conversion of 2,500 square feet o_ fo ice to circulation area and the addition of 15,007 square feet of a Studio use above the North Tower retail concourse. See Flgute 012 View Looking West with Product Design Studio. The following Initial Study evaluates the difference between the 2006 Project and that proposed in 2008, and in many cases includes an extensive summary from the 2006 Addendum as it provides the context within which the 2008 Project is reviewed. TABLE 1 TERRABAY PROJECT ANALYZED IN THE 2006 ADDENDUM Land Use Gross S uare Feet Office 665,028 Commercial 25,000 Child Care 5,000 Performin Arts 3,100 Total 698,128 Total Parkin 2,052 s aces 2.68/1,000 sf TABLE 2 A roved 2006/Pro osed 2008 PRO ECT COPMPARISON/Gross S uare Feet Land Use 2006 Pro'ect 2008 Pro'ect Difference Office 664,042 644,042 -2,500 Commercial 24,009 24,009 0 Child Care 5,644 5,644 0 Performin Arts Studio 4,433 4,433 0 Product Desi Studio 0 15,007 +15,007 Enhanced Lobb 0 2,500 +2,500 Total 698,128 713,135 +2.14% Parkin 2.80/1,000 sfz 2.74/1,000 sf -0.07/1,000 sf Environmental Background- Documents Incorporated by Reference The Terrabay/Mandalay/Centennial Towers Project has been analyzed in previous environmental documents beginning in 1982. ' The child care and performing arts (shared use facility) were and are treated as ancillary uses to the office and commercial uses, and not as trip generators during peak periods and these uses were enlarged through the entitlement process. z The parking was reduced by 100 spaces as a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measure. The TDM Program was approved by the City in 2007. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 3 1. The first Terrabay Development Project Environmental Impact Report (1982 EIR) was prepared and certified by the City of South San Francisco (City) in 1982. The 1982 EIR analyzed the environmental impacts of the Terrabay Project as proposed in the 1982 Specific Plan. 2. The second environmental document the Supplemental Environmental Impact Report for the Terrabay Speczfzc Plan and Development Agreement (1996 SEIR) was prepared and certified by the City in 1996. The 1996 SEIR to the 1982 EIR studied the environmental impacts of the development of the Terrabay Project with a proposed ten year extension of the expiration date for the 1982 Specific Plan and Development Agreement to February 2007. 3. The third environmental document the 1998/99, the Terrabay Phase II and III Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Final SEIR (1998/99 SEIR) was prepared and the document was certified by the City in 1999. The 1998/99 SEIR evaluated adjustments to the land areas of Phase II and Phase III and the construction of the hook ramps and Bayshore Boulevard realignment. 4. The fourth environmental document was prepared and adopted in 2000 that being the 2000 Addendum to the 1998/99 SEIR. 5. The fifth environmental document the 2005 Phase III Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Draft and Final) (2005 SEIR) was prepared for a mixed use project on the Phase III site and certified October 2006. 6. The sixth environmental document was prepared and adopted in 2006 that being the 2006 Addendum to the 1998/99 and 2005 SEIRs These documents and all the background documents referenced and cited therein are incorporated herein by reference. Updated Conditions since 1998/99 SEIR Certification 1. Approximately 25.6 acres of the Phase III site (Preservation Parcel) were dedicated to San Mateo County for inclusion in San Bruno Mountain County/State Park. The conveyance of the Preservation Parcel took place on August 11, 2004 pursuant to the City of South San Francisco General Plan, Terrabay Specific Plan and Zoning Ordinance and the Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement. 2. The modified Phase III site includes a "Buffer Parcel" and "Development Parcel". The Buffer Parcel comprises about 2.7 acres, which would be used for a roadway for emergency vehicle access which is a permitted use by the Mutual Release and Settlement Agreement and the General Plan, Terrabay Specific Plan and Zoning Ordinance. The proposed re- Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 4 entitlement of the Phase III site would affect the Development Parcel and the Buffer Parcels only consisting of approximately 20.7 acres of what was once a 47-acre site. Terrabay Phases I and II are completely built out and occupied. 3. A Wetland Mitigation Plan (WMI') was prepared by Wetland Research Associates (WRA) in 2000 (WRA 2000) to address the impacts of the City's Oyster Point Hook Ramp Project and development of the Terrabay Phase III Project site. The WMP serves to address the filling of 0.68 acres of wetlands to accommodate the widening of Airport (then Bayshore) Boulevard at the Hook Ramps (the City's Oyster Point Flyover Transportation Improvement Project) and anticipated filling of 0.10 acres of unvegetated other waters to accommodate development of the 2006 Project site. As defined in the WMP, identified impacts to jurisdictional waters were to be mitigated by creating, restoring and enhancing 1.82 acres of wetlands and portions of two drainage channels in the northern portion of the original Phase III site (now the Preservation Parcel). 4. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) issued permits to conduct streambed alterations and wetlands take and mitigation. The permit authorization from the Corps, CDFG and RWQCB remain in effect. 5. The City completed the Oyster Point Interchange including the hook ramp construction in front of the Project site. 6. The 2006 Project Applicant has paid the City a fair share amount for the review of the storm drain and sanitary sewer lines in Airport Boulevard (Mitigation Measure 3.4-8 2005 SEIR). The Engineering Division completed the study and has found that there is adequate capacity to serve the 2006 Project and cumulative development (Ray Razavi, City Engineer). Updated Conditions since 2005 SEIR Certification and Adoption of2006Addendum 1. Regulatory Changes which include the adoption of Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) and Senate Bill 97 (SB 97) which require the analysis of greenhouse gas emissions more fully discussed in the Air Quality Section of this IS. Project Site Characteristics The Project site comprises approximately 21.2 acres. Site grading, emplacement of retaining walls, and construction of the South Tower and garage have commenced pursuant to 2006 Project entitlements and grading and building permits. Project Conditions of Approval (COA's) and the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) are being enforced by the City. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 5 City inspectors and consulting inspectors on the site on a daily basis overseeing the COA's and MMRP. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Residential development comprising Phases I and II of Terrabay are located to the southwest of the Project site. The San Bruno Mountain County Park is located west of the Project site. The City of Brisbane is to the north and Airport Boulevard and U.S. Highway 101 are to the east. 10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: None. Terrabay Phase III Initial Study - 6 Figure 011 2006 Approved Project Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 7 Figure 012 2008 Project Product Design Studio Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 8 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The 2008 Project impacts would result in new or substantially more severe impacts (as compared to the 2006 SEIR and 2006 Addendum) for the environmental factors checked below. ^ Aesthetics ^ Biological Resources ^ Hazards/Hazardous Materials ^ Mineral Resources ^ Public Services ^ Utilities/Service Systems ^ Agricultural Resources ^ Cultural Resources ^ Hydrology/Water Quality ^ Noise ^ Recreation ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance ^ Air Quality ^ Geology/Soils ^ Land Use/Planning ^ Population/Housing ^ Transportation/Traffic DETERMINATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: ^ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required ^ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. ^ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. ® I find that the proposed 2008 Project will not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts and mitigation measures identified in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum and the 1998/99 SEIR and 2000 Addendum as described in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (2006) shall be restated and re-adopted along with this 2008 Initial Study as an Addendum to the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum. This finding is based upon the requirements of Section 15164, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3 wherein an Addendum Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 9 may be prepared if some changes or additions are necessary to a previously certified EIR and none of the conditions identified in Section 15162 have occurred. I find that pursuant to Section 15162 there are no: (1) Substantial changes in the project that will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. (2) Substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken which will require major revisions to the previous EIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. And that there is no: (3) New information of substantial importance that has become available and was not known at the time of the previous EIR's that would result in one or more significant effects not identified previously, significant effects that would be substantially more severe than identified in the previous EIR, mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not feasible or considerably different from ones identified before and would substantially reduce the effects of the project are declined by the project applicant. Sign re `~ 2op Date Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner Printed Name Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 10 EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS The following IS evaluates the 2008 Project in comparison to the impacts identified in the 2005 SEIR and as reconsidered in the 2006 Addendum for the Terrabay Project. The 2005 SEIR augments, enhances and supplements the 1998/99 SEIR, the 1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR as permitted by law where newer information is available and relevant. The 2005 SEIR contains an updated traffic and circulation analysis based on new build out and development assumptions. The 2005 SEIR also updates air quality and noise, aesthetics, hydrology and public services and utilities. This 2008 IS contains an updated traffic and air quality analysis. The 1998/99 SEIR remains the governing document with respect to issues such as archaeology, biology and geology and soils. Where appropriate and needed these distinctions are identified in the appropriate environmental sections of this IS. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Ixss Than Significant Mitigation Signifcant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ^ ^ ^ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? ^ ^ ^ c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? ^ ^ ^ d) Create a new source of substantial light or ^ ^ ® ^ glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Analysis a and c) The 2008 Project would not impact scenic vistas. The 2006 Project was found not to negatively affect scenic vistas. The San Bruno Mountain County/State Park forms a backdrop to the Project site. The 25.6-acre Preservation Parcel, previously part of the Phase III property, but dedicated to San Mateo County for inclusion in San Bruno Mountain County/State Park on August 11, 2004, combined with the 2.7 Buffer Parcel, used only for roadways, maintains unobstructed views of San Bruno Mountain along the majority of the Phase III Airport Boulevard frontage. Additionally 50 percent less of the site was developed with the 2006 Project than what was proposed and analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR and the 2005 SEIR. The 2008 Project would add 15,000 square feet to the 2006 Project above the North Tower retail concourse located in-between the two approved office towers. The 2008 Project would add a second story above the approved North Tower retail concourse. The second story addition would eliminate the view of a retaining wall and provide a stronger connection to the two towers. The Design Review Board reviewed the 2008 Project in June 2008 and found that the addition above the retail improved the aesthetic of the site. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 11 b) The site is not adjacent to a scenic highway. The approved 2006 Project is clustered on approximately eight acres leaving approximately 10 acres of land on the "Development Parcel" with a clear view of the mountain. The 2008 Project does not change these conditions. The Development Parcel is approximately 18 acres of land where development is permitted which in previous documents has been referred to as the "Office Parcel". The 2.6-acre "Buffer Parcel" is developed with an emergency access roadway and will include a turn around which would consist of pervious turf Crete paving materials. The "Pointe" area south of the development is being landscaped in order to tninunize the scars of previous grading. The 26 acre Preservation Parcel north of the Buffer Parcel remains in open space. The majority of the rock outcropping on the Development and Buffer Parcels remain in place. The 2008 Project would not alter any of these approved conditions. d) Lighting would be designed for the 2008 Project that is the same as that approved for the 2006 Project. The 2006 Project introduced building, pathway and parking lighting that add light to the project area and given its design and location was not found to be an impact. Mitigation Measures Requited from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 3.5.1 from the 2005 SEIR shall apply to the 2006 Project which restricts the use of reflective building materials and requires controlled and downcast lighting to reduce light spillage from the site. This mitigation measure also applies to the 2008 Project and is shown in the Project design materials. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: The unnumbered Mitigation Measures from the 1982 EIR generally addresses the residential development. The approved Phase III 2006 Project does incorporate the applicable mitigation measure which includes clustering development, maintaining view lines to the Mountain, restricting development generally to the swales and use landscaping for screening and use of open spaces to reduce visual impacts. The 2008 Project would not alter the approved clustering and view sheds of the Project. The 2006 site plan would not be altered by the 2008 Project: therefore, this mitigation is and remains completed. Mitigation Measure 3.5-2 from the ZOOS SEIR which addresses night lighting mitigations to protect residential uses on the Phase III site. The approved 2006 Project and the proposed 2008 Project does not include residential land uses. Finding: The 2008 Project would not alter the clustering of that approved in 2006. The 2008 Project would not introduce residential uses or a significant addition of lighting to the site. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Moreover, the following conditions continue to exist for the 2008 Project: Slightly reduced lighting impacts from those identified in the 2005 SEIR because there were no impacts associated with residential land uses; No conflict between night lighting and residential uses; and, the Project clustering leaving the majority of the site open with views of the Mountain. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 12 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incotpotated Impact Impact 2. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determifung whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the Califomia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? ^ ^ ^ b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? ^ ^ ^ c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which due to their location or nature could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? ^ ^ ^ Analysis a) The Project site contains no lands designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. b) The Project site is currently zoned Terrabay Specific Plan District. The Project site is not under a Williamson Act contract. c) There is no farmland or agricultural uses within the City of South San Francisco (City South San Francisco 1999). Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: None. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: There are no agricultural resources on the Project site. There are no impacts to agricultural resources and no mitigation measures are required. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 13 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Sign cant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 3. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) 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, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? ^ ^ ^ Background The Project is a part of the third and final phase of the Terrabay Development. The entirety of the Terrabay/Mandalay/Centennial Towers Project, including Phases I, II, and III, has been analyzed in previous environmental documents beginning in 1982. Adjustments to Phase III have been addressed in the Terrabay Phase II and III Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Final EIR (1998/99 SEIR), the 2000 Addendum to the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2005 Phase III Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, and the 2006 Addendum. The 2006 Addendum augments, enhances and supplements the 2005 SEIR, the 1998/99 SEIR, the 1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR as permitted by law where newer information is available and relevant. The 2006 Addendum contains an updated traffic and circulation analysis based on new build out and development assumptions. The 2006 Addendum also updates air quality. Table 1 shows the square footage of the 2008 Project compared to the 2006 Project. Texrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 14 TABLE 1 COMPARISION OF 2006 TO 2008 TERRABAY PRO ECT Land Use 2006 Addendum 2008'Addendum Gross S uare Feet Gross S uare Feet Office 665,028 664,042 Commercial 25,000 24,009 Child Care 5,000 5,644 Performin Arts 3,100 4,433 Product Desi Studio 0 15,007 Total Phase I and II 698,128 713,135 Source: Knapp Planning and Environmental Consulting, 2008 Updated traffic information was provided for the 2008 Project (Crane Transportation Group) and discussed in the Transportation section of this document. Traffic data were provided for the Project where the Product Design Studio was considered ancillary to the office space and therefore did not generate any additional vehicle trips, but resulted in a net loss of vehicle trips. The traffic analysis also modeled a Project where the Product Design Studio was considered as a research and development facility that generated additional vehicle trips. This updated air quality analysis focuses on air quality criteria pollutants and greenhouse gas emissions for the 2008 Addendum to the 2006 Terrabay Phase III Only Specific and Precise Plan Amendment. The 2008 Project includes a slight increase to the total square footage compared to the 2006 Project. The 2008 Project includes the construction of office space in two towers, commercial retail use and restaurant, a performing arts center, a child day care facility, and a product design studio in South San Francisco. The following modeling program, formulas, and emission factors were used to analyze the air quality and greenhouse gas emissions impacts. • URBEMIS2007 (version 9.2.4) See Appendix A • Formulas and Emission Factors from the California Climate Action Registry Report Protoco12008 The URBEMIS2007 version 9.2.4 model was used to analyze operation-related criteria air pollutants and construction- and operation-related COz equivalent (COze) emission levels. Construction-related calculations include emissions from numerous sources, including site grading, construction worker trips, stationary equipment, diesel and gas mobile equipment, off-site haul export of soil material, asphalt off-gassing, and painting. Operation-related calculations include emissions from numerous sources, including vehicle trips, landscape maintenance, use of natural gas for space heating, and consumer products. The 2008 Project would slightly increase operation-related criteria air pollutants from those identified in the 2006 Addendum but not by a substantial amount. No new or additional air quality-related mitigation measures for criteria pollutant emissions would be required for the 2008 Project. The formulas and emission factors from the 2008 California Climate Action Registry Report Protocol were used to analyze operation-related greenhouse gas emission levels from the proposed electricity use by the Project. When compared to the 2006 Project, results show that greenhouse gas emissions increase slightly as a result of the 2008 Project. While there are no statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas emission impacts, the estimated COze emissions from the Project do not pose any apparent conflict with the most recent list of the California Air Resources Board's (GARB) early action strategies for reducing COze emissions. The Project is also not a type of project identified by the GARB that would be expected to have a significant impact on Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 15 global climate change (i.e., the project is not a cement plant, oil refinery, electric generating facility/provider, co-generation facility, hydrogen plant, or other large stationary combustion source). The Project would also reduce its carbon footprint by incorporating a Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM Program) and sustainable green building and development practices. Analysis a), b) and c) The 2008 Project would not alter the clustering of that approved in 2006. The 2008 Project would not introduce residential uses or a significant addition of lighting to the site. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Moreover, the following conditions continue to exist for the 2008 Project: Slightly reduced lighting impacts from those identified in the 2005 SEIR because there were no impacts associated with residential land uses; No conflict between night lighting and residential uses; and, the Project clustering leaving the majority of the site open with views of the Mountain. The 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum found that short term construction impacts associated with dust without mitigation could exceed PM10 standards. Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 of the 1998/99 SEIR which is restated in the 2005 SEIR as Mitigation Measure 3.2-1 and referenced in the 2006 Addendum would reduce this impact to less than significant. Mitigation Measure 3.2-1 shall be required of the 2008 Project and would reduce construction impacts to less than significant. Mitigation Measure 3.2-1 addresses dust and erosion control and is identified by the Bay Area Air Quality District as effective. The 1998/99 SEIR identified that direct and indirect air emissions with full buildout of Phases I, II and III of Terrabay would result in significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts with respect to ozone and PM10. The impact is somewhat lessened but is still unavoidable with a TDM Program in place. The City adopted a "Finding of Overriding Considerations" with respect to this air quality impact in 1999. The 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum also identified this impact as significant and unavoidable and readopted the findings of overriding considerations (Impact 4.5.2 from the 1998/99 SEIR Changes in Long Term Air Quality Impact 3.2.2 from the 2005 SEIR). The proposed 2008 Project would result in a slight increase in air emissions, given its slight increase in square footage. The BAAQMD sets the threshold for analysis of air quality impacts at 2,000 trips per day (Bay Area Air Quality Management District, BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines Assessing the Air Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans, December 1999) with respect to the operational phase of a project. Assuming the worst-case scenario for the 2008 Project where the Product Design Studio is treated as a research and development facility (R&D) and would generate additional vehicle trips, the net increase for the 2008 Project from the 2006 Project is 58 trips per day, well below the BAAQMD threshold. However, for comparison purposes an analysis was conducted. As shown in Table 2, the 2008 Project would slightly increase air quality impacts of criteria air pollutants from those identified in the 2006 Addendum. However, the increase of 58 trips per day does not result in a substantial change in the criteria air pollutants. This impact would be less than significant. A TDM Program which is approved for the 2006 Project and shall apply (as a matter of law) to the 2008 Project (by ordinance and design) is also identified as Mitigation Measure 3.2-3 for the 2006 Project. The mitigation measure is included in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (NIIvIRP) for the 2006 Project. The TDM Program will serve to reduce the severity of the impact; however, it will not eliminate it all together. Full buildout of Terrabay will continue to exceed air quality standards, which will interfere with the region's efforts to reduce exceedences of ambient air quality standards for ozone and PM~o. Therefore the same finding will need to be re-adopted for the 2008 Project. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 16 TABLE 2 ESTIMATED OPERATION- RELATED CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS Criteria Air Pollutants (lbs./day) Scenario ROG 'CO NOx PM10 Net Change from 2006 to 2008 Project with Product Design Studio as Research 0.4 4.4 0.6 0.7 and Development BAAQMD Threshold of Significance 80 550 80 80 Significant? (Yes or No) No No No No Source: Miller Environmental Consultants, 2008 d) The proposed day care center is a sensitive receptor. The 2005 SEIR performed curbside carbon monoxide modeling on a considerably more vehicle-intense land use (see Traffic and Circulation Section) which was based on a mixed-use project with sensitive receptors on site. The 1998/99 SEIR also conducted carbon monoxide modeling. The analysis contained in both documents found that there would be no significant impacts associated with carbon monoxide. Table 3.2-3 on p 3.2-7 of the 2005 SEIR compares the curbside carbon monoxide concentrations associated with the more intense 2005 Project to the most stringent one- and eight-hour state and federal standards. The one-hour concentrations range from 5.2 to 8.1 parts per million (ppm) and are well below the state standard of 20 ppm and federal standard of 35 ppm and the eight-hour concentrations range from 3.7 to 5.8 ppm, well below the state and federal standard of 9 ppm. The level of traffic would need to increase by approximately 5,000 vehicles to increase the concentration by 0.1 ppm. Assuming the most conservative traffic scenario, the 2008 Project would increase traffic from the 2006 Project by 58 trips, which is not a substantial increase. There would be no significant impacts associated with carbon monoxide with the 2008 Project. e) Objectionable odors are typically associated with industrial land use activities. The 2008 Project would include office and commercial land uses which as a rule do not generate objectionable odors. All restaurant spaces would be equipped with exhaust vents that filter air before it is released outside of the building as a standard condition of the 2008 Project approval and requirement of building pertnits pursuant to the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 3.2.1 from the 2005 SEIR and referenced in the 2006 Addendum shall apply to the 2008 Project which address dust and soil erosion. Note that this mitigation is a re-statement of Mitigation Measure 4.5-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR. Mitigation Measure 3.2-3 from the 2005 SEIR and referenced in the 2006 Addendum shall apply to the 2008 project which requires a TDM Program. Note that this mitigation is a re-statement of Mitigation Measure 4.5-3 from the 1998/99 SEIR. This mitigation will reduce impacts but not mitigate to a level of insignificance as discussed in the finding below. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 17 Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: The 2008 Project slightly increases the amount of criteria air pollutant from those identified in the 2006 Addendum but not by a substantial amount. This impact would be less than significant. Ozone and PMIO would remain a Significant and Unavoidable Impact as identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2005 SEIR, and the 2006 Addendum. The 2008 Project would not substantially increase the severity of this impact, nonetheless, the 2008 Project will restate and re-adopt the Findings of Overriding Considerations for this significant and unavoidable impacts. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Greenhouse Gases Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact Greenhouse Gases. Would the project: a) Conflict with the state goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions in California to 1990 levels by 2020, as set forth by the timetable established in AB 32, California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006? ^ ^ ® ^ Background Air quality impacts were analyzed for Phase III as discussed above, however, greenhouse gas emission impacts were not analyzed because only recently have projects begun including analysis of greenhouse gas emissions in California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) documents. The remainder of this section focuses on greenhouse gas emissions for the 2006 Project, the 2008 Project with the Product Design Studio as 100 percent ancillary, the 2008 Project with the Product Design Studio as research and development, and the net change between the 2006 Project and the 2008 Project. Global Climate Change Global Climate Change is a long-term substantial change in the average weather on earth, as often measured by wind patterns, storms, precipitation and temperature. The science of global climate change is evolving and remains subject to extensive debate and uncertainties, however, recent reports from the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have concluded that global climate change is likely due, at least partially, to emissions of "greenhouse gases" (GHGs) from human activity. (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Working Group I: The Physical Basis of Climate Change, http://ipcc-wgl.ucar.edu/wgl/wg1-report.html). Greenhouse gases are most frequently produced by the burning of fossil fuels for transportation and electricity generation, and include carbon dioxide (COz), methane (CHa), nitrous oxide (NzO), sulfur hexafluoride (SF~), perfluorocarbons (I'FCs), Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 18 hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), and water vapor (HzO). They allow sunlight to enter the atmosphere, but trap a portion of the outward-bound infrared radiation, thereby warming the air. The process is similar to the effect greenhouses have in raising the internal temperature, hence the name greenhouse gases. Greenhouse gases have varying global warming potential (GWP). The GWP is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere; it is the cumulative radiative forcing effects of a gas over a specified time horizon resulting from the emission of a unit mass of gas relative to a reference gas. Because it contributes to over 80 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, carbon dioxide (COz) is the reference gas for climate change. To account for the warming potential of greenhouse gases, greenhouse gas emissions are often quantified and reported as COz, equivalents (COze). The carbon dioxide equivalent is a good way to assess emissions because it gives weight to the GWP of the gas. A summary of the atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected gases is summarized in the following table. As shown in Table 3, GWP ranges from 1 to 23,900. TABLE 3 GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS (100-Year Time Horizon) Gas Atmospheric Lifetime ears Global WarmingPotential 100 ear time horizon Carbon Dioxide COz 50-200 1 Methane CHa 12 ± 3 21 Nitrous Oxide 20 120 310 HFC-23 264 11,700 HFC-134a 14.6 1,300 HFC-152a 1.5 140 PFC: Tetrafluoromethane CFa 50,000 6,500 PFC: Hexafluoromethane CzF~ 10,000 9,200 Sulfur Hexafluoride SF~ 3,200 23,900 Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, 2007 According to the 2006 California Climate Action Team Report, (California Environmental Protection Agency, Climate Action Team Report to Governor Schwarzenegger and the Legislature, March 2006) the following climate change effects, which are based on the IPCC trends, can be expected in California over the course of the next century: • A diminishing Sierra snow pack declining by 70 percent to 90 percent, threatening the state's water supply; • Increasing temperatures from 8 to 10.4 degrees Fahrenheit under the higher emission scenarios, leading to a 25 percent to 35 percent increase in the number of days ozone pollution levels are exceeded in most urban areas; • Increased vulnerability of forests due to pest infestation and increased temperatures; and • Increased electricity demand, particularly in the hot summer months. Additionally, health effects from global climate change may arise from temperature increases, climate- sensitive diseases, extreme events, and air quality. There may be direct temperature effects through increases in average temperature leading to more extreme heat waves and less extreme cold spells. Those living in warmer climates are likely to experience more stress and heat-related problems. Heat related Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 19 problems include heat rash and heat stroke. In addition, climate sensitive diseases may increase, such as those spread by mosquitoes and other disease carrying insects. Those diseases include malaria, dengue fever, yellow fever, and encephalitis. Extreme events such as flooding and hurricanes can displace people and agriculture, which would have negative consequences. Global warming may also contribute to air quality problems from increased frequency of smog and particulate air pollution. Like the science of global climate change, the law surrounding its impacts is still evolving. Senate Bill 97, enacted in 2007, amends the CEQA statute to clearly establish that greenhouse gas emissions and the effect of greenhouse gas emissions are appropriate subjects for CEQA analysis. The following analysis evaluates the proposed project's GHG impacts. State Standards Currently the Federal Government does not regulate emissions of greenhouse gases; however, the State of California has been proactive in studying the impacts of climate change. In 2005, in recognition of California's vulnerability to the effects of climate change, Governor Schwarzenegger issued Executive Order S-3-05, which sets forth a series of target dates by which statewide emission of greenhouse gas would be progressively reduced, as follows: By 2010, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 20001evels; By 2020, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 19901evels; and By 2050, reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 80 percent below 19901evels. In 2006, the State Legislature passed the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill No. 32; California Health and Safety Code Division 25.5, Sections 38500, et seq., or AB 32), which requires the California Air Resources Board (GARB) to design and implement emission limits, regulations, and other measures, such that feasible and cost-effective statewide greenhouse gas emissions are reduced to 1990 levels by 2020 (representing an approximate 25 percent reduction in emissions). In June 2007, GARB directed staff to pursue 37 early actions for reducing greenhouse gas emissions under the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32). The broad spectrum of strategies to be developed - including a Low Carbon Fuel Standard, regulations for refrigerants with high global warming potentials, guidance and protocols for local governments to facilitate greenhouse gas reductions, and green ports -reflects that the serious threat of climate change requires action as soon as possible (California Air Resources Board, September 2007a. Draft List of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse). In addition to approving the 37 greenhouse gas reduction strategies, GARB directed staff to further evaluate early action recommendations made at the June 2007 meeting, and to report back to GARB within six months. Since the June 2007 GARB hearing, GARB staff has evaluated all 48 recommendations submitted by several stakeholder and several internally-generated staff ideas and published the Expanded List of Early Action Measures To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration in October 2007 (California Air Resources Board, September 2007a). Draft List of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in California Recommended for Board Consideration in October 2007b). Based on its additional analysis, GARB staff is recommending the expansion of the early action list to a total of 44 measures. Nine of the strategies meet the AB 32 definition of discrete early action measures. Discrete early action measures are measures that will be in place and enforceable by January 1, 2010. The discrete early action items include: (1) a Low Carbon Fuel standards for ethanol, biodiesel, hydrogen, electricity, compressed natural gas, liquefied petroleum gas and biogas; (2) restrictions on High Global Warming Potential Refrigerants; (3) Landfill Methane Capture, (4) Smartway Truck Efficiency; (5) Port Electrification; (6) Reduction of perfluorocarbons from the semiconductor industry; (7) Reduction of propellants in consumer products; (8) Tire inflation; and (9) Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 20 Sulfur HexaEluoride (SF6) reductions from non-electricity sector. The entire list of early action strategies is shown in Table 4. In total, the 44 recommended early actions have the potential to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 42 million metric tons per year of carbon dioxide equivalent (COze) emissions by 2020, representing about 25 percent of the estimated reductions needed by 2020 (California Air Resources Board Res. No.07-55 (Dec. 6, 2007), available at http://ww~v.