Annual Report 2013 - Granicus

Genent

AnnuGenente

Prepared foMay 201

tech Master Plan

ual Reech Fac i l i

or the City o3

n Annual Report

eport t i es Ten

of South San

2013Year Mas

n Francisco

s ter P lan

Genentech Master Plan Annual Report 2

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................................................ 3

Genentech Master Plan District ............................................................................. 3

Purpose of the Annual Report ............................................................................... 4

Genentech 2012 Campus Development and Buildout ............................................. 5

Current Campus Development Density .................................................................. 6

2012-2013 Campus Development ......................................................................... 8

Anticipated Campus Development (2013 – 2014) .................................................. 9

Transportation Demand Management and Parking .............................................. 10

Transportation Demand Management ................................................................ 10

Parking ............................................................................................................ 11

Changes to Use, Security, Development Standards or Design Guidelines ............ 12

Mobile Vendor Services ........................................................................................ 13

Master Plan Implementation Program .................................................................. 14

Appendices

Appendix A – Master Plan Implementation Program Update

Appendix B – Genentech Occupied Buildings in the Master Plan District

Attachments

Attachment 1 – TDM and Parking Report


INTRODUCTION

Genentech, the world’s first biotechnology company, was founded in 1976 and is located in South San Francisco. Genentech performs a wide range of functions at its South San Francisco campus, including research and development, clinical manufacturing, distribution, marketing, and administration. With approximately 9,000 full-time employees working in South San Francisco, Genentech remains the largest employer in South San Francisco.

Genentech Master Plan District

In 2007, the City Council adopted the updated Genentech Ten Year Facilities Master Plan, supported by a Master Environmental Impact Report, and amended the Zoning Ordinance to allow expansion of the Genentech Research and Development Overlay District (R&D), which was renamed the Genentech Master Plan District in 2010. The Master Plan was originally established in 1995 to guide the company’s growth and