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/19901eve1/arb res07- 55 1990 ghg level.pdf). The 44 measures are in the sectors of fuels, transportation, forestry, agriculture, education, energy efficiency, commercial, solid waste, cement, oil and gas, electricity, and fire suppression. The 2020 target reductions are currently estimated to be 174 million metric tons per year of COze emissions. (California Air Resources Board, October 2007, Expanded List of Early Action Measures To Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions In California Recommended For Board Consideration.) CARB has approved a 1990 emissions inventory and 2020 limit of 427 million metric tons per year of COze emissions (California Air Resources Board Res. No.07-55 (Dec. 6, 2007), available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventoryf 19901eve1/arb res07-55 1990 ghg level pdf). In addition to identifying early actions to reduce greenhouse gases, CARB has also developed mandatory greenhouse gas reporting regulations pursuant to requirements of AB 32. The regulations will require emissions reporting for classes of facilities that collectively account for 94 percent of the stationary source emissions in California, including cement plants, oil refineries, electric generating facilities/providers, co-generation facilities, hydrogen plants and other stationary combustion sources that emit more than 25,000 metric tons per year of COze emissions. (California Air Resources Board, December 6, 2007c, Proposed Regulation for the Mandatory Reporting of California Greenhouse Gas Emissions Pursuant to the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB 32), available at http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccei/reporting/GHGReportBoardSlidesl2_06_07.pdf (proposed regulations were approved by CARB on December 6, 2007).) Presumably, while individual facilities within these classes may not create significant greenhouse gas impacts, emissions from these types of facilities are likely to be cumulatively considerable. Likewise, facilities or projects not included among the classes required to report under CARB's mandatory reporting regulations are not expected to have cumulatively considerable greenhouse gas impacts. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 21 TABLE 4 RECOMMENDED AB32 GREENHOUSE GAS MEASURES TO BE INITIATED BY CARB BETWEEN 2007 AND 2012 ID ID # Sector Strategy Name #' Sector Strategy Name 1 Fuels Above Ground 23 Commercial SF~ reductions Storage Tanks from the non- electric sector 2 Transportation Diesel - Offroad 24 Transportation Tire inflation equipment (non- program a 'cultural 3 Forestry Forestry 25 Transportation Cool automobile protocol paints endorsement 4 Transportation Diesel -Port 26 Cement Cement (A): trucks Blended cements 5 Transportation Diesel -Vessel 27 Cement Cement (B): main engine fuel Energy efficiency specifications of California cement facilities 6 Transportation Diesel - 28 Transportation Ban on HFC Commercial release from harbor craft Motor Vehicle AC service / dismantlin 7 Transportation Green ports 29 Transportation Diesel - offroad equipment a 'cultural 8 Agriculture Manure 30 Transportation Add AC leak management tightness test and (methane repair to Smog digester Check rotocol 9 Education Local gov. 31 Agriculture Research on Greenhouse Gas GHG reductions (GHG) from nitrogen reduction land applications guidance / rotocols 10 Education Business GHG 32 Commercial Specifications for reduction commercial guidance / refrigeration rotocols 11 Energy Cool 33 Oil and Gas Reduction in Efficiency communities venting /leaks program from oil and gas s stems Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 22 ID ID # Sector Strategy Name # Sector Strategy Name 12 Commercial Reduce high 34 Transportation Requirement of Global Warming low-GWP GHGs Potential (GWP) for new Motor GHGs in Vehicle ACs roducts 13 Commercial Reduction of 35 Transportation Hybridization of PFCs from medium and semiconductor heavy-duty diesel Indus vehicles 14 Transportation SmartWay truck 36 Electricity Reduction of SF~ efficiency in electricity eneration 15 Transportation Low Carbon 37 Commercial High GWP Fuel Standard refrigerant (LCFS) tracking, reporting and recove ro am 16 Transportation Reduction of 38 Commercial Foam recovery / HFC-134a from destruction DIY Motor program Vehicle AC servicin 17 Waste Improved landfill 39 Fire Alternative gas capture Suppression suppressants in fire protection s stems 18 Fuels Gasoline 40 Transportation Strengthen light- dispenser hose duty vehicle re lacement standards 19 Fuels Portable 41 Transportation Truck stop outboard marine electrification tanks with incentives for truckers 20 Transportation Standards for 42 Transportation Diesel -Vessel off-rycle driving speed reductions conditions 21 Transportation Diesel - 43 Transportation Transportation Privately owned refrigeration - on-road trucks electric standb 22 Transportation Anti-idling 44 Agriculture Electrification of enforcement stationary agricultural en ~nes Source: CARf3, 2007 Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 23 The Climate Action Team (CAT), which was created and is chaired by the Secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaIEPA), has also issued a report to the Governor and the Legislature in response to Executive Order S-3-05(Climate Action Team, Climate Action Team Deport to Governor Schsvar~ene~ger and the Legislature (March 2006), available at http: / /www. climatechange. ca.gov/ climate_action_team/reports /2006-04- 03_FINAL_CAT_REPORT.PDF). The report proposes a number of strategies for public and private entities that are expected to contribute to compliance with the Governor's reduction goals. CAT has also issued specific early action measures intended to supplement the CARB measures (Climate Action Team, Climate Action Team Proposed Early Actions to Mitigate Climate Change in California (April 2007), available at http: //www.climatechange.ca.gov/climate_action_team/reports/2007-04-20_CAT_REPORT.PDF). The CAT measures, however, are still in draft form and have yet to be finalized, and are therefore not used in this report. Greenhouse Gas Significance Criteria At this time there are no statewide guidelines for greenhouse gas emission impacts, but this will be addressed through the provisions of Senate Bill 97 ("SB 97"), which was enacted in 2007. SB 97 requires the State Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to develop CEQA guidelines for the effects and mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, the guidelines will not be available for some time as OPR has until July 1, 2009 to draft the new greenhouse gas guidelines, and the State Resources Agency will thereafter have until January 1, 2010 to certify and adopt the regulations. In the interim, OPR, in collaboration with the California Resources Agency, the California Environmental Protection Agency and the California Air Resources Board, recently provided a new technical advisory containing informal guidance for public agencies as they address the issue of climate change in their CEQA documents. This technical advisory provides OPR's perspective on the issue and precedes the development of draft implementing regulations for CEQA, in accordance with Senate Bill 97 (Chapter 185, Statutes of 2007). In summary, OPR recommends each public agency that is a lead agency for complying with CEQA to develop its own approach to performing a climate change analysis for projects that generate GHG emissions. A consistent approach should be applied for the analysis of all such projects, and the analysis must be based on best available information. For these projects, compliance with CEQA entails three basic steps: • identify and quantify the GHG emissions; • assess the significance of the impact on climate change; and • if the impact is found to be significant, identify alternatives and/or mitigation measures that will reduce the impact below significance. Although, there is currently no adopted threshold for all City projects, for this analysis, a Project would be considered to have a significant impact if the project would conflict with or obstruct implementation of greenhouse gas reduction measures under AB 32 and other state regulations. Three types of analyses are used to determine whether the project could be in conflict with the State measures for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The analyses are as follows: A. Whether the project conflicts with or obstructs implementation of CARB's 44 early action strategies. B. Whether the project will be subject to CARB's mandatory reporting. Qualifying projects include cement plants, oil refineries, electric generating facilities/providers, co-generation facilities, hydrogen plants and other stationary combustion sources that emit more than 25,000 metric tons per year of COze emissions. Projects that are not included among these classes of facilities and Phase III Project Initial Study - 24 will not emit 25,000 metric tons per year of COze emissions or more are not required to report emissions to CARB and are not considered to be cumulatively considerable. C. Whether elements of the project, mitigation measures, and City policies and requirements contribute to the efficienry of the project and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Most projects include project components and/or mitigation measures that may not be intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, but will nonetheless have this effect. Similarly, many City policies and requirements, such as traffic demand management programs, may also operate to improve the efficiency and reduce emissions associated with the project. Item A. Greenhouse Ga.r. The Project does not pose any apparent conflict with the most recent list of the CARE early action strategies (see Table 4). As mentioned above, the 44 measures are in the sectors of fuels, transportation, forestry, agriculture, education, energy efficiency, commercial, solid waste, cement, oil and gas, electricity, and fire suppression. The Project is currently incorporating criteria from the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Green Building Rating System into the 2006 Project and would continue this practice to the 2008 Project. The LEED Rating System is a nationally recognized program that incorporates sustainable green building and development practices that lead to higher performing buildings and lower ozone depletion- and global warming-related emissions. The proposed criteria may include, but are not limited to, prohibiting the use of chlorofluorocarbons (CFC)-based refrigerants and using low volatile organic compound (VOC) glues, sealants, and paints. The project design team would include a LEED Accredited Professional to assist with identifying and incorporating additional sustainable green building and development practices best suited for the project. Implementation of these types of practices would be consistent with the energy efficiency- and commercial-related early action strategies. While the Project's emission impacts would be transportation-related, in the sense that they will be primarily produced by vehicle trips to and from the site, the Project is not a "transportation" project as described in the early action measures. Item B. Greenhouse Gas: The site is primarily undeveloped except for California Water Service Company pump station and associated piping and would involve grading and construction for the two office towers that would also contain a Product Design Studio, commercial space (restaurant and retail), a child care center, and a performing arts center. The Project is not the type of project that would be required to report emissions to CARB (i.e., the project is not a cement plant, oil refinery, electric generating facility/provider, co-generation facility, or hydrogen plant or other stationary combustion source that emits more than 25,000 metric tons per year of COZe emissions). Therefore, the specific emissions from this Project would not be expected to have a substantial impact on Global Climate Change. As shown in Table 5, project construction greenhouse gas emissions for the 2008 Project where the Product Design Studio is treated similar to a research and development land use would be approximately 496 metric tons per year of COze emissions and project operations would be approximately 13,194 metric tons per year of COze emissions (including emissions from vehicle trips, space heating and indirect emissions from the use of electricity). Operational emissions would therefore be significantly lower than the reporting limit, which is 25,000 metric tons per year of COZe emissions. Accordingly, the project would not be subject to CARB's mandatory reporting requirements. In addition, the net increase in COZe from the 2006 Project to the 2008 Project are 2 and 70 metric tons per year of COze emissions for construction- and operation-related emissions, respectively. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 25 TABLE 5: PROJECT RELATED GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Construction-Related Operation-Related Emissions Project Description Emissions (Metric Tons. of (Metric Tons of COze) COze 2006 Terraba Phase III 494 13,124 2008 Terrabay Phase III with 496 13,060 Product Design Studio as 100% Ancilla to Office S ace 2008 Terrabay Phase III with 496 13,194 Product Design Studio as Research and Develo ment S ace Net increase from 2006 to 2008 2 70 with Product Design Studio as Research and Development S ace worst-case scenario Source: Miller Environmental Consultants, 2008 Item C. Greenhouse Ga.r. The mixed-use design of the Project (office, product design studio, commercial retail/restaurant, child-care, and performing arts) has the potential to minimize greenhouse gas emissions related to transportation for both the employees and the patrons of the mixed uses. First, multiple amenities and services an employee or patron might use are now located in one area, which will reduce vehicle-miles- traveled. Second, the Project proposes a Transportation Demand Management Program designed to affect a 34 percent mode shift for employees, which will reduce vehicle-miles-traveled. As discussed in Item A above, the design of the Project also has the potential to minimize greenhouse gas emissions related to construction and operation of the building. The review of Items A, B, and C indicate that the Project would not conflict with the State goals in AB 32 and therefore this impact would be less than significant. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: None. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: The 2008 Project slightly increases the amount of greenhouse gases from those calculated for the 2006 Project but not by a substantial amount. This impact would be less than significant. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 26 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impart Impatt 4. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ^ ^ ^ b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? ^ ^ ^ c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? ^ ^ ^ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? ^ ^ ^ e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ^ ^ ^ ~ Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ^ ^ ^ Background The 1998/99 SEIR contains an evaluation of biological resources on the Project site. The 2000 Addendum, 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum updates the information. Section 4.3 Biology of the Terrabay 1998/99 Phase II and III Draft Supplemental EIR and Master Response 7.3-8 of the Terrabay 1998/99 Phase II and III Final Supplemental EIR are hereby incorporated by reference. The evaluation presented below is based on a Review of Biological Issues Initial Study for North Peninsula Playa Project South San Francisco, California (Environmental Collaborative 2005) for scoping of the 2005 SEIR. The 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum found that the biological impacts were similar to or less than the project impacts analyzed by the 1998/99 SEIR and 2000 Addendum. This analysis remains the same for the 2008 Project as the 2008 Project would not increase the development envelope and as such would not increase impacts on biological resources as discussed below. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 27 The 2008 Project would grade land that was previously graded as a part of the approved 2006 Project. The 2008 Project consists of the addition of floor area above the retail concourse analyzed and approved in the 2006 Project entitlements. Re-grading and removal of a retaining wall and extension of an existing retaining wall in an areas graded in 2007 would be required. The floor elevation of the Product Design Studio would be approximately 66 feet above mean sea level (which is about 16 feet higher than the Retail and Ground Floor Lobby Level of the North Tower). As a result, there would be approximately 4,000 cubic yards of cut at the existing berm (previously graded) and about 500 cubic yards of fill at the current generator area (BKF June 30, 2008) (See ASK-0001) . Site Retaining Wall No. 1 (a soil nail wall) comprising about 7,000 SF of vertical area would be lengthened in an area approved for development and previously graded. The analysis contained in the 2006 Addendum remains in force for the 2008 Project and the following discussion has been amended to incorporate the 2008 Project. There are no new mitigations or impacts, or any intensification of existing impacts Analysis a) The 2008 Project is the addition of a second floor in the central area of the approved Project site, and would not impact special status species due to its location. As noted in the 2006 Addendum, the 2006 Project would not result in new impacts to special status species beyond those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR. The area where special species habitat is located (larval host plant for the federally- endangered callippe silverspot butterfly) located on the Preservation Parcel. The Preservation Parcel was removed from any potential development impacts by its legal designation to open space during the 2000 Project entitlements. The Preservation Parcel was conveyed as open space to the County of San Mateo in 2004. Biological mapping of the Project site was conducted as part of the 1998/99 SEIR and subsequent mapping of the Project site has been conducted by West Coast Wildlands. No other special- status species have been found in the vicinity of the Project site. The 2008 Project would not impact special status species. Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 identified in the 1998/99 SEIR is implemented as a result of construction of the 2006 Project. The mitigation measure requires dust control, salvage and transplant of Monardella, posting signs along trails and vista points warning park users against illegal activities and required compliance with the landowner obligations identified by the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan with respect to the Project site. The redesign of Phase II and III as called for under Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 of the 1998/99 SEIR has been accomplished by the 2000 General, Precise and Specific Plan amendments, the 2006 Project design and the conveyance of habitat to the County as open space (the Preservation Parcel). As a result of the conveyance of the Preservation Parcel containing Johnny jumpup (Viola pedunculata) to the County for inclusion in San Bruno Mountain County/State Park no Viola pedunculataha.r has or will be disturbed. Installation of signage along trails and use of appropriate dust control measures is required as a standard condition of approval and is currently being implemented and monitored by the City. The provision in Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 for salvage of larval host plants for callippe silverspot no longer applies as all Johnny jump-up (Viola pedunculata) plants have been avoided. The Restoration Plan (required by Mitigation Measure Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR) includes a component to salvage and transplant other nectar plants (especially natives such as Monardella) that may be used for nectaring by adult callippe silverspot. Restoration and salvage activities were conducted by West Coast Wildlands and others in 2007 prior to grading on the Project site for the 2006 Project. The salvage effort was supervised by the City. The 2008 Project would not impact these efforts; nor would more salvage be required. Mitigation Measures 4.3-1(b) and 4.3-1 (c) from the 1998/99 SEIR 4Z J z 0 c~ a z w n. T N O O W U Y ~Q 'E m ~- ~~$ ~s ~Sd i U J J T C G. O „ U6 io ~ ~ U yy C E N ~, •m y o ~ C ~ u T ~ `~ c ~ ~ u °ina (n A ~ E O~ H cv .~ C ~ ~~ C~ U Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 29 also required the Restoration Plan to include a salvage component for other native plant material and use of existing fire trails for any new pedestrian trails linking the site with the open space lands of San Bruno Mountain. This effort was also completed in 2007 by West Coast Wildlands and others, as supervised by the City. The 2008 Project would not impact these efforts. A dust mitigation measure for Air Quality is identified in the 1998/99 and 2005 SEIR's and is required of the 2006 Project. The dust control mitigations would continue to apply for the 2008 Project. b) The 2008 Project would have no impact on the site design, avoidance and preservation measures and would continue to provide compliance with Mitigation Measures 4.3-1(a) from the 1998/99 SEIR. This mitigation required the avoidance of freshwater marsh and riparian habitat to the greatest extent possible. The 2006 Project was substantially revised (from that analyzed in 1998/99) to avoid freshwater marsh, seeps and riparian habitat in the northern portion of the Phase III site (now known as the Preservation Parcel). The 2006 Project take of 0.10 acres of an unvegetated intermittent stream is being mitigated as discussed below under c. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. c) The 2006 Project avoided the jurisdictional wetland habitat in the northern portion of the Phase III site evaluated in the 1998/99 SEIR. The 2006 Project conforms with the provisions of Mitigation Measures 4.3-3(a), 4.3-3(b) and 4.3-3(c) with respect to wetlands. A Wetland Mitigation Plan (WMP) was prepared by Wetland Research Associates (VURA) in 2000 (WRA 2000) to address the impacts of the City's Oyster Point Hook Ramp Project and development of the Terrabay Project site. The WMP serves to address the filling of 0.68 acres of wetlands to accommodate the widening of Airport Boulevard at the Hook Ramps (a City Project) and anticipated filling of 0.10 acres of unvegetated other waters to accommodate development of the Terrabay Project site, as noted in b, above. As defined in the WMP, identified impacts to jurisdictional waters are to be mitigated by creating, restoring and enhancing 1.82 acres of wetlands and portions of two drainage channels in the northern portion of the original Phase III site and removal of invasive exotics. The WMP is being implemented and monitored and by the Engineering Division of the City of South San Francisco and WRA. The 2008 Project would not impact any of these efforts. Therefore, the 2008 Project conforms with the provisions of Mitigation Measures 4.3-3(a), 4.3-3(b) and 4.3-3(c) with respect to wetlands. The required agency authorization was secured and re-authorized from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and California Department of Fish and Game to extend the wetland mitigations.3 The permit authorization from the Corps, CDFG and RWQCB remains in effect. The permit authorizations are attached to the 2006 Addendum. The wetland mitigations are continuing and are being monitored by WRA, as noted above. The 2008 Project would not impact any of these efforts or conditions. Implementation of a detailed erosion and sedimentation control plan was accomplished as part of the required Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for the 2006 Project and addresses the area of the 2008 Project. s This included re-securing authorization from CDFG, the Corps and RWQCB, if necessary. Reauthorization was received from the Corps July 31, 2005 and CDFG on September 22, 2005. This also included confirmation of the adequacy of the WMP in addressing the temporary loss of an estimated 500 square feet of potential wetlands affected by the 2006 Project driveway access improvements at Airport Boulevard. The Corps stated that this area does not constitute wetlands in a letter dated February 1, 2006 and that the existing plan is adequate. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 30 d) There were no significant impacts on wildlife habitat associated with the 2006 Project which is consistent with the conclusions from the 1998/99 SEIR. Additionally, the 2006 Project included a Migratory Bird Survey conducted in January 2007, as required by the City. The survey was conducted by Wetlands Research Associates. No Migratory Birds were found on the Project site. The survey was conducted prior to issuance of grading permits for the 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would not impact wildlife habitat or Migratory Birds as grading and vegetation removal was completed in 2007. e) The 2006 and the 2008 Project conforms to local plans and policies. f) The 2006 Project and the 2008 Project conform to the provisions of the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan. The restoration and enhancement efforts on the Preservation Parcel improved habitat values on this portion of the original Project site. Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 ensures that the Project sponsor fulfill the landowner/developer obligations identified in the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan. Ms. Autumn Meisel of Thomas Reid Associates reviewed the proposed Phase III 2006 Project limits and found them in compliance with the 1999 HCP Certification hearing Quly 12, 2006). The 2008 Project is clearly within those limits. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR -The dust control and trail signage portion of this mitigation measure is applicable to both the 2006 and 2008 Project. This mitigation measure is on-going for the 2006 Project and would continue to be required for the 2008 Project. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Mitigation Measure 4.3-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR applied to the 2006 Project which address landscape compatibility, a restoration plan and salvage plan. This mitigation measure is completed. Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR avoidance of habitat was accomplished by the creation and conveyance of the Preservation Parcel. This portion of Mitigation Measure 4.3-2 is complete. Mitigation Measure 4.3-3 from the 1998/99 SEIR which identifies avoiding wetlands take to the maximum extent feasible which has been accomplished with the creation and conveyance of the Preservation Parcel to the County containing wetlands and enhanced wetlands pursuant to an approved USACE Section 404 permit. The permit mitigates the loss of 0.10 acres of intermittent stream the only take of wetlands associated with the 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. This mitigation measure is completed. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in additional impacts over what was identified in the 1998/99 SEIR on biological resources. Moreover, as a result of clustering the Project, the 2006 Project impacts are considerably less than those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, as documented in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum. The majority of the wetlands on the Phase III site have been preserved, the viola has been preserved and wetlands have been enhanced. The requisite United States Army Corp of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game permits has been secured and the wetlands restoration is underway and being monitored by the City. These activities have been completed or implemented as apart of the 2006 Project. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Phase III Project Initial Study - 31 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incocpocated Impact Impart 5. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in X15064.5? ^ ^ ^ b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to X15064.5? ^ ^ ^ c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? ^ ^ ^ d) Disturb any human remains, including those ^ ^ ^ interred outside of formal cemeteries? Background Section 4.9 Archaeology of the Terrabay 1998/99Phase II and III Draft Supplemental EII~ and Master Responses 7.3-3, 7.3-4, 7.3-5, 7.3-6 and 7.3-7 of the Terrabay 1998/99 Phase II and III Final Supplemental EIR are hereby incorporated by reference. The evaluation presented below is based on a review of the 2005 Project site plan by Miley Holman, Archaeologist (Holman & Associates 2005) for the clustered Project leaving the Preservation Parcel in open space. The Preservation Parcel contains an archaeological site. The 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum restated that cultural impacts would be less- than-significant with mitigation. The mitigation included avoidance of the archaeological site and monitoring grading of the Buffer Parcel. Avoidance of the archaeological site was achieved by preserving it free from development in the Preservation Parcel. Potential unforeseen impacts associated with 2006 Project grading did not occur; Miley Holman, archaeologist supervised project grading and no cultural artifacts or remains were found outside the mapped area. This is documented as part of the mitigation monitoring conducted by the City. Mr. Holman was on the Project site overseeing grading activities in 2007. The 2008 Project would be construction of a Product Design Studio above ground floor retail; an area of grading that was reviewed and supervised by Miley Holman, archaeologist in 2007. The discussion below amends the 2006 discussion to include the 2008 Project. There are no 2008 Project impacts to cultural resources. Analysis a) There are no historic resources (as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines) located on the 2006 Project Site. The 2008 Project does not alter this finding. b) One prehistoric archaeological site identified as CA-SMa-40. CA-SMa-40 is adjacent to the 2006 Project site. CA-SMa-40 is within the Preservation Parcel. The Preservation Parcel was conveyed to the County for inclusion in San Bruno Mountain County/State Park in August 2004. Extensive study of this site has occurred since 1950. Beginning in 1988, comprehensive surface and subsurface archaeological investigations of CA-SMa-40 were conducted by Holman & Associates. The purpose of the subsurface archaeological testing was to assess the boundaries, condition, depositional integrity and research significance of the site. Holman & Associates determined CA-SMa-40 is approximately 2.2 acres in size. Extracted charcoal samples were tested and 18 radiocarbon dates Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 32 ranging from 5,155 to 460 years before the present were obtained, suggesting the site is one of the oldest documented bayside shellmounds in the Bay Area. The most abundant material present at the site was the remains of marine shellfish. Additional materials included those associated with cultural activities that typically would take place in a permanent settlement such as hearths, faunal remains other than shell, artifactual materials imported into the region and chronologically diagnostic artifacts and materials. The shellmound also contains human remains. While the number of human burials is unknown, the results of test excavations suggest that numerous prehistoric Native American burials are present and may be encountered in any portion of the deposit. Holman & Associates determined CA-SMa-40 is probably eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places. The 2006 Project completely avoided CA-SMa-40. The 2008 Project site would not alter this condition. The Preservation Parcel was conveyed to San Mateo County for inclusion in the San Bruno Mountain County Park. In addition, a Buffer Parcel containing about 2.7 acres is located south of the Preservation Parcel, and was required as further assurance to avoid disturbance to CA- SMa-40. Development on the Buffer Parcel is limited to roads, surface parking and an informational kiosk. Miley Holman supervised the grading of the Buffer Parcel in 2007, as required by the 2006 Addendum and the 1998/99 SEIR. No archaeological remains were found beyond the mapped area of CA-SMa-40. There were no impacts to archaeological resources as a result of the 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. c) There are no unique paleontological resources or sites or unique geologic features located on the 2006 Project Site. The 2008 Project does not alter these conditions. d) As discussed in Item 5b above, CA-SMa-40 contains Native American burials. The 2006 Project specific plan and site plan avoided CA-SMa-40. This implemented Mitigation Measure 4.9-1(b) identified in the Terrabay Phase II and III Draft Supplemental DEIR. Miley Holman was on site during excavation to monitor activities. As a result of the incorporation of Mitigation Measure 4.9-1(b) into the Project site plan, potential impacts to Native American burials was reduced to a less than significant impact (Holman 2005). The 2008 Project would not result in an impact. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measures 4.9-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR is implemented by the preservation of CA-SMA-40 on the Preservation Parcel and its conveyance to the County for inclusion in San Bruno Mountain County and State Park as open space in perpetuity. There is no impact to CA-SMA-92 off the 2006 Project site and on County land as there is no development on the Preservation Parcel and no trails connecting the two historic resources. The mitigation measure has been completed by creation and conveyance of the Preservation Parcel in 2004. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Mitigation Measure 4.9-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR as there are no archaeological resources on the 2006 or 2008 Project site. Mitigation Measure 4.9-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR as there are no archaeological resources and as such no indirect impacts between CA-SMA 40 and 92 on the 2006 or the 2008 Project site. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 33 Finding: The 2008 Project would be located above ground floor retail in an area graded in 2007, and in the center of the Development Parcel. The 2006 Project did not result in any impacts to archaeological, cultural or historical resources. Miley Holman, archaeologist was on the Project site during grading of the Buffer Parcel, as required by the 1998/99 SEIR and the MMRP. No archaeological or historic remnants were found. No burials or artifacts were discovered. Grading and development in archaeological sensitive areas was completely avoided. No additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 6. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a know fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ^ ^ ® ^ ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ^ ^ ® ^ iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ^ ^ ® ^ iv) Landslides? ^ ^ ® ^ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ^ ^ ® ^ c) Be located on a geologic unit of soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? ^ ^ ® ^ d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? ^ ^ ® ^ e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? ^ ^ ^ Background The geotechnical environment has not changed since the 2006 Project and Addendum. The 2008 Project consists of the addition of floor area above the retail concourse analyzed and approved in the 2006 Project. Re-grading and removal of a retaining wall and extension of an existing retaining wall in an area Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 34 graded in 2007 would be required (See ASK-0001, 009 Current Site Plan Building Level 2 and 010 Site Plan with Product Design Studio). The floor elevation of the Product Design Studio would be approximately 66 feet above mean sea level. There would be approximately 4,000 cubic yards of cut at the existing berm and about 500 cubic yards of fill at the current generator area. Site Retaining Wall No. 1 (a soil nail wall) comprising about 7000 square feet of vertical area would be extended. The geotechnical mitigation measures identified in the 2006 NI1~~P are being implemented in construction of the 2006 Project and would continue to be implemented for the 2008 Project. The implementation is supervised by Cotton Shires, Associates, the City's consulting geologists. Previous Studies Section 4.1 Geology, Soils and Seismicity of the Terrabay 1998/99 Phase II and III Draft Supplemental EIR are hereby incorporated by reference. Subsequent to the 1998/99 SEIR, a geotechnical investigation program was conducted by URS Corporation for the Terrabay Phase III development (URS 2001 a). The geotechnical investigation program included the following elements: geologic mapping of lithologic units, geomorphology, and structures (bedding and joint orientations); three joint surveys; 36 test borings; 20 test pits; 7 seismic refraction lines; 11 downhole velocity surveys; 9 piezometers; and 7 inclinometers. The investigation also included 10 geologic/geotechnical cross sections through representative portions of the previously proposed project as well as the results of a laboratory testing program to characterize the engineering properties of soil and rock units. The field investigation and laboratory testing program served as the basis for engineering analyses, the results of which were submitted in a second geotechnical report (URS 2001b). Additional field exploration, laboratory testing and engineering analysis have been conducted to provide geotechnical recommendations appropriate for the 2006 Project. This work is required by the City and is peer reviewed by the Engineering Division and Cotton Shires, Associates, consulting geologists. The 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum found that geology and soils impacts to be similar to or less than the project impacts analyzed by the 1998/99 SEIR. The 1998/99 SEIR, based upon 20 years of field analysis and implementing and monitoring mitigation measures in Terrabay Phase I, identified a list of mitigations for each geological condition facing the site; therefore, minor refinements to the mitigations are all that was required for the 2006 Project. The same conditions and mitigation measures would apply to the 2008 Project. The topography of the Project has been modified as a result of grading and construction of the approved 2006 Project. The bedrock type is predominantly Franciscan sandstone overlain by man-made fill, debris slides, colluvial and alluvial deposits. The Project site is subject to landslides, debris slides, rockslides and rock falls. . ~ ~ 4 R / 2 I i ° x \ \ ~ ~ o~ + • ~' _ ~ ICI 0 0 ' ~ ~ III, ~ oo~ ~ a~l 0o'I \ o ~g~g I li ~9 E, m ~9c~ o o ~~ ~ ,~ 00~ ~ ~ e~ ~ ~ - - oa ~_ o o - ,' ~ ~ ~~ __. 0 ~oo~ rnD~Q 00' / /~ g /~' ~ a ~- ~, ~~~ ~ ~ ~ a~ ~~ >~ ~, ~a ~g ~~~ C a .. ~~ti a~ ~, ~~ v o ..~ ~, ___ N N J o W Q 'W J ~' i ~ IZ '~O m ~~ J Z {~ r ~ ll i~ i I M o0 o ,~ _ 7 L ~o N I Yx ' ~ ~I~~ ^ ~'~ I..L I J4~.., t 'r' 4' ~'~. ~~ v J o o ~ N ', ' U I'i i I, ` I .~ :~ ~ ~~., ,,, ~~ •~ay I I r°~ O '' o O 0 N 0 Z ^ (n ^ Z N' O Q m m s a~ cn O ~i i* ~f ` ~ '. ~ ~ ~ r ~ . ~ J r i J ~ '. ~ ~ 'C ~ ';a ~ ~ O ~ O ~ !, U ~ ~ _~ ~ U ~U ,;. C z ~ ~~ o ~ ~ ~~~~ C~` z~ o~ ~~ w ~ ~~ f U ~ _ ~ Cn Cn C/) J Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 36 FIGURE 010 Terrabay Phase III Project Analysis Initial Studv - 37 a) No known active faults are located within the entirety of the Terrabay site. Four active faults in the region include the: San Andreas fault, located approximately three miles southwest; San Gregorio, fault about ten miles southwest; Hayward fault about 15 miles northeast; and the Calaveras fault about 27 miles northeast. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the probability of an earthquake of at least magnitude 6.7 along the San Francisco Peninsula segments of the San Andreas fault zone is estimated to be 15 percent over the 30-year period from 2000 to 2030 (U.S. Geological Survey 1999). Two inactive faults located close to the Phase III Project site include the San Bruno fault zone located about 1.5 miles southwest of the site and the Hillside fault which trends in awest-northwesterly direction approximately 1,000 feet west of the intersection between Airport Boulevard and Sister Cities Drive. A rock slope stability analysis was conducted for the 2006 Project site, consistent with Mitigation Measure 4.1-4 (a) in the 1998/99 SEIR to identify slope stability conditions at the 2006 Project site. Based on the rock slope stability analysis, the following measures were incorporated into the 2006 Project: Grade flatter slopes with benches, drainage ditches and access for maintenance; Install rock anchors; Install subdrains; Revegetate slopes; Install slope monitoring instrumentation; Locate fences below rock outcrops and above cut slopes; and Scale off loose rocks. These measures are listed in Mitigation Measure 4.1-(a) and reduce potential rockslide and rockfall impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures have been or are in the process of being installed as a part of the overall site work associated with the approved grading plan. Cotton Shires Associates is monitoring the installation work. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions. The 2006 Project was required to implement Mitigation Measure 4.1-4(b) to include a Slope Maintenance Plan in the CC&R's. The CC&Rs require that the Project's Property Owners Association retain the services of a licensed geotechnical engineer or geologist to maintain and inspect of the geotechnical mitigations. The City has reviewed and approved the Slope Maintenance Plan and has reviewed and made final comments of the CC&R's. This requirement would not be affected or altered by the 2008 Project. The 2006 Project implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.1-4(a) and 4.1-4(b) in the 1998/99 SEIR reduces rockslide and rockfall impacts that could occur as a result of seismic activity to a less than significant level. Implementation of 1998/99 SEIR Mitigation Measure 4.1-6, which requires a slope stability analysis on representative slopes to assess Project seismic loading and groundwater conditions. This analysis was completed for the 2006 Project as envisioned in the 1998/99 SEIR. The following measures were incorporated into the 2006 Project design including: Place keyways for fills through soft soils; Grade flatter slopes with benches, Install rock anchors; Install subdrains; Install retaining walls to minimize fill over sensitive areas; Design buildings in conformance with UBC Zone 4 and City standards; and, Remove rockfalls or encapsulate or fence them. These measures are listed in Mitigation Measure 4.1- 6 and reduce potential impacts from seismically induced landsliding and rocksliding impacts to a less than significant level. Again, these measures have been or are in the process of being installed as a part of the overall site work associated with the approved grading plan. Cotton Shires Associates is monitoring the installation work. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions. The surficial soil deposits at the 2006 Project site, as well as the 2008 Project, consist of very dense colluvium and alluvial fan deposits, which contain significant amounts of fines. These deposits are generally not susceptible to liquefaction. Therefore, the potential for liquefaction at the site is considered very low (URS 2001b). The 2008 Project would not affect these conditions. Landslides and debris slides are present within and above the 2006 Project site. Mitigation Measure 4.1- 3(a) in the 1998/99 SEIR has been implemented. The mitigation measures include construction of a debris basin, installation of deflection structures, perimeter drainage, retaining walls and monitoring equipment. Additionally, Mitigation Measure 4.1-3(b) required a Slope Maintenance Plan (see discussion Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 38 above) that provides for ongoing monitoring and maintenance of engineered slopes, perimeter drainage, debris slide retention and deflection structures. Implementation of Mitigation Measures 4.1-3(a) and (b) has reduced potential impacts from movements of debris flow slides to a less than significant level. The 2008 Project would not affect these conditions. Rockfall and rockslide fences are currently being installed pursuant to Mitigation Measure 4.1-4(a) and 4.1-4(b) (see above) reduce rockslide and rockfall impacts to a less than significant level. These mitigation measures would not be changed as a result to the 2008 Project. No additional mitigation measures are required as a result of the 2008 Project. b) The 2006 Project resulted in a reduced area of cut slopes from the previous Phase III development plan, slope stability problems and the potential for erosion remain high. Mitigation Measures 4.1-2(a) 4.1- 2(b) and 4.1-2(c) in the 1998/99 SEIR required the 2006 Project grading plan to maximize slope stability, install appropriately designed retaining walls, install perimeter type A -ditches, regulate the steepness of grade slopes (bedrock graded no greater than 1.5:1 and in soil 2:1), install subsurface drains, install slope and groundwater monitoring instruments and winterize exposed slopes and graded pads. This mitigation measures are being implemented as part of the approved grading plan, and have reduced erosion impacts to a less than significant level. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions. c) The Project site is not considered susceptible to liquefaction therefore the risk of lateral spreading is considered very low (URS 2001). The site contains landslides which could adversely affect Project development, see Item 6a above. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.1-3(a) in the 1998/99 SEIR requires measures to mitigate active slide areas and cuts into active slides. These measures include, and are a part of the approved grading plan, removing material, buttressing and building retaining walls. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.1-3(b), requiring the CC&Rs for the Property Owners Association to establish and fund a Slope Maintenance Plan to provide for the monitoring and maintenance of engineered slopes, perimeter drainage, debris slide retention and deflection structures has been implemented as noted in a, above. Potential Project landslide impacts were reduced to a less than significant level as a result of implementation of these mitigation measures. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions. d) 2006 Project development would be and is primarily constructed on rock except for small areas where foundations would be constructed over alluvial fan deposits. Alluvial fan deposits are very dense. Estimated settlement would be low. Implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.1-5(a) in the 1998/99 SEIR requires design techniques to mitigate differential settlement which reduces potential damage to structures, roadways and utilities to a less than significant level. Mitigation Measure 4.1-5(a) lists a number of measures that can be and have been incorporated into the 2006 Project design including: Over- excavating cuts to provided benches in the fill; Surcharge fill with excess material to accelerate settlement; Postpone development of areas most sensitive to settlement for a construction season; Monitor rate of settlement and delay development until the rate of movement is within acceptable limits of the engineered structures; and Place structures on deep pier foundations. The 2006 Project avoided the archaeological site which is contained in the Preservation Parcel. Therefore, two of the approaches identified by this mitigation are no longer applicable: "Fill over the archaeological site shall be placed on a scarified or benched surface" and "Construction activity on the archaeological site shall be limited to small construction equipment". The geotechnical mitigations are a part of the approved grading plan and are continually being refined as site work progresses. The work is being monitored by Cotton Shire Associates. The 2008 Project would not affect or alter these conditions. e) The Project is connected to the city sewer system. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 39 Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 4.1.1 from the 1998/99 SEIR shall apply to the 2008 Project which stipulates that all grading shall be in conformance with the Agreement with Respect to San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Plan. This mitigation also requires state and federal agency permitting prior to grading. The 2006 Project is in compliance with this requirement. This mitigation measure is currently being implemented and would continue to be implemented for the 2008 Project. Mitigation Measure 4.1-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR shall apply to the 2008 project which stipulates maximum slope grades, benches and drainage and slope engineering design to insure slope stability and minimize erosion. This mitigation measure is currently being implemented and would continue to be implemented for the 2008 Project. Mitigation Measure 4.1-3 from the 1998/99 SEIR apples to the 2006 and 2008 Project requiring measures to mitigate active slide areas and to mitigate cuts into active slides include removing material, buttressing and building retaining walls. Additionally, implementation of this mitigation measure requires that the CC&Rs for the Property Owners Association establish and fund a Slope Maintenance Plan which shall provide for the monitoring and maintenance of engineered slopes, perimeter drainage, debris slide retention and deflection structures. This mitigation measure is currently being implemented and would continue to be implemented for the 2008 Project although the Slope Maintenance Plan is an approved document. Mitigation Measure 4.1-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR applies to the 2006 and 2008 Project which requires rockslide and rockfall mitigations including such measures as flatter slopes with benches, rock anchors, subdrains, revegetation, slope monitoring instrumentation, sealing off loose rocks, netting and encapsulating rocks, fencing rocks, annual inspection of outcrops prior to the rainy season, slope maintenance plans and implementation of the plans through the CC&R's for the property. This mitigation measure is currently being implemented and would continue to be implemented for the 2008 Pro' ect. Mitigation Measure 4.1-6 from the 1998/99 SEIR applies to the Project which addresses the secondary effects of seismic shaking. This mitigation measure is currently being implemented and would continue to be implemented for the Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Mitigation Measure 4.1-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR Artificial fill over CA-SMA-40. No fill would be placed over CA-SMA-40. Mitigation Measure 4.1-7 from the 1998/99 SEIR Hook Ramp Mitigations. The City sponsored hook ramp project is complete and the mitigation was incorporated. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to geology and soils from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and as restated in the 2005 SEIR. The 2006 Project resulted in less site disturbance than analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. The 2008 Project would not affect these conditions. The geotechnical mitigations required in the MMRP are being implemented and Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 40 monitored by Cotton Shires Associates and the same mitigations would be applicable to the 2008 Project. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated 7. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project involve: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) 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? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? ~ Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? g) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Analysis ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Less Than Significant No Impact Impact ® ^ a) The 2006 Project site was found not to contain toxic or hazardous materials (PHASE ONE, Inc 2003). The Project would not transport, use or dispose of any hazardous materials notwithstanding Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 41 typical construction activities where equipment is used requiring various types of fuel. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. b) The Project is office and commercial uses which are land uses not associated with the use or release of hazardous materials into the environment. c) The nearest school, Martin School, is located about 0.75 miles from the Project site. See Items 7a and 7b above. d) The Project site is not included on the Department of Toxic Substance Control's site clean up list (DTSC 2004) as per Government Code Section 65962.5. e) San Francisco International Airport is located approximately two miles from the site. The General Plan designates airport-related height limits consistent with the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Plan. The Project site has a height limit of 360 feet and exceptions to the height limit may be granted by the Federal Aviation Administration. (City of South San Francisco General Plan 1999). f)The Project is not within the immediate vicinity of any private airports and would not present a safety hazard for people working at the 2006 Project. g) Development of the Project would not interfere with any adopted emergency response plans. The South San Francisco Fire Department reviewed the plans and requested the emergenry vehicle access and turn around on the buffer parcel which was incorporated into the 2006 Project. The Fire Marshal reviewed the2008 Project Quly 1, 2008) and did not identify any impacts associated with the 2008 Project. The 2006 project incorporates this request. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. h) The General Plan identifies the Project site as a "Low Priority Fire Hazard Management Unit" (City of South San Francisco General Plan 1999). The 2008 Project does not alter these conditions. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: None required. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Mitigation Measure 4.8-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR Aerially deposited lead applied to the hook ramp project and the requisite field work and analysis was conducted as apart of the City's Oyster Point Flyover transportation improvements. Mitigation Measure 4.8-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR from the effect of EMF on future residents applied to the Commons neighborhood proposed in the 1998/99 Project. The Commons parcel is now designated open space/recreation and is not a part of the 2008 Project. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to hazards from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, 2005 SEIR or its 2006 Addendum. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 42 Potentially Significant Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Less Than Significant No Impact Incotpotated Impact Impact 1. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? ^ ^ ^ b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table (e.g., the production rate ofpre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted?) ^ ^ ® ^ c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? ^ ^ ® ^ d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site? ^ ^ ^ e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ^ ^ ® ^ f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ^ ^ ® ^ g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? ^ ^ ^ h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? ^ ^ ^ i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? ^ ^ ^ j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ^ ^ ® ^ Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 43 Background Section 4.2 Hydrology and Drainage of the 1998/99 SEIR and the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum is hereby incorporated by reference. Analysis a) The 2006 Project did not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. A SWPP and compliance with the NPDES C-3 provisions was implemented and is being monitored by the City. The 2008 Project would be a part of the approved SWPP. b) The 2006 Project development resulted in a reduction of development area by approximately 75 percent over that analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. The pervious area increased groundwater recharge at the 2006 Project site from that analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. This condition is discussed in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum. The addition of a Product Design Studio above the North Tower retail extending back to a retaining wall resulting in the removal of pavers and approximately 8,000 of landscaping is not a significant increase in non-pervious area. The 2008 Project would result in a less- than-significant impact. c) As a result of the 2006 Project, a portion of an intermittent drainage upslope of the building was filled and the loss of jurisdictional waters is being mitigated as discussed in the Biology section of this document. Storm water runoff is collected into a pipe system that conveys storm water to the existing storm drain facilities in Airport Boulevard. The 2006 Project constructed the debris basin to accommodate entrained sediments and rocky debris. Mitigation Measures 4.2-11 from the 1998/99 SEIR is fulfilled as a result of the 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would not alter site conditions with respect to drainage patterns. d) The amount of surface runoff from the 2006 Project was substantially reduced from that analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. The 2006 Project reduced the potential for flooding at the Project site. See Items 8c, 8g and 8h. The 2008 Project would not alter site conditions with respect to surface runoff and flooding. e) The 2006 Project resulted in a reduction of storm water runoff compared to the previous development plans. 2006 Project-related storm water runoff was also evaluated in the 2005 SEIR. The City Engineer conducted the analysis required by Mitigation Measure a 3.4-8 from the 2005 SEIR and found that there is adequate capacity for Terrabay Phase III and cumulative development in the existing storm drain infrastructure. The City Engineering Division reviewed the 2008 Project Qune 30, 2008) and identified no impacts or additional conditions of approval that would be required over those in force currently as a result of the 2006 Project approval. The 2008 Project would not alter these existing conditions. f) The 2008 Project would be a part of the approved 2006 Storm Water Pollution Plan incompliance with NPDES C-3 standards. Erosion control and other measures are in place to minimize potential impacts to water quality. The 2008 Project would not alter site conditions and would not result in a degradation of water quality. g) The Project site is not within a 100-year flood zone (City of South San Francisco General Plan 1999/FIRM Map 065 062 002 B, September 2, 1981). The Project site conveys storm water runoff into a pipe and straw bale system (straw bales are used during construction in certain areas) that connects to the storm water facilities located in Airport Boulevard. The construction of the storm water facilities in Airport Boulevard was mitigation for the development of Terrabay as a whole, and was constructed by the Project proponent. These facilities were designed for a greater capacity than the Terrabay Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 44 development as a whole including the 2006 Project and the proposed 2008 Project. (For reference to this, refer to the development scenarios identified in the introduction section of this document). The 2006 Project design eliminated the need for a storm drain link as identified in 1998/99 SEIR Mitigation Measure 4.2-4. The 2008 Project would not alter site conditions mitigated and approved in the 2006 Project. h) The Project site did not and would not locate any structures within a 100-year flood hazard area and did not impede or redirect any flood flows (FIRM Map 065 062 002 B, September 2, 1981). The 2008 Project would not alter site conditions and would not emplace structures within a 100-year flood zone as stated in the 2006 Addendum. i) The Project site is not within the flood path of any levees or dams. See Items 8g and 8h above. j) The Project site is approximately 4.5 miles from the Pacific Ocean and about one-quarter mile from San Francisco Bay. The potential for inundation as a result of tsunami, seiche, or mudflow is considered low. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 4.2-11 from the 1998/99 SEIR refers to debris basins that are required on the Phase III Terrabay parcel. The debris basin was installed as part of the 2006 Project. This mitigation measure is not entirely completed as the 2006 Project is not at the certificate of occupancy stage, and there are portions elements of the surrounding slope analysis and remediation that are currently being conducted and emplaced. The 2008 Project is would be included in this mitigation measure. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Miti~atiorr Measure 4.2-1 from the 19998/99 SEIR storm water and flooding applies to the design of Phase II and does not apply to Phase III. Mitigation Measure 4.2-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR storm water drainage and flooding impact relates to Phase II and does not apply to Phase III. Mitigation Measure 4.2-3 from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to a storm water impact on the Commons parcel in Phase II and does not apply to Phase III. Mitigation Measure 4.2~ from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to the design analyzed in the 1998 Project (not approved or constructed) analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. Mitigation Measure 4.2-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to the completed City sponsored hook ramp project. The project is complete and the mitigations have been implemented. Mitigation Measurr 4.2-6 from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to erosion and sedimentation based upon the 1998 project (not approved or constructed) and does not apply to the Project. Mitigation Measure 4.2-7 from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to the Phase II Woods Project, not the Phase III Project. The mitigation measure is incorporated into the completed project. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 45 Mitigation Measure 4.2-8 from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to the Phase II Commons parcel. The Commons is now the "Recreation and Open space" parcel. The sedimentation basin has been improved and abandoned roads have been re-vegetated. Mitigation Measure 4.2-9 from the 1998/99 SEIR relates to the Phase II Pointe neighborhood which has been constructed and the mitigation measure is implemented. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to hydrology from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum. The Ciry did re- evaluate storm water/waste water and as noted by the City Engineer adequate capacity does exist in the existing infrastructure for the Project and cumulative development. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Potentially SigniFcant Potenially Unless Less Than Sign cant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 9. LAND USE PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ^ ^ ^ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the 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? ^ ^ ^ c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? ^ ^ ^ Analysis a) The 2008 Project would be a part of the 2006 Project which is the third and final phase of the development of Terrabay. The Project is a part of this planned community and would not divide an established community. b) The 2008 Project would require minor text amendments to the Terrabay Specific Plan and the Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District to accommodate the addition and definition of a Product Design Studio within the approved Terrabay 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would be regulated by the Transportation Demand Management Program that is in compliance with Chapters 20.115 and 20.120 of the Municipal Code which also serves to reduce traffic and green house gas emissions. The 2008 Project would not conflict with a plan or policy or zoning established to protect the environment. c) The Project is consistent with the San Bruno Mountain Habitat Conservation Pln. See Section 4 Biological Resources, Item 4f. Additionally, CC&Rs are required and have been prepared as part of the Project. The CC&Rs language and enforcement mechanisms for HCP compliance including the payment of HCP fees, prohibition of pesticide use in certain areas, maintenance of a fire break and exotic weed control. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 46 Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: None required. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: There are no land use impacts associated with the 2008 Project. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incoiponted Impact Impact 10. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? ^ ^ ^ b) Result in the loss of availability of alocally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? ^ ^ ^ Analysis a) The Project site does not contain any known mineral resources that would be of value to the region or state (City of South San Francisco general Plan 1999). b) The Project site is not delineated as an area of locally-important mineral resources under the General Plan (City of South San Francisco General Plan 1999). Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: None required. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: There are no mineral resources on the Project site and therefore there are no mineral resource impacts associated with the 2008 Project. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 47 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Sign cant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 11. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan, specific plan, noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? ^ ^ ® ^ b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ^ ^ ® ^ c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ^ ^ ® ^ d) r1 substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? ^ ^ ® ^ e) Fox a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ^ ^ ® ^ ~ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? ^ ^ ^ Analysis a, b, c and d) The dominant source of noise in the Project area is traffic from U.S. 101 and aircraft flyovers from San Francisco International Airport. The Project fronts Airport Boulevard and U.S. 101. The 2005 SEIR analyzed noise on a mixed use project that included 24/7 land uses inclusive of noise sensitive residential uses. The 2005 Project also proposed construction and land uses located on the point within approximately 200 feet of residential land uses. The 2006 Project clustered development in the northern portion of the Development Parcel approximately 900 feet from residential land uses. The 2006 Project did not include residential land uses. The 2008 Project does not alter these conditions. The 2006 Project is currently under construction. City mitigation monitors have been on site to insure that the noise mitigation measures identified in the 2006 Addendum and MMRP are in place. To date, no complaints have been received with respect to construction noise impacts. The 2008 Project would be an incremental addition to the construction currently underway, and the same mitigation measures would apply to the 2008 Project, although in and of itself, the 2008 Project construction would be considered less than significant. Terrabay Phase III Temporary Construction Impacts Initial Study - 48 Pile driving and blasting were not needed for 2006 Project construction and they will not be required for the 2008 Project. Grading, concrete work and pneumatic equipment is underway of the Project site. Although construction activity may on occasion be audible to nearby residential land uses no complaints have been received during the 2006 Project. In all likelihood the majority of construction noise is muffled by the traffic from the freeway. Additionally, Project construction is approximately 900 feet from the nearest sensitive receptor. Mitigation Measure 3.3-1 from the 2005 SEIR which restates Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR would applies to the 2006 Project and would apply to the 2008 Project. The mitigation measures require construction scheduling and limits hours of construction activity, muffling and shielding of equipment, stipulates location of equipment (furthest from residential uses) and equipment idling prohibitions to reduce temporary noise impacts. The mitigations also require "Disturbance Coordinator" which in practice on Terrabay Phase I and II has been entitled a "Mitigation Monitor". The Monitor has ensured and continues to ensure that all mitigations are adhered to, inspects the site and reports on compliance to various departments, agencies and officials and has the authority to recommend to the Building Division to red tag construction should mitigations not be in place. Operational and Cumulative Impacts The 2005 SEIR analyzed increases to ambient noise levels based upon a substantially more intense Project than the 2006 Project. The 2005 SEIR found that traffic related to the 2005 Project would increase the ambient noise levels by one db in the year 2020. A one db increase is not perceptible to the human ear and not considered an impact. Typically, a five db is considered a significant impact. A doubling of traffic volumes is required in order to increase the noise environment by three decibels. The 2008 Project would potentially increase traffic to the site by 54 round trip trips, less than one percent of the total traffic for Terrabay Phase III (see the Traffic section of this document). The 2008 Project noise levels are not substantial and would be considered less than significant. No cumulative noise impacts were identified resulting from the 2006 Project. The 1998/99 SEIR, based upon measurements and modeling, did not identify an increase in ambient noise levels associated with the 1998 Project and cumulative development. The 2008 Project would be a less than significant impact. No additional mitigation is needed or required. Impacts to Occupants The project site is within a 74 - 78 dBA, CNEL contour. A design level acoustical analysis was required, as a matter of law, for the 2006 Project. The 2008 Project is also required to conduct and implement a design level acoustical analysis. The recommendations of the analysis include construction measures to reduce interior ambient noise levels for the users of the Project facilities. The 2008 Project would not change these requirements or conditions. e and f) The Project site is within two miles of San Francisco International Airport. There are no private airstrips in the Project vicinity. The Project site is not within the current Airport Land Use Commission (CCAG) Airport Influence Area (AIA) boundary for the San Francisco International Airport. (General Plan, 1999). Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 49 Mitigation Measure 3.3-1 from the 2005 SEIR which restates Mitigation Measure 4.6-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR relating to temporary construction impacts. Mitigations are in place and on-going for the 2006 Project and would extend to the 2008 Project. Mitigation Measure 3.3-2 from the 2005 SEIR requiring disclosure of the location of the airport on CC&R's for the Project. This disclosure is included in the CC&R's for the 2006 Project and the same CC&R's would apply to the 2008 Project. This mitigation measure is complete. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2006 Project: Mitigation Measure 3.3-3 from the 2005 SEIR which requires the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.6-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR to the residential uses proposed in the 2005 Project. Residential land uses are not proposed as a part of the 2006 Project. Mitigation Measure 3.3-4 from the 2005 SEIR -Pertaining to noise from mechanical equipment. The 2006 Project would not impact residential land uses as none are proposed. The Design Review Board required shielding of mechanical equipment, as does a standard condition of approval. The City's Municipal Code restricts the level of noise generating from mechanical equipment to 55 DBA at the property line. Finding: The 2008 Project would add 54 trips to the Project site which would not result in any new or substantially increased impacts with respect to noise from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated impact Impact 12. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and business) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? ^ ^ ^ b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ^ ^ ^ c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ^ ^ ^ Terrabay Phase III Project Analysis Initial Studv - 50 a) The Project does not require or include the extension of roads and other infrastructure. The 2008 Project would be a part of the third and final phase of Terrabay. The Terrabay Project has provided housing, constructed a recreation center in Phase I and a fire station in Phase I a sound wall, donated open space, paid child care fees and developed project-specific and area-wide and regional infrastructure, and has been planned since the 1980's. The 2008 Project is the addition of a support use to the approved office towers on the site. b) The 2008 Project would not displace any housing as there is no housing nor has there ever been any housing on the Project site. c) The 2008 Project site would not displace any people. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: None. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to population and housing nor did the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, 2005 SEIR or the 2006 Addendum identify any impacts associated with population and housing. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project and none have been required as a part of the previous environmental review. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mirigarion Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 13. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered government facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? b) Police protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? e) Other public facilities? Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 51 Analysis a) The South San Francisco Fire Marshall, Luis Da Silva, evaluated the 2008 Project and identified specific Project requirements that will be imposed as conditions of project approval. No new environmental impacts pertaining to the 2008 Project were identified Quly 7, 2008). b) The South San Francisco Police Department evaluated the Project. Mitigation Measure 4.7-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR would be required for the 2008 Project. The mitigation requires the funding of one new police position. Additionally, Mitigation Measure 4.7-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR requires the installation of relay equipment to facilitate police and fire communications. The communications equipment was provided as a part of the 2006 Project. Cumulative development for police and fire requires the implementation of Mitigation Measure 4.7-6 from the 1998/99 SEIR which carries over the 1996 SEIR and 1982 EIR requirements to fully fund a separate new fully-funded staff (1982 EIR) consisting of three police officers and one new patrol vehicle (1996 SEIR). The addition of 15,000 square feet of ancillary use to the Project does not alter this requirement. c) The 2005 SEIR analyzed school impacts on a more intense and mixed-use project and found that there would be no impact to schools. The state required school impact fees required to be paid prior to issuance of building permits adequately addressed the land plan. The 2008 Project would not alter this finding. School impact fees would be assessed and paid on the addition of the 2008 Project. d) The Terrabay Project constructed a recreation center in Phase I (Terrabay Recreation Center). The Terrabay Project has or is in the process of dedicating over 400 acres for open space and recreational use including the Preservation Parcel (26 acres), the Recreation Parcel (6.3 acres) and Juncus Ravine and remaining parcels (400 acres). The addition of a Product Design Studio would not have nay substnaital adverse impact on existing park and recreation facilities. Accordingly, impacts to existing parks and recreation facilities are considered to be insignificant. e) There are no other public facilities affected. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 3.10-6 from the 2005 SEIR addressing mitigations for wildland fire which was included as a condition of 2006 Project approval. The fire buffer area has increased from 50 to 100 feet from project structures. The fire buffer is in place around the perimeter of the Project. This mitigation measure is complete. Mitigation Measure 4.7-2 from the 1998/99 SEIR requires the funding of one new police position is required of the 2006 Project and carries over to the 2008 Project. Mitigation Measure 4.7-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR and restated in the 2005 SEIR as Mitigation Measure 3.10-3 requires the installation of relay equipment to facilitate police and fire communications on the first building constructed on the Phase III site. This mitigation measure is completed in October 2006 by the payment of fees to the City of South San Francisco Fire Department for the provision of the communications equipment. This mitigation measure is complete. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 52 Measure 4.7-6 from the 1998/99 SEIR which carries over the 1996 SEIR and 1982 EIR requirements to fully fund a separate new fully-funded staff (1982 EIR) consisting of three police officers and one new patrol vehicle (1996 SEIR) to address cumulative development impacts. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Mitigation Measure 3.10-1(a), (b) and (c)from the 2005 SEIR which mitigates an more intense project that proposed in 2006 and requires the funding of six police officers and three vehicles, crime and safety equipment specific to the 2005 Project, and the timing of the funding of the six positions and three vehicles. (Please note, the Public Service Mitigation Measures from the 2005 SEIR are numbered 3.10- 1 through 9 on pages 3.4-8 through 3.4-13 and as 3.4- 1 through 9 in the summary table.). Mitigation Measure 3.10-2from the 2005 SEIR requiring additional fire positions based upon the 2005 Project. Mitigation Measure 3.10-4 from the 2005 SEIR requiring a radio communications design and study based upon the 2005 Project. Communications issues for the 2006 Project were satisfied by the payment of $35,000 to the South San Francisco Fire Department for the provision of the communications equipment. This was addressed through Project conditions of approval, and not a mitigation measure for the 2006 Project. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to public services from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2000 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR or the 2006 Addendum. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. No impacts associated with parks and open space are anticipated. The project has constructed the Terrabay Recreation Center and has or is in the process of dedicating over 400 acres for open space and recreational use including the Preservation Parcel (26 acres), the Recreation Parcel (6.3 acres) and Juncus Ravine and remaining parcels (400 acres) as open space. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 14. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 53 Analysis: a) See Item 13d above. b) See Item 13d above. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Unnumbered Mitigation Measures from the 1982 EIR that include: • 153 acres of open space dedication consisting of the remainder lands abutting Phases I, II and III . Phase I and II lands have been restored and have been offered to the County. Phase III will be offered when construction is complete. • Trail access to the Mountain- Completed to the satisfaction of the County in Phase I. The County has stated in writing that they do not want additional trails. • 2,000 square foot child care center- Completed September 25, 1996 when the City accepted a $700,000 in-lieu payment. • Improvement of Hillside School, grading and soccer fields and outdoor facilities- Completed in 1997 as a part of Phase I. • Construction of Terrabay Recreation Center- Completed in 1996 as a part of Phase I • Restoration and offer of dedication to the County of the 157-acre Juncus Ravine Parcel- Restoration complete and offered to the County in 2004. • Restoration and conveyance of the Preservation Parcel to the County Phase III -Completed August 2004. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to recreation and open space. The Terrabay Project has constructed the Terrabay Recreation Center and has or is in the process of dedicating over 400 acres for open space and recreational use including the Preservation Parcel (26 acres), the Recreation Parcel (6.3 acres) and Juncus Ravine and remaining parcels (400 acres) as open space. The 2006 Project is constructing a 100 child day care center. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 54 Significant Potentially Unless t.ess Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impatt Incotpotated Impact Impact 15. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result in: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle traps, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections? ^ ^ ® ^ b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? ^ ^ ® ^ c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? ^ ^ ^ d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? ^ ^ ^ e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ^ ^ ^ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ^ ^ ® ^ Background Terrabay Project traffic has been analyzed extensively since 1982. More recently updated studies have been conducted by Crane Transportation Group in 1996, 1998, 2000, 2005, 2006 and 2008. The Ciry requested Crane Transportation Group to analyze the changes in the 2008 Project as compared to the approved 2006 Project analyzed in the 2006 Addendum. The 2005 SEIR was used as the baseline for the traffic analysis because background, environmental and cumulative conditions had changed since the certification of the 1998/99 SEIR. The impacts of the previously approved Project is an appropriate baseline for an evaluation of whether project changes require additional CEQA review. (Benton v. Board of Supervisors (1991) 226 Ca1.App.3d 1467, 1484.) The project analyzed in the 2000 Addendum to the 1998/99 SEIR was very similar to the 2006 Project in magnitude, however, due to the changes noted below a 2006 Project comparison was made to the 2005 SEIR. The following three paragraphs identify the changes in the environment to 2006, and then to 2008. Changes from 1999 to 2006 • U.S.101 Southbound Hook ramps and the Oyster Point Southbound Off-Ramp Flyover have been constructed and were in operation for the 2005 analysis, but were not for the 1998 analysis. • Hickey Boulevard extension was completed in 2002 and its affect is analyzed in the 2005 SEIR, but not in the 1998 SEIR. ~ BART extension to South San Francisco and the Airport is in and included in analysis for the 2005 SEIR, but not for the 1998 SEIR. Phase III Project Initial Study - 55 • Hillside Boulevard and Chestnut Avenue signal was not in place in 1997 when the 1998 SEIR documentation was established, but was in and operational for the 2005 traffic analysis. • Home Depot and Lowes were not included in the cumulative assumptions in the 1998/99 SEIR, but are included in the 2005 SEIR. • East of 101 cumulative traffic impact study was not complete or included in the background analysis for the 1998/99 SEIR, but was complete, in place and used for the cumulative analysis in the 2005 SEIR. The 1998/99 SEIR analysis is dated, using older traffic models and counts to identify project impacts. • The 1998 SEIR used 1994 Highway Capacity Manual analysis methodologies for the traffic analysis. • The 2005 SEIR used 2000 Highway Capacity Manual analysis methodologies for the traffic analysis. • The 1998 SEIR traffic counts were conducted in 1994. • The 2005 SEIR traffic counts were conducted in 2004 Changes from 2006 to 2008 Additional changes to the regulatory environment have occurred since the adoption of the 2006 Addendum. More specifically, AB 32 and SB 97 were adopted to address greenhouse gas emissions, as noted and discussed fully in the Air Quality section of this document. Therefore a traffic update was prepared by Crane Transportation Group to identify the change in trip generation form the approved 2006 Project to the proposed 2008 Project. Traffic Analysis Comparison 2006 Project The 2006 Addendum analyzed the traffic and air quality impacts associated with 665,000 square feet of office, 25,000 square feet of retail (including a 7,000 square foot restaurant), a child care facility serving 100 children and a shared use performing arts facility that would be used as an office meeting and presentation facility during the day and a performance space in the evenings and weekends. The traffic analysis in 2006 as well as this 2008 Addendum uses Trip Generation, 7th Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2003 by which to base vehicle trips associated with the Project. Some of the commercial traffic in 2006 as well as 2008 is assumed to be "pass-by" and office serving. As a comparison, campus-like projects in the East of 101 Area in South San Francisco include retail use as a TDM measure, and as such no retail square footage is included in the traffic modeling. The practice is supported by fact that amixed-use project does reduce vehicle trips over those associated with a single use. As a result the Terrabay traffic analysis is very conservative in that it does assign vehicle trips to 16,000 square feet of the retail use. The child care and shared use performing arts facility were considered a part of the TDM Program in both the 2006 and 2008 analysis; thereby no trips were or are assigned to these uses. 2008 Project The 2008 Project is the conversion of 2,500 square feet of office to circulation area and the addition of a 15,007 square foot Product Design Studio. The Studio, according to the project description submitted by the applicant, is to be an ancillary use to the office. The Studio would be used to produce video and sound arts in direct support to the office use in the 2006 Project The studio is not envisioned as additional office area, and if approved, would be conditioned to prohibit such use. Terrabay Phase III Initial Studv - 56 For purposes of analyzing the delta of the 2008 Project two traffic generation factors were modeled for the product design studio; one assuming no traffic trips assigned for the use (i.e., 100% ancillary) and the second assigning a research and development trip factor to the studio. Theses two models show the extremes in the potential trip generation for the 2008 Project; a negative (-64) trip generation and a positive (+58) trip generation. TABLE 6 compares the 100% ancillary analysis for the Product Design Studio to the 2006 Addendum and TABLE 7 compares a research and design analysis for the Product Design Studio to the 2006 Addendum. The memorandum from Crane Transportation Group is in Appendix A. TABLE 6 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON SUMMARY 100% ANCILLARY DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS TRIPS PROJECT 2-WAY IN OUT IN OUT TRIPS 2008 Addendum 8248 825 118 201 773 2006 SEIR 8312 829 119 204 778 Difference 2008 vs. (-64) (-4) (-1) (-3) (-5) 2006 Source: Crane Transportation Group Assuming that the studio is 100% ancillary to the office daily two-way trip generation is expected to be reduced by 64 trips (or about 0.8%). AM peak hour generation would be reduced by five trips (or about 0.5%) and PM peak hour generation reduced by eight trips (or about 0.8%). TABLE 7 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON SUMMARY R&D TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS DAILY AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS TRIPS PROJECT 2-WAY IN OUT IN OUT TRIPS 2008 Addendum 8370 841 121 203 787 2006 SEIR 8312 829 119 204 778 Difference 2008 vs. +58 +12 +2 (-1) +9 2006 Source: Crane Transportation Group Assuming that the new design studio square footage would have the same trip generation potential as research and development (R&D) uses the 2008 Project is expected to increase by 58 trips (or about Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 57 0.7 %). AM peak hour generation would be increased by 14 trips (or about 1.5%) and PM peak hour generation increased by eight trips (or about 0.8%). The two models show the extremes in potential Project trip generation. In all likelihood the 2008 Project would fall somewhere in between the addition of 58 daily round trips to/from the site and the reduction of 64 daily round trips to/from the site. Even with the minor increase in peak hour traffic associated with the assumption of the design studio square footage having R&D use trip generation, there would be no new year 2010 or 2020 circulation system significant impacts. The following analysis does assume the most conservative scenario that being R&D use and some trip generation associated with the retail uses. Analysis a and b) The 2008 Project would add approximately 14 inbound + outbound trips in the AM peak hour and 9 inbound + outbound trips in the PM peak hour beyond the currently entitled 2006 Project. The addition of these trips is considered less-than-significant. c) No change in traffic air patterns would result from the 2008 Project. The 2006 Project maximum height pursuant to the FAA is 360 feet above mean sea level (as noted in the South San Francisco General Plan). The North Tower is proposed at 360 feet above mean sea level. The 2008 Project would not change the height of the towers. The 2008 Project would change the height of the retail concourse associated with the North Tower to approximately 40 feet above mean sea level. d and e) The 2006 Project site plan was reviewed by police, engineering, fire, planning and the City's traffic consultant. The on-site intersections are designed to be free flowing for traffic inbound to or outbound from the Project garage. Pedestrian walkways are mostly separated from high traffic flow locations. The parking garage proposes underground, well-lighted and appointed pedestrian tunnels separating pedestrian and vehicular movements. The 2008 Project does not change the approved circulation pattern and was also reviewed by police, engineering, fire, planning and the City's traffic consultant. No new impacts were identified. f) Parking is proposed at 2.88 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet of land use and includes an approved TDM Program. The parking is calculated on all the land uses, a very conservative analysis, compared to that of other campus developments which exclude the retail uses from the parking capacity. The 2008 Project impacts would be considered less-than-significant. Mitigation Measures Required from Previous Environmental Documents: Mitigation Measure 4.4.2 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Intersection (Airport) requiring a financial contribution to the Oyster Point Interchange project sponsored by the City. The Applicant provided X8.5 million and this mitigation is completed. Mitigation Measure 4.4.3 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Intersection (Dubuque) requiring a financial contribution to the Oyster Point Interchange project sponsored by the City. The Applicant provided $8.5 million and this mitigation measure is completed. Mitigation Measure 3.1-Sa and b from the 2005 SEIR -Intersection queuing 2010. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Studv - 58 Mitigation Measurz 3.1-9a and b from the 2005 SEIR -Intersection queuing 2020. Mitigation Measure 3.1-10 from the 2005 SEIR - On Site Circulation. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: Mitigation Measure 4.4-6 from the 1998/99 SEIR Roadway Widths. Mitigation Measure 4.4-7 from the 1998/99 SEIR -Turnaround Sizes. Mitigation Measure 4.4-8 from the 1998/99 SEIR -Phase II Residential Parking. Mitigation Measure 4.4-9 from the 1998/99 SEIR -Overflow Parking. Mitigation Measure 4.4-10 from the 1998/99 SEIR -Potential Commercial Parking Shortfall. Mitigation Measure 4.4-11 from the 1998/99 SEIR - Pedestrian and Bicycle Access and Trail Head Parking. Mitigation Measure 4.4-12 from the 1998/99 SEIR -Potential Storage Deficiencies Between Intersections. Mitigation Measure 4.4-13 from the 1998/99 SEIR -City Hook Ramp Project Freeway Mainline (required an override). Mitigation Measure 4.4--14 from the 1998/99 SEIR -City Hook Ramp Project Freeway Ramps (required an override). Mitigation Measure 3.1-2 from the 2005 SEIR -Intersection Level of Service 2010. Mitigation Measure 3.1-6 from the 2005 SEIR -Intersection Level of Service 2020. Mitigation Measure 3.1-11 from the 2005 SEIR - On Site Parking. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to Transportation and Circulation from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2000 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum. Two traffic scenarios were evaluated that represent the extremes in potential Project trip generation. In all likelihood the 2008 Project would fall somewhere in between the addition of 58 daily round trips to/from the site and the reduction of 64 daily round trips to/from the site. Even with the minor increase in peak hour traffic associated with the assumption of the design studio square footage having R&D use trip generation, there would be no new year 2010 or 2020 circulation system significant impacts. The analysis does assume the most conservative scenario that being R&D use and some trip generation associated with the retail uses. No significant new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. The 2008 Project would not substantially increase the severity of any of these impacts, nonetheless, would still require the 2008 Project to restate and re-adopt the Findings of Overriding Considerations for three significant and unavoidable impacts. The three impacts are: Terxabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 59 Impact 4.4-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. Impact 4.4-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. Impact 4.4-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts. Potentially Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Significant Impact Mitigation Incorporated Sign cant No Impact Impact 16. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the pro ject: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? ^ ^ ® ^ b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ^ ^ ® ^ c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? ^ ^ ® ^ d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? ^ ^ ® ^ e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? ^ ^ ® ^ ~ Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?) ^ ^ ® ^ g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ^ ^ ® ^ Analysis a, b and e) The 2005 SEIR analyzed wastewater impacts on a more intense land use proposal. The 2006 Project Applicant has paid the City a fair share amount for the inspection (televising) of the storm drain and sanitary sewer lines in Airport Boulevard (Mitigation Measure 3.4-8 2005 SEIR). The Engineering Division completed the study and has found that there is adequate capacity to serve the 2006 Project and cumulative development (Ray Razavi, City Engineer, August 17, 2006). The Engineering Department reviewed the 2008 Project and did not identify any new impacts associated with the addition (Sam Bautista, Senior City Engineer, June 30, 2008). Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 60 c) The existing 48-inch storm drain system in Airport Boulevard was designed and constructed to accommodate the 100-year storm event. The 48-inch line connects to a 60-inch culvert which crosses under U.S. 101. The 60-inch culvert drains to a concrete lined channel that discharges to the Bay. The downstream system is sized to accommodate the 100-year event. (Corolett, 2005 whom was the City's engineer for the storm drain improvements). Additionally, as a matter of law, the 2008 Project shall comply with the NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permits including the C-3 requirements and as a matter of procedure will be included in the approved 2006 SWPP. The 2008 Project does not change these conditions. No new impacts or mitigation measures are identified. d) The Terrabay Project installed a water tank for the Terrabay project as a part of Phase I. The Project also constructed the water distribution system and pump house on the Phase III site. Cal Water has provided the project with a will serve letter (Appendix F of 2005 SEIR) which is based on a more intense land plan. The incremental change represented in the 2008 Project does not alter these conditions. f and g) The Project is required through conditions of approval to provide rerycling and waste diversion (2006 approvals). The same conditions of approval apply to the 2008 Project. Mitigation Measures Requited from Previous Environmental Documents: None. Mitigation Measure 3.4-8 2005 from the SEIR is complete. Mitigation Measures from Previous Environmental Documents that do not apply to the 2008 Project: None. Finding: The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to utilities and service systems. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 17. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? Terrabay Phase III Initial Studv - 61 ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Findings: The 2008 Project would not result in any new impacts or substantially more severe impacts as compared to those identified in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum which supplement the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, 1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR. Significant and unavoidable impacts were identified, analyzed, and mitigated to the extent feasible in prior CEQA documents. The 2008 Project would not increase the severity of any of those impacts. Nonetheless, Findings of Overriding Considerations will be re-adopted for four significant unavoidable impacts adopted by the City Council February 1999, 2000 and 2006 relating to air quality and traffic. The impacts are: 1. Impact 4.5.2 from the 1998/99 SEIR Changes in Long Term Air Quality. 2. Impact 4.4-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. 3. Impact 4.4-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. 4. Impact 4.4-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts. Terrabay Phase III Project Initial Study - 62 REFERENCES Corlett, Adrian. BKF. Email correspondence February 27, 2005. Environmental Collaborative. 2005. Review of Biological Issues Initial Study for North Peninsula Playa Project South San Francisco, California. March 1, 2005. Holman, Miley. Holman & Associates. Personal communication January 3, 2005. PHASE ONE, Inc. 2003. Update Report Northwest Corner of Sister Cities Blvd. and Bayshore Blvd. South San Francisco, California. Prepared for Myers Development. February 24, 2003. City of South San Francisco. 2002. South San Francisco General Plan. Prepared by Dyett & Bhatia. Adopted October 13, 1999, as amended December 2002. City of South San Francisco. 1999 Terrabay Phase II and III Final Supplemental Environmentallmpact Report. January 1999. City of South San Francisco. 1998. Final Terrabay Specific• Plan. October 16, 2000. Prepared by Myers Development Company. City of South San Francisco. 1998. Terrabay Phase II and III Draft Supplemental Environmentallmpact Report. July 1998. City of South San Francisco. 1996. Terrabay Specific Plan and Development Agreement Extension Draft Supplemental Environmentallmpact Report. January 1996. Prepared by Wagstaff and Associates. City of South San Francisco. 1996. Terrabay Specific Plan and Development Agreement Extension Final Supplemental Environmentallmpact Report. Prepared by Wagstaff and Associates. City of South San Francisco. 1982. Terrabay Development Project Draft Environmentallmpact Report. August 1982. Prepared by Environmental Impact Planning Group. URS. 2001 a. Geotechnical Exploration, Terrabay Phase III Development, South San Francisco, California. February 12, 2001. URS. 2001 b. Report Geotechnical Design Criteria Terrabay Phase III Development, South San Francisco, California. March 16, 2001. U.S. Geologic Survey. 199. Earthquake Probabilities in the San Francisco Bay Region: 2000-2030 - A Summary of Findings, Working Group on California Earthquake Probabilities, Open File Report 99-517. Weiland Research Associates. 2000. Wetland Mitigation Plan, Oyster Point Hook Ramp, South San Francisco, California, COE File Number 23533S. September 2000. Wetland Research Associates. 2004. Letter to Mr. Ed Wylie, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory Branch, from Tom Fraser, Principal, July 21, 2004. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM 2008 ADDENDUM FINDINGS TERRABAY PHASE III Aesthetics The 2008 Project would not alter the clustering of that approved in 2006. The 2008 Project would not introduce residential uses or a significant addition of lighting to the site. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Moreover, the following conditions continue to exist for the 2008 Project: Slightly reduced lighting impacts from those identified in the 2005 SEIR because there were no impacts associated with residential land uses; No conflict between night lighting and residential uses; and, the Project clustering leaving the majority of the site open with views of the Mountain. Agriculture There are no agricultural resources on the Project site. There are no impacts to agricultural resources and no mitigation measures are required. Air Quality The 2008 Project slightly increases the amount of criteria air pollutant from those identified in the 2006 Addendum but not by a substantial amount. This impact would be less than significant. Ozone and PM,o would remain a Significant and Unavoidable Impact as identified and fully analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2005 SEIR, and the 2006 Addendum. The 2008 Project would not substantially increase the severity of this impact, nonetheless, the 2008 Project will restate and re-adopt the Findings of Overriding Considerations for the following impact: Impact 4.5.2 from the 1998/99 SEIR Changes in Long Term Air Quality. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Greenhouse Gas The 2008 Project slightly increases the amount of greenhouse gases from those calculated for the 2006 Project but not by a substantial amount. This impact would be less than significant. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Biological Resources The 2008 Project would not result in additional impacts over what was identified in the 1998/99 SEIR on biological resources. Moreover, as s a result of clustering the Project in 2006, the 2006 Project impacts are considerably less than those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, as documented in the 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addendum. The majority of the wetlands on the Phase III site have been preserved, the viola has been preserved and wetlands have been enhanced. The requisite United States Army Corp of Engineers and California Department of Fish and Game permits has been secured and the wetlands restoration is underway and being monitored by the City. These activities have been completed or implemented as apart of the 2006 Project. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Terrabay 2008 Addendum Findings July 17, 2008 Page 1 Cultural Resources The 2008 Project would be located above ground floor retail in an area graded in 2007, and in the center of the Development Parcel. The 2006 Project did not result in any impacts to archaeological, cultural or historical resources. Miley Holman, archaeologist was on the Project site during grading of the Buffer Parcel, as required by the 1998/99 SEIR and the MMRP. No archaeological or historic remnants were found. No burials or artifacts were discovered. Grading and development in archaeological sensitive areas was completely avoided. No additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Geology and Soils The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to geology and soils from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR and as restated in the 2005 SEIR. The 2006 Project resulted in less site disturbance than analyzed in the 1998/99 SEIR. The 2008 Project would not affect these conditions. The geotechnical mitigations required in the MMRP are being implemented and monitored by Cotton Shires Associates and the same mitigations would be applicable to the 2008 Project. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Hazards The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to hazards from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, 2005 SEIR or its 2006 Addendum. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Hydrology and Water Quality The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to hydrology from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum. The City did re-evaluate storm water/waste water and as noted by the City Engineer adequate capacity does exist in the existing infrastructure fox the Project and cumulative development. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Land Use The 2008 Project would require only minor text amendments to the Terrabay Specific Plan. The Project is otherwise consistent with applicable plans. Therefore, there are no land use impacts associated with the 2008 Project. Mineral Resources There are no mineral resources on the Project site and therefore there are no mineral resource impacts associated with the 2008 Project. Noise The 2008 Project would add 54 trips to the Project site which would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to noise from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Terrabay 2008 Addendum Findings July 17, 2008 Page 2 Population and Housing The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to population and housing nor did the 1998/99 SEIR, 2000 Addendum, 2005 SEIR or the 2006 Addendum identify any impacts associated with population and housing. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project and none have been required as a part of the previous environmental review. Public Services The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to public services from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR., the 2000 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR or the 2006 Addendum. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. No impacts associated with parks and open space are anticipated. The project has constructed the Terrabay Recreation Center and has or is in the process of dedicating over 400 acres for open space and recreational use including the Preservation Parcel (26 acres), the Recreation Parcel (6.3 acres) and Juncus Ravine and remaining parcels (400 acres) as open space. Recreation The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to recreation and open space. The Terrabay Project has constructed the Terrabay Recreation Center and has or is in the process of dedicating over 400 acres for open space and recreational use including the Preservation Parcel (26 acres), the Recreation Parcel (6.3 acres) and Juncus Ravine and remaining parcels (400 acres) as open space. The 2006 Project is constructing a 100 child day care center. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. Traffic and Transportation The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to Transportation and Circulation from those identified in the 1998/99 SEIR, the 2000 Addendum, the 2005 SEIR and the 2006 Addendum. Two traffic scenarios were evaluated that represent the extremes in potential Project trip generation. In all likelihood the 2008 Project would fall somewhere in between the addition of 58 daily round trips to/from the site and the reduction of 64 daily round trips to/from the site. Even with the minor increase in peak hour traffic associated with the assumption of the design studio square footage having R&D use trip generation, there would be no new year 2010 or 2020 circulation system significant impacts. The analysis does assume the most conservative scenario that being R&D use and some trip generation associated with the retail uses. No significant new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. The 2008 Project would not substantially increase the severity of any of these impacts, nonetheless, would still require the 2008 Project to restate and re-adopt the Findings of Overriding Considerations for three significant and unavoidable impacts. The three impacts are: Terrabay 2008 Addendum Findings July 17, 2008 Page 3 Impact 4.4-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. Impact 4.4-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. Impact 4.4-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts. Utilities and Service Systems The 2008 Project would not result in any new or increased impacts with respect to utilities and service systems. No new or additional mitigation measures would be required for the 2008 Project. CONCLUSION The 2008 Project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts as compared to those identified in the 2005 SEIR.and 2006 Addendum which supplements the 1998/99 SEIR, 1996 SEIR and the 1982 EIR. Significant and unavoidable impacts were identified, analyzed, and mitigated to the extent feasible in prior CEQA documents. The 2008 Project would not increase the severity of any of those impacts. Nonetheless, Finding of Overriding Considerations will be re-adopted for four significant unavoidable impacts adopted by the City Council February 1999, 2000 and 2006 relating to air quality and traffic. The impacts include: 1. Impact 4.5.2 from the 1998/99 SEIR Changes in Long Term Air Quality. 2. Impact 4.4-1 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2000 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. 3. Impact 4.4-4 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Freeway Impacts. 4. Impact 4.4-5 from the 1998/99 SEIR 2010 Base Case Plus Phases II and III Ramp Impacts. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The Adopted 2006 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (City Council Resolution # 82-2006) contains all the mitigation measures required of the Terrabay Phase III Project, including the 2008 Project increment. 1120874.1 Terrabay 2008 Addendum Findings July 17, 2008 Page 4 co a O +: 0 0 N C1 t/1 a 0 !W ~- m D ~ ~ O o Z y ~ O ~ Z' c U U D I- on c ~ on m m ~ R ~ {• 'G N OIl a~ o a a'c W ,- J ~ .^ ,~ is E 'C p y °° ~' ^ > ~ C ~ °° ' c v c U o y G ~? ~ ~ ; ts, _ , y y ~\ ' O~ ~ F. C C C w ~ ~ O G N~ U N a i 0 2 0. ~ m" U O ~A c ~0 ~ ~ m y y ~ Z ~ y U W o ~ g a'~ W ~ a a~ y 5 w~.. ~ .a ~. ~? 'C ~ 3 'O c i O N U .. i ~ ~ ^'9 ~ ~ y ~ .0+ H O ro N .C Q "' U .C y~ GCi « p a ~ ~ ~ O C U 'O 'cam ,L y vyi p O ~ ~ O ~ W ~ O A Vj ~'' a0 ' a i i w ' a a~ s = a ~~ ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ~, y ~. y y U o >, '~ eA i•-° E•F 'y c y ° ' ^ c-~ E y•~ E °a '~ ~`' c `c° cv o-~a :~ ~ 3'c ° cc ~ h ,~ ~ ~ ~~~ N Y ~~ .+ W U~ ~ N w ~~ ;~ c7 O F y0 T w rT„ C C N m O ~+ ~ .C ~. aVi .L c o > v ~ .~ '- o a a ~`' y a o • a : r c ~ w a ~ . .o o ^ c ~ , c ~ .o • ~ ~ U w w ~ ~'O" M~ o~ N~ 'C ~"' O iV C C ca C p •~ O U N~ o y N O > U~ ~~~~ W~ O y L ~ 'O ~ y .U ~ ~ .~ i.. y ~ -0 .A.+ try ~ CC Q) 3 C ~ 0. ^ h ~ ca O aJ O ~ ..+ ~ ~ ti N ' y '' > a N N~'' C ~ > ~ O .~" = O 'G ~ _ 'O y `-+ N C • ~ C .a 0. C a .Y O 7 c O C G1 ~ ~_ .O N a > .A + c C, a C ~~" ^' 'C ~ 0 y ~, O N ., ~ C O C ~. C ctl 'O y 0 U ""' V y a ~ i 7 Gy C `^ cE a) ~ 'O ~ y~ O 'O a> .A.+ 'G _q 0. C V] y X Q..-. a G ~ .O cC7 °• ~ w ~ °' ~ ~ ^ o ro w ~ '- a°i o c E o A .o .n c a~ i ~ t Q c° ~ _ ,L Y :~ C F. > ~ ca C . . .O is O . ti ~ C A c~a T ... 'O C ~ ~ ~ m y _ c c .c tt w ~ a~i `° ~ a o o U o o~ o c .o ~ •y c .S m ~~^ y o ~ c y , Tn ~ ~ " o y 'tl 0.U .`? a~ as R 4, o C ~ ' ~ ~' ~ aci a :3 ~ ai U ~ N a o c y ° a i c a ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ Z ., c o. ~ ~ ~ .° -~ y o ~ x 3~ 3 ~ co`a ~ ~ ~ ° ~ v ~ ° ~ °° " ~ ~ ,N, v ~ ~ ~ p. c v> >, ~ O ~.. 7'L ca .O _~ C y p G o v p +- a7 O q" of v 0. _ .+ O .D _ v h d = •~ C aKi 'O C V 7". R C y •_ ,0 N cGtl ,!'+ ~' [~ y O .D N O itl 'O ^ a) O N a) ' C ~ '" y .O OL ay+ fE 'C _ Q U N _ CV ~a) d O ~ _ Y y R _ ~r F' 00 y 'L 67 > U ~ ~r ~ r C"'L..' CO 4 Z + + y ~^ E O ~, ~ 4, V ?, O i.. O ~0 ~ a C C ' ° O ctl ~ ^ v cC `'-' . ~ OD C C vi O c^ . ~ y 0. ~ R• a c ~ ~ c C o v ^ ~ c c a~ c ~ ~ o ~ o ~ • a C _ _ , O C O .0 'G V 0.' C C 'G ~ YO C O i O N ~ O ~ C 0.a) ~ O aVi •U ~ '~ ~".^~ ` ~~" ~ y a~ c~ d-0 ~~ C N ~~~ z a co ro a ~v N v> > _' ro ~ ~ y T ~ , o °'" ~ ° o °''y ° ~ °~O c ~ a~'O c~ ~ ~'= ~ Z~~•c 3 nF•3~[r 3 0 E . ~ . • RS . ow ~~o ~.E ~ ro ~ ~ ~ W y y '~ U 0~ 7 N C O O ~' A ~ ~ ~ oo ~~ c~ ~'o ~ 3'- E 0 •~ A C 0 ~ O . ~. ~ O y C •ctl 'c 'a ~' ~ °J c ' " a' ~ ~ ~' W n ~ 0. ~ Y •~ y aJ ~ ~ ..: R a,= ~a5o~~~~y ' _ v ~ c ~ •~ ° ~ c aki •x ~ ~ v y 3 a • y a) y 0 U C y C a~ y c . a.o ~ ~ w F • o o ~ ~ O i.. A ~" O ~ bD ~ N ~ Q ~ W ~ ~ .Q ~ LO y y C ~ ~ .9 a) N ~ ~ A 'O p .O ~ ~ = O N C Q O O w >' O H O ~AO. ~ a' V ~ C° ~ o o c y o 3~ a ~ e` ° G ~ = . A ~ ~ O ~ G ~~ ~i ~ a O ~ 'D ~ y 5... ~"..~ ~ ~ U ~ ¢ J rn O W aJ ~ N ~ 3 ~ o ~ ~ A ° ' U ~ ~c O _ W ~ ~r Q 0 m 'o W C • o m W ~ c ~ ~ w o ` 'mo:a ~ 3 C o c o •c 4 a O-~ eu ~ •• ~ c O O `~ O~ U C C U O .~ p ~ _ i E by o0 OA .~ O ~ ~ £ ~ a O ~ O T 0 ~ ~ ' G 0 C f0 {C{-0- " If 0 y U~~ W U U h E .._. Vl ~ Q , O ~ 0 G y ~ ~ m O C yU, C z+.C {{.... ' H ~ w .~ OU [,," h '~ y ~ a ° ~ ~ W J c €' O G w w ¢.~ Y U y a , ~~, ~~~. c U o ,~ p. ~ G w ~ Y 'n ~T ~ y ~0 p 'Z ~ C a~ ~ O it ~ C O C c 0 ~ L m N c Z c 0 N U L U °o ~ C , to C ~ ~ i ~ ` a°u a c a- ~ c w C = ~' y 'y ~ ~ 'j ~ •~ w ~ N O Qj .Q 4J .~ ~ ~ c7 U 'O U ~ C °'a$ ~uQ ~p ° ° vi G c j y .C c ~a ° G ~ 3 ~ td ~,~+$ ~ ~ c 3 ~~ c A ~ ~ ` ~.c m. '> • a . >. ~ ~ 'O ~ .'• ~ 'O A p U • O ~ ~' • 0. b0 'n .C. C •^'i (~ .C 'D ~' U N O O U G ~.N 0.O C F 0.00 . ~ G 00 'Ur' ~ O dC ' U ~` 0. p .U ~ U > ~,., A ~ U ~" R N N '~ ~ N C ~ .C ~ O ~ ~ N O ~..,, c0 ~ O~ N N O .G U ~ C <y ,~ , ,O ~"' p N~ p~ C U ~ N A C N iC ~ y ,-. >, ,~ •N O ° C1.C OJ ~ > p ' C ~ ~~ ~ y - ~.+ ,~ r 'G N .~ i + y . O N 7 > A O ' R O _ y N ^ N ~ FJ. Q O . O^ O y .~ y C~C N Q N x Cp6 ~ (^q .n ~~ ~ cc F O I., ~ ^~' ~ d U ~~ ~.. N LO y y 3 ,O CL ~ C N z U N 3 . U U U y 7 Q~ G C 0. y .~ ~~ y~ U~ ce 5 O + U L~ ~ ~ U .UC y U 'C O O - U .D N O 0.N ~ U~ id ~' ~ F. C O .. y V ~ 'N y jU ~ ~N-' ~~ U C ti ~ W 4 U ~' ~ U U U N F i a~ vs ~ ~° c v ,c .NN. N 0q ~ 0qD N U ro rd '° 3 aNi ~ .a O U N C •~ N ;v .C ~ ~ ~ ca a`6i C ~ U ° ` o «? ~ '' Oq 'O ~ ° °~ a ~_? `•1 U ; .a N •-• O ,~ O U •F N 'h O U Q~ C G" ~ ~d ~ M" C ~U^ E 0 ~ 'O O W N~ N C N •U 0. ' aU+ U k^ U O ) ' ~ ~ a~i ~ N A N iU. 3 ~ U ~ ~ ' C ~ .a - c v x a 'o :: ~ U 0. O= ~ ~ ° v ' ~ ~ U U C ~ r 'O 00 ~ o <«. 'o c .cc ~ 'C C U O O O ~ ~ u, m N a ~ ~ y : U 'O a~ Y ~ ti ~ c y ~ ra ~ O C N id cd •~ C U ._ y of p w ~ c m ~ 3 L ~ '° '" ~ ° y 0 ~ w . y 3 G ~ ° ~ 4. O o y~ 5 o c ~ ~ ie a O~ C !1 ~ y t7 ~ 'aao ~ ~ ~ ti ~ c L O R >> c °' ~ .n e ~ ~ ,. o ~ , ~ w ca N~ c c~ N `~ ~ R M° ~° ~° as .c m a~ v ,on o n o ° ~ U ~ o o' 'o^ c~ c c °~ c ro i ~ W O o0 pp .t'.' O y C O ~ ~ .a i U O o0 'C O 0. ~ ~ N ..+ U ~ 00.p rq y ~ ~ ~ d X ~ 0.C r,... .D I.U.. °~ cp. ti ~ •, ~ ~ ~ Vl m .~ '~ w 3 y .G. ~ cAa W 0.U. c'Oe v7 '`^O.'~. p p ;a > 'h DA ~ ~ ti .t o. .n ~ ~ i .a U~' 3 .n p ro''L ~ N ~ ~ W • • • • y >> C ^ 'j 'm iI". P .Ri G I.U. 'O cV ~ • s . ~ . ~ I ~ y ~ ,d U ~ ,O C~••~ aU+ ~ ~. ~ _ O H G a ~ ~ 4. F U Q W +' c0 O 'C y ~O N 0 U U r/Ui C ~ m •'~ y dj G' d4 U ~y+ Gb .o ,~, ... ~ c a ~ c ~v ~ ° `~ y > ~ N N '~ y aU+ ~ Q,y U cE O O O ^ .~ y O W N ~a3 „. ,~~ A O ~ 9 a U ._ ° a~ a N w i m y c d ' ¢ c a ~ ~ ^ Z ° uj 'y ,~ a-Ui v ~ ~ ~ G ~ v o • \ N N ' % G O U O C i . O t y I.. cc~ I.. ~«?3 ~'- ~~wo-~ ~. ~ ~ a c y ~ A r, U ~ O y '~ ~ < N /J Oq ~ fQJ ~F.+ ~ O " v 3 ~ O ~ ~ m -~ O w a i . ' a i .a a. y ~ Y ~ a~ ca o °' .a h c c ~ ~ -5 a°Di ~ y C~ tf ~ C O O U U S N ~ ' m N U ^ . C 0. .O .+ v m W ~ ~ m pp ^ U G o Q' . y O R ~~> 0 U O a.w R .~ y G O A ° Vl O C7 = - d -- VI 7 L ~ O ~' o ~' C ~ c ~ U o°Jq UU3U W ~~'«. I ~ R U W > `o ~ m 4. oq a~ ~ c vi ._ J c ~'~ 'o R y ~ 2 . _N tC y y .Y U O R ~ ~~~ 3 ~ G O y Q ~ . ~ (~- ~ M W cd RI W y 'C .~ ~' ~ N yi O U W c > W c c a w ,z J c w '~ ~''~ ~ d U N ,y eu c W m G O a~ O .U+ G y ,O y vi ~' ~. O ` A 0 ti O~ y y> y Q a~ a "i .C O ,y C U c U G .O a> R 'O G R~ ~ X vi U ~~ R U ~C 0. S C 0. ~~~~o wyo~ pa~Aa~ =~ o~ ~o ~~ N .'~+ C F A F v O ~' a0+ N U O R R ¢. 4.. y W C cV y~ U ~+ ~~ V1 ~ O G ,Q O .O y DA .~ C= U h y R ~ c0 N O « y O '~ U u ~ , 7 00 O ~ N W ~~ <tl ~' 7, d U tC 'C U ~ y O O N c d ~ ~ G G ti ..C R ~ A 7 F 'C O ~ 0.t ~ c^Ri ~ 'i ~ U ~ ~ w ~ 'n ~ . U . ~ A y R y r~i « . '~ ~ca Z O a i a i ~ ~ G~~ O ~ p~ 'p03 G 'C _ .~ ~ itl O cGd ~ W ~. A i3 _G. _ , m ,-. Y U C O C OD O '~ O O O ~ > A 'O c •~ O N ~ O O ~' ~D ~ A C y N m ~G 'p y A ~ A R E ,D 4. ca ,O {.. ~ LLI a>i ~ y y .c . .. °' 3 ~ 0. ~ ~ v ~ ~ y E c~a ~ G ~ o C c "' G~ ~ '~G ~ o ¢ ~ L ~ 3A~ ' ~ ~, ~ m~ ~ R ' ~ Y ~ ~ A 7 ~ U O D C W Z ti O U 2 O ti ti ~ O V O Q O W C7 0 ~- m W C c ~ °J on 00 p ~= oo ~ p ~ > w- T 'O ~` _ _ , _ '_l O vl `~' ~' ~ L ~ ~ 'O G m p ~ ~ m C ~ w, ~ ti ti m A Q C c3 ~ o a) O~ .0 L .~ ti p ~' c7 ~ a~i .y ~ ~ ~ y G m ~ U .~ V h 'O y cC .~.. ~ 7 7 ,_, i ~ .T W CJ ~ ~ A 'O 6 ~ o ~ `° .3 d ' c o ~ v y- ~ a ~ o ~ °-° ~•^ ~ ~ ~ G ~~ c a ?..' .~+ ~ C . a i a o a „ti i y o ~ ~ a v ^ : . o C/1 U o ~ y W 4J p~ (~ C C .. ~~ U L ~ y 'O 'O 4... y U ~~ O J U J o 0 U .~ Y . y ~ A¢ y ' G C. G G O .va C G G .9 d C ca cC ~~ y ^¢ 'O ~ y v w~~ CY, N~ ~ .C ~ ~ q y / ff G () 1.. O Z ~ ~ C V y ~ ~ _ :O ~ N G ~ ttl .G O N OJ ~ .^ ctl N YO ~ C ~ O O O p 4-r N {-~ ~ y v U ~ a •- ctt ~ u d O ~ . ~ ~ ti .o on •- L on x .. E > CJ .on ., ro o .~ y c ~ ~ ~ O 'G cd ca +~. O C o y C w ~p .~+ 'O '- O G y `~ m >> ca F. cd N ~ co ~ ~ 5n'~, uAi- c°~ E .6 c°i a E ono ~ G 3 ~ •~~~. ro ~ ~ N ~ o ~ °~~ ~v ~o ~ a ~ '~ ~ ~ c ~' O T U ~ U . C W 2 . 0 W S Q c ~ ~ y c U ~ ~~ ~ OU /~ W ~ ~, N ~ ~ ~y y ~ y ~ o 'c U S N ~~ U ~ i N U ~ N Q '~ r^ c7 ¢.~ G O y T ^ ¢' y 0 C W ~ ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ y ~ c . ~ ~', ~ h a`.E gad °' a 'o m m R ~'~ a~' c o~ ~° m 3'd m c.`' £ ~ 00 p m ~ G ~ y o C '~ ~ ~ C 'O G ~ O ca ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ d ° ~ 'o ~ ~ ~ 'fl ~ O ~ 4. cC ¢ " ~' °' ~' ° °' ctl ~ q ^ `'~' ~ c ~ c ~ y ~ 'v F, c ~ p • .L h ~ 00 '~ F m .~ p ~ ~ .~ O ~ a~ ~ Ce .~ cC ~ .G ^~ iC '.G d > .fl 'L ~ ~ Cr v~ CG N y ~ •ti ~ ; 'y 'O y • WO ~ p = v ~ ^ ~ 4^Nn ~p C m O O . U y N O ;p y G o O 00 h ~ y P, ~ cd ~' '~ N N C D c7 y ~ {.. _ m r~ y U ~ ~ •i-~ L' ~ ~ 9 ~ ~ C y . o y ~ 6f" tt ( o '~ R7 (0 r- ~ ~-. T.+ F. " . .~.~ . ~ CJ .~+ ~ U ~ p ~ N bA '.~ N ~ CVE ~ R y . F F. A ~~ ++ a+ ~ R ~ A. G •~ ~ U y 04 'D ~/ j O U N~ C N N ~ y ttl ftl ~ .. C ~ a~ ~ p O ~ p ti y ~ O ~ ' ~ c 9 R .C ~ ~ N O w o ~ pn' 0. ~ _ O . CS ~ 'L' U , ~^. , C 61 . W ~ vJ L. o (~A ~ U C' ~- ~ . ~ y 4r ~ 0 V] Q f0 ~ V U ~ 3 y 3 ~ 7 d y ~~ C ~ L N L y .~ y `V O IL 4. ~ Z . d ti C ti G V ctl Dq ~> R C N ~--. y C C . ti y L ~ ¢ _N N b0 U U p~ W ..+ fE ~ c ~ U f O . U O C V _ " ~. Q Q. ~ (1, OD ~ U .L ~ ~ .~. V «d a~ Q' O N ti ~ ~ .. C ~ 'C ~ ~ ° ~ .G ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~ ~P ~ eo ~ ~ ~O ,^_ 'O ~ Cam. ti O 'D ~ _N 0. ~ a 'a a~ y ~ ~ Q °• ? °' G y o fWn ••J C .C . a i ~C F' ~ 5 N .~ y N ."O i a ~ 0.'p^.U w o ~ 'U p fd ~ . ~ " ° ° ~ g rn ~ ro ° ~ ~ roc :°5u~° ~° ~'m~~ a.~ ao.~a ~v~ i E a G ~v €~ ~ ° o '' . . . ~ y ~ cr y rn ~a~o ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ N ~ ~~.r`..YIII N ~ ~d y O W " ~ ~ c0 W ~ 3 a A ~ ~ ~ ~ H c ~w ~ `° w: 3 ~ v ~ euy , h ~ y °°p c °' ° ~~ a~ ~ z : ~ ~~ o~ R ~ a ~ y Z O N GJ ~~~ p .v ~ y ;Q O cC C y U ~ ~ c ~ '~ 3 ° °c 'o c ? c . ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ m an VJ L a a i ~ $ ~ ~ N n :_: ~O b R. C O :- A 0.C G C ~ O U~ . ~ N y ~ y Q. Q ~ ~ ~ r ~ ~ y ~ O ~ ~ r.+ ~.C, ~L.' 0 .~ y ~ ~ ,Q ~ CJ cE ,N ~y" y ~ "'" ~ F ~ - ~ . ~'~ y N ~ N ~ y 'O ~ .O ~ ( V ~ ~ r .+ ~ ~ y ~ y R ~ 'D 'C N r ~ o a ~ v ~ ~ ~ ~ F ~ w J '~ i ~' :G io X C /l C ~~J V !. e-eC`1 ~ ~ J~ C '3 ~~ Y G '~ A O N w N ~ ~ om im ce i ~-1 W to rA M ~ t /) VJ p rA V .. v i '~(1~ i .. ~.+ 00 G O C 'G F T U ~+ ~ `o cn `" ° y ~ c y ~ U U ~ O G~ OO G E cGV F y 'O O O C O G U ' O N O C G R CO " 'G c¢ ~~ ~ i~ m~ m ~ ~ q o w p 0. Q.~ ~ C O Gp m y . . y UC]4' W 2 ~ o0 W ~ ,°. ~ ~~ J `~ ro a a C C~ ~> Z F ~ N O '" R V 3 ~• ~ 0. ~' ° U a m on c y ,c .C ~ '~ >, o ~ -= c c F . ti C ,~ U G O b0 O O U ,~ C a ~ ° ~ O .~ ,V a m ~ a. ° ~ m c E ~ a ° i Q O v v y U y W OR N. 3 C .0 P U G N .^• V C, ~ ~ ..G P.. . . $ .C A w ~ O ? c a ~ a.50- ~ ~ O O ^ y C ~ • : O G ' G p U> ~'" 0. v U_ N G' X .~ 0 0 cC ~"" N C F ~ CC .GU.. O 'C F N r ~ i N ~ p ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ O C •~ C A y C ~U, ~y O U O O1 H ro ~„ '~•, .~ 7 W O N C .O ~ y G+ F Oq . cE .~ 4, U y N~ N y ..+ y ro nS G R~ +% G O ¢ U 'G ~ C Q C QJ O CJ ~ ~ om O 7J V GO N Q y N '~-. C (/] C U R _ .F-• ~ R ~ A'G p O 'O 'O t .. ~ 4,,, ~ .p F. '•' O ca O 4. ca T cd y 'Q U U ~' R^ ^!" " 6J N U x U U c7 U y Rti ti O LL 'G m 7 G {'~ ~ U '~ ~ •~ ¢ N ^ O '~' .~ 4. ~O^ ~'. O O'O ~-• ~ ~ ~ U ~ .C y C O ~7~ U U U ~ ~ ~ y ~O~ ~ ~ y ~ Q. Q ^~ 4J OJ .C X W O ~ N .0 N ~ ~ Q m t+ N C N U y> .~ ~ "` ,,` G ~--~ N .1 U ~ ~ U ^G R G t O • ti ~y O L ~ ~ Q ~ R . ~ ~ p~ ~ ~ • a)- p U > RP O ~ 6 '•- M ~ ` ~ •.D :° ~w R a~i ~ ~ ioA ~ • ~~ m is ~~ ~ •~'•_ m X ~ - .o ^ y o ~. v ~ O p W ~ .O 7 'a CO ~ O O F h ~ C U ~ 'O ~' .G iC F. „d, U 'C ~_ U y C' L y O w y ~•"' ~y p C .-. ca C p y N O aj y v A. Z y m .O v G 7 y OO ~ N R G O m F y . O o 0. ~ N d 'C ~ ^, c ~ 0.O O U CL .O ~~ ~ y O ~ U ro •y ~ U U ~ U ~~ c6 O) O ~ N R O C p, y p•' ~ U C " " U 'G C N V O D U C yQ<"" 4) . + , G is R X 'C U p y . + O.fl 0. .~.• ~ U U O m G C m d '^ O O U~ ? a>i O W w. W '~ ,` ~ 6J .~. d h ~ 7 ~'00 O U F. 'O ('~. V] C7 y O ~ .G f0 C ~ O N G y ~~ ~ ~ •~ aid ~ g ~ ^ , y m ~. a> ti v ro 0 Y O. p y ~ G ~ `d ~ U Y U ~+ W F Z ai v' y~ cE m y U ~ U c G ~ U ~ « ~ a i v . ~ . T ~ O) ~ O G ~ ~ ~ N i 'y C ~ ~ G O ~ aw ~ ~ W ~. " ~ ^ y y T U C 2 O ~ ` a a ~~.R o• C +-• U F O U U ~ y ~ U Y 0. 0. Y~ ~' y o R y~ V F 'v a~ ^ U ~ ~ _O ~ G X _ _O • o~ X C m .E O .. Q ti (O X G i+ N S1. ~'" F V' O ~ U R a v, Q1 F Q w G . O •L U a y~ V U C N 'F'' •`.G cV W ~C 7 Q.O+ O ~ O ~Fp J Q O a G O c~a y 0 '~ a`i ~ c ~!' h a ~ w ~ . ~~ z ~ z~ ~ m C 7 t}~Oa h ^ N Q`" a 0 m W C U y ~ ~ ~ F y m p O 'D O Q ~ y O ~ O 'O y 0. ctl 7 cd W ~ y w ~~ o y a .~ GJ R 0. O ~ O f y m G~ O ~ y R '~ '~^ ~ Z $ ~ F G G. ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ O O +''Qa'~ ay ~ a.~ N ~ U.S~~~•c~,~a. D ~ 2 W ~ ~ °~° ~ W y a z ~~ ~ 3 w ~. o o ° w F m C y ,y y L~''O U D O O y ~ p >, ~ U ~ y `~ O U N 0. Res.+ G W VJ w+ bn .-. '~ o~ R'z he~,oc ~ aro ~• ko r C a"i'cA Tc o•~ o ~ ~ 'o ~ ~ ~ 'ono ~ n w° a +U~ y ~ ~ 0.p cvv' ,O C G r f.. G ~~ w .--. fpq W U q C ft1 ~ ~ O G ~ Y ~ `~ U y N ~ ~ G y y 0 ayJ y ~ U ' O ^ On p p G .~ C O G ~"" ., cy0 O r cv ~ ~' ~ G y t, ~I N ~ ~ U C G ~ O G U R O~ U~ y .o ~ y /..~ O ,o .a U U O y p ,~ ^~I ~ C y T.' ~n ~ O C~ 'O h0 U ~CC 0 r.. ~ U ~N O pp YO 7 ~ O O U 'O T L1 'G ~ ~ ~ y p . . ~p ~' ~ OD cd y ~ ._^+ ,O C O N U re U .fl 'C 'C O O ~ .~'~ ~ G cd ~ y F ~ ~ tC vi ~ a~ c 'y V ti w a> a~i ~ •~ aUi ~ ~' c y rU. v R U •U ~ ~ ~ pn on U 3 '~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m ^° actli o .=' ~ n ~ y a .s U ~ Q. a F ~ H O C L~ y' V O tq y y 7 ~ 'O ~ >' ~' ~ L Vf N N Ctl ~ O N .C 3« '~ eC-'r y~ ~- ~ G .C O ~ U N '-. id > W ~ y • O bq y U ~ ~ ~ -: _n cO , _ T _ y ~ m ~o `° .G T y p . . Q ~.a ::.p ~ y'~ O cGd O N ~ ~~ ce G .fl '-. y p _ . ~ ~+ U cC V ~ _ .D L .U '~ fE ~ L' ~N ,v C^ ~.e = rL r ll ~ ai ~/] W p Q~ 5 U ~ 7.1 7 W ~ ~ ~ G ~ O ~+ ~ G C ~ .C • • • • • • • ~ ~ ~ L` O ' O ,Y G m a o ~ U ^ ~ U p O W ~ a on £ ~ ro y G O c :e U U . U C R z'' y ' Z 'v a o ~ y~ 3 R ~. O~ .~ O ~ •C C cV U ~ 'D .~ 0 vi ~ ~ ~ ~ cd G y O C ~ Z ~ U y R ~ x •D N ~ O ti ~ . N • " o W o ti R ~° c C' , gyp . U G m~ SUn p ~ ~ lp 00 O U y U b0 ~ a O ~ 4., > _F O ~ y y~ U ,~ U~~ R O ~p G N ~" '-' O O 7 U ~ ~ r rr ~ , •^ p 7 ^^ i V rr^^ r~ ~' V a~~~ y ti~ 'Q 0 i m ~W } 00 D W O '2 O D FW- 2 W W J Z 0 Z W J a G O ~ ,~ ° •p N w O m 'D C C C O ° C ° o .°~. w ~ s c a a. ~ ~ ~ ro ~ 'c ~ ~ _ ~ 'o ^o 'o ~ ° N c ~a ~~ 'O p c LL p 0. E ~ E ~. G m Y ' pp p y .O O A y F a~ L y ~ w ~ 7 y G tO O~ ~ O ~ ' ' e L C o a .^ ,mr' .. y , .o c ~ ,o O O v a 3 0 , v C '° a ca 'o .a ~ C ~ C .a ~ a~ 3° c 3 3° 3 a °: ' ~ ' c~ E 3~ ~~ ,n G t a~ ° 0 ~ 3 c ~, R 3 o ~o ~ F y .~ 'OT 3 ~ ~ y .a ` ° ~ C O O ' .L ~ 'C ~ :D •~ 0 ~ ~ .p 0 .y y ~ L1. ~ 0 z A d at0i t1. O COi O O y v b y .O ,--. = to . . c0 >~ O C C b 0 ~ ~ ~ y C y C Ld w U ro 'O .d OC of O V ~ 0.~ > C 'O ° y A ~ v~ N V U y N ~ V O O O m 'p O > 'G aOJ 'A-' ~' v1 i. ° c0 G N ,L rN, w N C 'C cOa •O+ O L U cE ° A N V • ~^ U U ',' •p O V U ~-. ~ t«. .~ ~p L .C1. ° d m O 0... Ge- ~ ~ . N d Y^% > ~ OV y 0. ~0 ~ O C y ~ y G „~J .0 > A ro O ~... t0. 7 N~ N ti . ~ ~ ~ cn o0 0 • • . . . • a •y ~ O ~ .~ O C O w. y Y ~' N~ cal O ~ O ~ m h ~A. b0 0. :p ;fl O~ .~ y O C W O a r y ~ ~ p ~;, N ONJ :~ '+ 0. G N~ •U w O O U •7 6i O N y N~ ~ !/~ y,,, ^ ~ 00 b O 0 0 O O N y N cC ~' y N„ y~ L=i S _ L3 ft ~~ F y° ,C ~~ 3 N 'O i.. ~0 ~ C G ,9 .O O O O ~ w .a+ ~ .- ~ ~.' ~ ~ a ,N '_ .~ R F ~ T C y ~ 'v ~ 'O y N ~ C ~ ' _ G U C G. O > N ~ ~ ~ 3 NO a. A O .0 y '°O ~ ~ ~ A ~ .O P ~ q V cC y ~ N U cC V G ~ ~ y a~ OO 'G V V . . W y •G O ~ ~ R~ N j 'O V y N +j A ~ F ' '° ~ _ ~ 7 U • C ~ c C L,' ~ lU/J ~ N y a a ~- ¢' N V ~ y V O y '~ td 00 G N y A V tl GJ c Vi ~ N ~ Q V +~'•' ~ V. O a y C7 ^_ ~ o g~ •E c'~ °V'.o aT,.N + ~ ~ ~°" ~n:° ~ a ~ a ' ° CE " . a 3 a ~.N ~ v ~ ^w~ v a a ^ ~~ Imo. V N C a~ w ° _ .~ C 'y N° , . W p y '~ A 'O U 7 '3 R V ~ .A .' c0 C cC i... V w ~ ~ V O .'C+ ' X U U 3 .~ C .~ 0 V C ~' y 'O G ~--~ ctl a ~ W E [[ ~ 5 w~^' ..N. V ° cC Q U ~O ~ C V O N A >- V a°0i ~ ew° D °' 3 °° • +y+ .o k '^^- N E >. c ~ ~ o .~ w E y cd V L' ^ U o ~ V ~« ~ api A>, A a A ~ m ~ 'O O 'fl °° w w G •~ ~ aJ y 'D ~ O N m O... rte, y d~ cc rn h G N .D G C A '~ ~ 0 ~ ro 'o o ~ '~ tic 'o d a •o o > ~ a y 0 5 ~ a ~ ^ ~i. ° cQ ~ o ~ ° ~ -^. R 3 ~ ~ v G °' A ' ~ N °' W > ~ o~ 5 ao 0 ° ~ 0 oNp ~. a k ~ a i o ,~ ~ ° o a i a 3~o°~,.a~rxa~^~ou~en icy c ~_ U ~ p N ~~~~ ~ '-a~ ~ 3~ ~ >,~Y •y3 °~~°~~ GO A U N IU-. N F O ~~ ~ V U .N w N G ' q N A= A F N N~ y G A F l..~ i ~ ~ O 0. V] C1 w ~ 4 ~ w . . , W ~ p O ; 'G A V1 ~ w U m y F ~ 0 3 .~ ~ .D 3 ~ 3 3 ~ riai b N b b Q O O N b W 0 0 N N a~ ~o b O O N W Cif GJ .wC U N :H ..o "CJ 0 U Q 0 ~- m W GO W i O ° ~ W O w g 0 a W o W ~ .~ 2 $ c 3 a=..'o 00 ~ .~ O FW. ~ W -~ v W ~ .~ J ° $ a ao ~ Q ~ ~ .. v a~ c U y ~ i ~~ ~z ~~~ O U f{4 y C ~ ~ ~ C . ~ ~a ~~ga` ~~ ° '~w ~~ o .° ° ~ ro c ~ '9 0.y 0. y ,~ ~ Ur ctl C ' ~ ~ ~ ~ y O ~ ,n as c ~ 'y N " ~ v •G ' c '~ ~ G y y _ ~ ~ W ~ G N ~ N N cC ~ S,a:~C]8 '' ^^ yJ Y /_~ ~! ~ ~ G ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ,.U O ~ - W Q ~ ~ ' o m iC ¢ 0 y 'D E i ~ ~ ~ y ~ '~ C ~ .~ ~ Z Q ~ H > ~ ~ Q ~ a~.~ 1= ~' G c 'o ~p •y ti ~ W ep~ 3 , C7 ~ y'c~= p I. W'O ~ a N ~ ~ 2 o N = ~oo v °~0 3 ~ 0 m W 0. p ~ U .~ op '° E D ° W ~ o C ^~ ~ ,; O c ° c I~ ~° c . cv w O ?' o ~ ~ U o 0 W w W ~ o W ~~ a ~ •~ vl y 0. W ~ ° _ $ 'o ~S ° a ~ ~r/~' a W G N W o.~~y~ Z y o y a y C W ° ° ° c ~ asy°'o a • o ~ `~ ~o 00 a aw° a > ~; .s .~ m ~, ao .__ o G ~ c _ 'o a~ 3 `~ ° ti c a0i aoi ~ y o4 ~ ~ ~ ° o w m •._~. C y Y 0. y OF w c^Oe Cy F Z' 'p-' C> 'O ~e y F :~ iU. cf, f1 ¢ r. q, •L U .D N G ti cOC ~ y ~ .~ gi %p 7' .0 O y .,, ,~ G G~ N y~L~ O F aU., C t~tl j y N G y F cd .~ C O C •C N O N •C id C O C ~ c ~ v .o ° o ~ ro ~o ~a • ,, ~ ~a ~ o c ~ p. U ~ N O i3 '~yGy.~ O pUp ~ V pq ., ,4J •vr .~ '~ y p•'O 'O •"' j vi~1. Q. a~.+ W 6) > r~.+ VOl ~ ~ ° C. .7 N CC ~ N CV 6J U O 'O 5 cC '~ ~q y '~ G G .U.r ~Q ~ .p U~ G U y ~ ~' y C «7 tq ~°~~U3rooN.~a~ C C .p p U H~ U ~ W ~ ;Q .~ ~ F. G ~" cGC C .y U cd .. ,9 ~ N 4 ~ is ~ ~ ~ c 3 ~ ~o ~n w ~ `°' ~ cy°o Z W ~V a> o~ m„^ G 5 ~w^ ~ ~ ~ U •G cy0 cy7 Q. ~ .0 F ° .c.. G •y Q ~ C y 'p^ K c~7 G~0 ~ .C ° y ~ 5 ~ p {p t0 ~ O p~ G 'G 'O d m O R~C~ ~p O w CL U Q J °~ ~ N' ° o0 .c U U U O O~ 'o U _ g m .- a J cya o-•~ a~~ A m o~ ,~ ° c a ... 3 0 m W LL 0 ~ ~ ~c m b ~ W w o O C O U R ~ ~ c7 N C ... ~ w ~ O E c C _ U U U W ti W W a W m W W W a >' O ,O 'O .C U id F, ~' F ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ h N ~ N O U N • y r ' ~ ~ • cC C ~• O y L ~ . .+ U ~ cO7 ~ ~~ F~ ~ .UO R p U CO ~ y T Q O M U U F F. ,~ O LL CC c `a vi °° ~ ^O :D ~ ~ c v 0 on ~ •c a, 3 'a a~ m o ~ c ~ m ~ v , ~ ,L 'G ,Q _N ~ C y G O p Oq ~11 ~ ~ 'O ,y ~ ,L a ~ y ~ y .C ~ c° i~ o~~ 3 0 3~ `° ~' °° ¢ c b W a R °~ ~ R m a F 3 ~ `° ~~ ° c o _ F' ~ ~' .Up ~ ~ •p ~ N F > ~ ~ ~ ~ r v y p N C a't N O ~ ;? .Ui C m p C~ N 0 G O a ~d •y C. t7 ~y c w y •~ y C i0 F U~ ' - N C1 .`-. .~ N ~ ~ N O •p .N. U U CD tlq ^O ~ ctl O ~f U U p. O t .cR,DEa EFC~~~ anoony v~~a~~ '° ~-o- c,,. ,~ y y 'C N C C O W O ctl O M a r. 'D ~.~ O cd O Off. O~ m 4"' ~ ~ c 0. Q "v ~ a~ `° ~ .c ' o o y R.~ c w ~ c m " o a o ° o ~ ~.o v a o ,~ -~~ •" ~ O S :c ~~ ro~ ti a .~ c o 0 0 0 ~ •a y c~ ~ " m " 2 ~ y o •E ~ •o ~ ~ a i c `° Q i 3 .o °, o y Iroh-- ~ ~ :o '~ v ca G = ~ac ~ ~ ~ y F ti d~ 'O a1 a C U N 7 ro~ y G . ~ O N y h ~ N 7 0 0~ ~ . O O ~ w O O ~', U O P. t. E 'C O ~ 'O ~ R ~ C. cd cv np ~' ca O 'D ,a G G is U ,m. O c0 ~ " O O C Q p ~ i.. . ~ O ro y O G ca O ~ iC ~V ' C U ~ C A ~ Q 0. a~ " 'C ~ C C a N '~' U ~N `a '~ ~ C y j . C ~ y azi aUi nUi ~ E 0 U~ C +'~-~ U•~ O m pip ~ R 'O p ~ p C ¢' ^~ O~ U~~ 7 N 0 C O ' S L y U m 4. N 9 y y U y O C y~ ~.._. O m~ N U '_ °_' ° c ~ a°'i c ~ a`°i ~ •o a~ ~ a~ ~u ca o a °~° Q a :v c c~ " ' k ~ a a i _ . ti a~ d a n. e- o a w w a d ~ ~ ca ° ~ a °? .5 R ~ ~ $ ~ ~ d . ~ y E p ~ a ro W d o~ oE~~w, ayi y~ o U• o 0 o ay O ' ' ' f „ y w y 'V ~ O G ;j is . ~ ~ •o o t° ~ c o ~ ~ y cFC ~~ 7 ~ y y 0 l LJ . . + G .~ N ~.E ~ ,^ a ~ v ~ o Q o~ ~'~~ ~ c Gw' ° 0. ~ y P y U . a ' :°pcEo~E~~'y~ o ~ 2 W ~, R ~ ao. c a a~ ~ ~ ~ >, 0 3 > ~y c, Q e"~''ctl~a'Oxa~m I. rn ~ ~ . .n y ao m a~x ~ Rw°w . ~ G r C ~ .. a .. . L.1 O U _~ a... ~ ~ ` / ` r N U ~ ~ ~ •rr v ~ Q L Q F C .~ f0 f0 N ate.. ~ N O O C O p O T U B Q 0 O) ~ ' ,i0 N C p ~~ w 7 M y z 4' 1 ., X~ ~ U v o°'a R ~~ 3 W. ~a . ti O T~ O ~ °~ 'O C F O .. Q ~ a,~Uv ac ca ca ° 3 o ~ w 3 .? ~_ °~ ~ ° m ~ ~ a i c .~ oo ci U ~ a c W v c 4r7 ,~°, ep o° p. y •ia ~.' ~ Q I~L C~ N ~ O a~ ~. ° `" ~ a W ~ ~ v~Ca ~ K >, 3.~~U aa~.~wO.~a, W ~ ~ C7 ~` O U ~ Q o ~~ya U ~ U v 2 W W J 2 W 00 O W W a O ,,~ V ~_ Z O ~ ~ V ~ a0 0 U sy+ c0 F N C a o eo " C o` a ~n ~o c ~a `o 0 y O p .o 0 a 'a ~ `o .. w.. >, ~ p ~ ~o > ~ a ~` o a~ a~ :°. a ~. c y O U G 11 cp 0 3 c0 y ~ 0 d .^ ~ ~ ~ Q. ~ ~ ti a N y Fem. 3 •o 'ai d a~ .. ~ ~ ~ =o tO 3 ~ °y' c .. 0 3 3 0 `" 0 _ a ~ ~ ~ ~ O v O '~. , ~ .r V O o 'a a ?, N O d L ~ ~ 7 O ~~ y~ X O ~ O N m a O ~ `0 J =% ~ y eh a~i .~ E eh a E aC°i v ~ ~~ y W C ~ "' ~ Q C ~ } m ~ ~, g ~n ° ~ m o ;, .c °J a W t~ j o o a W U V v ~ p O N~ G~ w .~ Q O N ~ c .~ w O q yj U~ ~ ~ o ° a ~ ~ o ,c on `° ~ N m C] o ° ° ~ °J o .G on °° A O y W `~ N G i N~ ~ 0. O'~ ,O .' .. 4. C N G G b0 .+ . %. ~' ~ c ~' o` ~ w ,r° c~' 3 ctl w ~ w 5' a ° ~ w y G U Z O o ~ a, ~ " 'L '~0°~ ° c~ ~'''O'a o ~ m a ~ c o 4 . • o ,c 3 c ~~~v c aX ~ '$'a o ` ~ ~' ~ c C a _ i U W cu ~ .~ 0.U ~ v 0.h ~ ~ .~ _ ~ a a • i U W m ~ .~ a U ~ v 0.y ~ ~ .~ O R ~ ~ W ~ o W ~ 'c a°i ° ~ ~ 9 ~ a°i G ~ ° 2 W ° ~ W ~ ° ° _ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ `° W a • o ~ °'w o~ aw ~ a ~ , , G o A~ o .y O A ~ 0 0 g ~~ y W •~ r y a .5 '~ ~~> 'S 2 o C C ~ W ;:¢ roan' cv ° c ¢ ~v~ 3 ~~ n ~ m U ~ G O ¢' y C w ~ ~ ~ 'O o a O } m C . cV F, o ~ W., C C c. ~ .C o .. ~ ~ W N G, ~ ~ o a O N N vi ~ ;~ ~ ~ O N O O m W ~ O a •o k ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a ' ^ ~ ~ a> ~ a`Ha ro~ ~ . o a`Ha ~ ~ ~ ~ a o ~o,o G ~' c O 'C ~ 'U ~ O w. 0Oz '.+ ~ .Q y V „~O„ 0 3 '7 G G > d N C o y m y~ v~ .O ~ c~Ga ~ R. cd 7 i,,, > N N U ~' N w ~ G ~ U Q 'v o ff; ca O X ~ O O cC ~~ +~+ bA m O O y p 0. 7 GN ~ .~ O .~ W w N ~y ~'G.. a) ," '" m ca `° .^, ~ ~ c p °' y N C O 7 O C y~ " 3 G c 7 0 ~ 7 .L" ° o i ~ ~ a S ~ ~ O aXi ~ YO ~ ~ G ~ ~yG- . ~ N O O .~- o ~ . •~ ... ~ w ~ N O G ~ v . O ~ O w U O .c ~ N O G E 'G 4 0 0 3 ~ ~ ~, ~ > ~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ 0 = ~ N .' + ~ N C O M A rn N w V', 3 ea R ~ ~ o ~ ~ °~ ~ ~ 6 ~~~ 6J N ~ ^ ~ ~ .F O . ca 'y '~ eD ~ ,c G o .g ~ ai °~ c ~ 3 ~ a ~ o 'c ~ ,g .L y ,p o a~ Ln . a .o ° y c ~ ~ o c .o y ~ O cC •., o a •~, p ,~4„Ok~OL C•aC~WOvO? ¢'y O'=.flO~N~N UW,~NO 1 ~ ~ ~° E o ~ ~ 3 .N o '= m c moo ~D'E y ~ c ~ ~ ~ W @ w a ° w ~. en h~ R E ~ c ~ a~ c y v ~a ^ ~, c o ~., .o ~ ~ o ~, = ~° 'c wO ° ° ~ ° ~ ~ ,L ° :° ° O ~ ~ " v ~ ~ w^ a o c ~' o '~ v 5 oo v N ~ G ,--. O 3 ~ ~ FOi C C T > ~ ~ f0„ O ~ a ° y f7 ~ ~ r O OA ~ O r ~ ) C.1 Q .7 .~+ ~ 'y 2 O a~ ~ rn'~ ~a ~~ ~ " aW a-- o N ^~ N c ~ao ~ c 5 ~ 'D 3 a`°•~ ~ ~e o aL ~~`° ° g ~'' m> ~ ~.%'c o ~ O "';J ~ ~ ~ ~ "i ti F` . o . ^ ~ '~ a° cNa 'c •°- c '° .a o °_' c t C p ti G' c ~ .? ~ ~ .~ o ~ 0 3 W ~ •C ,x '° ~ v , . 4. ~ '~ . ^ • p ... ~ O ~ 7 0 0 a • 7 U ~ A•'O 4. •F: y ? Qy, ~ , ~ y 6 i ~ ,.~C G T O C G O O 'N ~ c7 .7 a~ ~ p^ v ~ ' E ^. ~ ~ . . ~ N 4 O G U •G N '9 w .O N x ° ~ ° • ~ p0 c~ 0~ G Fr a ,= ° 3 CO v S °? y ro ~ CC R o r v a i a ~ . £ ~ ~ ~ v ~ a .~ 3 ' w aXi ° G A ~ + ~ •° ~ 'O ~ to ,:; ~. G~ o x ~ ~U ~O ~ ~ o vi ~ ~ a „ v1 y o a ~ iE ~ •~ O ss. m ~ o^ ~ ~ ~ typG7 ~A o.o ac ~,t~~.D a~w ~ °' aa" a~i'ti C^ y ~ c o W y '~ v v t a~ ~° Q~~^ ^~ N ~ v C , >> a~ m~ 3 ~ Q O a, U U ~ c y ° 7 ~ Q A ~ ro ° i a1z ~A a~ w d a ~ y~ 3 °~•o R o U ~~•c ova ~ ~ O y w V1 y~~ O 3~ ~ ~ ~. V] E O G ~ ~' C~ ~ O m U w 1- ~ • ~0 C a~ 0 0 U~ ~ ~ , G , Q v w "~ ~~ v O •• C9 O ca 'C G .C ~ ~ y. ~ c0 p m O N V ~ ~ 7 .O U ~ N N d O~ C v~ 0 ~ .-O. ~ ~ Q1 ~ 0 ~ c ~U ~v„-a 0. °~ ~ V i i 3 > ~ 3A O .o ' G cv 4. O 1D d U rd Q U ca ~ W ~ Q N " ~ `° ~ o ti A °~' M . '~ at a W ~ ~ f~ ul V ~ 1 ~ ~ aO O c G ~ .. ~- tt O w id Q. . .a 7 V'. ~- OA0.i~.~~ N ~ Mi Q 0 m 0 W C 4] ~ .~ O W O .~' ~ U W o W ~ ~ ~ ti J ~ U R. Z > O Q ~ •3 _ a .~ ~a ~ ~ .a ~v a0 O ~ 2 0 ~ ~ W v 4 ~ ~ ~o ` a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o w ~ w >, a> ~ ~ G ~ O N~ 'D G ~ O~ .b O ... ~ O y O i.r ~ Cd .~ ~ N ~ • ~ M ~"' by U O > ~ cn ~ C C Q U N G ~ ~ ~ > i > O ~' ~ ~ N m O U .. I-. C U N ^ N U ~ ti N cC O ~ N O ~ ,~ .N .~ cd ~ ~ O ~ ¢ • ~' ~ C ^ O O p ~ O iC O O ' ~ ~ ~ cq0 'D ~ y '' U • ^ N O .6.1. •^ ~ Op, y W ~ y F. N p,, to t)fY1 ~ ~ .5 c p E ¢ ~ ~ ¢ ro ~ ~ a ~ ~, ~ . ~ ~ y+ ~ ~ 7~ U vOi ~ O .~..+ C U ^~ of 0. LY10 ,D ~ U 'U' O C ^ O a U O p~ 0 7 ~ y• C U U R X 0 0 0 V O ~ ~~~ . .+ ~ c~ C y o ~ a o ~ ~ ~ p^ a~ p, a "O Q. ~ :~ ~ d - ' o ' N ~, C U U O ~" y O y ~ "~•~ 'O t-~ , _ b0 O 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ p, •c ~ .~ ., ~ ~ ,1 ,, ,~ m C 0..~ .~"O.. ,~ _ ~ ~, a~i ~ o ~o a ~~ o °' m o o °' ' ~ K 3 c _ _ a, o ~ a c ..a i 3 • r^n axi Q ,~ GG . ~ r : G:1 G] C' rn cC c~ ~ ~ N R. ,~ co" J O ~ O N I c • ~ a a~ a 0 U C y ~ V o a °~ o ~ "~ N erj ti 0 m I W m W ~ ~ .c O ~ ~ w O >' ~ U ~ ~~ W .°o>, ~ J o ~ ~ LS. ~ > a , 7 o ° ~~ ° W ~ ~ a i • ~ ~ ~ •~ ~ 3 a. ~. 00 W W n ~ - ~ W ~ ~ a a~ .o a` G ~ ~ 4.. >, O ~ O~ ~ O Y 'O b y a~ ~. o ~ v ~ ~ x '> '~» o .o w y ~ cC ~ ~i ~'?C ~ ~ C U ~ .O '~" O ~ cad > ~ .b V G, U .> O .~~i 'L ~ a 'v .II ri .~, c L Q.o o. ~ N a~i c ~ ° c°a c ~ ~ ~ ^o ~ a~i 'h o Q ~ i. ~ cV 6~ . O t].'~, cC ea G c0 ~ ~ .~ ~ ~bA 'O 'U .~ m O aad'~~°a w ~~..•o ~d3~~cotiv c° ~~~v~ ~ . o . . d O ti .' ., M Q. O . ~ a U L U ~ _ O ~ ~ V a ~ 1 ~ ''ri ti Q 0 m W } o ~ L .9 <° a ~ 'o a ~ ~ v~a•~ o g ~ ~ ~•~ ro ° ro o ? I. Z m c ~,, a y O ~ c U Q ~ UL.+ L G w .0 Z . Cp cF0 Q ro ~ y b0 ~ J C.v` G ~ _ ~ c m'o c O o C'p , U • W F ~ N U °~~9 ~ ~ o c ~ <° c z~~p~ ~- r~i, w OF •- ~; o ro ° N ~ O R ~ ~ Z O O ~ 'L ,~ O '~ N ro rG U .9 L U ro ~~ a . .>o~ O O"p U U F a y .^ .S ~ ~ ° _ y y ~ N •'~ U O to .~„ ° _ L m F ~". C ro '3 'G ~_ N 7.1 ca L N ~ 'O ~ ~ U U '~ 'w^.. U ti N .D C L^y ~ b0 [' ~ •~ •F ~ w L U ^ ~ a~ c vL_i U ~F{.•" ~FL L L U " •o f0 ro v c r~ii W w .~ N •v 0 L N y y 'O U C S] ° 'G CJ 'O N `° ^O N ~ ^ N 'D L ^ o ~ ^ ~ .a U O. L Q ~ ~~~+ G y ~ ',~•' U •y C" .~ •° ~ N ~ ~ U ° ~ ~ U ' ~ Cd m w N T m 'U y x '~ T ^ ~ R W v w a^ ro a~ ~ ro .a •v v `' a i ° •~ " .o c .i'_ '«~ •~ o ,. ti C O a~ 3 ^ 3 ° c~ o ~ w c ro K x 3 0 ,F ~ ~' ro v 3 .~ o v ° ^ •v ~ ~ y ~ F 0 T C G y F .fl O U 00 ^~ ro U O O U '- 0.E y y y C ro U ~ ~ ro O ~ O. U 'O > ' 00 .U+ C '.n '~.. ro ~• G ~ O ~ L e y U~ ~ O i -• ~ .. - ro o ro U~ U •a c° , v c w ~ N ro a ~ ~ w U O. ro N O~ C v 'C . y v v ro o L N N E U L •o o G cyC O ro .G, c ro O. ~ :k c O rn ro Y >. ca v a L y G y •o ~~ c ro .Q ro o L c : o y U _ ~ C. r O ~ ro ~'~ L 'p .~ ro p ~ ~ y 6L1 ,~ .D .UD C . ¢' U y •~ ~ ~ T ~,~ H ~ y ' ~ .C C' y o m ron (~ 'O m U G~ t-. U ~'~p L7 N ro i O ro 0..O ~ ~ U ~ F G~ ~, h O b y U > N h° ro .- 5 O~ 'D L d y^ 7 0. b e y ro H .C ^' O ~ ~ L ro ro 'O 'O F ~ ~, .U+ U ~ ro• >~ % w.. > •O _N ~ F ro d ~--~ ~ CU d p ~ y F" 'D i m ° F U~ ro F ~ F U •Y t ti h ~tl O C y a N V a~ U " '3 + G ~ •O ~ ro ~ x y 3 O C L L a U O ~ y F L ~ ~ F O a ~ ~ ~ ~ ° >, y „ g ? 1.. ~+ ~ ^ ~ 4J p C • GJ vl ~ U N ~ y U L y y '' P ~ Vl ... Vl ti L CJ O ~ = ~ C 77 G ° .C U ~ a _, ~ o ~ c °' o a Q o~ ~~ a'i ~ a `o o ~ •~ ro R °'a 3a ~ ' ^ r ~ s ~ .N L • ° via ro ~ 3 v . ° ~ ^a ~ `"•' o` ,~' ~ `°c y L • p ° ~ ° j ~ ~ c ~ ~~4•'.0 0, ~~ ~~ o•°- > `v' F c , x ~ ~ o c ~'~.~ ~ ro ~o ro w ,t y a. c•>~ c°~ ~•v ~ ~ c y ° ~ v , Q?? y c ; L ~ o ~n v o O ~ v~ a o ~ ~ ' N ~ > F G y ~ v v 2 ~ ro v c y~ • ou y >> U L w N~ ro N •O G m O C y ~ y 'fl ti • G ti ~~• O - c ~ . 7 y v .... c a c p, .._ >~ i ~ a a U U U ro a> . m~ .^ A ro ~c O O .,U, L t~,U^ : y' <i ro ~ '~ 3 ~ ~ _ ~ ~ F ~ ~ ~ ^ O O ~ p , ~a a ^ ~v y ~v ~ o ~ ro ~ £ Q .?? v v ca o O d ~ v L p ^_ F CL R o . ~ U ~. y ,_ ~ ~ Q N 'Q a~ ~ 3 ~c f/J fq ro i .D ~ a ~ L >, ~ La ~ 0. ~ ro x F v W r . ~y ._ L, ~ ^ 'o ro ~ ro ~ W c L U > n• C ° N ~ ~ O y ~~.c = ~ o O ~~Uw ~ F-~w cU N ~ w H V] t IJ . . , • • • • • • • • • O ~0A is ~ ~ t . . . ~ O ~ ro °~ •ry. O ~ ~ 7 y O (S ~ y~•. U O'C ro ~ W I~ °~ °~ C 0.w C N ~ ODC O c v ~ v v ro c~ a'c"~ i W O ~ w N •y ~3w~ y G = ro _ •D o V 00 O M 'o • ~ ~ ~ a ro v c~ v c .oo ~ ~~ ~ o' ~ o a z ~ ~ W roo ~.. ~ ~ 'G .c y N N J ~ O p p C ~U OC O L`7 b + „ h Up ~' ° stn O • ~ O ~. W T y~ a r~ ~ Q O N h 0. .. ~ y E ar N rn ~} La rU..U. ~ co y ~ 0 ~ - m ° w m W O O g w° W W a W >- CO W W W a o ~ ~_ ~~ p G •k ~ N t y ~ O 'j ~ ~ yO,, a~i ~~. N ~ y 'O R G' .0 ~ U y ~ ~ ~ •~ O p QO 'O C pA O ' C > r 3 ~ ~ pp m U N W 4. y ~ a ~ o ¢ ~ c ~ ° ~ o \ G vi 'O ri ° a~ ~ N c~E ~.+ ~..~ ~ ~ Fcd- ~. a ~ on ~ >> ° a oi° . a~ w a ~ m o ~ o a~ v v :: a . O ^ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .N ~ ~ o . . n a m ~ y v c .o c ~ s- coy ° c 'C o .0+ O O p .p ,-. ~ ~ A c N a ti G y .m y U •C y p Z+ :j ~ c ~ ' a~ °r~, ,c T . F. Ll C N O p .O > ~ ~ ~D ~ ~ O O~ cy b y ~. O .n O C ~ ~ y ~ ,a p ~ ~'O ^y y ac4 "' Cy _ ~ '3 .~ .~ v 6) •0 3 k-~ p U > O ~ .O U C+ 'O ~ > O F Cy m • 1 V O r~ E (Oj T fr '~ ~••' O .fl G iy ti ~' O O C . ~ p, ~: 67 y ~ O F X ~ V v C ~ 7 iy h G > . ~ y ~".+ ~--~ O G ~ 'p iy r.+ ~ y ~' ~ O ~ > ~ ~ 4i U .O ~+ U R ~ ~ O P ~" . T~ p I-+ N C .ti R O O F m .~ N..'~' O~ ~ m V> °J v ~ .O O U O .~ y 0. a ~ y v ~ w O y ,L ~ .~ ~ cy ~ a ~ ~ ~ .~ ~ 'o v ' O ttl GC.+ 'O 'O .~ U G H a ~ o ^ :a ~ p y L ~ ca O C ~ 0. . ~ ' 0. a, ~ ~_~ ^ O~~~ 'a O d~ O 'O N y y • N N C G .C D. ~ d N ro 7 4r '0 y G N i. k y >. p Oq y~ cy cy 2 ~10~ •O 0 ,L~~ cy `y3Eoo.~a0o~ y 7 0 ~ C 7 'O ~•~;03°' `~ E 'a^~,; 7~~ u1'o~'a3._~ y.o~ C ~ N G~ G c. O r. ~ _O 0 4, O O ~ y 3 0 x . y O h N N p m ctl U O .0 v cy y N> 'D 0 0 N C •a., ~ W d U O N ._~ O ,_ ~ ~ y ~ O ~ X 0. U ~ O V 7 C ' ~ ~ (7 ~ D>~ 'O ,--~ 3~~y R C . y O i wy~a"iy°O~~Oa 00 C C ~ 3>~~°^ ~ ~ >> ~om ~ 4. 'O 'O O .~ ~ C ~ v° ja _ o ¢c a~ ~~c°~ w . a rn rn rn O ~ 2 ~ C ~ W J ~ Q ~ O a ~ o e N C ~ ~ ~~ ~'.. ~ G ° r¢ ~ F ~ ° yw O~ y w ~ .-• 0 T ~ O o ~ /~,, cd N H ~ ttl • a W mrE'O w Qc~ o Y~~ m ' S'° c° ~ °' ~ ~ o c a .o ~ ~ ~ ti ~ a c . W ~ . >,~ ~ O ~ w H ~ v U a~ ~ w c R °~~ a.~ 'O w A o 0 . . O H C. C } m ~ F ~ ,a G G O W °' F ~ `° ~ > Q pq W C ~~ ~ Z O y. ~ c O ~ > cR UA ~ U0. 1 D o U y W ~ ~ '~' ~ ~ a ~ ~ W 8 ~ J a ~ 'a ~ F G r C y g w a~ 4 ~ 2 a " a, E o ~ °' •~ on c ° a 4' w A 5 . a 00 W eq ~~ W c 'S° L o o g W F W o °' J ~• ti 'y ~ 'S e°i U Q •o a ca ~ ._~ ~ ,? 'D .G R o c o ~ .`~+ .a N O ~ d ~ o F N F "` ~ ~ .L h U ~ a~ ~? ° ~ O ~ a U O T a :n ~ 0 o a a~ ° ~ a N , 4: ~y a'~. U a y V y v a ~ . i c ~ 6) fin V ~ > > . o . . / ~ C F O~ F y U° "'~ O W y 0 0 • . r0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .o ° •o G °° a L° o U C7 ... o o° c o ~ O > . ~ N N ca p y ~ E y 'O ,~_, U .~ ,~, p ° ti°° ~.:, mo 0. > '~ DD ~ y ~~ V G O^ O y ago L~ >. ~ O ca ~' O O •p •D cv L' G 'w ~ N ~-. F 33. ~...° L°~ R U y T U O N 7 ^ c,L o 3° o'~ c c A~ y ti~ ~ °• ~~ ~' n C o 0 0 s ~ b ~ ~ c~ ~ y~ •c T aO ~• ~ F ~ c a o m ¢'O ~ o.,z ~. L ~' ~ v v ~ °"' a `" °>' w ~ 3 .E o ~ ~ ~ `o° " '~° ~ 'O 8 ~ .~ ° «° a yz- •E c ~ ~ ~ o 3 ~ v ro a`i E ^ '~ ~ >' cLa of ° w a`°i °~' O ~` o •o " R •c ~ 3 y a' T ~ ~v a•Oi ~ a•°i .F°. 'v w ~~ , ce = O ~ ~ C cV N 7 y 0. > ~ C 'y aJ F U m R y p O 'V7 v t' F 0 '0 c d c a G Qa ¢ y' ~ O a y 0 O N; p ~ 3 !F y. y C C a • F > ~ • ~ 4~~ G C .. ~ y y y y •G V N v=i .L U 'O 4. p V 7 7 F of .^~ .p aV+ O ~ ° c . . h G cd U P"'O O V .y ~ N 'G 'O N V • y c y O O {U.. d A~ 'O N V O ~ a L ~ ~ 3 U yJ U N 3 rG ~ 'O 7 •y O 0. U 'O •v V <a y cd ~ G ;? e ~ y L F ° ~ .^ ... V ~ ~ •o ~ 0. ~ oU ~ ~ ~..ya v i cV N L iC cd bq ~y U y O V vi °,t a~ 3 F ° F as a; m m ~ a w ~° a; ~O e,N o ( ? cv cd ~ F O O F ~ > •O o ° w a .VL+ ~ Or..V. 'C y C O c a o c °J ice- ~ a ~ N V 'O_ y '^ ~p 'G y `~ > , ~ ,~ y y ~ ~ U cC ° C7 •v y „ 7 ~_ v on v o .? ° 0 a ~ o ~ o • en F y V a y c _ti >, ~ cn o . ~ G0 ° a a •v ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ y ~ ~ «"F+ ~ 13 ~ a) i . ^ ~_ ~ Oa ~° `~ W 4.. ~ h ° ¢. N . n a y r a. ~ a ^ ' V/ ~ y 0 y A y V ~ O .^ ~y G~ F ~ O F C y, ~ y Q 0. 0 °~ U 4 C y Q G 00 U U~ 3 ti . .i ~ y F V 0 .~ C y (i ~ y y V~ y ~ ~ 1~ o o ~ ca ~ a' ^~• ~ .c ~ bD ~ ..'-. ~ ~ ~ 0. ~ W ~ y C O O .C ~ y 'O F O ti T ~N 61 ,y LC .~ co _~ ~ O 'y 'D .G w N~ U; 'pL a, V 4, G O V U ~ ~ ~ ~ p U ^ cd ~ '~ m is ~ ~ e ~o° ocd ~ ,L R c~ ~ o3.onJ,c.w tWiJ Z ~m.~w ~•~ ~a,~ a ~ W ,.~, ~ ~v.~• Q Q . ~~ '~ Y ~ V y F ~., U~ o D N 'p^..~' ~V., F ,~ M ~ p NOS `. .0~ i O' y ~ 0.'-' y•Ow y ~ m a ~i ~ ~ k a ~ a~ '°~'oEa.c°o ~ o ~ ~ ._~ ~ Sao >3 Q ~ rAti~p~.o~w~ A O 'D N V~ ^ 'L °... ~~om r.+ p y . O r .+ U N Q cv tfC3r a° ~ 3 ~ 3 ~ : axi ~~ ` o •c w . ^ a v i ~ A Qr .~ 0 .~ .~ a> a~ 0 a C 0 .~ 0 N_ T 0 .~ O U Y Q b O .~ Q~ TJ O U aq ;ti .~ O c~ 0 m W LL on ~ ° a'=+ 'L ~ U N m 'O_ C C Q 7 O ~ C •'_ ~ ~ '~ y ~, ¢ 0 ~' '~ ro A C v O O w a^Oi ~ 'fl G ~ ~ C N O O . ~ O '~ ° ~ U a. y o m .~ 'E 'O ~ 2 W O C ,•, C~ •~ C O V O y .... ~ 0.~ N Q ~ U~ .~ ~' >~~ p .+ O N C N U C] 5o a w e ~ U •> v a W W J ~ F " a t. G o 0 ,G U 3 p ~~ U M U h p ••~ ~ 0 • W W • w ri i y y O ^~ v " •~ F. O O ,= •c C A o ~ a.o E > W J ~ " ~ o U y c7 G _ a~o ~ oa 0 .~ 'O ca C W^ cO .~.. C T O ~ J~ v w O w ~ > ` ti ~ ^ `~ N OD O ,~ •v • ~ ~ 0. ` "" d O G cu O o .~ a~ ~ o ~ •o ~o x ' ~ T . a i ~ O E == .c B ~~,, a.°: w C .. ,o .a p ° y ~ . y ~ C O 'G 'O ~ N ti •o 'o °' ~ 3 ~ ~ ;o o. c ~ C X ,O :: ~.. N e 3 ~y cs y 7~ N O •o 0• i c U O m ~ o O y ~ ti y iq U ` . o ° ~ ° d>~ a'•°'^., ~ c ti y • e c ° aQi•c E °'w'° o C° ' ~ ti C C C ~ ^ y ~ d . ~ ~ o ~~ o y~~~ ro y~ ~ y ~ bD p •> a~ O O ca p'• G • O o c co. az~•v Z ' ^ N °r p, a O C F `.~ ap•C~~ Ewon~ ° N .c c~ 3 ~ r i, ~ cw O ~ 3 A •o c ~ a r~i~ a i C o m °' ~ ~ a ~ ~ h•.o E E~ ~ ~ U 7 O ca ~ -`9 i1+ y7 vi ~ U ~ y ~ N .-. m O C .~ ~ d ~ f7 N p ~ ~ b ~w. ~ p ~~ ti a~'9 G~ O O C~~ y C y~ O N a Ctl ~ O O Cd G i"~.~ ° U ~ ~ ~ ~ R .~+ ^~„ .. E . c ., U •o ~ O = G ~ cD ti a~ ~' ~ ro ~ ~ ~ G ~ ' m '° ° ~ G •E a~ m a O ,~ oD ~ ~ ,~ ^a ~ ca '"' a~ ro O ~ :0 ~ > °' ° ~ ~ ~ N ~ v ~ ~ p vi y . y o p ' ~ Y, ~ y Wi t; .'C... N E T r c ~ a i •C a i :. y ar. ^ y ~ ~ ~' • ~~ 9C O ~. C y ~ a h~ ~ vi G ~ a~ O G~ y ?' c . a. U o o ° ti.o o. y ~ ~, y. y V O C y c~ O N N .D o ~ 0. O ~ C U ~ ~ .o .a ~ d p O ' :: ~ h c . . d co y •c C O :o O ~ R ' e •d ~ O A ~ ~ ~ :v V N N b a~ v-. ~••~ y ~ O C aZi ~ ai o y v '7 O C O' G ~ ' c i ~ ,,~w G cam ~ °."3oooa O^ i 0 ?G C c m ~ a'- 8 ~:° o ~ ~ ° ~ ._ m o ti ~ a~ k . m 0.C 4. ~ w. w ,p ° ro ~ o ~ °'o E a o'o•a Z CC bA y ,ou V •~ cCa C .~ C~ ~~+ O ro L C O t •G d~ 'L ~' G C" p •` O~ a~ v~ .C a~ a~ p A ~ .... O m G +" ~ ~ y ~ y ~ .c O ` ~ C ~ 7 ~ Oq O t ¢ O' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N O ^^ Q U 'C •ro O C Q T d aj O 'D Q ~ ~ ~ N ,= G y C •C y ~ U O ° o o S a d y 0] ~ 'C W 'O .p .F O) O, . , O 0. y~ ti O 0. y~ y N N N p O ' p, y U v o q E v , c ~ 9? ~~ E v w ~~°~ ~ a~i W~ ~ w Z ~~~ v •v° v v°~ 3 c a o ,'°, ~ a °~ rn eo > ~ a e a • ~ _ o Q ,~ o ,~ ~ .+ rn v ° c ~ o °' C3 ~ `~ ~ ~ c e m > ~ v ~ _ ~ Z ~ ~ y o i 2 Q F "' N _ W Q ~ y i v o ~ ~ e Q W ~ ~ ~ oCi N ~ ~ W ~ . C ~ C O p tl V U 0. 0~ U W 7 O o so c '~ •~ ~°• Q 0 m W ~' o m U vi U ~' N ~ ~ 0. O 'o on `off ~ a p W ~ ~ U W c a W a E 3 U¢ /^ y W .~ ~ ~U o U W o Y , a~i ~ rn .5 a W .o ~ a ~ ~~ g ° ~ `o av~«. o ~ `° c o N O y ~ ~' ~ ~ Q ~ U O ~ cOd U a~ O O C .. N C is .' ~ Off.,, ~' d ~ 'G tC M N O U ~ y ^'1 y y C U ~O O ,L .~ ~. i y ~ :: ~ v1 ~ o~j ~ 'O U ~ ~ °o . N a N m U .~ a ~ a o c o W o Z c ~ ~. w U O ,~° ~ ~ F" o 0 . ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ g w ~ F O U Y D) '~". 4 p 3 ~ ~ , F O O z ~~ N ~ ~ ~ C ~O ~ .- o° ~ y o W ~ ~ ~ ~ ,~ R ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ R m.~ Q ~ ~ ~ z .. U ~ M p Q Q W ~ ^'' ~' c ~ a ~ ~ a~" `°~ ~~ U U U LL ~ r U ~ ~ o Q tg o 2 cv a 0 m ° w W ~0 c G ~ 0 F •y ~y ~+. N N CJ F > ~ U U U c eo O U U U a' ~p 0.° ° n. O a ~ _ U W D ~ 3 `' W ' ° ~ ~ m ° ° y ~ o y ~ c . ~ . W ~ • mow- + R7 a vf1. ~ ~d ~ ~ c U o ~ 3 ~ a o ~ ~ U °~$ y~ 3 C? c o o ?w ~~O a o a o a 0 0 ¢ p )- m 2 ` $ 0 o 0 °, ° ° ~ ° ll! y 0. 0. i ~ ~ a ~ a a a ^p d~ N O w ~° O G s p a O U cd U a~ U 'o ~ •C ~' _ ;0 O o ~ co U~ O ~. o ~ \ ~ ~ ~ `'-' ~.. ~- is ~ 'O ~ c ~ ~ a'Ci ~ ~ ~ c W a w 3 ' p ~ N ` ,~? ~ ° ~ o ~ c ° oq ~,~ Y o ~o y '~ °N° c N aFi N o ~ v +- C C U 1, ~ a~i y= U `~° p a w [ C w C~ N .Y N~ a° y~~ A a c.9a U O 'O ca N P. 'G "c O o w ~ ~ p U G 3 > o = .' U N N X F~ ai C ~ N 4 .' + O\ ti'b ~+ U 'O'ff w p • . 3 ° `° _ ~ ° a J y U . °'`n °o '° ` ~ 'c v y y E ' y ~ v o- ~ a °-~ agw .~ w o y ro _.. ~ ~ .o c ° c a ~ ~ a L" U a+ I. ~ N ~ ti = w I.+ ~+ c a+ m ° y ~+ O ~ n ~ ~ V _ = f ~ N L 4y V W N ~ 4" U N 7) F. F ~ ~ ~ L G [d GJ 0 ~ ~ ~ ,9 ~ q .c ~ a c y a y 'y aUi y '„ ~ ° ~ ~ ~ >, a'Fi ~ o Q r. ~ N Cd ~ U •O T ° ~ ~ ~"~ Q , o _ g O V ~ ~ to t ° F F '~' '~ -~ 0 3 o ~ v °~ ~ ~° .L ~ ~, c ~' .~ = y `,' ° ~v c ~9 ~ c~ c o ~ ro W ~ ~ ~ .U+ ~ U R ~ y a U ~ ~ . ~ t0 00 ~~ .N a.~ ~ ~'~ ° ; ~ ~ y.?~ o ~~ ~ o ~ ~ q • ~ ~ O V] •_ ~ ~ N O F w ~ ra G ~ 'b0 ° R O Q' ~ O _ p ~ W C N .~ Ci d C j ~ > •~ ~ Q'.~ rUi~ ~ > y 3 v i G ~ •_G ~ y U y y q~ Z w N~° 'y U lp L ^tl A p p .y « U ~p ~ V~ U O ^. ~ cd U a ~ ~ ~ ro ~°~ ~ a ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ o o. .. g ~~ a = ~ ~ ; ° ~~ C a ° °' r ~ ~ . N ti > ~ ~ i ~ n ~ a~ o v Zvi o ~ a C '~~ ~ i a ~ y v i iv >, . ~ °~ ~ ?o ~y ~ ° a U °~ i~aR ~ya O V 'O = ~ ~y O ~ 4~~o ~, :o> y °J p o ° ~ R y ~ Q . ~ ia .~ c w >, j cc o o' ^ W ~ ~ M d c ~ a O N O . ,~ ~ ' V aCi ~ ~ Q ~ ¢ ~ y ¢ • , E ~ ~ ~ c o ~ ~ c°J. aci l ~ . _ a ~p y ~ . ~ Q ~ y 3 ' U ~ V ~ :: a ctl a i t0 y .. y C i.. t o a i ~: y y o 'r ^. ° ~y 3 w c'~ . d O >. r.. 0 7 G O F F.. ~ W i ~ ~ c a. C ~ ~ G ~ a F.. G O U ~ U dl ~ ti V•~ ~ „ ~ O ,a ~• ~ cow F = ~ ~•'~ o ~ ~ ~ Q >,-.c o ' = °' ~ v a a a`, ~ 3 v o i a a i ~ ~ R tf O~ c ~~ m a 3 a ~ i , o o_ ~ ~ ~ o ~ C tq C . ° ~ ~ a w ro .??, a o 3 y Q w.~w ~ ~ ~ .~ a, ~ ~~°~~ ~ -- ~ .~ W ,; a ~ ~ .: W W cri C a ro~G°~ a. o, o` E ~' a0.i ~° .c °' O O .~. U U~nOa.~ U U ~, C1 A .E A .E ~ ~ °Q =<U ~ O~ av aU~ Z U y ~+ ~; y .7.' cC ~ w U'ti t U •~ b `~ M ~ y 2 ~- ^ "'" ~ a~ W ~ ~ ~ .° ~ W ~ °' a c 4 ~w o c°i ~ 3 0 ¢, 2 0 ~s ~ ~ ~ N a. a, a 00 =.o Uw E 's a0 0 ~j ~ a ~' ~ ~ m ~ ~, ~ W ~ ~U -~ Z G y O ~" iU. G W~ a a y w a ~ ° `` ° a •~ ~ o ~ ~`~' a`.dU •O .~ •o CA •~ ~ ~ ~ h Q Q~ 'O ~ O 0. ~ Fri C' U ' ^ N 'O y ~,' ftl U „C O~ ate.. v W G ~ p .f> ic~i.~, .~; • M1. ~. ,L eu p w y U b C7 ~ N ~p ~ 7~^~~ ~ y G O F ~ F..i a, E ^ ~o ~o ~w y ~ c ~~ 'C 'ti p ~ a~ ~ y .~ ~a o °' c ^d~+ LL +~.+ v ~ ~ O. O ~ O ' j p; at •U ,D '~ A 7 O p0. ~ w = ~ f-i a ~ ooa~ ° ~„~ -° 3 w~ `°~ ~~ o ~ i w o -FO, ~ v v1 y v] p ~o v F., ~ ~ ~ oNO 0~_A ~ ° ~' = a~~i y ~ O N cON Q Oc~~. y~ ?°.a 'oo~ o~ 1. N y ~ a~ 6., m ,.acs o o a~i ~ 4. id ~' `.7 co a Q b O ~ ~° Fi C N id 'O N~ y ~~ p X ° > L U~ p ^r b c0 c0 N= y O C y R '~ U °~ 7 y ~, 'O G C 'G fy y .~ .X a. m a°i ~ c m ~ v° .~ ~ ~ ~ 'c 3 R w° o ~°, w ~ c ~ a`"i G A N ~ ~ ~ G in N G O U ~ ° E aFi ~ .°+ ~. a0.i .~ ._~ ~ U eC .~. h C M ~ '`O c7 ~ G A r/i rn ~ y ~ ~ U °~ cCd N O C '~' - U ^~ d 1 0. ~-' > 00 ~ V .--. G O p 6J a v 'm ° v °' o `° ° of . _a a. ~ °~ ~ c G T E ~ p E v a°i ~ ~ ,_.., 'Z ° '~w'~R ~ m c ~.o ~s ~ ~~ "~ ~p^~, ~Qa ~ v-.E o cctl. E~+"' ..d ea ~ o cn oci ~ ° ~ o °' c ~ ~ a ~= ~o ~'^ '~ a io °o y > ~ ~~ > c°o., ° c°i ~ 'C1 ~ ~ v a"i " ° U ~ U o ~, on 3 Q •~ m w ~ ~ ` F, O °~ '` °~ ``" > o ~ ii a~ v c .o `^° ti F ~v ~ ~ o u1 ~ }% C ~ v c~a G ~ y ~ ~ 'v ~ d c .c G C a~i aFi cv T'~ 0. >, ... ~O U ~ ~ cv 0. ca 'p a~ ca rn a ^> ti y C C7 p ;~ ca m C ~ ~ ~ ' 7 N~ p O C ~ M ti N p~~ •O Oft U o O N~ aJ y y. .+ ~ ~' ~+ ~ N a ~ ° a~ ~ 3 C7 ~ x ~ E ~ Q 7 ~ c o v a ~ b .='' ~ ¢ ~ ~o ° H 'v ~ ~,, ~' °o ~ y `" ~ y aki > ~ °,- E •^ of ~ ac O fl. ~` ~ p~ ~ y~~ f« R 0.C ~ °' 'c c U O Y F° E= F O o m o v' ~ r ` '~ ~ C N w 'y ~ ^ ~ W w ~ ~ ~ j U ~ p N N U ~ y E 'fj ~ n..~ +~+ y '~ ~ 0. ~ v m . ~ o ... ~r C1 -. ~ ro U ~ d ~ ~ E v w ~ . ~ cn y °~' . F"~. W Q U ~ '^ ~ ~ m y -. OD . •~ • y 0. •d ~ N O ~ ¢ Q X ,L C y • C1 >, `o o a~ a ~ w ~ o R ~ Ll ~ W o W ~ o . ~ ~ a'~ A n t~ o o ~ O n '° ° o c °' °C' =° N o v o a p c ~ 'y CE C O 0 dQ C 5 C ~ ' C ~ y ~ G . ~~C L d U k""~ . R 'O ca U F" 'G V ~ ~ ~ 0. Q . .. ~ / W W ~ O ~ c ~ 2 °, O ~ U W W ~ W ~ 4 Z ~ o a >- C1 W v W `~ J •o a ~ s ~ ~•~ o o w U C j~'O R ~ .~ .~ ctl U ~ ~ ~ N ~ d y c 0 ~ O y _ ~ ~ `~' ~ a y p p 'y d .~.. ~ .n ~ y :: O CCC W O .p ~ y Cv 5 ~ vi 0~30~~0~ opo a~ ~ ~"=~ c a~ ro~o•^ c7 N ~ ^C O r,N ~ ~ y ~ U T .~ y c OJ b0 "" N W ~ C cd H F~ U 7 ~ y ... y p Z T 0. ..+ ~ bA F~~ 3 N O ,-. y"X ~ y y O'O y ~ y o~ ~ ~ w y ~ ~ C7 ~ ~ ~ ~ VJ ~. ~' W ~ a`0i a~i o~~ ~ c i c . ~ ~ ~ w ,se m z ~ a. y w o „ ,~ Q V ~ y ~ ~ 7 CC G ~ .C G U O w£3:~ 1= .~ ~ .? "'~ F U '~= ~ 3 ~ 1= ctl o` ~ ~ ~ ~.v° 0 "F ~ ,0 o ~ ~ c Q F w ~ O J ~ ~ O R 7 .. U a. o ~ a 3~ ~ W ~•^ I. Q N d o E .~ .. ~ Q 0 3 co ~ ._ 'o aE~ c o ~ O ~ ~ ~ APPENDIX Air Quality, Miller Consulting Traffic, Crane Transportation Group AIR QUALITY AND GREENHOUSE GAS REPORT APPENDICES Greenhouse Gas Calculations 2006 Addendum GHG Summary Emissions 2006 Addendum Electrical Use 2008 Addendum GHG Summary Emissions (Ancillary) 2008 Addendum Electrical Use (Ancillary) 2008 Addendum GHG Summary Emissions (R&D) 2008 Addendum Electrical Use (R&D) URBEMIS Results Existing 2006 Addendum Annual Existing 2006 Addendum Summer Existing 2006 Addendum Winter 2008 Addendum Annual (Ancillary) 2008 Addendum Summer (Ancillary) 2008 Addendum Winter (Ancillary) 2008 Addendum Annual (R&D) 2008 Addendum Summer (R&D) 2008 Addendum Winter (R&D) Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Calculations Project Name: Tertabay 2008 Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Area Sources and Vehicles I Annual Emissions I - pounds (Ibs.) Tons Metric Tons URBEMIS2007 Area Emissions 2,080,480 1,040 944 URBEMIS2007 Vehicle Emissions 21,993,920 10,897 9,978 Total Emissions (area sources + vehicles) 24,074,400 12,037 10,920 Indirect Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Project use of Electricity (Power Plant Emissions) Estimated Project Annual Electrical Use: 9,250,213 kWh (kilowatt hours)lyear 9,250 mWh (megawatt hours)lyear Annual C02 Annual Emission Factor Project GHGs Equivalent C02 Equivalent Indirect Nitrous Oxide (N20) 0.0037 9,250 0.0 298 5 I Methane (CH4) 00087 9 250 0.0 23 1 T.,e.r rnd,re~ CHG Emissrons from Protect Electnaty Use- 2,204 Total Annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission from Project Operations --All Sources (C02 equivalent Metric Tons) Area Sources 944 Metic TonslYr C02e emissions Vehicles 8,978 Metric Tons/Yr C02e emissions Electrical Use 2,204 McVic Tons/Yr C02e emissions Total= 13,124 Metric TonslYr C02e emissions Total Annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission from Project Construction --All Sources (C02 equivalent Metric Tons) Tons from URBEMIS Metric Tons 2008 951 883 2009 878 813 2010 5 4 Total Construction 1,632 1,481 Average Per Year 544 494 Notea and References: Total Emissions from Indirect Electricity Use Formula and Emission Factor from The California Climate Action Registry Report Protocol 2008 Pg. 32 (CCARRP) gives Equations Pg. 85 (CCARRP) gives C02 equivalency factors Pg. 87 (CCARRP) gives Methane and Nitrous Oxide electricity emission factors (Ibs/mWh) Methane - 0.0087 (Ibs/mWh) Nitrous Oxide - 0.0037 (Ibs/mWh) PGBE Carbon Footprint Calculator gives C02 output emission rate (Ibs/kWh) 0.524 IbslkWh Ibs/metric ton = 2204.82 Percentage of 25,000 52.5% Percentage of 174 Million 0.008% Annual kWh Calculations for Project Emissions of Electricty Used by the project Project Name: Terrabay 2006 Project Total GHG Emissions From Commercial Electricity Use Average monthly consumption (kWh) Office* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 12.95 665,028 8,612,113 Quality Restaurant* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 47.45 7,000 332,150 Retail* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 13.55 18,000 243,900 Child Care* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 5.9 5,000 29,500 Performing Arts Facility* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 10.5 3,100 32, 550 Total 698,128 kWhours per year 9,250,213 *Electricity Usage Rates from Table A9-11-A South Coast AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook 1993 -Usage Rate is Average for SCE and IADWP **Based on project description Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Calculations ProjedName: Terrabay2008Andpary Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Area Sources and Vehicles URBEMIS2007 Area Emissions URBEMIS2007 Vehide Emissions Total Emissions (areasources+vehiclea) Annual Emissions pounds(Ibs.) Tons Metric Tons 2,119,060 1,060 961 21,830,080 10,915 9,902 23,949,140 11,976 10,863 Indirect Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Project use of Electricity (Power Plant Emissions) Estimated Project Annual Electrical Use: 9,219,056 kWh (kilowatt hoursyyear 8,219 mWfi (megawatt hours)/year Annual C02 Annual tmisslon F-ador Project GHGs Equvalent C02 Equivalent idired GHG aces Ib/mWfi Eledrid mWtl metric tons Factor Emissions metric ton :arbon Dioxide (C02) 524 9,219 2,191 1 2,191 litmus Oxide (N20) 0.0037 9,219 0.0 298 5 ethane (CH4) 0.0067 9,219 0.0 23 1 Total Indirect GHG Emissbna from Project Electridty Use= 2,186 Total Annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission from Project Operations --All Sources (C02 equivalent Metric Tons) Area Sources 961 Metric Tons/Yr C02e missions Vehicles 9,902 Metric Tons/Yr C02e emissions Electrical Use 2.196 Metric TonsNr C02e emissions Total= 13,060 Metric Tons/Yr C02e missions Total Annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission from Project Construction -- All Sources (C02 equivalent Metric Tons) Tons from URBEMIS Metric Tons 2008 951 863 2009 686 622 2010 5 4 Total ConsWCtion 1,642 1,489 Average Per Year 547 496 Notes and References: Total Emissions from Indirect Eledddty Use Formula and Emission Factor from The Caffomia Climate Action Regstry Report Protocol 2006 Pg. 32 (CCARRP) goes Equations Pg. 85 (CCARRP) gires C02 equNalency factors Pg. 87 (CCARRP) gees Methane and Nitrous Ozde eledridty emission factors (Ibs/mWh) Methane - 0.0067 (Ibs/mWh) Nitrous Oxide - 0.0037 (tbs/mWh) PG&E Carbon Footpint Calculator gives C02 output emission rate (bs/kWh) 0.524 Ibs4Mih Ibslmetdc ton = 2204.62 Percentage of 25,OD0 52.2 Percentage of 174 Million 0.008% Annual kWh Calculations for Project Emissions of Electricty Used by the project Project Name: Terrabay 2008 Ancillary Project Total GHG Emissions From Commercial Electricity Use Average monthly consumption (kWh) Office* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 12.95 662,528 8,579,738 Quality Restaurant* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 47.45 7,000 332,150 Retail* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 13.55 17, 009 230,472 Child Care* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 5.9 5,644 33,300 Performing Arts Facility* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 10.5 4,133 43, 397 Product Design Studio square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 4.35 15,007 65,280 Total 711,321 kWhours per year 9,219,056 *Electricity Usage Rates from Table A9-11-A South Coast AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook 1993 -Usage Rate is Average for SCE and LADWP **Based on project description Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions Calculations Project Name: Tertabay 2008 R&D Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Area Sources and Vehicles Annual Emssions pounds (Ibs.) Tons Metric Tons URBEMIS2007AreaEmissions 2,119,060 1,060 961 URBEMIS2007 Vehicle Emssions 22,127,220 11,064 10,037 Total Emissions (area sources +vehicles) 24,246,280 12,123 10,998 Indirect Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions from Project use of Electricity (Power Plant Emissions) Estimated Project Annual Electrical Use: 9,219,056 kWh (kilowatt hoursyyear 9,219 mWh (megawatt hours)/year Annual C02 Annual Emission Factor Project GHGs Equivalent C02 Equivalent Indirect GHG cases Ib/mVUh EledddN mWh meVic tons Factor Emissions (metric for Carbon Doxide (C02) 524 9,219 2,191 1 2,191 Nitrous Oxide (N20) 0.0037 9,219 0.0 296 5 Methane fCH41 0.0067 9.219 0.0 23 1 Total Annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission from Project Operations --All Sources (C02 equivalent Metric Tons) Area Sources 961 Metric TonsNr C02e missions Vehicles 10,037 Metric TonsNr C02e emssions Electrical Use 2,199 Metric Tons/Yr C02e emssions Total= 13,194 Metric Tons/Yr C02e ertissions Total Annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emission from Project Construction --All Sources (C02 equivalent Metric Tons) Tons from URBEMIS Metric Tons 2008 951 863 2009 686 622 2010 5 4 Total Construction 1,642 1,489 Average Per Year 547 496 Notes and References: Total Emissions from Indirect Electricity Use Fomwla and Emission Factor hom The Caffomia Climate Action Registry Report Protocol 2006 Pg. 32 (CCARRP) giros Equations Pg. 85 (CCARRP) gives C02 equNalency factors Pg. 87 (CCARRP) giros Methane and Nitrous OHde eledridty emission factors (Ibs/mWh) Methane - 0.0067 (Ibs/nM~h) Nitrous Oxide - 0.0037 (Ibs/mVUh) PGBE Carbon Footpint Calalator gives C02 output emission rate (bslkWh) 0.5241bs/kVMt Ibs/metric ton = 2204.62 Percentage of 25,000 52.8 Percentage of 174 Million 0.008 Annual kWh Calculations for Project Emissions of Electricty Used by the project Project Name: Terrabay 2008 R&D Project Total GHG Emissions From Commercial Electricity Use Average monthly consumption (kWh) Office* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 12.95 662,528 8,579,738 Quality Restaurant* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 47.45 7, 000 332,150 Retail* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 13.55 17,009 230,472 Child Care* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 5.9 5,644 33,300 Performing Arts Facility* square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 10.5 4,133 43, 397 Product Design Studio square footage** kWhours per year (kWh/sq ft/Year) 4.35 15,007 65,280 Total 711,321 kWhours per year 9,219,056 *Electricity Usage Rates from Table A9-11-A South Coast AQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook 1993 -Usage Rate is Average for SCE and LADWP **Based on project description v N rn 7 U rn c .N ~X W a N of N 01 r ~ O dj o ~ N (0 ~ 4. n v N Oi c 0 .~ m r 0 O N .~ N N c O H N O a N c 0 .N N .~ W m 7 C C Q .D N C O U Y f6 U 'o J rn c m v c m C N 7 U 0 i U N E I6 Z N U rn c .~ ~X W T (0 N N H N E f6 Z U N O a c 0 U 0 N N C (6 c O m U O J U N ~O d 0 0 N •-- O Z M N O O N U w W C 0 .N C 0 a m m DO C O .y N .~ W m U L a f6 O C O O N Q O C 0 v a~ m 00 C O .y fA .~ W a~ U L m (6 O ~ N (D ~ trD ~ O f0 m ~ ° o o c ~ _i ~ O ~ `2 a' O O O W I = W O ~ C7 O O O O N O ~ cd o 0 ~ ~ o M O O O ~ O O ca o 0 O O O O O O O O O ~ O N tD O N N O u~ o O Nll a _ O O O pl °o u~l o a M (~ ~ X OD Z o O O W O O N ~ fh a M N d N 0 O~ n UI °' N r X N Z N h O 00 N O n a~0 O a' O ~ Or O ~ ~ (O O ~ fh O W ~ _ H (n W W Z O ~ ~° ~ m g i a i n ~ m m m ~ -° W rn rn rn ~ y ~ a i _ w ~ w m Z E E E O O c c c Z rn - W _ - ~ 7 7 ~ O •~ J U E ~ ~ f6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a i i a i a _ _ ~ w C C C W ~ ~ ~ N ~ O O 0 > ~ O uJ . J T N J J J ~ Z N (~ O O o is t- O O O ~ J ~ W ¢ ¢ E ao rn O F - W H ~ ~ ~ O ° ° o Q ~ a O a n U1 U o N o N N 0 fV~ O (OBI N M O N N tb f7 a M O a N 0 O~ o UI ~ N X tT O Z i-J T ~W!I O u7 N a L X W d N a a -I t d O a v m m rn C ~0 r 0 n d f ~ ~ c m •m ~ _rn p < •E ~ c ~ 3 ~ ~ L `° •E T C ~ C ~ F O C _ O ~ ~ I J I ~ O I H V I OD O O ~ O In O O ~ O ~[) O1 N ~ ~ C7 O (O 11) M O (p In OD n 10 ~O O t0 O N f0 O (O O N N 01 r W ~ ~ ~ Q t0 N n ~ ~ O N n sr ~ O O t0 CO t0 O O aD (O O O O O O ~- O O O O O O O O O O O O O f") ~ O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O u~ n n o 0 o n n o 0 0 0 0 0 r~ cc cc o 0 o co co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n ao o v ~ o ao o v v o 0 n M N O O f") N O O O O O . . . . t0 M M O O O M M O O O O O O ~ f0 O ~ ~ O (O O ~ ~ O O M O O O O O O O O O . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O V' N O O O N O O O O O O ~ N N O O O N N O O O O O O . . . . f0 C7 M O O O M (h O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O . . . . O O O O O O O O O O O O O O rn a °o r°Oi o o v °o rODi o o ° o N ~ O O '- O .- O O .- O O O O N O O 1l) ~ O m O O ~ O C7 M O N O O n N O 01 O n N O N N O . . . . aD f7 O O C7 O M O O M O O O O O a0 O T O) O OD O O O O f") M O (O N O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N O) O N ~ O ,n a_yi a~ n o O ~ ._ ~ udi N y Q' LL' '~ O ~ ~ y ~ 'O I- a o 0 0 0= 3~ "_ ~= o g o Y N O C C C C O O O O N ~ O ~ C C G C O O ~ C_ N f~`6 N N C I~~O N N N ~ C C N ~° °O U C7 C7 (7 0O (~ ~ ~ C7 Oi N ~ 'O O O L L M ~ U N N uNi vi w ~ N N d N N C C C 4 N~ cc l0 f0 l0 O O C G C C U N d ~ N W ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ LL LL LL LL ~ H H N ~ ~ ~O LLr ~ 4. h N ~ W (D N 01 O ~ aO t~ u7 O aD 1~ N O N r r O r N O) OD ~ O h O ~!Y aD a0 OD N O N (O (O O f0 r Oi 00 ~ ~ O N ~ 'Q N M 01 OOD ~ O ? ~ V' O ~ fD ~ ~ O r ('~ 1~ O (+7 O N O O C7 _O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O f0 O M O N O O N _O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C7 O C7 O O f0 _ N C7 O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O f~ O M O M O O V N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O h O O N O n O Q1 W (O O U') O LL] O ~ O ~ O O O N O O O t0 01 ('7 M O O O O O O O t0 O O O O O O O O t1~ O O ~ O O O O O O O O O 47 O ~ O M h O O O O O O O O O f~ N N O ('7 O C7 O O N ~ ~ N O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N •- O O O O O O O O O _O N N O f~ O O O C7 ~ V' u'1 ~ O M M M O O O O O O O O O 47 (") O 1n 47 O a1 O? T O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O (h C7 O C7 C7 M O T O ~ O O y N N ~ N ~ N y n n ~ Q O. N N N N y y y N y ~ ~ F- co N d yn ~ ~ d o. ~ d ~ ~ o d ~? ~ ~ v H F- 4 m H a N ~' Y p y N N ~ O O O N O O y _ ~ > m o o a~ O ~ v ~ O U Y N O O > N C7 ~ d' Y ~ ~ ~ p ti N O r ~ c c ° O O O ~ o O > ~ o ~ ~ C U U O C C ~ C O C C C r d C 00 C C •• O1 'O 'G ~ O~ t ~ y °o c ~ ~ a s a a a ~ m m' m' ~ ¢` U ~ ~ o F Q m U a ~ N O 0 N N O y C .n ~ c0 ~ O O N O U Y N f` O n o 3 O r N C C U /0 O ~m Q U O O o U N O O N a O y M ~ ~ l0 N N ~ U a N_ a Q !4 d Q v E Q 3 E ~ ~X m H ~ a N 07 N of ~ ~ 0 y o N m a n 7 N 0 O ~ T m J y N ~ 7 0 ~ n N a 3 O LL N f0 V N d 3 O L w O w 0 co O l0 .~ N a N d E L 3 ~ c W ~ m v o ~ O O O N H '~ 2 ~"- v m 0 C Q O ~ T l7 N Q 7 O L W w 0 N 0 0 m N O1 C .~ N d O L '~ -- ~? 0 00 ~ ~ N ~.~- 3 ~ N_ ~ .~-. N ~ 07 ~ a a ~ ~ T J 4y4 ~ N U p ~ m 7 N d E w~-, ~ .x 'p) ~ LL N O N M a N 0 N d Q :°. O H T f0 N 7 O L ~O O Ti w v m 0 O f0 l9 O C .~ N a C ~ E a t d 7 ~ w '~ ~ ~ o ~ O O O Y~ U v m 0 Q' C O ~ c0 N O L OD w 0 w v 0 u~ 0 m m C .~ N n O d Y U d N d C O .n U N O 3 m r H rn 0 0 N O M O O O N a °' E C G U ~ Q m W f- ~ m 0 N Q' l0 a O O 'C U N O O a 3 O rn N N ('~ O O o .. N ~ C d N ~ E l4 ~' c a _~ W m a ~. c v m 0 N ~ m a ¢ O C O .n .~ N N i a v N Of N 01 (O ~ 0 y o ~ N f0 a r. a~ n .~ a W v m 0 ~ O N N NO N [~ rn O ~ (O M c ~ ~ rn o> n n rn U N W 7 M M ~ O O n O N Q1 `"" ~ T O ^,7 O O O O ~1 O a0 [7 n O cWal N O N M N O a0 O O O O ~ O O O C7 O f+7 a °o °o o °o ° °o ~ n °v, o 0 0 0 0 ~ o n o 0 a N o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o p °0 0 0 0 0° 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ 0 °o 0 ~ 0 v ~ O U o o ~ ao v o v ri v o rn cV .- O N ~ o O ~p y ~ ~ N a a N ~ N c ~ ~ n ~ ' ~ ~ D ~ o~ C ~ ~ (n m ¢ N ~ •~ ~ y } ~ a ~ ~ 7 C C ~ W gam' 2 ~j W Z O W W U ~ ~ ~ ¢ ~ ~ CO 0 o O ~ f`6 m z O 0 ° O L a/4i = O 0 o O ~ N m ~ o O ~ 7 p o °~ j o U n O y ~ c l0 p CJ ~ r ~ ¢ 000 0 no O ~ m ~' .' ~ d T c y J O ~ ~ o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ l0 t U N O N O 3 t y3 C d ~ y N o m C m a ° o e ° E ,k ~ ~ U y N N tC O 3 t ~3 ~ ~ v y d `o m C ~ a O o ~ c '~ a~i m U ~ ~ d ~ N p~ ~ , c t 3 ~ ~ ,v_ y d o m C a~ a C G N ~ _ m ~ ~ ~ ~ C ~ c N a O ca ~ •E ~ ~ `m ~ d C ~ N 7 C ¢ W ~- - ~ W z ~ ~ W J Z ~ ~ Wa O X Z ~ ~ O o O O ~ c ~ lp m D W o D O C ~ w m ~. ~ C7 O ~ D O . ~ L y a°'i ~ N o i 00 l ~ ~ 7 .G ~ o ~ a~i C7 O o O O y Q c E m a N O O v ? iy m •, m N ~^ c o J O H a N Q1 N Oi ~ O Qj O N f~ N a n c_ 67 f6 C •ia N N d (O E a~ c cD 0 H ~ O n E N T j ~ a y v ~ Z h O C M D. C Q j o c E ~ O U N N a~ afOi f) m a N .~° ~ E ~ o o W ~ O O O N 7 7 C O C C } ~ .O •O N C C 'y ~j w H T w° O ~ Q W ~ N N N ~ ~ O ~ ~ t0 ~ (O O ~p r r ~ N ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ O d O f 0 m ~ O N N ~ N n r M ~ t0 f~ OD M O O O F- N O O O M O •C O O O O Sri n oo ui ri ~ 0 o fO Z m ~ ~ ~ ~ +K 0. F N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o ° ° ° ° ~ ~ o '- o ~ o ~ o .- Q' O W N O O w d W ~ 'C N E E o 07 N U Q O) c 'O N ~7 C y ~ N N N ~ t~ y ~ 7 f~ Q ~ ~ N `~ O O C N ~ y m •E ~ Q ~ -O " C d O ~ fT6 7 d N y ~ o c7 ~ c7 a y ~ ~n O O t0 M o0 N O N O O O M 1~ _N N M f~ N t1') W ~ O a n N T W l19 O O (O N ~p O O O O f~ (O N U H r l0 O O O O T r r O O O O O m m U 0 Z d T O N M h (O O n O O (D O O O ~ ~O ~ N C N a N N d ~ N O ~ 0 0 o °0 0 °o a ~ H N o a a o a p ~ O O O a n ~ o o°- O lf~ a0 W ~[ 1~ ~ U U M ~ ~ ~ ~ >` O U U U / H ~ ~ ~ ` ~ O N v Q F- ~ ~ 2 2 = ~ rn rn rn d m °~ d ~ J J J ~ J J i a a N Q! N Of ~ O dj O N (O a r. -y o 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O O O N O O O O y O O O O O T O O O N O O f0 C'7 O i0 ~ U y O O O O O O ~ O O O n O O l0 (O i0 ( T C O Z x LL L 2 ~ r ~ OD O '7 T O O O N O O ~ H C d a N O O O O ~ _ O O M U H a ~ y m 7 H = O m (~ m O N j m > (j` _ U , > N O d L O t O 1 = _ ~ ~ ~ (/1 ~ v, co o u~ o o u? o ~ n co ui tai ao n n n O f`') O W O V O) N 7 U -~ v, co o ~n o o ~n o n co ui ~i v ~ n .= ~ ~ M ~U ` C y O Z O U m u~ n o 0 0 0 0 0 O) ~ ~ In OD N ~ N M fh O U ~ ~ O O L n n ~O O _ O C7 ~ d E 0 2 O. (7 O O ~ n n ~n oD L M <0 ~ C d O O N = d Y CO aD O O) O t0 ui N 3 M M N O N 7 L C f6 T a N N ~ ' ~ ~ ' U O) E € ~ a ~ ~ , ~ ~ •~ C Ol O. y E C C ~ N ~ O Y ~ ~ ~ ~ U c ~ ` c°~ Q n ~ ~ N d O N d N N ~ L O C d _ C ~- N H ~ {p f ) .~' y f0 ~p ~p .. - C N O 3 d ` o O ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I - e o ~ C7 ~ C7 a a o~ v eo N Cf O Qj O ~ N f0 a ~ v CV C O .~ r 0 O N w .~ N '~ T N a C 7 O a O Q N N C O .N .~ W N 7 N C 0 U U rn c ~. ~X W T N (6 L H ui E f6 Z U N O a c 0 U 0 N N C ''f^6 VJ c 0 m U J U N ~O a tD O O N O Z M N O O N U N W ~ ~n n o ° c o o N M M f~ N O O N N O O ~ ~ ~ O h O L N aD N O O (O O O ~ N M M O O n N {n M t0 o n o a o, ~ ° o `t N c +~, ~ O ~ N ~ ~ ~ 0 EO ~ O a I O fD 1 ^5 I O ~ r ~I CO N T N O O O O (~ O (VI N fD Q I O Q I (O (/ ~ O (/ ~ O ~ ° o o 0 0 , 0 m OI o 0 0 UI N W f0 (p ~ X ~ X M h t0 GD 01 Z v Z ~ (~O. N N ~ L O) <O O ('I ~ (7~ a0 F m N n l O N 'l 4'1 'I M ~ F C ~ ry N O O ~ iJ v J ~ W ~ r n ~ M M ~ llJ ~ Q w N ~ W W ~ i- z ~ ~ Q O ~ ~ w m m m t n ~ Z rn rn o, w ~ W O _ • _ • _ • z E ~ E m w ~ ~ ~ a ~ m U ~ _ ~ c m m w a v v ~ ~ W ~ ~ a a r ~ a W m J m ~ N n H cn (n (n V ~ Q ~ ~ ~ U J J J ~ ~ Z ~ O < N m ~ F ~ ~ O O O N ~ ~ N ~ Q Q ~ a ~ Z ro rn o W ~ F - O a ^ ~ N N N Q O ~ O ~ N O tt~--AAI O O 00 tD 0 M ~I N a Q~ a CVI N (/O)II f0 O 0 OI ~ 0 m xl n n Z co N ~ O O X N a a N L ~I a a a d m _rn ~E C T l0 x~ Ory~ d Z a J i ~ I i S o ~ a ~ i• ~ ~ i ~ ~ - ~ o, ~ i. . a; c ~ ~ j c rn ~ S ~ ~ c C ~- ° ~ ~ J ~ F ~ C ~ s C i ~ U aD O 00 V' c0 CO O 00 ~ (O In 1l) 'af O O ~ tD h 1~ O ~ O N n O ~ O N '~ V; (O ~ ~ ~ (O GD ~ t~0 O O M N f~0 O O _M N O t0 ~ ~ O O ~ O N O ~ N O .- c0 OD n ~ ao c0 r ~ M M O M M O ~ •- ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N O O n (O O O t0 n (O O N N N O t0 c0 t0 O r r ~ OD 00 O ~ ~ 00 OD O O O O O O O O O !- M ~ ~ O M r N O O O O O O O O O V ~ M ~ M O O .n-• M O O~ O O ~ M O N N N O t0 ~O tD O Il) O CD (O O ~lM7J ~ O a~ f0 O 01 ~ 01 O a0 OD oO O ~ o ui o n o ai o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 rn m o M o rn m o M o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c0 V' O N O tD 7 O N O O O O O O O O O M M O O O C~1 M O O O O O O O O O O O M M M M n O M M ~ n O M M ~ ~ O d' ~' M O N O 40 O O N O CO O O O O O O O) O O m O N O O W O N t0 O O O O O O (O fD f0 (O {{{ppq~~ (O O M N O (D O M N O O O O O M M M O r O O ~ O ~ ~ O O ~ O O O O O T O 01 O OO O N tD O CO O N (D O O O O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ N O n O ~ O? N O n O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O O O ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O pfd m O O O O Ofd W O O O O O O O O O O O O OlJ O O .-~ O OrJI ~ O O .- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O fD O O M O fD f0 4'1 n n N u) N~ N O 01 1~ ~ ~ N O O h ~ n n ~ N ~ ~; M r O OD O O 00 O ~ T O O ~'- O W W ~ ~ n u~ n ~n R O M N 01 ~ O M N m O O N n t0 (O O n (D O n ao O (O O h ao O ~ ~- ~ O O O 07 O rn o ~ o ai o r~ 0 0 0 0 0 0o ao ao 0 O~ M f0 O M t0 N N N ~ ~ ~ N~ N O N u~ ~ (y N O N ~ O n n M d' N N O ~t N N O (O ~ O c'ay'1{ N O t0 ~ O M M M O N N ~- O ~ ~ O ~ O O ~ O ~ O O N N N O N N N O y y O O O O 00 N ~ N O n O O y d y _N y d O O N O y O N O y y O O OD L f0 v f6 F N a0 ~ ~ C O 'O •C H N M y y ~ to d ~ N c` N ~ y d t0 O _ Q' ~ ~ N O O O N M O -p f- O Q O U F- N N y >O ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ U 01 ~ G O O O C O C O C Of C p pJ ~ C C C C O N O ~ O > O O O O > O O N O C N N N ~ ~~ O V 'O 'O 'O ~ N N m > Ol ~ N N Oa O~ N ~~ f 6 O C O N N N N ~ ~ C C ~ .- C C Q~ O y L O f6 O U O O O y 'O O O O O O y Ol L U L U N T 07 C L U L U M O yy T U l0 O (,~ N y y y y y y y y ~. N l0 ~p O N d N N d 1. ~~ C L N N Q~ ~+ O L N O Q y 0 f6 f6 ~L N O O~ C C C C Q U H U ~ N H ~ N > N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; C N LL LL LL LL ~ > ` F- ~ > ~ m N N E~ ~o E~ iii E~ ~ E~ ~ a n ~Q HQ F=¢ i=¢ u~ u~ o N o M rn o v m n n o n ~ o u'~ f0 /D O ~ O n ~ N O M V' 7 O ~ n O f~ ~ R O O M O 00 7 ~ O ~ ~ O ~ n n ! M O O N ~ u~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1{7 47 N N M f0 l0 Q1 O O N t0 f0~ fD ~ n N N O N fy N O N N N O N O O ~r7JI LL~ N ~ O O O O pOJ1 O O O .- r O .- O O O O O O O O O O O 01 T O N fD O ((((pppp~~~~ (O ~ O O O O N N O N O O ~ d; N O O O O O O O O ~ .- O ~ O O '~ .- ~" O O O O O O O O O O O O O O~ O 0p O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N O M n n n ao t0 M M M O M M O M ~ ~ O M O O aq W N N M O O O O O O O r r O .- O O 1 •- •- O O O O O O O O O O O O M (O O OOOO~~~~ O 00 N ~ O O ~ ~ O C7 O O (q t0 N N ~ O O O O O O O ~ .- O ~ O O 1 ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O N N O O (O~ ~O O ~ N N N O N (y N O N O O O O O O NOJI N O O N O O O O pOJf O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 47~ Of ~O O O O O '~t O O O O O O O O O O~ OJ O O O O O O O O O O O O p i O O O O O O O O p I O O O O O O O f0 M i0 47 O) N (O ~ O n N aD .-~ O O O O O O O O OOO~~~ ~ O f0 O O O (O C - C G ~ ~ O oD O N ~ ~ ~ 'C ~ Y7 ~O O ~O '~t O d' E 'C U N N N Y7 N ~ O O N (O cD 1~ M .- N O N ~O C1 M O) N O O) N O N O O O) N (O~ c y t0 N O O t0 N a C N f~ n O to ~ O ~ n u'~ N O O O O p l O O O O r r r N N ~ N C LL M M N N ~ n t0 f0 n N n ~ n t0 fy N n ~ O ~ M M 47 (O .- O W O) oD ~ (O O OD ~ o J O o0 .- .. - M M O N O O ~ O M O .~ ~ A n r O ~ N { n n O 0 M M f' 7 I M M c0 O O N a0 N O pp W O) m O O y O N O N ~ N N O N O 7 N n N N N N n ~ d N N M N N N N ~ O N O _N _N N '- d d _ O n _ O) D. N a `'' o H m m ~ ~ °o 0 o a °~ c ° ~ ~ c ° ~ m y m 01 ~ p f0 O O N p O Q' 'O ~ Y p O U O O O U O C ~ U 00 O N O N f~ C? '~ d' ~ a' C ~ O O O N~ N O ~ O C ~ OO ? N n 0) ~ ~ m ~ O 3 O N N ~ ~ O O ~ ~ O w N ¢ T \ W ~ N ~ O) O O 07 ~' N O C C C r' N ~ d C . N ~ N C . N C O Q ~ ~ ~ y ~ U ~, C 'l>0 C .N C .N C .<>0 Ul ~ U 0 p~ C 'O 7 ~ 7 ~ 7 ~ N O 07 C L ~ 0 ~ N O O~ C L ~ ~ LL ~ U ~ ti ° ~~ n a a a a N y ~ m m m N~ m ¢ U m u~ m ¢ U ci ¢ E ~ to N ~ N> E~ N ¢ N> E~ 7 m N> E~ O U d> E~ O U y r o m d n ~¢ i=¢ H¢ H¢ a F- ~ a !q 7 O T t l0 pp ~ ` N w d ~ O U ~ O w L -~ GO f0 O w W O ~ O m ~ ~ ~ f0 p~ O C O ~ ~ 7 O O G f0 O N O N O ~ ~ ~ L C •m ~ h N ~ ~ d o ~ o a~i ~ N > 10 ~: F- E t D N J N U G ~ U ~ ~' ~ ~ 2 Q m H W `-' H ~ ~ o d ~ m n m m a o > O v ~ ~ N .• . a ~ ~ m 3 ~ ~ Q' a ti LL N O O .- O O 'O N N 0 N rn m m Q T :~ 0 E E ~X O N C7 m '~ O N Q fC H (0 N `o J N 7 O .j LL O O y .. ~ c ~ ~ E ~ Y ~. ~ ~ f0 ~ H W n m m a d' ~' O C ~ N O O c d E d W v m d' C O .n U N N O C .~ a_ 3 w N 0 O O n N C7 O 0 N N N c .~ a ai N L a 0 °O c E ~ n a ~ N ~ ~ W o ~° m N O d ~ Q ~ i a o~ of N O> ~ O Qj O ~ N f0 a ~. a 0 L ~ N T f0 'O d d 7 O L O O U f0 'O f0 _O (O O f0 f0 C .~ d n 0 n t d O 0 c o m ~- ~ o d t 'j ~ Q ~ W N N O ~ 2 O l4 V N d 7 O L (O w O w V c0 O M O f6 f0 C1 .~ G1 0 a r N ~_ N ~_ Y 0 LL N C .~ O U m U G1 t'r5 Q N m t a O O O O O N O O ~ ~ n ~ O M ~ O O (~ ~ ~ O ~ n N co n O O ~ ~ O N N ~ O M [7 ~ O u o ~ a ~ m ~ F •~ u u o N U a ~ u rn °' `u v N ~ 0 Of ~ ~ O U ~ N ~ t N `1 N p d n Q a 0 0 0 ~ o ~ v n v N O ~ 00 O O M O O O ~ O ~ O a N O O M ~ O O ~ ~ (~') M f0 O O O ~ O OD W l0 O M a rn O O O N O ~ Y7 f7 O N O O O O In O t0 O O O U) O O O O O O rn ~ n M n 7 7 A n ° ~ ~ ZI v o v i i i i ~ M O t0 O O O O O V ~ 1 y ~ N .y i0 I y 0) i ~ w y 'E d c ~ I i E ~ U i ~ O f6 ~ i ~ Z ~pn~p ~ 7 ~ U 3 ~ J ~ O W C C ~ H Z S ~ U Q ~ O ~ ~ rn v N ~n V C7 V; N f`7 O (O ~ ~ N OD ~ O O O LL~ f0 d i0 O C X n N th O M ~ O o o rn n N rn Z o v v nv o ~ Q O M ~ M ~ ~ f O ~ d' ~ o < n ~ F U 'm u m D ~ ~O u °' u m - C C O F m ~ O C a~ Ol ~ c c v ~ i m ~ r`~. C C .G y ~ ~ ~ !A D_ ~ O) .a d d L O C ~ ~p ~, y f` E J mU ~ N d N O o O ~ C7 a I- a o~ a 00 N 01 ~ O Qj O f6 ~ a ~ rn N O .~ N O y d ~ E m E E ~ a~ N c 0 ~° m so ~ fn o° y O N a E ~ 00 .. o y ~ .~... Z y y M m rn o- c ~ > c m n c ~ o 0 o ~ o. o N E c~ t 7 ~ w $ v° ° W m m o .. N C 7 7 p m ` C C } N O O y C C 'y U y y T w O O Q W N ~ ~ ~ N N O 1 ~ (O ~ (O m M N i0 1~ h n N ~ O ~ O ~ O ~--• ~ (O a O t0 ~ ~ O O ~ N N n n M N ~p tD h OD M O O M H w o 0 o c~ o •~ 0 0 0 0 ~ ui r oo ui m ri o ~O Z 2 C ~ ~ ~ C N N N N ~ y O O O O O c ° ° ° ° ° o o o o o rn ~ ° c io v rn o ~ O T N O O w d O ~' `- ~ 'C F' E o O1 f0 v O) c ° m .7 - N Y C a y N ~ ~ T y 7 ~ Q d O C N ~ N ~ ~, L y m E t0 7 p ~ N N ~p ~ o c~ ~ c~ y a y v ~n o o co r~ ao ~ O N O O ap M I~ N M 1~ D y ~ O ~ O ~ !~ N ~ a0 ~ W O O N iC O W O O f~ (D N i0 U y I~ LL) O O O O T ~ ~ O O O O O iC f0 U C Z O. O ~ N M r (D O ~ ~ ~ N t0 O O O C N a y y a ~ a o 00 o °0 0 o ~ o v ~,.~ y y O ~ ~ ~-- O y O p ~ p ~ o ~ i "~ ono ° {O ~ ~ Y ~ y) ~ U U r ` 3 N V M ~ ~ ~ H .y Y ~` O U U Y U Q ~ ~ ~' _ _ L L L t 'O 'O y rn rn rn m 4: 4? m ~ J J J ~ J J a OI N 01 ~ O Qj o N N ~ a ~ -y o 0 0 0 0 0 N O O O O O O _d O O O O O O ~ O O ~ O O O N O O ~p (7 O l0 ~ U H O O O T O O T O O O r O O N t0 t0 U c 0 Z x_ N 00 O ~ O_ O O O N O O 1 f"- yC U N a N d O O O O O M M U E - N T > N H = j ~ U m O m m T _ N U j~ C ` O > N f6 O O O L ~ S _ O ~ ~ fn ~ y v cc o in o o in o , f~ (O 10 N 00 f~ f~ f~ O fh W 00 O) ~ O) N 7 U .~ v, m o in o o u~ o O f~ CO 47 N ~ ~ 1~ .- ~ ~ M ~ U ` C y O Z O U d ~ n o 0 0 0 0 0 7 O) t(7 ~ CO N ~ N ~ M C7 O U ~ O W O ~ L f~ I~ ~ 01 Q M v m E 0 2 d M O O O f~ I~ l0 OD L fh l0 ~ C N O O N = N .fie o0 00 o rn O O t0 ~ N r r C7 C7 N O N V1 C l0 T N N ~ ~ N ' ,U O) ~ ~ ~ C O ~ C C ~ N C ~ ~ Y `~ y N J ~ V 7 Q J N ~ d n d O C ~ d d N ~ m _ E ~ n ~ m ~ o o o i, m o~ c 'C ~ . ~ ~ o 0 o d e c7 a a 0 N Of ~ 00 O O ~ N m ~ a ~ v, N 01 c 0 .~ m r 0 0 N N .~ N {' m 0 C 7 O a O d a~ c O .~ .~ W N C '~ N C_ a O U U rn c .N ~X W f0 N N H hi N Z U N 'o a` c 3 0 U 0 N m C (6 c 0 .~ U O J U N .a a ca 0 0 N O Z M N O O N U w W o ~ N c7 r~ n N O tD N ~ O 0 v ° ~ n, v o L n o ~ o ~ ~ o C~ ri ( j r~ C j o rMi o c rn (O v M a O O ~ O ~C! (D n M O ~ 00 O (O O O t(~ M M ~ O ~ ~ N ~ ~ N (O O fD O 00 ~ O ~ O f~0 (00 O ~ M ~ . M LLI (O N O N O ~ O O N~ N (O~~ OI~ O f/„ O (/J~ O ~ ~ ~ M v~ 0 0 0 ~ o p~ 0 0 0 UI N ~ t0 lD ~ X s} n X I n t0 n O (-~ eD Z v Z~ n Z~ ao rn XXXX~~~~ O~ (~O_ N N i Zf ~ N O ~ (a7~ O ~ Q ~ - _ ~' '~ ~I ~ ~ ~I i f- ~ C ~ ry iJ N O O W Z ~ ~ [ ~ ~WJ r ~ ~ W !n ~ ~I W Q Q ~ . ~ a ~ a ~ ~:! ~ °o N ^ r m ~ m E E N ~ W ~ ~ w Z (n ~ ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ Z O m m rn .C > m v a to Q O oo N ~i m rn .C > m ~ n cn Q O rn N ~°i m rn .C m v a ~ Q O o N (n Q ~ cFn W O ~ ~ W v ~ N Q ~ Ol __ .~ ~ m ~ a ~ Q ~ O W ~ vii ~ w W J _ w J Q O ~ w O ~ N _rn .~ > m ~ .n ~ Q ~ O Z Q~ Q d o Z Q W ~ > ~ u~ Q ~ ~ (~ ~ f6 _rn E > m ~ a ~ ¢ ~ O ~ o ~ - :° O -o m °-' .c ~ c ~ ~ U L < ~ u _ G u C F C F u C a t a a a t a a CJI Z ao 0 0o v co ao o ao v o ~ in e{ o o v cn n n O ~ O N n O ~ O N ~ V f0 O ~ O (O o0 v v o n o r v o ~ o ~ co co v <a co v (O O M N c0 O M N O O N N O r N O '- OD 00 n ~ eo ao n .- M M O M M O .-- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N 01 t0 n t0 O O O n (O O N N N O t0 t0 (O O r r ~ OD OD O .- ~ OD CO O O T O O CO OD OD O r M ~ Y7 O M .-- t0 O O O O O O O O O ~ M ~ M O~ O O ~ M O O~ O O ~ M O N N N O fD f0 CO O ~nMJ 10 O a0 t0 O nNIJ ~ O a0 f0 O 01 O O O N aD aO O n O tc7 O n O u7 O O O O O O O O O O O O M O O) (O O M O O O O O O O O O t0 a O N O t0 ~ O N O O O O O O O O O M M O O O C7 M O O O O O O O O O O O M M M M n O M M ~ n O M M r ~ O ~ ~ M O N O OO O O N O aD O O O O O O W W O Oi O N O O ~ O N O O O O O O O t0 f0 (O t0 (O O M N O f0 O M N O O O O O M M M O r' ~ O O .- O r O O ~ O O O O O O T O O CD O N (D O OD O N (O O r ~ ~ O O O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O) N O n O ~ N O n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (O (O (O (O r Ofd O O O T O Ofd O O O O) O O O O O O O O O prJl O O .- O rpJl e- O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O f0 O O M O t0 fD u) n n N ~ N N O O) n ~n N O O n 10 n n ~ N t st M n n O oo ~o ~ ~ O ao ,O r O O O ~ W ~ a0 ~ ~ O M N W ~ O M N T T T N n (O (O O n cq o n co o co o n ao o ~ .- ~ o rn rn rn o rn o ~ o of o ~ 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 0 W M fD T M (O N N N ~ ~ ~ N O N O u7 N O N to 1A n n M ~ N N a0 ~ N O f0 ~ O N O f0 tl') O C7 M M O N N ~ O ~ 7 O ~ W O sf O 'Q Oi O N N N O N N N O d d 01 O O) O aD O ~ G O O O N O a ' O N d W N N ~ ~ 'O 'O F N C N_ M N N d 00 ~ N N d O O O N N W O O N M 4 ~ ~ NO Q 0 ~ d N O N O 7 0 `~ O ~ O >O ~ ap N t0 y ~ a' ~ 2' C '~L O ~ oD ~ O ~ ~ Y M ~ 0 O N ~ Y oD > O O O O O ~ O N O N N O C C C C N O O > O O N O ~ 01 C ~ N 'O lC 'O l 0 L N OD O ( ~ O) 'O U 'O 'O M ~ Ol > Of N N N O) O N ~ O ~~ ` p C O f0 f6 l` N ~ N ~ C C ~ N ~ C C ~ ~ m O T N O O O O O T C V U T C U U M ` v O N N N N N N ~ N ~ _ ~ O O N N O l 0 A N cC Q N C~ C C C C ~ ~ N - N - Q t N ~ d ~ ~ N N > N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ y d > N~ C r, LL LL LL LL ~ y d > ~ F F N N d ~ 1 F - co ~ E~ ~o E~ iii E~ F- E~ H a n ~a ~a ~a i=a u~ u~ o N o M rn o a m n n o n u~ o ~n (O (O O ~ O h ~ N O C7 ~ V O ~ ~ O n ~ ~ O ~ C7 O 00 ~ V O ~ ~ O ~ ~ M N N M fD N 1C1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r r r n n ~ r v O W O N c0 (O~ t0 ~ n N N O N f~ N O N N N O N O O ~r7Jl N N r O O O O pOJI O O O r r O r O O O O O O O O O O O O m O N fD O c0 n O O O O N N O N O O ~ V' N O O O O O ~ O O O r r O r O O r r O O O O O O O O O O O O O 01~ T O aO O ~ O O O O O O O pOJI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N O M n ~ ~ a0 O M M M O M f`7~ M O M sf ~ O M O O a0 N N M O O O O pOJI O O O r r O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M (O O O aD N r O O ~ ~ O M O O fD N N r O O O O ~ O O O r r O r O O r r O O O O O O O O O N N O O f0~ (p O ~ N N N O N (y N O N O O O O O O ONJI N O O N O O O O pOJI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 4~ u7 O ~ O O O O O~ O O O O O O O O O OJ O O O O O O O O OJ O O O O O O O O O p I O O O O O O O O p I O O O C O O O O f0 M O ~fi O N ~ (O ~ O n N aD r O O O O O O O O pOO~II ~ O (O O O O t0 - C O O 00 O N tD ~ ~t 47 tfj O Y7 ~ O ~ d co ~ E •c U N N Q 0 C N ~ N O O O N (O OD n M r O N ~O M M T N 07 O N O N O O O N (q (y O N O O fD N = d N n n O 10 r O ~ (O n to N O O O O pO~~ O O O O r r r N N r y N C LL M M N N r n (O (O n N n V' n (O N n to O C7 M tl') (O r O O) D7 W ~ t0 O 00 r O CO r w M M O (V O O ~ ~ M O r ~ ° ~ ° A n n n ~ 4 M M M M ~ m O O G O O O O O N O O N O N C N N O N n N N N N N N ~ n N d N N M N y N N N n N ~ O d O m ~ n r ~ 0 ,~ n ~ _ Q O) ~ n ~ N O O ~ g d M 01 'O 'O H r W ~ f0 F H ~ O c0 O N' r O i0 O F ~ p O ~ O O N p O ~ ~ Y ~ O U Y O O U Y Q! O N O N a C7 ~ d' Ek Q' C ~ O O O ~~ N O O C ~ OO > n~ N n t` > O ~ n N > O O O ~ > ~ N > ~ ~ l0 ~-• ' . . . ~ c0 O7 ~ 'O L ~ O L ~ O ~ ~~ N j > a ~ a ~ (n ~ 7 7 f0 ~ O .C ~ N O f6 ~ O .C t ~ ~ O ~ CT N N> N d d N> ~ 'j m m m 7 O Q U o Q U m ~ E~ ¢ E'er-, m N E~ U N> E~ U a ~ ~¢ i=a ~a ~a ap O N ~ '~ r N OO ~ O ~ N ~ N O N O O M 07 N O~ y N C ~ U N r Q N T 'o '~ C_ N ~ LL U j Q E ~ N X m a r° ~ a O 01 N of ~ o o N (~ ~ N 0 J O 3 LL O O ~ .. ~ ` C ~ ~ E N d C~ 7 7 m °~ ~`- W m v v o. m m y O O a ~ ~ O C '.k N O O O O w .0 7 O N w O ~ ~ ~ r N ~ I -' ~ O ~ N N rn 0 `o ~ U N ~ ~ N ~ J ~ Y d .~ N U U ~ ~ ~ H W O E > vni o 0 •K ~~ a ~ ~ ~ 11 N O O 117 O N v C1 '~ `~ f0 O H T N N O. N 7 O L CO O O U f0 w f0 O O l0 i0 C .~ N O d C L N E ~ _G ~ W o m O x x O N C O .n 'C U N N C .~ f0 d 7 N T O O N n N r7 O 0 O N N N rn c .~ a N N l0 a 0 O C ~ N ~ E f0 a a ~~ N ~ a W o ~ m N O N ~ Q ~ a 0 ai N 01 (O ~ O Qj O ~ N f6 a n ~, m v m a y J O L n 0 0 m v m _o cD 0 m m o> c .~ `m a 0 n t W d O a~ E n .~ W v f0 O rn c 'v .~ m N a O o °o o O ~ ~ 'o ~ ~: 00. ri o c+~ U ~ li a v oho v m m w ~ co ~ ~-, In ~ f") a ~ ~ u O F O. ~ h •~ G L D v ~ d L a ~ o/ ~ ~ 0 N ~ ~ ,~ c y O vJ ~ N ~ (6 `1 d a ~ Ifs O ~ ~ ~Wai7 O O O N O ~ ~ O1 O M O O O ~ O ~ O d N O O ~ ~ C7 M (O O O O O O O ~ O GD W If1 O ~ a ~ o o °o p °o 0 o v °o ~ 0 0 o cn o 0 0 0 0 0 ° rn rn o, ri o ri ° n q n o ~ ZI i i v o v i I ~ V O O Of M 1 iJ c'7 O O O V' I /WJ O O O ~ ~ N C c ' ~ ~ ~ w ' v . ~ a> ~ W ~ i C Vl ~ s!s ~ 1 Z ~O o I o U ~ a ~ m m ~ 'a a, ~ 5 N Q m c o ~ C Z a~ 2 ~ U Q O H o o ,~ o u i o ,~ E c O C .k L .O f N 1 m ~ ~ C It ~ N U ~ ~ N t I ~ i I ~ I d t I N i i ~ ~ 1 a 1 0 1 O j 3 1 L_ J 3 1 N 1 1 ~ i i d > O I 1 ~ A O I a i O `r ~ a v v cNo U o 0 0 ~ ni v ~n co rn o ~ n v d m _rn ~~ 0 O N 10 O M O c Z o co ~ ri o ~ ~ n ao 1 '^ V O N ~ ~ N O ~ O ~ ~ ~ O ~ O s d d ~ ~ .~ L m - O ~ ~ ~ +O-' C ~ ` ~ i G F 0 ~~ L O .o J y > _~ OI ~~ ? c c J ~ 'j T J C C a N ~ w a ~ ~ ~ O ~ L S N f0 E J ~ J j, l0 Ol C 'C E'" ~ o C7 ~ C7 a ~ N r ~ N N O ~ ~ ~ ~ N N h 1~ ~ N Q O ~ ~ O (O ~ O O C O t0 ~ ~ O O F:, N T N N 1~ (O n M N ~ cD n ao c? o cD ao H .y. O O O M O ~C O O O O ~ O I~ W O M t0 O (O Z C a O 07 N 01 ~ C Qj O N fD 6n a ~ rn C N O .~ a~ N n •° N l0 = E a~ c 0 w H f0 f0 C (~ O N O N n E a '- T N .. 1 ~ O O M ~ v Z N y M N O. ~ O ; O C ~ O V ~' C E a H ~ ~ E v ~p o W N N N . . 7 7 C ~ O C C y O O N ~ C C 'y U w w 2~ w O ~ Q W a ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~, Q c v c o• ~ N O N O (Il O N O N O C O ~ O r O r r O r O r f ~ tt O O f M O Q' O O N O O d O ~' H E ~ D) lC N U a C v .0.. ~7 N N C y a N c _ ~` U y T C 7 U Q O ~ y L C N ~ ~p N f` E ~ C T f0 Of C 'C J O d ~ C7 a -y ~ in O O t0 M o0 ~ O N O O OO ('7 f~ N M f~ 0 y to a0 In O ~ ~ N T W l0 O O (O N m rn rn rn o n o N m U w n ~ 0 0 0 0 T r - .- O O O O O fC f6 U C O Z d T ~ N M h (O O T ~ O (O O O O ~ 1C1 r N C d a N N a ~ ~ O O O 00 O O rj O ~ M N y O ~ ~ ~ ~ N O O ~ p ~ O ~ O ~ pOp O O Y ~ U ~ U U M ~ ~ 3 ` ~ G V M ~ H H ~ ~` O U U U N ~ ` 7 ~ y y N :~ a~ ~ J J J ~ J J -y o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ o0 00 oc 0 0 0 O ~ ~ `"' y O O O '- O O ~+ O O O N O O l4 M O f0 ~ U y v, m o ~n o o ~n o E n m u~ N ao n n n o c7 rn o rn v w N 7 U -~ v, co o u~ o o Sri o n co ~ ni v ~ .= m 3 ~ U C y O E Z E O U a~ ~ n o 0 0 0 0 0 E Oi ~ ~ 1n W N ~[') N C7 (`7 E 0 U a O O> N o> ~ O Qj o ~ ~ a n H o 0 o rn o 0 T o 0 o n o 0 io ca m U 0 Z x_ LL r o. .- .- ~ o o a T O O O N O O ~ H Cy U N a N O O O O ~ _ O O f7 M U F °> ~ m m N j m (j` 2 U , > C O L N O L O > = ~ O ~ iq ~ y ~n rn o L I~ n 1n W 4 M v a~ E 0 2 O. f7 O O ~ n n u7 ao L M ~ ~ C N m E ~ O N N -1C aD aD O O> j O f0 ~ N > (~7 C7 N E 0 N N N N l0 .~ ~ .C L N a O1 ~ d N y c E ~ "~ J N H n N a c ~ ,~ 1- N ~ d O ~ ~ H o N 7 '~ C f0 T l0 ~ C N :0 E ~; • c c ~ a w y ~ ~ U c r ~ Q y U O. O d N N L C N m E ~ ~, O O ~ 7 C N ~ ~ N 0 o O ~ C7 a a N M O! r ~ O Qj O ~ N f0 ~ a r: v N of c 0 .~ m n 0 O N w .~ N m a~ c 0 F- O fl.. N c 0 .~ N .~ W m 7 C C Q N C O U U IO ~U C Q T IO (6 N H N t0 Z U N O a` C 7 O U O N (0 C (6 c O Y U O J U N O a m 0 0 N O Z M N 0 0 N U W W H H W Z O a w M ~ Z a o ~ ~' ~ U o~ ~ O ~ ~ 0 ~ N ~ Z ~ O a ~' o 0 0 ~ ° ~ o O O O L n ° r i. o o 0 0 N CD O m o 0 a ao 0 ch o 0 0 0 `" ~ o ° o, OI co 0 0 O O O O O O a O O ~ (~ W O N f0 O N O O N OD O 00 N O iJ fD N O ~WJ O ~ a ~ ~ O rn vi o rn o n O N a 0 O ~ M a a ° ° o m ~ 0 21 0 al N 0 ° 0 0 pp~~ UI "'• OI ° '' N r X O X ~ O O Z OD ~ O 0 0 N W Q F fA W N N W Q Z O N N f0 O1 f0i f0 O1 .~ a~i f0 01 .~ af0i ~ N W Z O N N _rn ~ fn ~ W Lll ~ C) N rn .c C C C W ~ ~ f0 0 0 o W T y ~ ~ c o Z O c o O H 0 N O H 0 N O H ° N N Q ~ Q ~ ~O ~ ~ a O ~ 0 H n rn n 0 gl r~ a _ o ~ o N ~I 0 Q~ N (~ (O N X N O Z a X d a a I N m ~I a a U C C ° ~ xl e ° ` O I m I Z °~ } J m j a J C N ~ c ~ O ~ d ~_ ~ F ~ G Q: ~~ V rn p C ~~ u m u ~ ~ m ,~ c C '~ ~ h v c C J ~ ~ u Q N G ~ U C aD O O ~ O N O O ~ O O O N n ~ (h O f0 ~ M O (O ~ W h ~ O O N N O O O N N O Oi ~ ~ t0 fD O f0 fD O N .- W Y ~ ~ ~ CO ~ GD V' N O ~ CD V' _N O O fD 00 (O O O OD t0 O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O ~ O ~ O O M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I~ O O O O O m O O O O O O O (`') t0 (O O O O (D c0 O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O rn a o v ~ o v o v ~ 0 0 00 'Q N O O ~ N O O O O O fD f") M O O O M M O O O O O O ~ f0 O ~ N_ O fD O ~ N_ O O M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OCJ N N O O O N N O O O O O O . . . . (O f`'9 (h O O O I`7 M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OOi ~ O M O O ~ O M O O ~ O N ~ O O ~ O ~ O O r O O O O N Q7 O ~ 'Q O O O ~ ~ O M M O N W O h N O T O 1~ N O N N O 00 f7 O O M O C7 O O M O O O O O aD O O O O W O W m O C7 f"> O f0 N O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W N N N N p ^ ~ C' N d O. o ~ W ~ 'O ~ ~ 'O F- C\ ~ d f6 f6 ~ N >~ O ~ l4 0. ~ ~ ~ ~ ? O ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ N aD m m O O ~ O {y O C C C C ~ c C C C O ~ C_ A R N N C_ ~ ~ N N ~ Ol O/ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ M p~ (p O 'C O ~ ~ ~ ~ O L L O N N fq N /O 0 C_ U U M 00 (~ N w H N N N d d N N C C O N ~ f6 f6 f0 f6 C7 ~ C C C C ~ N ~ ~ N O R~ ~ ~ ~ ~ C N LL lJ.. L.L LL ~ F H ~ h N v ao co N ao o V' ~ ~ n o rn n o 0 0 0 0 o m O O O ~ O f0 CD O (O c0 (O M O ch 1~ ~ O n O) 00 r ~ O N ~ ~ N M ~ W ~ O ~ ~ `~ O ~ ~p ~ ~ O ~ M I~ O fh O N O O M O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O fp O M O N O O N O_ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O C7 O f") O O f0 _ N f7 O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O ("> O P) O O V' N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (O _O Of N O r ~ O O n M 10 O ~ I1) ~fl O 10 O O N O O O h O) C7 ~ O O O O O O O (D O O O O O O O O ~ O O ~ O O O O O O O 0 o u~ o v o a ~ ~ o 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N O M O ('7 O O N ~ 47 N O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N ~ O O O O O O O O O N N N O I~ O O O M V' ~ N N O O O O O N O O O O O O O O ~ C"7 O ~ tD (O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O ch C7 O ~ ~ d' O O O O O O O y N N N f\7 y y ^ N ~ n ^ N N N N y y N y c 4 a H ~ d a~ y r- 'p n n ~' n c O O N ~ O D ~' ~ 'O f- H Q l9 ~ Q. N ,'~ ~ O N O O N O O V Y O U Y N O O y N ~ C >O N N OO a rn ~ ° O O O > O O > > o ~ ? v rn o o~ c7• rn ~ C U U O C C Cl C O C C C mod„ C ao c c •• rn v 'o v rn r .~ °o c ~ ~ n a a a a ~ m' m' m' ~io ¢` U ~ ~ o ~ Q m U a ~ N O O N W N Ol y C ~- O '~ ~ O O o U y O ~ N O 3 3 O m c C U ~ 0 O .o Q U o U N t0 O .a N 7 tD y N ~ M N O) U ~ y N ~ U a N T O 'm N 0 ~ E Q f6 X m H ~ 3 O w O O O ~ ~ - F f0 o Z a o ~ .. c N ~ ~ ~ M f.. ~ ~ J N y O. ~ ~ W ~ 00 ~ m v v N ~ > y O O p) N ~~ a ~ ~ f0 ~ c a ~ o LL o N ~ ~ co G7 a N_ 0 o~ m Q T .~ O E 7 ~X f0 N d .~-~ d U Q m O ~"' w m .m 0 0 J 3 .~ LL O O O Z ~, .. ~ c N ~ ~ O Y d V ~ 7 m ~ H W n m m y o 0 a ~ ~ O C .~ N O O a d a a~i d .~ W f0 0 0 n .~ U y N C .~ fC a m m 0 m O O N n N o'i 0 0 N N N Ol c .~ m a N y L a l9 a m O y d Q m O_ .~ c W 0 a N M 01 CD ~ Qj O ~ N (C ~ a .. N n .~ W v m O r- N 0 ° ~ o o, ~ ao 0 of ~ ~ 0 0 ° ° ° ° o o o o r 0 n a~ .~ m O N ~ ~ a ~, N M ~ C ~ ~ of °~ 00 Qj o ~ N (gyp 1= d a n a 0 0 0 0 ~I o 0 0 0 c_y o 0 0 0 U~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 n °o, ~ 0 0 0 .- a°DO °0 0 0°0. 0 0 0 0 o °o o °o `n° ado 0 0 0 0 0 0 v a~ is rn : ~ N 7 m o ~ ~ + o U Tn a m o m ~ m m ~ ~ ~, to i0 L N 3 N 7 ~ ~ N L Q ~ Z N S C C U U ~ ~ Q ~ M M o N W N N O U ri o rn o o vi ao n ao ao _rn u'~ rn w o ~ n N rn rn M ~ O (O W N In lC ~ C7 f~ O ('7 1p ~ O M O 7 ~ l[) H ~ N O M N O O W N O O O f") O O f") a ~ N N M 7 ~ (4 O ~ W O O ~ (OO M ~ O fOp O ~ tD O r r I~ O O O d ~ N ~ ~ O M ~ „ ~ •C ~ (O ~ O n O ~ ~ ~ v N O O O O p f0 O O O O O O O Z fn O O O O O O O d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ D' N U N a N Q N a N O ~ O ~ N 0 O ~ 'C ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O U o cp ao rn u~ 0 0 O CD 07 N O O N O N ~ ~ N f0 ~ ~ ~ M O ~ O O N O O ~ n °O ~ ~ N F fC ~ C ~ X Z O O O ~ CO O O O ~ O N O fD O O O O O ~ ~ E E y ~ N f0 U ~ ~" N G ¢ N a c ~ UO ~ o 0 m 0 n o v ao o 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ c c ¢ N ° N cp o O N ~ ~ m d d N M ~ ~ ~ '~ n r O d N ~ N d Q m ~ C C p N n O f- Q ~ ~ W Z O ~_ ~ w J ¢ O H ~ wa O O. U (Np U w ~ C ~ N ~ ~ ~ C7 .• C U p L N ~'i ~ ~ ~ ~7 L O ~ aoi C7 N r C E y a o 7 fn Ol 0 j ~ a N ~ O - ~ ~ d ~ c ~"~ ~"~ p E- N C ~ f/) C ~ n O ~. N ~ a w C p m o U 7 C C N o o j ~ N m C C Q U N a O 'p 7 C C N o D N C ¢ C O N N U O ~ N } y c ¢ ~ Z M ~ n O O E w C N U w E w N T ~ ~ ~ ~ d C y U f0 U m o ~ 7 ~ ~ ~ d w yy U n p ~ a°'i ~ o C 'O L ~ ~ f~ aoi C7 r ¢ ~ ~ a ~ 1l~ O O (O C7 f0 O O O O O O N ~ ~ O N O O ap M f~ O O O O O O E r N C7 f~ O O O O M O j ~ ~ ui U m rn o ~ H ° ~ v, m o r d r ~ _ U C u ~O OD 10 O ~ h N O O O .- O O O O ~ o cO ~ l >` OD 10 T O (O N O O O N O O ~ Z ~p N R W O O) O I~ t0 N M O E pp ~ O H U U a~ u~ ~ ai E 0 O ~ Sri U 0 Z H ~ v~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn o 0 r ~ .- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o r o 0 m co ~ f6 ~ d Q U L n T H _ O c o Z ~ ~ o 0 x_ S N c m o Q' O LL n n M O r ~• L O W O N M h (D T .- r ~ OD O ~ N . O O O O O O > ~ ~ ~ N O N O O •C O C ' O O N ~ N = 07 ~ ~ a Y pp O N O N VJ ~ ~ a N ~ O ~ O p O ~ O O O M sf j ~v N N p ~ ~ p ~ a ~ O N N ~' ~ d ~ G O ~ ~ M h ~ O ~ ~ M N ~ ~ OD W V L Y Y U 2 . . v n rn ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 2 ~ ~ V C7 n ~ ~ F ~ O. y j H F- ~ d J OO ~ ~ O U U U ~` > y N N 7 E O ~ d > ~ . N ~ Q F- ~ ~ m m = = m m ~j' 0 2 N ~ ~ ~ 3 O C L L L L •O ~ ~ N fO O O ~ J d n J d ~ J J ~ J J ~ 2 O ~ ~ fn ~ ~ y co o u~ o o u~ 0 0 E ~O ~ rn ~ rn rn rn 0 r i v N 7 V .L (O O N O O l0 O O ~ ~ > M U C y O E Z E 0 U m n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ O ~ a0 N N N N E '- c7 r~ E 0 U y rn o t n ui of R M ~ N E O = C C d O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ L ~ M f0 C N f- O O N = N Y 00 O O (O ~[) N 3 C7 f7 N E O N fn 7 C N A ~_ N ~ a i ~ m ' O O a _ ~- ` ~ ~ ~ a 3 a L a i ~ w? a rn n w E ~ ~ _ ~ h ~ 'a ~ ~ U ~ ° ~ c ~ ~ Q 'H O ~ J -NO ' y U N d. ~ O) N ~ C a N d d N N ~ O C ~ = '_ •c w m _ E o F a ti c N O . 7 d O O ~ ~ ~ O O N ~ O N ` d o ~ ~ e o o d ~ C7 a a a N O a of o y o ~ N m ~ 4. n ~T CV C O .~ ti O O N N .~ N T (C N C 7 O a (n O d N N C O .~ tq .~ W m 7 N C O U v N 7 U U N ~U C Q O O N T c0 f0 O F- N N _T f6 C T I6 .a f0 N F- U C C W ~ ~ O O N i ~ _N O O Z y M C N N > 7 ~ U ~ O N ~ U T w N W Y .. ~ o U o _N ` O N J_ ~ ~' U c ~ ~ o y ~ c ~ U ~ o `~ ~ ~ U m o Q m 0 ~ ~ c >. ~ 'u, N N N 7 ~ ~ U ~ ~ L1J p H c o i O U U ~ ~ ; ~ Z .° m co Z ~ ~ ~ ii a` a` O ti O O N Q O LL c 0 m w m m c 0 .y f/1 .~ W m U t a co 0 O N ~ ~ C7 f~ N ~ ~ O ~ o ~ ~ o ~ ~ t n W C O M O ~ ~ ~ ~ (+ > O ( ~' ( ~v~ o o ~ ^ ~ ~ N OO t0 (p n ao r~ o ao 0 O ~ N sr o ~ N O N 1111]]~~ N~ d M N N (D f0 O O ~ O O ~I O O ~I ~ O ~I ~ c zl O - 2I N - 2I N WWW I r N O N O o o p~ o p~ p~ (/71 a)I o v~ o ~ ~ 0 N O ( 0 f~ ~ ~ 0~1 x ~ yOj ~ ~ ~ ~ t0 r i XX~~ Q~ ZJ t~0 ~ M N N O N ~ ~ ~ ~ _' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ (~ r y N N O m O ~ f _W J •'- M ~ ~ w (n ~ f 0 < I- w F ~ Q E N N d a N ~ 0o N H ^ o n ~ Z• E E V) ~ Fw.. v~i Z O ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ ~ Z U m rn ~ T 'O a a H O °o N ~°i rn ~~ T V a a F- O rn N m rn ~~ C T v ~ a H O o N rn Q ~ w Z o U v) ~ W ~ O Q~ W ~ a ~ ° _~ E ~ m ~ ~ Fa- O H w O tin W w J U W J a p ~ w a O ~ ~ Of ~E ~ 7 m ~ a ~ F O z ~ ~ a O Z a W U ~ ~ OU ~ ~ a ~ ~ V) ~ ~ Of .~ ~ ~ m v a J H O o °~ ~ '~ m o a~°i ~ 'c o ~ ~' U ci u a s v c (/ V LL C (: U Z L a r x d O a a W d O a Z CO O OD ~ (O 00 O OD ~ tD 10 In ~ O O ~ W n I~ O ~ O N r O ~ O N ~ ~ t0 ao W u~ CO ao ~ (~O O O M N ~ O O _M N O O ~ O O tD ~ O N O '- N O ~ GO OD n r o0 oD n ~ M M O M M O ~ .- ~ ~ ~- ~ N N N N N N N GO n t0 O N oD n t0 O N N N O t0 (D (O O EOJI 00 O 00 CO O OD O 00 CO O O T W O c0 OD OD O ~ ~ .- ~ O ~ M ~ W O O O O O O O O O O O ~ M O O~ O O ~ M O N N N O (O fD fD O ~ O W t0 O ~cN7J u7 O aD (O O ~ O~ 01 O QO cO cO O n O t1~ O n O O O O O O O O O O O N N W O M O N aD O M O O O O O O O O O ~~'~~JI~ M O O N O M O O N O O O O O O O O O M) M M O O O M ~ O O O O O O O O O O O n o M M ~ n o M M o V' a M O N O OD O O N O CO O O O O O O) O W O r ~ N W O n ~ N W O '- ~ ~ O O O O O (O O M N O t0~ f0 O M N O O O O O M M M O O O .- O prpj' .- O O ~ O O O O O O) O O O aD O N f0 O CO O N (O O O O O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O I~ O 01 N O n O O O O O O O O O M M O O O M M O O O O O O O O O O O fql (O f0 (O f0 QJ~ O O O O) O p1~ O O O 01 O O O O O O O O O r O O ~ O r'J ~ O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O pO~~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O t0 O O M O (O t0 ~O n n N W N~ N O m f~ ~ f~ N O ~ f~ ~ n n V N ~ ~ M ~ o ao o nab O oo O ~ rn rn W ~ O) rn ao .- n n in n ~n sr O M N O 'Q~ ~ O M N 01 O 01 N n l0 (O O n (O O h OD O 1pp~D~~JI !O O n a0 O ~ •- ~" O T O 01 O OOj O M (O O Q1 O C7 (O O N N N O GD OD OD O N N O N ~O ~[7 N O N W ~O n n M 7 N N ao ~ N N O (O ~[) O N O t0 ~ O M M M O N N ~- O ~~ ~ O V' 01 O ~ O ~ O O N N N O N N N O N N W N N W O O O) O CO O ~ n O ' O- 0 d O N O y O N O y O O N R ~ 0 Q ' ' F" N ~ 0 d ~ 4 0 N ~ O O N ~ N N N ~ ~ ~ r O Q' ~ N N ~ V I- fO') ~ 'O H ~ ~ 3 ~ C O ~ O N O 3 ~ C O ~ ~ O O O ~ d r Q O O ~ N N °D O aO 01 07 O) O O O O O O M '~ ~ 1 O N ~ O O O C C C C N Of C O~ C O~ C O~ C N O O > > O O O ~ N O C I~ 6 l~ d R N ~ O ~ O) 'O 'O 'O 'O M N N O7 Of N N N N D7 O) ~ ~~ :~ W ~ ` p C W N N f0 N (~ ~ C C ~ ~ C C Q1 W ~ ~ O O O O C U U > U U ('7 OD + () f6 O (7 N y N y y N y y y T ~ O f0 0 N y N N N ~ ~ y C C . ~ m C C C O ~ y (O l0 fC f0 f6 Q U~ C C C C O U ~ ~ O U ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; C ~ Il Il Il LL ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ~ N N > ~ so ~ E~ ~o E~ iii E~ H E~ I- a ~ ~¢ i=a i=a ~a N N O N aD M O O 1n tl~ n n O n ~ O _~ •- r O ~ [T f~ O? N M M O O O a0 r O 01 a) O M M n n T n N N O N M O M n n M ~ O O N ~ M in 1(7 ~ 10 to 47 In N N ~ ~T fD (D d' V 'cT ~' ~ r r r n ~ r r v 01 O O N t0 (D n N n N N O N ((~~ N O N N N O N O O ~ 1{7 N r O O O O O~ O O O r r O r O O r r O O O O O O pO~~ O O O 01 01 O N f0 O t~l n n O Q7 O rr~~ N N O N O O 7JI ~ N O O O O O O~ O O O r r O r O O r r O O O O O O d O O O O O O O O O rl ~ O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O d O O O O O O O O O O O N N O M n app op pp n ~ M M O M f+H M O M ~ ~ O M O O orOfi oD N N M O O O O pOJI O O O r r O r O O r r O O O O O O O O O O O O M n O ao N .--I `cY ~ O M O O ~ O N N r O O O O OI O O O r r O r O O r r O O O O O O d O O O N N O O f~~ n O ~ M N N O N fy N O N O O O O O O ONJI N O O N O O O O pOJI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (((ppp~~~ c0 O In O O O O OO~~ O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O d O O O O O O O O d O O O O (D tD T O O N ll7 O O O O O O T C C O M 1C! N ~ O ~ M r O O O O ~ f0 O tD - 4 O ap O N c0 V' N Y7 ~[) O O ~ O ~ a O ~ 'C U N d 01 C f0 (O O N M n ~ u7 0o T O) O 01 (q (O O (p L v 47 In O (O 00 r ~ M M O O N N O N fy N O N d N n n O l17 r O t0 h (O N O O O O O~ O O O ~' ~"' ~" N N r N N N C LL ~ `7 M N r n O O n N O sr n D) ~ ~ ~ M M t(9 (p r O O O 00 tT 1~ r ~ r O ~ r w M M O N O O (O f0 f7 O r r ~ 00 O ~ ~ O 0 M M ~~~77MMM000111111 M M CO O O N O N ~ O O O O O O r N ~ N O N y N N O N O 7 N n N d N 1~ N ~ O ~ O CO N ~ N d N N n N N d d M N D7 N N N D1 N N ~ O N O O O n ~ r ~ .C ~ C G N C d p M N a M o~ v -o H r w ~ F- ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ '~ H °' N o °o ~ o o a`> o ° ~ v° Y ° °o U ~ ~ °O U `m c m m O C O ~ ~ ` ~ ~ N Ov C ~ ',C C >O N~ O ~ ~ ~ n W p 7 C N n 7 3 ~ N T O O O > ~ a 3 `N O ~ - ~ OO U~ O ~ ~ C C ~ T O V 'O 'D T r ~ ~ N r ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ _ _ N ~• C o ~~ r m m m m O o > > > ~0 .5 ~ c 'C70 c ~ O LL ~~ ~ N al > y d a a a N> j m m m N> O ¢ ~ N> O ¢ ~ u~i ~ X m~ E 't-, ¢ E '~-, m E~ V E '~-~ U t o m a n ~¢ i=¢ ~¢ i=¢ a r ~ T f6 N d 7 O L O w O w v m 0 ~ 0 0 w O f0 y o O ~ ~ ~ c .0.. y ~ !`9 a o o ~ o ~ N ° ~+ `° t`0 . > F- E t J ~ G ~ ~ U 7 n ~ N ~ > Q ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ y L N ~ > y O O ~ ~ N ~~ a ~ ~ t0 fO ~ ~ C ~ C~ a n LL O N o o .- T l0 d d 7 O L cc 00 .. .0 a 3 m O O o 0 ~ 0 _ y ( 0 0 +~-. o Z a +~-, y ~ Q l0 p F- ~ V a •~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ c ~ a y ~ ~ > r ~ LL ~ 'Q V m n y ~ O N ~ N Ej' C H m O ~ C ~ .. ~ E Q W m O ~ ~ ~ T fO L N d a~i d .~ W c0 C O .n .C U y N O C .~ lC a m m D rn O n N ('7 0 0 N O C N ~ ~ N ~ d f0 c a .~ ~ ~ W a g ~ O y y ~ f0 a ¢ O a N O of ~ O y O ~ N (p `1 a ,~ N n ._ W a m d' N m a 0 cy o ~n T UUII r~ ao ~ ~ a rn ~ ~ ~ ~ r f 4 d ~ 1 •~ ~ ~ a~ i a ~ N ~ O C t t o~ ~ N G (A ~ ~ ~ N ' a ~ ¢ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o~ 0 0 0 2J o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O N f7 ~ O M O ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O c0 In C7 I~ O N O O O ~ ~ y C ~ _o y y ~ 07 ' w y E ' ~ ~ ~ ~ o m ~ o U ~ y o n- m .n ~ ~ c ? ~ ~ y f N C O 0 ~ Q Z 2 ~ U Q F- O ~ O u O i 1 I U I ~ ~ J I C I I ~ q L U ! I y I I ~ Y I d i I d I ~ I U I O I O 3 L_ 3 1 N ~ C i a~ ,v_ 1 d i o ~ m n rn ~ `o ~ c~ '. a ~ ~ ~ o `p p ao n o () OD O N 01 O r .- OD N a0 ~T ~ _ ap N 1~ V' tO N f0 H ~ ~ N T M ~ O f0 O N u) r M O 1O O cC 1~ M ~ M ~ ~ H ~ ~O N M M O O O N O ~O I~ ~ O O r ~ f~ O O d •- N b 0 C f0 cD V: O i c 7 ~ N ~ ~ O n M d ~ m a o o ~ _O M O O d' N O O) N l0 O O W h F O OD O ~ O O N d rn y 7 O M ~ „ „ ~C (O O O ~ ~ 117 1~ ~ N (O V' N N O O O O t0 O O t D Z O O O O O O O O Q ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T N N N N N ~ O O O O O 'C O O O O O ~ ~ M ~ O O O O O U W W O sh O tD N N O M ~ lp t{y h ~ O N I~ LL~ ~ M O C f0 V: O) O M O Q' O O N O O ~ d O ~' lO O H O O 0 O ~ E (O 4 7 N Z O ~ ~ ~ O O ~ ~ ~ c0 N ^ ¢ Q. y d ~ a E c m E ~ O r N r E 7 O d ~ ('7 O) M O O M ~ O O N C N ~ C O E ° m co ~ ~ tq °o ~ y N N (A •c E ~ 7 O r ~ T p d ¢ y ~ v Z ~ ~ d Ol `~ N ~ C ~ N W w c m y Z ~ 7 y n O ^ O ~ C ~ n O E N O E N ~ ~ V 7 7 ~ O O 'O • J C C ~ l4 C C ~ ~ C O y O ~ 7 3 N C d N r o C~ ¢ l ' ~ ~ ~ ~ O O. ~, c ~ ¢ ~ m O ~ y y ~ C C } N ~ y U w a •~ 01 Op OD C F - L O O C O C y O O C G p N L fn O O O y ~ y N ~ L ~ N f 4 ( p ~ y ~ ~ j J ~ C C 'y V ~ ~p ~. y fO ~ ` lL U ~ N w T l0 Ol C 't ~ ~- N N N f0 '~ ~ >. l0 O) C 't m a a m o a~ m y E O n o o c E ~ m o m m o a r. O O ^ O ~ C7 a a ~ O o o ¢ w ~ ^ d ~ C7 a y d v o ~ cv o o o 0 co 0o N M ri C7 co ~ n 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 o o a~ E O ~ n f" ~ ~ ~ ~ O N U m ~ o H ~ ~ ~ ~ o n m ~ r ~ U d ~ l0 lo- O 7 N ~ ~ N U ~ W O CD ~O O) 10 07 O O O O V' n n f0 (O N N N O O O O O O ~ N c'i O O O O O O E EO U O Z a~ ~ ~ ai E N •c ~° EO U 0 Z N n u'f O O O O O O O Oi O O T r r O O O O O O O O n O O a ~ ~ H _ O m ~ (D t O ~ n •C ~ 0 0 o Z y o X_ S N C N O ~ O lL d (7 E E n y ~ ~ 'L ~ T H ~, y a In ~ r O N O O O O O O O N O O ~ C m y N ~ r ~ E 2 n Y 00 O O > > ~ N E O S N a o ~ N ~ 0 Oo ~ N ~ o 0 0 M ~ °o 0 ~ N N Q. N O O N ~ ^ , 7 C J O ~ (/~ 'y ~ ~ ~ d N O ~ y ~ Q ) J N ~ 10 V H ai J ~ O n C7 H O J N a O O ~ ~ H N ~ O ~ ~ Y H N 2 .0. J ~ c O O y H d 2 r J ~ o O ~ Y ~ N 2 N ~ p M (h Y ~ 2 ~. y 2 m L O m c .e ~ ~ 0 O ~ m o 0 U (n N 2 o p ~ N y J H c m 'e ~ y co o ~n o o ~n o 0 E `O ~ rn 00 rn a rn rn 0 r i a o N 7 U .fie co o u~ o o ~ 0 0 O (O 10 N ~ .- f~ ~ r- f6 ~ M ~'- U C N O E Z E O U m n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 ~ ~ ~ 00 N l0 N N E r M M E O U y rn o L I~ ~ M O ~ q d E O = C C d O O O ~ ~ ~ L M r ~ N ~ N F ~ E O y = d Y 00 O W t0 ~ N M M d E 0 2 a~ N 7 U C f0 T ~_ N N . O O O ` C _ ~ N O ~ N .~ E ~ v '7 7 (/~ 0 d y E ~ C C d y ~ 1 ~ N O ~p C O) ~ y ~ U c ~ ~ Q ''n 0 01 J y ' N ~ y }~ 01 N ~ CO O N y C O ~ .~ d O_ ~C N ~ L y ~ ~ ~ O. ~ f0 ~1 ~ N ~+ ~ ~ d O O f6 7 N N y O ` d o ~ ~ o o ~ d ~ C7 a a a O N OI O N ~ ~ N f0 ~1 a r. v N c 0 .~ a~ 0 0 N .~ N m 0 a c 0 a O d a~ N C O .~ .~ W N C_ N C 0 U U m ~U C a a m ca H CN C f0 Z U N O a` c 0 U O N ~o c m c O Y U O J U ~O a co 0 O N O Z M N O O N U w W c 0 .N m C 0 v m m 00 N C 0 .N .~ W m _U t `~ a (6 O 0.' C O o ~ N ~ ~ M n N W ~ O o ~ o LL7 ~ O 1~ O = N O N (O O _ (+7 N cv,~ o O o ~ r ~ rn ~ ~ ~ ao r> 0 00 0 O ~ ° N LI O L I N ~ 0 ao •- c o °~ n al o al n N W N O ri o o o r~ f0 ~ O ~ ~ O O O M ~ ~ O O ~f ~ 0 0 0 0 p~ o o rn UI N O co aD ~ X C7 k N f~ c0 00 ~ Z V Z ~ ~ ( D M N 01 N O 1n ~ t~0. ~ ~ :-J N ~ O ~ +J W ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ IW- ~ W H w Z O N W N m d m N m ~ ~ (n N (n Z VJ rn .C rn .C m .C W ~ a-°i 01 w J a-°i Ol ~ a O. N p p N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N (n W O U H Z O 7 a ~ J O O N 7 a ~ J O rn N 7 v ~ J O o N ~ W ~ ~ W Q ~ m ~ ~ J H ~ W J Z O q W O ~ m ~ ~ J O 0 N ~I N a 0 0 a (~ M (/Q]I~ ~ O c~ ~ M °n N Z ~ a L W d N a a N xJ W ~I a O a ~.JI ~ fD T 0 X ~ a i o C ° 1 a `m ~ c > (n W ~ j r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N .~ y ~ W Z O 1 rn N ~ ~ ~ ~ o - j W Z O `~ a ~ c U ~ y J Fa- ~ ~ c ~ ~ Z ~ ~ U n ao n o o ao v a o m ci ao n o o ao v v o cp cy u'~ q ~n v, V co ao o ~n o ~n v ca co ao ~ N t~0 N O , O O C07 N •- t~0 N O O O ~ N ~ t0 ~ O c0 ~_ f~ ~ ~- (O c0 f0 GO ~' ~ ~ '' N N N N N a0 ~ O O f`~ N aD ~ tD O N N N O t0 ~O (O O aD O oD 00 O a`V7J{I a0 O a0 aD O O 01 Q) O oD GO ~D O ~ ~ ~ ~(j p ~ ~ In O O O O O O O O O O O n M O O O n M O N N N O f0 (O tD O In O 00 (O O ~ O OD (O O O O O O O W W O N c0 O M O N GO O M O O O O O O O O O NN~~JJ~~ M O O N O M O O N O O O O O O O O O ~fl ~ ~ O O O ~ M O O O O O O O O O O O n O c7 ch ~ n O c7 th O ~ '~t ("~ O N O OD O O N O CO O O O O O W O O) O N N f") N f0 O N M N tD O ~ •- ~ O O O O O n ~ fD ~ t0 (O O M N O ~ f0 O M N O O O O O M M M O r ~ O O .- O ~ O O ~ O O O O O T T m O 00 O N CO O OJ O N (O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O) N O n O 01 N O n O O O O O O O O O M M O O O C7 M O O O O O O O O O O O (O (O <O t0 r rn o o rn o rn o o rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .- o o ~ o .°~ .- o o ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 of o 0 0 0 0 0l 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O (7 O f0 O O M O l0 f0 O n n N ~ N~ N O 01 h ~ ~ N O O) h ~f1 n n ~ N ~ 'ct M r O c0 O O OO O r W O O ~ O W aD r n n ~n ~ ~ ~7 O ('7 N O) 'Q O M N W O O N n (O fD O n t0 O n ao O (O O n ao O ~ ~ r' O W O O O T O n O O O n O O O O O ao ao ao O W C7 ~ 01 M t0 N N N ~ •- ~ N O N ~ O N O N ~ ~ n n M ~ N N QO V' fNVJ~ N O f0 O O N O (O O O P) f`') <`'> O N N ~ O ~ O ~ T O ~ O V 01 O N N N O N N N O N N 01 T 00 O O d O O N O N O d p O N O y O N_ O N O oD ~ m ~ a a U F- N C` O d N ~ ~ d O ' . N O N O O O N (h G - F- O ~ U N O N Q LL 'Z O ~ O N y Y ~ aD O O ~ 00 O a O O O O O ~ p O ~ O O > O N ~ -~ ~ N LL' Y O N ~ OD O O C O C O C O) C p N ~ C C C Ol O N '~ O >O O O O O a O N O ' ~ C c~0 ~ N N O O a 41 'O L 'O 'O ~ fh N O ~ m C > Of C ~ N ~ O C O C ~ O d O O p Cap N O N O ~ O N O ~ U ~ U U M O T N O ~ O O N y y y y y y y y yy T U O l` O N d G7 N N ~+ ~ O C L U y y y T U C O O y ~p f6 f0 f6 f6 ~ O~ C C C C 0 U O U ~ ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ j C ~ LL LL LL LL ~ j ~ F- H ~ j ~ H H m N ~ N> E~ ~ ~o E~ 'u.~ E~ n E~ I- N N °o rn v n ~ o ~ ~ n r o n _o o u'1 N (+7 M CO 00 O aD O O O O M fh n n Qa n fV N O N c+i O M ~ ~ ~ ~ O O N ~ C7 In ll~ 1A In N N ~ ~ (D f0 ~ ~ ~ st ~ r- n n .= ~ v N N O N O O ~ ~ n N ~ N N O N fy N O N N O O O O pOJI O O O ~ ~ O r O O .- r O O O O O O O O O O O O N (O O ~I n n O 01 O N N O N O O ~ ~ N O O O O O ~ O O O ~ ~ O '- O O r r O O O O O O O O O O O O O OOO~~~ O O OD O O O O O O ~-~ O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O d O O O O O O O O O O O N N O C7 n a0~ aD a0 n ~ f7 f7 O (+7 f'~ C7 O ('7 ~ ~ O (O O O ODIf a0 N N M O O O O pOJI O O O ~ ~ O .- O O r '- O O O O O O O O O O O O M n O op ~ ~ O C7 O O ~ (O N N r O O O O ~ O O O ~- ~- O r O O r r O O O O O O O O O N N O O n n O O O O O O O N N O O N O O O O (~~J O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OI O O O O O O O O O f0~ (p O 1l7 O O O O O~ O O O O O O O O O pOJ~ O O O O O O O O pOJ7 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (D (O O OOO~~~ O O In ~ 07 W O O OOO~~~ O O T C C O M 1n N ~ O ~ M r O O O O ~ fp O (O - O O 00 O N ~ ~ 1N O 1CJ O ~ ~ O ~' E •c U N N Q C c0 (O O N _M ~ n ~n ~ ao O~ 01 O m (D~ p O O L ~? ~ O t0 ~ C7 C7 O 01 N N O N fy N O N d R ~ ~ O ~ '- O f0 ~ tp N O O O O d O O O N ~ N C LL ~ ~ M N r n O O n N ~ O ~ ~ W ~ ~ 7 C7 M In O '- O O O O ~ n r p~ O O r M f7 O N O O (p (p ('7 O r O O O O ~ OD Op CO a0 ~ f`') M (7 f7 W O O N t0 aD N ~ O O O O O O ~ N O N O N d N N O N O 7 O _ n N N d N n ~ ~ d d C7 N Oi y N N m y O O O ~ N <~ n N ~ O a ~ n rn ~ n ~ N d ~"~ rn ~ ~ H ~ m ~ F H ~ '~ ~ ~ ~ o "> rn ~~ ~ N O N C7 ~ d' ~ O N ~ 'O Y ~ O U Y O O U y ~ .D U ~ N O f~ ~ ',K C O N~ (O '~ N >C ~ W n ~ C N n ~ C N +~- Q ~ N~ O O O O ~ ~ O O > > a O ~ ~ \ N O 7 3 ~ _N ~. G1 a N ~ m C/ 01 pf '~ N O C C C N ~ N O ~ y ~ y Ol O f6 T C C C C a 7+ +-~ C T ... C N ~ ~ fC .-. ~ f0 O 'O ~ 'D ~ l0 Of L ~ fC Ol L C N ~ ~ 0 fO m m m m 0 ~ '~ '> > O .S ~ o O .E ~ o LL v j ~ N d> w d a a a ~; = m m m N> O Q U N >_ O Q ~ w f0 'X a i. HQ Q ~ ~ m ~~ V E~ U `° m F= Q F= Q H Q a f°- ~ a 0 N '~ w `n o o f6 N a ~ 0 °o ~C1 Z .. N ~ U d m U F W n m m y O O C C N O O w d .m N 0 J N O 3 LL co v a~ 7 a~ rn Q 0 E E ~X N c7 a~i O y Q f0 `,~° N N O 0 J y .~ 0 u°~ F Z N ~ N U 7 ~o ~ n m O C N O T lC N d 7 O L w O w v 0 0 m C .~ a N L d '9 n w o 'o N d O .Q U N N O r o. rn 0 0 0 M O 0 N a 01 N C O. U ~ w ~ m fN0 ~ a O T f0 V d d 7 O L aD w O U w v m 0 r 0 m m m C .~ N 0 a O x~ W N O .Q U N O) a a~ rn 0 O N n N f7 o~ 0 0 N N rn .~ m a N fC L 'O iy n a ~ a~ °~ a W o ~° m N ~ N ~ O C O .n U N d 0 a 0 N 01 0 ~ N_ f0 ~ d T f6 d yd G 7 O L n 0 w v m _o co 0 m m rn c .~ a~ n 0 n L ~_ N 0 m E d .~ Q W V f0 O C U .7 m N t a T fC N d 7 O L (O 0 t'i m a m 0 m 0 m m rn c .~ `m a 0 n L N ~"' Y LL N T f0 d d N 7 O L 0 v :~ m 0 v 0 m m rn c .~ d a 0 n L .~... N U c7 f7 O M n o n rn rn r n ui ui o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o °0 0 0 0 0 cy o 0 0 CV7~~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ° o 0 0 v o a v m m rn _ E p~ ado o° a`°o ~ zIl , v o v T lO 0 N a H ~ ° ° ~ ~ ~ r i o o u~ ~ a 0 0 , o v v a~ c N o N W Q ~ ~ N O ~ (n W N N ~ O -o Z O W ` m rn ~ a ~ N ~ of O ~ a~ ~ ~ o a ~ U j ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ z ~ x m ? ~ m _`~ ~ o a ~ o v m U m ~j ~ ¢ ~. ~ a fA ~ ~ N ~ ~ M W ~ O O f 0 O V N O ~ ~ i O N tT ~ CO M ~ N Q1 M ~ ~ 1M ~ 1~ N W O) M ~ Oi c0 M O) W N l0 u") O jp f~ M ~ M O H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O O N O I~ O O r r 1~ O O d r N N ~O 1l~ ~ O d O O ~ O M ~ N N M ~ 7 ~ (D f~ 00 O (O O O ~ N O U O ~ ~ i C O OD 01 ~ O O N a a, N ~ O M ~ •C ~ t0 ~ O n O ~ ~ ~ ~ N O O ~ O ~ O ~ ~ O O O O M ~O O Z O (n O O O O O O O o ~ ~ C ~ ~ . ~ N O N O N O N O N O C ~ O r O r O r O r O r N O ~ O ~ I~ (~O W N M O O f07 O ~ ~ ~ ~ a~ r o v M o C N ~ O 01 M O ~ O ~ N O O ~ J w d a N l0 ~ O) • ~ c O ~ Z O o N ca O r~ (O ~i ~ ~ o O 0 m o E a~ rn m T d ~ O N U Q N a N C a O ~ O o N v W v N ~ N o O o ~0. ~ n '~ f0 ~ ~ N C 0 N w N N t0 D ~ m a d N ~ ~ ~ ~ N ~ i. r O N 2' l0 y O N N ~ C m C ~ n O yC H Q ~ F W Z O ~ ~ W Q Z O ~ ~ a O N C ~ y ~ m O ~ j N ~ ~ C7 ~ y U n L N C aO1i ~ C ~ 7 ~y U O N N aci C7 ~ Q C E O y a ~ 3 fn G 'y O ~ O ? a ~ ~ 01 .C 7 T ~ N ~ (n J Q p F- 1 C y N O ~ n O N d ~` y ~ O. w C O N O N 'O U c O C N o D N ~ 7 'O ~ C C O U d 3 ~ N 'O U c O C N o o (n O V' .. LL d 7 ~ d ~ H O_ O N 10 m N •N ~` c ¢ N ~ Z ~? N O O N ~ ~ w C ~ ~ ~ w E w N T H y ~ ~ ~ J N C ~ d lE U m o ~ 7 N ~ ~ C7 ~ ~ o_ L N C a°fi ~ l C 7 ~ ~ O N N aci C7 ~ Q C E O a~i a a ~ v ~n o o cc r> ao 0 0 0 0 0 o ~ n N m o ~i o o ao N ri ch r~ r 0 o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ U r• m ~ o ~ F m ~ ~ o n m 3 _ U d r ~ O C ~ N l0 aD ~ O ~ n N O O O ~ O O ~ Z F T a0 to d) O (O N O O O N O O ~ N !O 01 T O) O n f0 N c7 O G o CJ H U m ~ ~ of E E m 'c ° U 0 Z w n ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn o 0 T r r O O O O O O O O n O O _ ~ l0 ~ m x m t n T {- w C O O O y .C O Z ~ o x_ a~ c m ° ~ o LL n c+> w n. t ri ` p O N M n f0 W r ~ r ao O ~ (n ~ L a O N O O ~ T tf) O t0 O O O O O •- C ~ ~ tl~ r N ~ E E C •p O E _ N y y U N ~ ~ ~ a Y 00 O O > > r- N E 0 S N N ~ N ~ N ~ O .n o 0 0 o ° 0 0 0 0 ~ o v ~ N N O ~ ~ O D ~ ~ ~ O O N O ' ~ O N ~ O M G ~ o n ~ ~ o O ~ Y v N fn ~ ~ Y Y V 2 r n M _ 'A 0 ~ rn v rn ' V n M ~ 2 ~ ~ >, y N LO H H N J OO N ~ F O U U U > > ~ N = ~ V 7 p O. ~ O N 3 2 ~ ` N N N = m m = F ~ ~ N Q H F- d N = m U N ~ 2 2 ~' O c _ c L 0 ~ L O 'e f0 ~ ~ O O/ O) G1 . . d N •e U O d A J d ~ J J J ~ J J ~ = O ~ ~ (n ~ ~ ~ t0 O 10 O O N O O E co vi N oo n n n n c ~ m ao rn v rn rn N 7 U ~e co o ~n o o vs o 0 O ~ N v ~ ~ .-- 16 3 fh ~ ` C N O E Z E O U m n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 ~ ~ O W N ~ N N E ~ r> r~ E 0 U y rn o L n u7 Q1 Q M ~ N E O = C d O O O ^ ~ ~ ~ L ~ M f0 d ~ ~ E v = U1 N Y a0 O O) t0 ~O N M c7 N E O d N 7 C lG T a_ ~ ~ ~ - ~ _ ~~ o~ o d E c_ o a> E ~ a ~ m n y E c ~ a ~ w? ~ y ~ ~ U c ~ ~ ~ Q rn ~ .~. N ~ ~ N N N pp O. d 4 N ~ O O C O C ~ t ~ m E Fi ~ (V l0 N 7 {p n o o ~ ~ ~ ~ O ~ O ~ a ~ ~ ~ o e o d ~ C7 a a G a M <D Oi o y O ~ N f0 ~ a ~ V' N of C O .~ ti O O N N .~ N f0 N N C O H N O n N c 0 .N N .~ W N 7 C C Q N _C O U v N 7 U O 0 0 N T t6 N N I- N .y _~ f0 C T (0 (6 N I- U C C W N N .O J N C N 3 U O T N Y t6 U 'o J N rn c m c m Y C~ C U 0 _~ U N E co Z N LL U ~ a ~ c ~ 3 ~ O - U ~~ o Q '~ ''~^^ V/ H c O ~ U Z J U U N N O O a a 0 0 N 1 O Z M N O O N U W C 0 .~ c 0 v m N (6 m c .N .~ W m _U L a co O C O N W N F- W Z O a ~ W c7 ~ O ~ U Qi Q' o ~ 0 rn N E z d n <n' ~ ~ ~ o cc o 0 0 ~ M O O O O L I~ O M O O ~ O O rn o 0 00 N O (O O O v ao 0 M o O O O t0 N O tCJ O O (O O O f~ O O a O O O (/ ~ O O O a (~ O O N f0 O N OD O 00 N O O N O (O N O O ~ ~ M ~./I ~ O O O ~I O a C C) L 0 N~ O !/U)I~ O p~ n UI 07 O O M .N-- r 000 ~ ~ O ~ O ~ O ~ ~ ~ W Q H (n W W Z ~° ~° ~ Q O a i a i m ~ N m m m rn rn rn ~ v v r _ _ - . N m ~ a~ E E ~ W m W w c c c Z rn W rn 7 > > ~ J m m `m ~ ~ U ~ ~ 7 ~ ~ T N ~ N c N c c W ~ ; O O O W j. J ~ ~ c Z c J J = ~ ~ .~- . ~~ .. O O O N J ~ 0 o O ~ a O O N N N Q ~ ~ ~ M O O N N W M a O a N (/ll ~ O p~ o UI n M N O Z M N r Q7 ~I M a O a N (/]I O N UI ~ N m a L d N a d Lx cw G a N i0 07 C f0 Z } N a C ~ 0 n ~ F ~ _ c L rn p '~ G m c T .C C Vl ~ ~. .~. O ~ ~ ~ a J 2 ~ y ~ U C OD O O ~ O In O O ~ O O W N n a M O t0 l0 M O (O O O n O O O N N lCl O O N N O O .- ~ V O ~ ~ O ~ N OD ~ aD 'Q ~ O d' O ~ ~ O O (O ~D (O O O CO t0 O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O M ~ O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O n rn ao 0 0 o rn o 0 0 0 0 0 0 M f0 (O O O O f0 (O O O O O O O r O O O O O O O O O O O O O m ~ (O if ~ O } tD ~ ~ O O OD ~ N O O ~ N O O O O O t0 M M O O O M M O O O O O O 7 (O O ~ ~ O O O ~ ~ O O M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (O o0 (D O O a0 c0 O O O O O ~ N N O O O N N O O O O O O (D M M O O O M M O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O rn a °o r°Di o o v °o c°Oi o o ° o N ~ O O ~ O .- O O ~ O O O O N O O N ~ O O O O d' O M M O N 01 O n N O T O n N O N N O . . . . 00 M O O M O M O O M O O O O O 00 O O W O ap O 0) O O M M O (O N O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W O N ~ O n a_> a~ y O d O O •C ~ y O. O O O N O N N ~ O N N ~ ~ .>L~ O O O N Q 'O H 4. O ~ O O > (O 7 ~ C O O O N o ~ O O ~ N ~ {'7 O C C C Of ~ ~ C Of C O O 'L} ~ C N N N N ~ N N N N ~ C_ C_ o~ m O C7 C7 C7 C7 v O C7 C7 C7 C7 rn t t M ~ O y y y y l`0 O _C (~ U (7 N y y y y N y y y y C C G y O N IO R t0 C~ ~ C C C C U N N N N y N ~ ~ ~ ~ N N_ LL LL LL LL C -~- F ~ ~ a n' N v ao o N o0 0 ~ n n r~ o rn n o 0 0 m m o 0 ~ O W ~ O O O (O 00 tD M O ('7 f~ f~ O I~ IfJ Q) W ~ O N ~ 'Q O) f~ I~ ~ 'C O ~ ~ V' O ~ GO ~ ~ C7 N N C7 O O f0 tD ~ f") f~ O f`7 O N O O ('7 O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (p O M O N O O N _O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O I'7 O O (O N C7 O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O M O f7 O O ~ N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N O O N O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O f0 O T N O h O O O n M ~ O ~ ~ U) O ~O O O N O O O I~ O M 'R O O O O O O O f0 O O O O O O O O ~ O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O ~ I~ O O O O O O O O a0 N N O M O f`7 O O N ~ ~O N O O O O O O O N O O O O O O O O N .- O O O O O O O O O N N N O I~ ~ O O fh V ~ N N O O O O O N O O O O O O O O ll') (") O (O f0 O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O M c+i O ~7 ~ ~ O O O O O O O y N N N t+> y y ^ N O D F- fh N N y N p d d N ~ d a o ~ Y rn y v v H o m rn o r N ,~ O O ~ O O N O ~ '00 Y O U Y ~ a c c ° O O O ~ ° O > ~ o ~ ~ C U U O C C ~ C O C C C r d C 01 'O "O 'O O~ L ~ °o c ~ F n a a a a ~ m' m' m' ~ ¢` v f0 ~ c H Q m U a ~ N O O N rn N Oa y C n ~ .m H o ° y o O m c O ~ Cl m L I6 E ~ o ~m Q U O O o O N _O O N (O y 0 m ~ v m N N a ~ w a _y T ~ l0 N ~ ~ E Q ~ E ~ ~X m H ~ a M <D o~ ~ O dj O ~ N f6 ~ a r. 0 0 u~ N .. ~ ~ ~ ~ U d U ` O m ~ f- W d ~ v d f0 f0 y O O a ~ ~ C N O O N 0 O J 7 .~ LL a N_ N N a D E 7 E .~ N M a~ a N_ N Q N O O N 0 O J 3 .~~-. .~ 7 LL 0 0 y .. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U G U ` O m H W N v v d l6 N y O O a ~ ~ C N O O E a .~ W [6 O O t0 -o ~ ~ E ~ a a ~~ ~ a ~ W O ~ f0 y O N ~ Q O C O .n .~ V N N 0 a r M tD 07 ~ O y O ~ N f0 a ~ T f0 'O d d N 7 O L tD w O U A a m 0 v 0 m m rn c .~ a~ .; n c o a~ ~. ~ n G L 'j ~ O' ~ W N N O C ~ ~ ~ r p~ o °o ~ ~ 00 0 rn UUII ~ o '~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 °o °o °o ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 n °o ado ~ 0 0 0 v a~ m rn ~ ° O ~ 0 o , 0 o 0 a o 0 ~ o ` 0 m u~ a~ a ~ E N C ~. ~ O O O O O O O O n O aOp O O ~ y C O) L c a v N t'• O ~ W Q ~ ~ O H O ~ ~ 01 a ~ a M 1D ~ C G N ~ m ~ ~ ~, ~ C ~ ~ O (/~ t0 a` c n w Z O ~ LLJ W U ? VJ Q W a H ~ N j z L ~ = 6 N 'D ~ -~O o d O j C ~ ~ 'C O U m U ~N, L a ~ m °' :c ~ t0 j, w c o N J ° 3 L ~3 c°~ ~ a~ N `o N C a NO f0 N M O> M N t~ oo N O f~ (O U M ° °' ° o o o o rn ~ v ~ r~ ao _ .- o of H n N rn rn M i r ~ Of tD O N ~O ~p ~ M ~ T M ~ t? O M f" ~ ~ ~ LL7 O OD N ~ N ~ N N O N M N O O O) O O O M O O M a n `~ o c o c o v rn ~ ~ N N M ~ ~ ~ co n ao o ~ O CO W N O O O F O sr c0 M _ N oD ~ o r- ~ ~ 0 0 0 a ~ N N ~ O M ~ •C ~ (O ~ O ~ O ~ 1n ~ ~ p °0 0 0 0 °o °o o Z ~O (q o 0 0 0 0 0 0 n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ N O N O N O N O N O o m h rn N ° 'C O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 O 0 ~ O OD o o W N O ~ r M O N c m v, rn rn M o Q' O ~ N O O J d V d F-' f0 _~ E c ~ X Z o 0 o r 00 o o o .= o N 0 m o 0 ~ 0 o M ~ E E d m m } N d Q N a c F ~ ~ o 0 ~ 0 n o v w o 0 ~ 0 ~ 0 E f0 ~ c Q ~ . 0 N E o o N O N ~ . H Q ~ (/1 N r N N G ~ V O ~ ' l0 C Q o Z M ~ 0 N m a d •- CJ l0 a ~ ~ ~ N N n ~ O ~ f0 ~ C = ~ N n O w Z ~ ~ ~ w Q Z QO LL a O N ~ ` ~ m o ~ ~ d ~' ~ C7 ~ . t N C aO7i ~ ~ 'O 'j ~yy U O ~ N aci C7 ~ Q _C ~ O m a O 3 (n C 'y ~ ~/ O ° a ~ Of •E ~ N y .CO.. ~ J Q O ~ / C ~ N p - ~ n O ° CO ~ pN U N ~ V C O C N o o ~ ,0., m 3 '06 N 7 U C O C N o o O y (n O O N l0 N N 'y ~` c ¢ ~ O U ~ W .. C '~ ~ V l0 E w N . F- y ~ ~ ~ N C ~ N fp C'1 m o C 7 N d ~. ~ O r ~ d L H C a°7i ~ ~ ~ a 7 ~ ,~ O N N m C7 N Q p~ C E O d a y v .n o 0 o M ao 0 0 0 0 0 o a`~ ~ ~ o c~i o o co ri ~ 0 0 0 0 0 o E n N ('7 n O O O O O N ~ y N ~ 3 ] c n U m rn ao o ~ H m ~ ~ o n 3 y 00 ~ U C O. j O y ~ O In O ~ n N O O O r O O O O ~ n N n ~` W ~ O O O N O O O N O O ~ Z 16 '' fh N O O) O O n fD N M O ~ o F- U U m in ~ ai E w E •~ o 0 ~ ~ U 0 Z y n v~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn o 0 T ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n o 0 m o d ~ ~ y ~ n a U r ~ T y Z ~ O ~ O X = d ~ C l0 _ ~ O LL G d M O ~ ~ G ~ O? N M n f0 T .- r r cp O ~ ~ > f0 O O O O O O fV O O • ~ ~ ~ N C C ~ _ N `~ y O O ' N Q' ~ U a Q Y ap j O N O y y .L] ~ y ~ p ~ O C p O C O O O ~ ~ y y O ~ ' O ~ ~ '- G O y d O N O 0 O ~ N ~ O 0 r 7 n O ic'~ O ~ Y ~ ~ ~O In ~ O V n U ~ F ~ d Ol C •7 ~ lf7 j ~ Y Y N ~ ~ Q H F- ~ N N 2 ~ m m Cj' 0 = H ~ ~ 7 . N O C L L t t ~ ~ ~ N O O ~ N Ol 07 O) G1 .0.. w N y L -e O U O ~ h J d ~ J J J ~ J J ~ = O ~ ~ (n ~ ~ y m c v~ o o in o 0 o ~ ~ N eo ~ r ~ r M rn o m v rn rn N J U -i~ m o u~ o o in o 0 _N 5 M U C y O E Z E O U d ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E ~ ~ ~ W N N N M M E O U y rn o t ~ u'i ci O " ~ d E 0 = c c n o 0 o ~ ~ ~ ~ L M r l0 N N ~ ~ E v O • _ N N Y GD O W (O t0 N M M N E O d N 7 C lC T ~_ ~ y m a - ~ • '~ ~ o ~ ~ °~ ~ a~ a 3 L n 'n E •~ ~ ~ l ~ C E G O d ~ ~ a N m ~ U c 7 ~ Q ~+ • o 07 J N N ~ a N a•- d O O • d n a N N L O _C D ~ ° ~ n H H ~ L• `~ m E N ~ w ~ ~ ~p ~ n o o >. ~ rn ~ d i• ~ ~ o 0 o O ~ C7 a a` a O tD 01 ~ O y O ~ N f0 a n N c 0 .~ ti O O N .~ G1 '~ f9 0 a 0 a N O d N C O .N N .~ W N 7 N C_ d O U v N 7 U o~ 0 0 N fC (6 N F- N .y _T f0 C g .~ m f- U C c W ~ N ~ 0 N r _N ~ O O Z N M C N N ~ O O U 0 O N ~ U ~ ~N Y w m U o 'o m J ~ `~ U ~' ~ o ~ c ~ ~ ~ ~ N 0 'n m U m w Q ~ o N N ~ tN ~ ~ U ~ ~ W 0 N O ~ o ~ V ~ ~ N U ~ ~ Z J ~ f6 Z ~ ~ ~ N O ~p C ii a` a O O O N 0 O tL W O c 0 a a~ y m m U) C O .N tq .~ W m U_ t N O O o N ~ sr f! f~ N N tD N CO ~ O o ~ o n ~ ~ ~ L !~ O ~ IA N O ~ M ~ In ('7 O ~ ~[7 ( W M O O 00 ~ 7 ~ C7 Oi (O f0 n ao ~ o ao 0 ~ ° ~ o _ v ~ _ I o ~ N I N f0 (D O O ~ O O M M O ~ ~ ~ ~ t~ N T N O O O ~~~~ N ~ I ('y a O~ O (/~ O (/~ O m cc N O 0 ( 0 ~ (O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N l0 O ~E (~O. M N W c ~ T N O ~~r ryryry ~ N ~~rryryry ~ ~ ~ ~ CNp ~ Q' ~ Q' ~ ~ dr ~ _ H ~ W ~ ~ a w Z N _ O ~ r~ O ~ r~ ~ O (n ~ ~ O a C ~ ¢ ~ m d a ~ ~ ° p n ~ ~ m E E fn w ~j W Z O (n w ~ ~ ~ z ~U .°i m rn 'C 7 lV v ~ Q O ro N m w rn .C 7 N v a Q O rn N -°i m rn 'C 7 N ~ ~ Q O o N cn a ~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ w ~ ~ Q Q a ~ T C 3 m '° ~ J F O v~i w o ~ w J = w J O ~ q w a0 v ~ p~ 'C ~ m a ~ J ~ O z O ~ ~ d. ~ ~ z W ~ o ~ Q ~ ~ N ~ ~ ~ _ .~ ~ m a N J H O r 0 ~ - ;o O ~ ~ °-' .c o ~ ~ U ~ ~ w a ~ w z O w O ~ ~ ~ z O a L a a a L a 0 a ~-~I OD O aD `7 (D CO O CO ~ (O 1n 47 V' O O ~ (O n n O ~ O N 1~ O ~ O N ~ sf <D ao N ~n fD ao ~ (~O O O f07 N t~0 O O M N O f0 ~ C t0 (D ~ O N O r r N O r 00 Op n .- a0 ap n r N f") N N fh N r- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ NI N aO ~ (D O N N a0 ~ f0 O N N N O (D t0 (D O Wll aD O a0 a0 O OyaD{I aO O o0 a0 O O W W O o0 a0 oD O v ~ ~ ui o ~ ~ ui o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O O n M O O O n M O N N N O fD (O /D O ~ O OD (O O O O OD (O O O O W O CO OD ap O n n o .- ui o r~ o .- u~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N OD O M O N ap O f7 O O O O O O O O O M O O N O ('7 O O N O O O O O O O O O ~ M ~ C O O ~ M O O O O O O O O O O O n o c~ r> ~ n o r~ ch o v v m O N O aD O O N O OD O O O O O m 01 O) O N n ~ N O O ^ ~ N (O O .- r .- O O O O O f0 O M N O (O O M N O O O O O ('7 M (h O ~ .- O O ~ O r O O .- O O O O O O O O O 00 O N tD O ap O N t0 O ~ r .- O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W N O n O O N O n O O O O O O O O O M M O O O M C7 O O O O O O O O O O O c0 f0 t0 (O W O O O O O O O W O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O O '- O ~ r O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O (O O O M O f0 fD U') n n N ll> N N O O n ~ ~ N O O n 1f7 n 1~ ~ N ~ ~ M r O 00 O r O CO O r O O O r W T W ~ n r~ u~ n ~n ~ O f7 N 01 ~ O C7 N O O O N n (D tD O n cD o n ao o ~ o n o0 0 .- ~ .- o rn rn rn o W O fh O O ~ O M O O N N N O W ap 00 O N O N tf) In N O N O ~ n n M ~ N N O ~ N O t0 47 O N O f0 In O M (7 f`7 O N N ~ O ~ V' O V' W O ~ O sf O O N N N O N N N O N N T O O O ao O O n. °o m a`~i m o N ~ 0 N ~ .C N O ~ 0 O fh N O O O N N W 'N 'lC0 ~ M ~ a N ~ n ~ N N `~ ~' 2' o ~ N Q ' 2' ~ ~ W m ~ ~ °~ m H a ~ ~ ~ 7 O ~ O C O ~ 3 ~ - ~ O C O ~ o O ° ~ " ~ O ° ~ " N O p O C C C C o N _o ~ C C C C ~ O > ~ N ~ Ol C U N 'O f 0 'D c0 'O ~~ O 'O 'O 'O ~ N ~ M O N O m O N N O N O Of m ~ CO ` m O C pp l0 f6 lC f6 ~ N r C C ~ N '- C C ~ O T ~ ~ ~ ~ C U j M O N~ U (~ N tl1 f/1 N N N Vl N N ~~ N O N y y y y y T U f0 U C C . ~ Ip C U C U C O (n ~ N fD IO f0 f0 t0 N~ ~~ C C C C N 0 C d N ~ ~ C N d ~ N d > N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; C ~ l1 I.L. LL Il ~ ; ~ H F- N ~ N H F m ~ E~ ~o E~ iLr- E~ H E~ F- a ~ i=a i=a ~_¢ ~¢ N_ N_ O N m c") O O ~n in n n O n ~ O in O ~ ~ h T N M C7 OD aD O 00 ~ O ~-- O O O M f7 n h ~ n N N O N M O C7 n n ~ ~ O O N ~ c'7 u'7 O ~n an u'7 47 t0 N N ~ V t0 fO ~ ~ V' ~ ~ n n ~ ~ v D) a7 O N O COQ t0 ~ N n N N O N f~ N O N N N O N O O u7jl ~ N ~ O O O O pOJI O O O ~ ~ O .- O O O O O O O O O O O O a7 O N (D O n n n O O O O N N O N O O ~~ V' N O O O O O O O O r r O ~ O O ~- .-~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 00 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N N O f7 n a0~ a0 00 n ~ M C7 O ~`7 c`7~ M O C7 ~ ~ O C7 O O aoJl a0 N N C7 O O O O pOJI O O O .- .- O r O O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O M O O ~ (O N N ~ O O O O ~ O O O ~ ~ O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O N N O O 1~ n O ~ (`') N N O N (~ N O N O O O O O O N N O O N O O O O pOJI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O (O~ OJ f0 O O O O p O O O O O O O O O O~ OJ O O O O O O O O O O O O p I O O O O O O O O p I O O O O O (D M f0 L[') O N OOO~~~ ~ O O O ~ M ~ r O O a7 O O O a1 O ~ O t0 O O W (D C - C O ~ ~ o ao o N ~ ~ v ~ ~ti Sri o ui v o v E •c U N ¢ N ^ D) (O Ip f0 ~ O O N f0 00 ('7 ~ n C7 ~ M u~ O o0 O 01 N m N O O O N f0~ NJ t0 N O O (O N a C N n n O u~ .- O ~ (O n (O N O O O O O I O O O O r .- r N .-- d N C LL V' C7 t ('7 C7 Y1 N t0 ~ ~ n O O O O O n CO N V; 1~ r O .- •f 07 n r O O V' 01 ~n r O w M C7 O N O O (D t0 f") O .-- ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ O 0 f`7 ('7 f`7 ('7 W O O N ~p W N pp p~ W O O O y D1 N O O N O O N O O N O ° ~ O N N O y N O N fD N N d d y ~ ~ ~ d y d y d ~ N m y D. N N O y d O N ^ ' ~ ~ d ~ ? °' ° y m m ~ a ~ o m o °~ ° c ° U ' ° c o U rn m m N O o p O N co U' 0 Q' o Q' ~ ~ c O O ° N ~ v C Y p O N o ~ N Y O O ° ~ ( Y O E ~ a w v ¢ 10 N O ~ ~ ~ C O N` O ~ O ~ ~ n~ O O ~ ~ N O ~ O ~ m y ~. 01 a y G 07 O Oa Cl ~ Vl O C C C ~ y N- O C ~ y ~ O Cl N O ^ ~ ap ~~ .,,, c c c c ~~ rn v v `o ~ m . rn t .~ ~ m rn t .m LL y ° E ~ ~ m m m m ^ c '~ '~ '~ ^ ~ ~ o ^ ~ ~ o ~ ¢ o ui ~ n a a a a m o ~ m m m ~ o m ¢ U N y m ¢ U ai E ~ ~a N ~ N> Ems- y ¢ N> E~ 7 m N> E~ O U N> E~ O U y L o m n. ~ , ~ ¢ i= ¢ ~ ¢ i= ¢ a r ~ T lC 'O N d O L w O w 'O O O 7 O O w O N O O 'n c0 C .~ N ~ ~ d o ~, o ~ •• o. N m c o y ~ H y n E L y U X17 °° ^ y ~ v n N ~ O O 'O ~ N • .G ~ ~ O ~ a n LL N O O ~ _~ aO N a 3 O O) d Q 0 E E ~X f0 N N a N 0 V1 N Q +~. H 3 w N 0 N 0 0 J N .~-. .~ LL O O O Z y .. T ` C m m 4O U _n U ~ ~ ~- W O. N f~0 N O O O C '`k N O O l0 N n O L W O w W O (O O f0 N c .~ N n O n L n m v f0 T f0 ~+ ~ N ~ O. = d j O L 4. O GO U L N ~ O N ^ w O ~ O w ~ ~ N d 'O O T f0 ~ F O O O) O ~ O O O ~p N N O~ O ~ C ~ •~ m N OD f0 ° n d N O r d O ~ C L co y O1 E ~ Y C G ~-' ~ y W o ~ ~ 0 ~' ~ c~ N f0 a O N O .Q U N d O) C .~ N a_ 7 w G1 W O O N n N f`7 01 O O N N N 01 C .~ f0 a N N l0 L a ~ C ~ E f0 d a ~ N W L ~ o ~ N O N ~ Q ~ C O .n .~ U N N G a N 0 to a ei ~ O dj O ~ N f6 H a ,. a m a m n N O L O O U w lO O t0 ll"1 O l0 f0 Ol C .~ d n 0 n L rn d O c 61 E n .~ w N O rn .~ m N f0 L a 0 c0 v a~ n O L fD w O ~1 u~- N O (`7 O t0 lC C .~ N 0 d r v N O LL N M 00 n O O n ui 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 cy o 0 VO~~ 0 0 0 0 p~ ~ n UI O N ~7 W ~ r OD ~ O V O ui 0 0 0 0 0 r~ f"1 C7 T ~ V' O c0 ~ C7 I~ O N O O O ~ to r O d N .~ L ~ ~ a rn N O ~ C o~ °~ ao N c tq N ~ ~ a r. N C ~p O y N ~ O ~ W N ~ ~ ~ o m ~ o U o+ p a m a c7 ? n E ~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ 7 C C U Z 2 U ~ ~ Q n p n ao n o N ~ U aD O N O O u'i N r aD ~ _ N CO c0 N ~ OD W Y7 V' 10 ~N tD ~ n N ~ m M ~ O (D 01 N l0 M M 11) O m n M ~ M H ~ ~ ~ ~ N M M O O a0 N O ~ f~ a0 N ~ O r .- 1~ O O d ~ N ,C ~ tD N t0 N ~7 f`O') W ~ M ~ ~p t0 I~ O O M O V' O N LO O F- t0 _ O N O) ~ ~ ~ O OD ~ ~ O r ~ d rn v o M •~ 7 m ~ o n o ~ ~n ~ ~ N O 'tl' N M O M O O O O O O LL7 O O LO Z (n O O O O O O O n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ N N N N N O m ~ ' N O O N 'C ~ O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 O O 0 U O t0 M N 00 O N n aD N N ~ l0 to tD ~ O N I~ ~ ~ M O C cC ~ O O M O ~ N J a' n O ~ ~ O O f6 ~ H j T Q Z O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N O n O N I~ ~ E E y 01 f0 Q f0 O a v N o. `m E ¢ D ~ ~ m a a a ~ ~ ~ OO N ~ ~ ~ 0 p m _O1 ~~ C f0 ~ ~ N n O c O d y E 7 ~ cn w f- U w ~ ~ ~ w ¢ O F- ~ w a O O ~ O o . ~ N {~pp U T m o M ri N d ~ /O 7 c3 ~ ri -' C 0. t N C O7 m ~ r v c v 7 ~ ~ O N d C m (7 N o C ¢ C E O `t y a ~ o c > fn Ol f/1 ^ ~j 7 ~ o a ~ ~ N ~ •E > T ~ ~ J ¢ ~ O I- ~ C y ~ C ~ N n O N - '" T d w co ~ ~ d > fem. C O N N o D m E °~ ~ ° ~ O E N 7 ~ C C ~ a ~ N 7 C~ C O N N o 0 E 7 ~ c 0 m i/i ~ °° ~ 7 ~ °~ F°-' _o O N O } m T f0 c ¢ o °o N > O ~ ; n o0 ~° w C y N w E w N T ~ N = ~ ~ J • ~C7 t) ~ T m O ~ 7 ~ ~ f0 7 d . C ~ p N c O m ~ f ~ ~ O N `m C a~ C7 ~ ¢ C o 'C y a - a a y N v, ~n o 0 o M M o ~ 0 O 0 0 0 0 O o O ~ E n O O N O O W N (") I n O O O O O O O ~ rn N O ~ '' `"" in N 4'1 7 > r> n U 0 m rn ~ o ~ F- o ~ ~ o n m N OD ~ ` C ~- y O ~ N O N ~ ~ ~ O ~ n N O O O .-- O O Z N n T oO N O) O (O N O O O N O O E ~ ~ r> m rn rn rn o n o N M o E o ~ .- o U U a~ ~ ~ of E rn E .~ o U 0 Z y n ~ O O O O O O O O O O T ~ ~-- O O O O O O O O n O O l4 CO N ~ R d ~ T v V t n F N C n O Z N ~ O E O X = N ~ C f0 _ d' ~ LL a a O M t ~ L N O ~ N C7 n (O O ~- ~-- .- aD O ~ T N O O O O O O O O N O O ~ ' ~ > ~ u~ ~ N ~ E E E c a = o ~ `~ ~ a i ~ ~' a U Q 'L ao O O N E O N H a ~' a o N ~ O a o 0 0 o ° 0 0 0 ° 0 ~ o v ~ ° '' 0 a T o o in O N O 0 O f`7 ~ a a in O o 0 M ~ n ,°~ ~ o ~ y E N O ~ W W U (n ~ i y y V ~ .L.. 2 ~ ~ n rn M n '° 2 ~ ~ ~ n Y Y ~l7 ~ F- ~ ~ y J N y ~ N d ~ O = U ? = U > O f° = m m o = ~ o ~ 3 d Q F- F- ~ d a i = ~ c rn N ~ a r r r r _ = v ~ a~ m o 0 0 ~ ~ h J a > J J J ~ J J ~ 2 O ~ ~ (n ~ ~ y o o ~ o o ~ 0 0 E `D `~ rn °O rn v rn rn 0 r i o O N 3 U .fie co o u'~ o o ~n o 0 j (O ~A N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _N > M U C d O E Z E O U a~ n o 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 ~ ~ to 00 N 47 N N E ~ Co M E O U ~ rn o t n ui of O `n ~ d E 0 2 n o 0 ° r~ ui o0 L M r l0 N C N N O N d Y OD O T j (O ~ N >~ M t+~ E 0 m N 7 V C R T ~_ O N ~ ~ d a N ~ 01 ~ ~ N N o =' E y J a ~ ~ > ~ n £ N N N y 4 ~ N w ~ O. H O o •` ~ E U O. F O 0 ~ c N ~ ~ o ~ m ~ ~ ~` 7 C7 ~ c ~ O. t N c N ~ ~ 'O a ~ O f0 N N C7 H Q ~ ~ O y a a 7 c °' N ~ ~ ~ O a` a 00 r '~V ai o dj O ~ N f0 d h v N W c 0 .~ O O N N .~ N 0 0 a N O n m c O .N y .~ W +~+ >C a N C 9 O U v N 7 U otS 0 0 N A I6 lC N H y .N A IO C g U C c W N _N O J C N 7 U 0 N Y `m U 'o J N rn c m v c m c m E U 0 D i U N E N Z U ~ ~ ~ c ~ ~ ~ o - U ~~ o Q w m m ~ m m a`> ~ i- c O N U ~ O Z J U U N N O O a a co 0 0 N O Z M N O O N U f0 W c 0 .N m C 0 a m m m c 0 .N .~ W m U L a m O C ~ o N ~ ~ C7 h N ,~ 7 cD to O a o W i ~ o in v, o ~~ L W n O N ° ~ ~ r i cv,~ o o o ( r~ ~ ( j cD ~ C~ v ~ ~ ~ O ~ O o 00 a o, o ~ ~ CI ° c ~ zl _~ N 2I N tD O OD r O ~ M O ~ r ~ ~ ~ N O N O - O O ~ ~ NO~~ e O O (/J~ O V] ~ O O ~ OD N O O O ~ ~ O N O ( p f` (O ~ ~ ~ ~ d' ~ N , i XX~~ (~O, m M N N O ~~r ryryry ~ N ~ ~ W Q ~ m -I ~ ~ ~ ~ I _ ~ N N O T O W p ~ 1 ~ r ~ (~~ ~ W _~ ~ ~ C W ~ Q ~ Q i . N ~ ~ a ~ °c h c n ~ ~ N ~ w ~ v~i w z U) (n ~ ~ ~ O m m rn C 7 R a ¢ O N m m rn ,C 7 N a ¢ O N ~ m rn .C 7 N a ¢ O N w Q ~ W ~ ~ U ~ ~ ~ a ? _O .~ ~ ~ ~ O N W O vi W J 2 ~ Q p ~ p ~ ' Cl .E ~ a ~ Q O Z O ~ ~ p Z Q W a' N ~ ~ p UJ ~ :? 01 'E ~ a ~ Q O n ~ r m V ~ .c ~ o ? V c F ` F ~ ~ C_ U U C ~ H u L a L W a O N a a N f0 ~I a 4. m o w v co 0 0 0o v co u~ u~ v o o v cD 1~ O ~ O N n O V O N ~ ~ (~ aO In O (O a0 ~ (~O O O M N (~O O O M N O O ~ o O (O ~ G N N O r N O r CO aD n ~ ao 0o n r M M O M M O .- r r .- r r N N N N N N N o0 n (O O N O n (O O N N N O f0 (D t0 O OD O OD 00 O 00 O 00 O O O O O O O W CO O ~ ~ .- ~ O ~ '- In O O O O O O O O O ~ M ~ M O O n M O O O n M O N N N O f0 fD tD O ~ O 00 (D O O O a0 f0 O O m W O O O W O n n o ~ vi o n o .- ui o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N~ N aD O M O ~ N a0 O M O O O O O O O O O `M''JII M O O N O M O O N O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ O O O M ~ O O C O O O O O O O O n O M M ~ n O M M O ~ ~ M O N O W O O N O O O O O O O T O O) O ~ ~ N t0 O r ~ N O O ~ ~ r O O O O O (O O M N O (O O M N O O O O O M M M O •' '- O O '- O ~ r O O r O O O O O O O O O N O N t0 O OD O N (O O .- ~ r O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N O n O ~ W N O n O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O O O ~ ~ O O O O O O O O O O O Ofd O O O O O Ofd m O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ ~ O O r O p!'1J ~- O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O M O c0 O O M O t0 (O O n n N ~ N N O W n ~ ~ N O O) n to n n ~ N ~t ~ M n n O oo uo,~ .-- ^ O a0 `O r O O ao ~ O O O .-- ~ O M N 01 ~ O M N O O O N n f0 CO O n co o n ao o co o n o0 0 ~ ~ .- o rn rn rn o of o r o of o r~ 0 0 0 0 o ao 0o ao 0 O M (O O M O N N N ~- .- .- ~~ N O N O O ~ N O N O ~ n n M ~ N N aD t N N O tO O O N O ID l0 O M M M O N N ~ O V ~ O ~ T O ~ O ~ ~ O N N N O N N N O N N O O O O N C1 N n O N N N N CO 0 O O O ~ O Q ' O 4 C 0 N D M roil N N O 0 ~ N N N p N ~ O O N N 0 ~ N ~ M O •d 0 N p Q O. N N W a' a' O 0 N ~ Q' Y N aQ0 ~ ~ M a0 ~ F a W O O O O ~ co (O 3 ~ C O ~ O O a, d Y ~ O O ~ d OO aD O O O/ O O) 07 O O N O ~ ~ O O ~ O O N ~ O p~ O N ~ Y >O N O ~ O C .O l 0 .O lO :~ (~ ~ l` ~D 0 f ~ O) C ~ C 'O C 'O C 'O ~ M O N O O] ~ 01 N N O N O O) > m ~ \ W ` O C pp ~ O N (~ N ~ r C C ~ N ~ r C C ~ O O O O O r U ~ T C U U M ~ U7 m N N N N T ~ ~ O ~ C U ~ ~ '- ~ N LO N f0 f0 f0 ~ Ur ~ C C C C ~ U ` N ~ U `7 N ~ N N ~ Iy0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; C ~ LL LL LL LL N > ~ F- ~ d > N H F~ m ~ E~ ~o E~ 'u.~ E~ I- E~ F- N N O N ao M O O 1n u7 n n O n 1n O _O ~ ~ O O ~ !~ O N c+7 M 00 aD O aD r O O O O C7 f") n n a) n N N O N to O M n n c7 s} O O N ~ M 1n O u~ 1n In 47 ~ N N tF ~ t0 t0 `7 ~ ~ ~ ~ n n ~ ~ v W O O N (O (O~ fp ~ N n N N O N fy N O N N N O N O O ~L7JI 1l) N ~ O O O O pOJI O O O .- r O r O O O O O O O O O O O T O O N t0 O ~I ~ ~ O O O ~ O N N O N O O ~ 7 N O O O O O O O O •- ~ O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O ~ O O O N N O C7 n a0l ap op n sr M (7 O f7 (+7~ fh O M ~ V O ch O O aDlf a0 N N c`~ O O O O pOJI O O O ~ .- O r O O r .-- O O O O O O O O O t1 V O M O O ~ fD N N ~ O O O O ~ O O O .- ~ O .- O O r .- O O O O O O O O O N N O O f~ n O sf M N N O N (y N O N O O O O O O N N O O N O O O O pOJI O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O t0 pOJ ~ I f0 O O O O O O O ~C1 O O O O O O O O O O O O~ OJ O O O O O O O O O p I O O O O O tD M (O In O N OOO~~~ ~ O O O O fh 1n r T O O O O O O O QQQ~~~ ~ W (p O O O (p C - C O O ap O N f0 ~ tf N In O O In ~ O ~ d (D ~ ~ U N a N L71 t0 47 f~ (O h n O O O N tD ) OD - C7 ~ n ~ n C7 u~ M h u7 O O a0 W T N T N O O O N O (q fy O N O O (p N L d C ~ ~ O r r 4 •- . O N (O N .- ( N O O O pO~~ O O O _y N N C LL ~ ~ f7 N .- n O O n N O ~t n T ~ In r ~ C7 M In C! r O O O OD ~ n r r 01 .- O a7 ~ w C7 C7 O N O O CO t0 t7 O ~ ~ r ~ ~ O ~ ~ O 0 M C7 M M O O O N (D N ap Q1 O m p O O O O ~ N O N p p N ~ N N O N O ~ ~ O n N N d N N n N m ~ d d fh m N O W N O CD N_ 0 N O _ ~ _ O t/1 d ` ~ O N '" Q Ol C G ~ C O C n (O nj M O a M a) 'O 'O H ~ T ° ~ f'- H ` i0 H ~ i0 H ~ f ~ c °o ~ o o d o o ~° ao ° ° °O U d ° °O U m c °~ ~ ~ ~ N ,° p C? '~ ''~ C C EN O O O ~ ~ ~~ O 7 ~ 3 N N n 7 ~ ~ ~ N T ~ ~ N O O O ~ ( O ~ ~ ~ ° y C7 _ O f6 01 N T O O Ol 01 Ol ~yy N T O C C C yy N N Y C ~ y ~ ~ ~ C D ~ ~ ~ ~ m > > > > U ~ U 01 L ~ ~ N O L f6 LL ~ E m m m m ~ > > > ~ ~ ~ o O .E ~ o ~ a rn N ~~ H a a a a ~~ 3 m m m ~~ o a U ~~ o a U y k m ~ E~ a E'~ m E~ U E~ U t c m a n ~a i=a i=a ~a a ~ ~ 3 O m o y o ~ ~ •~ ~ ~ N > a ~ o ~ .. ~ N ~ ~ N ~ ~-- ~ J U d ~ N U ~ Q ~ m H W ~ ~ O ~ m n m m o w m N a ~ ~ IO `1 7 C ~ ~ P I1 O N 0 0 O O .-. .D a 7 ~a y O O o o ~' o Z ~ N ^ to ~ U p F- m m U a A fp O 7 m ~ c N N ,J ~ ^ d > W ~ ~ ~ m Q O N ~ ~ ~ U ~ ~ C O .. N E d 7 W N ~ O T m a a~ a N 7 O L O O O _m V m O N O m N rn c .~ N O n C L N E cp _n. ~ N W o W O O N c O .Q .C U N D) C .] m a_ 3 N O O 0 n N (+7 0 N N N O c .~ m a N m a O C m °- a ~~ N ~ ~ W o ~° m N O N ~ Q a io a of CO o Qj o ~ N (0 a ~ E n .~ w v m 0 0 ~ O M ~ O ~ n n vi ui o °0 0 0 0 0 o °o, o 0 0 0 °o °o °o 0 0 0 o °o, o v o v a~ m rn _ ~E ~ p'9 ZI ~ v °o ° aMO a ~ o 0 ~` `4 D ` 0 o 0 0 m a ~ M o N ~ `k 7 a y ~ry :-J ~WJ c`~ O O O O O ~ ~ N ~ w y O) ~ N p~ fC0 U SC L U qN 1 O Q' ~ S W Q ~ W C a N v N O N O 3 L " ~ N ~F O 3 L D 'O O IL ~ O) _ ~; N _ ~; N ~ ~ O1 d c i d OD r ~ ~ o~ o N n aN. f0 01 C ~ ~ o (n t0 Q ~ (n W W U ~ ] U ~ Q ~ U N 7 Z L ~ 2 N C S Z ~ ~ m N 'O ~ ~ ~ o a ~ j C U N O C p U m ~ d L Q E C 7 ~ ~ N a -~ ~ C d O m m C a C N O d m C a O ~ ~ O ~ ~ t 0. O M f 0 7 O (~ (O 1~ N W W , ~ (O ~ ~O a0 O M N [i ~ N M I~ I~ (O M ~ ~ lfj H f~ M N a0 M f~ N W O M ~ 01 (O W N ~ M m 1n O N I~ M ~ M O ~ ~ ~ H ~ N O tN n aM0 ~ N 'd O r r ~ O O d ~" N G ~ t~0 ~ W M ~ N W ~ O n f7 d ~ m a o O O ~ N T ~ LL~j O'1 a ~ ~ d o co of ~ o y ~ O M ~ ma , .C ~ l0 47 O 1~ O ~ ~ N O ~ ~ O O O ~ O O ~ Z f0 (/1 O O O O O O O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~ Q y Q y Q y O' y Q y o ~ ~ N7 M f0 'C ~ O O O O O O O O O O V N t0 N 10 W O O ~O I~ 47 W OD M O) 00 O ~n n a~ n u~ v M o c ~ v, rn o M o .O J a O W V' O O N - l0 ~ O ~~ C ~ X Z o O N l0 o f~ c°DO, N n °v O °~ r m Ih o E y ~ ~ m ~ ~ O a`> n Q a y ~, j O d ~ Q. O O N ~ W ~ N W v N O Op O ~ O .n ~ c c 0 O ~ N a a D ~ ~ N ~ n r a N ~ .~ y ~ m ~ ' ~ f0 n O ~ c ~ f- ~ 1- W Z O ~ ~ W O d' d o p U ~ o N ~ - ~ CJ ~ L y C aoi ~ m O '9 O ~ d aci C7 _ ~ O ~ a o 7 n ~ ~ ? a ~ > rn _~ O ~: ~ J Q ~ ~ y n c CO ~ ~ O y n T h N n w o m t C C y d o o ~ N E 7 ~ c •C > cg N a O ~ C C y a~ o ~ in ~ .. ~ y ~ ~ ~ °- ~ F~ O c } y T m ¢ co °o N ~ O Z M ; c ° U w ~ W N U w w ~ ~ ~ `~° ~ p U >. o ~ ~ m c7 . `~ L y rn ~ n C v ~ O f0 c C7 a m °t a ~ ~ O l0 N O O O O f0 OD N M M M aD n n O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O N E O ~ n H O N ~ y N 41 O ~ ri n U 0 m rn ro o ~ F m ~ a: o n ~ 3 d ~ ~p ~ N N ~ r O n C7 in >` N ~ eo m O iri O ~ 01 O) O O O ~ n n (O f0 N N N O O O O O O r N M O O O O O _ U O E E C O Z H ~ U U m ~n ~ of E rn .~ ~ o ~ 0 U 0 Z H n u~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 o rn o 0 T ~ .= 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o n o 0 m m n F C ~ a- y o O m C Z r Q E 0 ~ ~ x_ 2 o v c m J E E ~ O_ F- ~ O ~ W lL L . ~ yCy U a 1 ~ ~ ~ N N M O n O 0 O 1 O r O r O r O o N O O ~ O C v y ~ O. O ~ = M n U Q Y 00 O O 3 E 0 x y y .n 0 O y ~ o 00 ~ y ~ 00 0 M ~ O O 0 0 ~ ~ d d ~ ~ <D 01 N ^ N F ~ C J O O ~ C ~ ~ d d ~ ~ L N ~ Q L Cl J y ~ ~O ~ Y ~ t O/ J y ~ O n l!7 ~ M ~ L 07 J y .O O ~ O ~ ~ v ~ 'D N ~ O T ~ O Y U H ~ _ w J ~ ~ p ~ H ~ _ .0. J ~ C ~ ~ j ~ _ L d ~ O O M U ~ ~ m ~ O y 2 y m N L O ~ m N '~ ~ > ~ O O ~ j c O U f/7 N E O O ~ y ~ l J n c N ~ y o c ~ o o ~ 0 0 E f0 u) N O n n n n p M T O O ~ T W N 7 U -~ m o ~ o o ~ 0 0 ~ ~ N a _~ 3 U C y O E Z E O U ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ l17 aD N t1j N N E M M E O U ~ rn o L 1~ l0 O _ C7 it O d E O = C C d O O ~ ui ao r ~ ~ U H c °~ o v N = N Y N O W (O ~O N C7 M E 0 2 a~ !q 7 V C f0 T w a °~ `-° • v rn o ~ c °~ ~ ~ m v ~ C ~ C E Gl O d ~ ~ N C y ~ U c ~ ~ Q ~ ~ ~ O ~ n r- d ~ ? d N ~ L O ~ O O ~ N . H •C N € ~ N y H ~ L` ~ ~ N b m a `o o i. m ~ c ~ v d n ~ ~ ` ~ ~ ~ d ~ C7 a a CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP 2621 E. Windrim Court Elk Grove, CA 95758 (916) 647-3406 phone (916) 647-3408 fax 6220 Bay View Avenue El Sobrante, CA 94806 (510) 236-9375 phone (510) 236-1091 fax MEMORANDUM TO: Allison Knapp (Allison.knapp(a~ssf.net; aknapp(a,ix.netcom.com) FROM: Mark D. Crane, P.E. DATE: June 30, 2008 RE: TERRABAY TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON Allison: Here are two comparisons of the net change in gross trip generation for the Terrabay Phase 3 office/retail development. Alt 1 assumes that the new design studio's 15,007 square feet will have the same trip generation potential as R&D uses. In addition, there will be 1,000 less square feet of specialty retail commercial use and 2,500 less square feet of office use. As you will see, this results in overall higher year 2008 proposed project trip generation, even with less office and less specialty retail. Trip rates are the same as those utilized in the 2006 SEIR, from Trip Generation, 7th Edition, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) 2003. Alt 2 assumes the same development plan as Alt 1, except that the new design studio has no trip generation associated with it. This is probable to liberal an assumption, but it results in less overall generation from the 2008 proposed project. ALT 1 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON (PRODUCT DESIGN STUDIO WITH R&D TRIP GENERATION CHARACTERISTICS) DAILY AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS PROJECT 2-WAY TRIPS IN OUT IN OUT 2008 Addendum 8370 841 121 203 787 2006 SEIR 8312 829 119 204 778 Difference 2008 vs. 2006 +58 +12 +2 1 (- ) +9 source: crane T ransportation (croup Assuming that the new design studio square footage would have the same trip generation potential as R&D uses, daily two-way trip generation would be increased by 58 trips (or about 0.7%) with the AM peak hour generation increased by 14 trips (or about 1.5%) and PM peak hour generation increased by 8 trips (or about 0.8%). ALT 2 TRIP GENERATION COMPARISON (NO NEW GENERATION FOR PRODUCT DESIGN STUDIO) DAILY AM PEAK HOUR TRIPS PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS PROJECT 2-WAY TRIPS IN OUT IN OUT 2008 Addendum 8248 825 118 201 773 2006 SEIR 8312 829 119 204 778 Difference 2008 vs. 2006 (-64) (-4) (-1) (-3) (-5) Source: Crane Transportation Group With the design studio square footage having no trip generation potential, the project's overall daily two-way trip generation should be reduced by 64 trips (or about 0.8%), with AM peak hour generation reduced by 5 trips (or about 0.5%) and PM peak trip generation reduced by 8 trips (or about 0.8%). Even with the minor increase in peak hour traffic associated with the assumption of the design studio square footage having R&D use trip generation, there would be no new year 2010 or 2020 circulation system significant impacts. Mark 6/30/08 Memo to Allison Knapp Page 2 MARK D. CRANE, P.E. CRANE TRANSPORTATION GROUP PRODUCT DESIGN STUDIO The PRODUCT DESIGN STUDIO ("PDS"), connected adjacent to the south side of the North Tower and consisting of 15,007 RSF, will be situated on a second level above the North Tower retail promenade. Access to the PDS will be available at ground level through a dedicated lobby/reception area of approximately 1,500 square feet at the North Tower. This area will include an elevator and grand staircase. This area was formerly allocated as retail space (as part of North Tower retail). To make up the difference in this reduction in square footage, approximately 1,500 square feet of space at the ground level of the South Tower has been allocated as retail space. Approximately 2,500 SF of the North Tower second level will be utilized to provide connectivity (circulation) and function (storage and other miscellaneous supporting space allocations). Secondary access to the PDS will be available from this level. The PDS is designed by the same Project architect that designed the entire Centennial Towers campus -Skidmore Owings & Merrill. As a result, the design has been executed at the same level of dramatic expression as both the South and North Towers. The PDS's presence atop the retail plinth (the overall total height of the PDS above street level is approximately 39 feet 8 inches inclusive of the retail component) together with a highly complimentary facade articulation will add dimension and accent to the North Tower that enhances the already distinguished architecture of the entire Centennial Towers development. Glazing, horizontal fins and metal panels, punctuated by appropriate levels of other detail - e.g. lighting, will grace this elevation to give even more strength and solidarity as a part of the architectural composition that defines this gateway development. The intended use of the PDS is deemed as ancillary use for the development and operations of product designs by the anchor tenant and will not include any dedicated office space for employees. Office space will be located in the South and North Towers only, which have been approved under the 2006 SEIR Addendum. The addition of the PDS to the Project will NOT include additional office space to the Project. Interior features of the PDS -vital to the function of the production space -include column free, floor-to-floor heights of 16 feet. Finally, the PDS will not be considered a common space that is open to the public. Rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened from view by an articulated wall to avoid any sightline of the equipment. Screening will be incorporated over the equipment to avoid sightlines of the equipment from occupants in both towers. A rooftop graphic design, similar to the one already approved for the roof deck of the parking garage, will be applied to enhance the view of the roof from the two adjoining buildings. The floor elevation of the PDS will be approximately 66' above mean sea level (which is about 16 feet higher than the Retail and Ground Floor Lobby Level of the North Tower). As a result, there will be approximately 5500 CY of new cut at the existing berm and about 800 CY of fill at the current generator area. Also, there will be an extension of Site Retaining Wall No. 1 (a soil nail wall) comprising about 7000 SF of vertical area. The PDS will be serviced by two existing loading docks. In addition, there is grade level direct loading access at the rear entry of the PDS. cn cn cn w ~ o ~~~m ~o ~z ~~~~ ~_ ~~ o ~, m o ~. ~ z ~~ ~. z ~~ o ~° ~ D ~~ ~r- ~~ ~ ~_ CO ~_ ~ O ~r ~ ~r ~~ ~ m o z -~ D i (n TI cn p m °' m ~ z 0 N O O O O ~ ~ 0 N ~' ~- z 0 N O 0 0 0 m z 3 m r O O z m -~ O D nCn ll 0 m z O Y •i ,a fi V, $; yl ` I r i;, ~ , '~ +~~{~'. al i ~ ~ S \\. '/ ~ -1 ,~ ~~ ~ :~ ~'. ~ ~' e~ ,:i`i '' t ~ 1 ip f' . ;~ s" ~ ~ ' r F aa~~ } ,,, i ~ 1, ,~ ~ ~~~ ~: -u~ ax, ter. If JIN :fY. elf N .7llfl' ~'. ;! P: ., ~~I~y,`~~~t~~~~~ ~lI Vr Al ~ i- a ~ ~ `~ ~~ 1 ~~ 11 y`'~ r/e ii y 1 i/ d / Y ~ n r ', _- I ~~ * ~ i ` '' ~ `~~` i ~ ~~ ., ~, ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~m „~ ~a ~z ~~ ~_ ~~ ~o „m ~~ ~z ~~ ~z w cn a ~° _ ~ _~ D ~~ ~r v~ ~- o ~ r ~ ~~ ~~ w m A I I I ,T\\_ / ~. -~ ~~~ ~ v ~, o ,~ ----- ,~~ D ~ n O m oo~ Om3 00 OZm <v <m~ mC m~O v ~ m ~'~ ~j .. I o ~ c ° ~°o ~~ . 90 ~ ~~ --- ~ ~. 08 ~ ~ ~~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ o ~"' ~; ° o 7 0 ~ ~-~ I I ~~ W N II z D 0 O O 0 .~; m D 0 m N O 0 0 0 z 0 w z m m z 0T ~lI 2 W z m m r 6~ S~,// ~~ ~ o~ ~ ~ ~~ - ~ m T, ~ ~o ~z ~~ ~~ ~_ ~o „m o~ ~z ` z w ° O S2° _ ~ e D ~~ ~r N ~ A~ - -~ '~ r ° O ~ ~r 1~ m `0 e ~ a m m W N I I z i" D ~ O O N o` Q z 0 m D N O O W 0 N m w z m Z O //z-~ LI r m m r N 1JI;i .~~, I 0 0 --- -- // 1 \~ ~o~ u u O D ~ o 0 _ ~r o mss; ~' o ~ ~~~~~ 1' ~~~ / , ~ ~, I -- ~- ,., ~., { ~ ; ;~-_~ \ ~ ~ ._... . \\ y --- ,. / - --- 1 Lim--IDL~m W m~mzm~C Z m Z p Z rn ~ m~ D m A p i ~ .0 Dm--1 DmZ 'I °o °v ~ ~~ ~~ ~~~ ~ c j' O i n tin ~ ~ '~ v ~ m / ~ N / W~ ~~ A Z D N %~ i ~ cCnCp '/, ~~ ~ . 1 ~ ~~ ~ ;~~ U ~~o ~ i ~ ~~ ~~ i ~ o ,- ~ ' ~ W~ W C~ o i ~ ~ 08 ~ ~ ' ~~ ~~ ~;] . ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~~ cfl~ ° o ~ _` N ~ _ ~ ~ ~ - 7 0 r~~~~ I I I J ~~ cn cn cn v ~ o ~ Q c ~ ~ ~ fTl ~ o cn ~ ~ ~ w ~_ ~ ~p „fTl o ~_ ~ z ~~ z ~~ o~oD ~ ~ r-- =. - ~'~ ~ ~' ~ ~. ~ ~ o 1r ~ 1~ ~ m ~ ~ s ~ m ° d s ~ ~ z o O ~ T 1 z Z :~ m D ~ o C - D ~ m ~ o w T ~ Q z ~ z 3 ~ z /'~ Ll O O ~ N O O ~ D 0 0, Z I'~ I I -_ .~ ^~~' I^ ^' j O ;, ' ;-~ O "= O 1 _ O - -_ ~~~ - -: ~) ^ . _ , / , n ^ ;, .~- --__ \ ~'i \ 1 i ~ I ~ ii _~~ __ ~~~ -_~ ~. .~ ~ ®--~ 1,1 Z \\ ~ ~0 O I \ 7 /~ ~,,. J C _ ~ y M i //B `~e x i r' J ... Y"~ ~~•~ m n 2 D Z ('1 D r D c z i v+ v n m x ~ m -*~ Z A D r r._~ ,~ ~~ ~`~; ,,; r ~~ 11 ~~1 '. _ f ` 1~i.:~ n .~ .... ~ J Irv fw~,f ~ .. !~1 l"". t ~', ~~~ .. r`~~"= ray •~'~ ~ ~~ ~ ~.~~ r I / ~a ~~ ~'.. _,' .. ~, . r..., '~. '• `~~ `..._:~ Y~ ~! W.~. i .,~.f v. ~~~ •... W , ~~,~ !' t:z !'6th ."'.~ .~.~ ~+ ." r-~ ~:!, ~.~~ 1y ~~ ~ 1, .~ ~~~ .` 0 0 ~ .. ~ `~ o o °"i ~'~ y..` .~ ssf~;f. 4. /FC ~~~ F. f--, :`~ ~,~`'4 ~~ ..~. i~ , w ~ o n ~ Q ~~ ~ m w o cn ~ ~~ ~ ~_ ~~ o „ m o ~_ ~ z ~~ z ~~ a~ ~ o D ~. ~ ~ ~ -~ =_ O ~~ o -~ r ~ j~ v S m ~• ~ • ~ ~. .-. -- ~~ .~i ~¢ f ~ \ a ~ o ,. .• ,- '• !_ i • i ~... / ~, ~ I - o I I s o n I ® (~ I ~ e ° •_ O I n -_ v I e O ^ {J i ~ I I n ~~~yl J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ iF I a _ \ ~ ~ ~ l ~ ~ n ~" I ® ~ IIAA I \ u _ ~ ® \ ~ ^ ~ ~ '~ ~~ • 1 I Y I ~ ~ ! ~ ~ III e ~ ~ • • ~ ~ 1 _® B • ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ _. I u ® e ~. ~ ~ _ ~ I ~', e i • p o Q Z `.~ ~ ~ i z z z :~ m v o o 0 r D ~ ~ W ~ m < s ~ ~ m Z °' r ~7 D o Q r p ~ D ~ ~ , z ,,~ ~: ~o 0 ~ r ~ o .~- ~ ' ~, ~ ~ ~, ~~,\ D ~ ~~~ ~- ~ r ~v 02m __-_ ` \ I • m~ <m~ ~~ ~ ~ i y mom ^ i = I~<, ^ i • o / l I y o J~O ~ ~ I ~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ I g~ Q I O~ ~, f ,y~,,. ~ - O ~I ~ o ~` I • ~ w ~ mZ1~~ O O. O I ~1 -~0i~co'°c OS ~ O ~o~~ 1 °~oz-~ ,~, ~ ~. ~ ~ ~ ~o .o ° ~ 00 I• ~ ~. o o 0 0 p I ~ ~~ o ' o D , °~ o 0 I~ ~ ~ ~ I ~o o ~o I I, l I ~ ~ N ~i I ~ o ~ ~ \~ ~ ~i I ° ~' ~ ~ ~ 70 I ~' I ~ ~ ~~ , I ~` ~` ®/~ 0 ~~ op ~~ 0 o~ ~~ ~ v ~ o n ~ Q ~ ~, ~ 3 m ~o ~~ ~ ~ ~ C1 _ ~ ~ ~ TI m o ~. ~ z ~~ ~. z ~~ a~ o D ~~ n~ ~~_ ~ co = -~ 0 ~, - o ~ ~ ~r ~ ~~ m ~I ml ml °I Z Z ~ D ~ z 0 0 0 cn --1 m D n N 0 0 0 o 0 w ~ z 3 m C ~_ O m r m D O iz - w ~ p N P a ~ ~ c ~ - x a ~ •{ ~'{ ~'{ ~ V{ ~f ~' V{ tl{ ~l{ ~J ~l{ R{ T ~f{ V { U4 il4 U'~Y i 'A 'i 7 7 9 •~ .i •~ ~ $ ~~ K{ >){ i R{ •~ -~ J ~ ~ o n ~ p_ c T ~ 3 fTl ~o ~z ~~~~ ~_ ~~ o „ m o~~z ~~ ~ z ~~~ o~oD ~~~~ ~= _ °_ O ~~ 1r ~ -o m a m 0 N n t!~ ~ ~ m j Q Z ~ ~ O Z Z ~ D ~ ~ m D ~ Iv o o °° w cn O m ~ ?t m Z m v O r VJ N O O m C) O ~ O T VJ ~ I o _ H 4 _ .>. a ., .~ ~ ~ ~ , Ifd , U'<' , t7d , 17d , IYd , tId _, tYd , IYd , ~Y4 , tYd , R4 tY4 , IYd , 1S4 , tYd , IYd , tYd , IJd IJd IJd , ttd , Sd .~ IYd I°~ b p b ~ b Fp P~ S P^ P C $ ~ b b b C ' ~ ~ ~ ~ o n ~~~m „~ ~o ~z ~~~~ ~_ ~~ o „ m o ~. ~ z ~~ ~. z ~~ o- ~ o ~ ~~~~ ~- ~. -~ O ~~ o 1r ~ -~ ~~ m o ~, ~ ~ Z ~ .~ ° z o z ~ ° o D ~' ~ W o ~, Z N 0 O O A V O O nC l / m Z C _~ O C 2 m m D O a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ . ~ ~ i -r ~ 1 ' , , t ,r i , , c ~' v ua , .r - . ' - - a F:. - F F ^ P p p P ~ P b ~ Pp PP P p P p PP e P p O -~ O ~o _.,..,;~~ g °~H s ,~ Plannin Commission 0 ~ y H J c9LIFOR~1~o Sta Re o rt .ff P DATE: July 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: Twelve-month Review of a Use Permit allowing a cocktail lounge with daily hours of operation from 3 PM to 2 AM and allowing karaoke and limited live entertainment consisting of piano playing, within 200 feet of a residential zoning district situated at 107 Hickey Boulevard in the Retail Commercial (C-1) Zoning District, in accordance with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 & 20.81. Owner: Kelly-Moore Paint Company Applicant: Billy Ket Chau Case Nos.: P06-0040 (UP06-0013) RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct the Twelve-month Review of the Use Permit. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The New Wave Lounge (formerly known as the Manor House) is situated within aone-story multi-tenant commercial shopping center at the intersection of Hickey Boulevard and El Camino Real and has been operating as a lounge for many years. At the Planning Commission meeting of May 18, 2006, the Commissioners approved the Use Permit allowing extended hours, karaoke and live entertainment (consisting of live piano). At the hearing the Commissioners expressed concern with potential noise impacts to adjacent businesses and residents associated with the live entertainment, and potential security concerns associated with late hours and karaoke and required 6, 12, and 18-month reviews. CONCLUSION: The South San Francisco Police Department (SSFPD) Planning Liaison has reviewed department records and determined that since the previous review months ago no calls for service associated with the business have occurred that were directly related to the operation of the business. No complaints regarding noise or other issues have been received from either residential or commercial neighbors. Therefore recommends that the Planning Commission accept this report in fulfillment of the one-year review and direct City Staff to schedule the 18-month review. eve C son, Senior Planner Attachment: Approved Conditions of Approval CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P06-0040 107 HICKEY BOULEVARD (Adopted by Planning Commission on May 18, 2006) 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 approved plans, as amended by the conditions of approval, including the site plan, floor plans and plan elevations, dated March 20, 2006, prepared by design division of Kitami, as approved by the Planning Commission in association with P06-0040, as amended by the conditions of approval. The final plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City's Chief Planner. 3. The hours of operation shall be limited to the hours between 3 PM and 2 AM. Changes in the hours shall be allowed only after review and approval by the City's Planning Commission. 4. Karaoke and live piano playing are the only allowed entertainment venues. Change in the entertainment venue shall be allowed only after review and approval of the City's Planning Commission. 5. Noise levels shall not exceed a maximum of 50 dBA measured at the property boundary (SSFMC Chapter 8.32). Prior to the issuance of any permit the final construction plans shall include the acoustic retrofits recommended in the Acoustic Report prepared by Charles M. Salter associates dated March 20, 2006. (Planning Division Contact: Steve Carlson, 650/877-8535) B. BUILDING DIVISION 1. Provide two additional toilets, one men's and one women's or post the occupancy limit at a maximum of 50 persons. 2. Additional comments at plan review. (Building Division Contact: Jim Kirkman, 650/829-6670) C. POLICE DEPARTMENT Municipal 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 conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 2. Additional Requirements a. Mandatory installation of the high-tech ceiling for sound reduction. b. Mandatory installation of carpet beneath all speakers for sound reduction. c. Both front and rear doors, and windows must be closed during any music being played for reduced sound to the neighborhood. d. Proposed floor plan must be submitted to Police Department prior to approval of Use Permit. e. Site must not exceed 100-person maximum occupancy at any time (including employees) pursuant to the CA Fire Code. f. Two licensed, unarmed and uniformed Security Officers must be at the front door to provide security, and enforce maximum occupancy concerns. g. Use Permit subject to 6, 12 and 18-month review by Planning Commission. h. Street must be swept clean of refuse, e.g. cigarette butts, etc. nightly, prior to departure. i. The Chief of Police may immediately suspend the Use Permit upon any singular major incident at this site, or for any violations of the Use Permit. (Police Department Contact: Sergeant E. Alan Normandy 650/877-8927) ~~~s Planning Commission 0 o Staff Report cgLIFOR~1~ DATE: July 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: REVIEW OF: 1. Use Permit and Design Review legalizing a commercial postal facility with 24 hour operations, generating in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips, with outdoor overnight truck and trailer storage and off-site parking at 202 Littlefield Avenue. 2. Transportation Demand Management Plan to reduce traffic impacts associated with the development. Zoning: Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District SSFMC Chapters: 20.32, 20.74, 20.81, 20.85 & 20.120. Project Location: the property is situated at 222 Littlefield Avenue (APN 015-143-120, 015-143-130 & 015-143-190) in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District. Owner: A-M-J Associates Applicant: Michael Nilmeyer Case No.: P06-0056 (UP06-0017, DR06-0044 & TDM06-0006) RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a review and offer comments. BACKGROUND/DISCUS SIGN: The Planning Commission last reviewed the matter at their meeting of May 1, 2008. At their meeting the Commissioners noted that not all of the project improvements had been completed except for the entry driveway and the fire lane painting. The Commissioners also noted that the off-site improvements at the employee parking garage situated west of the site at 202 Littlefield Avenue were not complete. The applicant's representative indicated that they are working with city staff and are actively addressing the concerns. The Commissioners continued the matter for up to 90 days to allow the applicant to complete the improvements and resolve the fire lane issue. The Commissioners Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P06-0056 FedEx 222 Littlefield Avenue July 17, 2008 Page 2 of 2 encouraged that the facility site manager be made aware of the concerns and be present at the meeting. Because the use of the site relies on the functionality of 202 Littlefield Avenue, the review of this Use Permit should be conducted in conjunction with the Use Permit approved for the off-site FedEx facilities situated at 202 Littlefield Avenue (P06-0054). S ve Carlson, enior Planner ~o~~K„s~~ Planning Commission o -~ o Staff Report c9LIF0R~1~ DATE: July 17, 2008 TO: Planning Commission SUBJECT: REVIEW OF: 1. Use Permit and Design Review allowing a two tenant building comprised of a 10,228 square foot industrial use and a 17,600 square foot commercial mail distribution center with a 32,000 square foot indoor garage for the occupants of 202 and 222 Littlefield Avenue, outdoor parking for twenty- one (21) vehicles and an indoor parking garage for up to seventy-eight (78) vehicles, outdoor overnight storage of up to five (5) tractor trailers, and 3 thirty (30) foot long loading docks, generating in excess of one hundred (100) average daily vehicle trips, and twenty-four (24) hour operation. 2. Transportation Demand Management Plan reducing traffic associated with the development. Zoning: Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District SSFMC Chapters: 20.32, 20.74, 20.81, 20.85 & 20.120. Project Location: site situated at 202 Littlefield Avenue (APN 015-143-200) and a portion of neighboring property at 212-218 Littlefield Avenue (APN 015-143-150), in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zone District. Owner: Wells Enterprises Applicant: Michael Nilmeyer Case No.: P06-0054 (UP06-0016, DR06-0043 & TDM06-0005) RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a review, offer comments and direct staff to schedule a public hearing. BACKGROUND/DIS CUS SION: The Planning Commission last reviewed the subject matter at their meeting of May 1, 2008. At their meeting the Commissioners noted that the applicants had completed nearly all of the improvements. The applicant's representative indicated that they are working with city staff and are actively addressing the concerns including the lack of a fire lane. The Commissioners continued the matter Staff Report To: Planning Commission Subject: P06-0054 FedEx 202 Littlefield Avenue July 17, 2008 Page 2 of 2 for up to 90 days in order to allow the applicant to develop an acceptable solution to the Fire Chief. The Commissioners also strongly encouraged that the facility site manager be made aware of the concerns and be present at future meetings. The applicant has worked with the Fire Chief and developed a letter indicating the fire features that they have agreed on. Staff recommends that the conditions of approval be amended to include the items listed in the letter. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct a review, offer comments and direct staff to schedule a public hearing to amend the conditions of approval. Attachment Applicant's Letter .. JUN-18-2008 09:49 From:RFP 858-459-3415 To: 16508293954 Pa9e:2~3 RESPONSE FIRE PROTECTION www.responsefire.com lvlay i 4, 2008 Fire Chief Philip White City of South San Francisco Fire department Fire Prevention Division 480 North Canal Street So. San Francisco, L`A 94080-4G03 RE: FedEx Ground Facility - 202 Littlefield Avenue Dear Chief White: 1 am writing on behalf of FedEx Ground regarding their facility at 202 Littlefield Avenue in your jurisdiction, specifically in regards to the issue of fire department access. As you are aware, currently portions of the fire department access roadways circumventing this building encroach upon abandoned railroad property. FedEx Ground has pursued possible purohase ofthese easements, however that option is not possible at this time. Therefore, we are proposing to provide the following alternative mitigation and pr~ection measures, as allowed by Section 503.1.1, Exceptions #1 8c 2 of the 2007 California Fire Code, and we ask for your approval. Fedlrx Cround proposes to replace the existing sprinklers throughout the parking and distribution areas of the building with quick-response sprinklers; the existing ordinary harard pipe schedule piping will remain, as this occupancy is a Ordinary Hazard Group 1 occupancy under the current NFPA 13, and so the system meets the requirements for that occupancy. To our knowledge, the sprinklers currently installed are the original sprinklers installed at time of building construction in ]960. By replacing the sprinklers, we will upgrade the fire protection to the superior sprinkler technology now available, including the quick-response element for faster sprinkler activation and, thereby, notification. We propose to complete this work within 90 days, unless a tiros extension is mutually agreed upon due to unexpected circumstances. FedEx Ground also determined that existing sprinkler system was not rnanitored, and has contracted with A~DT to provide central station monitoring to ensure prompt Fire Department notification. FedEx will also provide proper striping of the existing pavement and signage of the existing access roadways and fire lanes and maintain these to provide clear lanes. This includes the portions on abandoned railroad property for as long as such areas remain available for this use. This work will also be Completed within 90 days. Additionally, FedEx Ground will pay sn "in-lieu" fee in the amount of $12,500.00, to aifset necessary trainingand/or additional equipment needed to protect the facility without proper access. This fee will be due and payable within 30 days of issuance of the Final Certificate of Occupancy, Please consider this request in the spirit in which it is pc+esented. In no way does FedEx Ground wish to compromise the safety of their facility, their associates, or the community. We believe that this proposed alternative provides a level of lire and life safety that moots the spirit of the code, and mitigates the 305b Renault Street ^ San Diego, CA 92122 fire P'roteCtion Ph:(858) b77-9278. ^ Fax:(8S8) 459-341 S Consulting and Design . JUN-18-2008 09:50 From:RFP 858-459-3415 To: 16508293954 Page:3~3 May 14, 2008 f edTsx Cround facility -South San Francisco, CA Fire lkparanent Acerss Altcrnativc Proposal Pagc 2 of 2 potential access issues for the site, providing a reasonable level of safety for responding firefighters. We ask for your acceptance of this proposal. Tha~ik you for your consideration and assistance. Sincerely, r J Laura J. lle ! Fire Protection (:onsultant F1RE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE: By my signature below, I accept your praposal for alternative measures to address fire department access for th+~ subject facility as described herein. I ~ Signature of the ire Chief Date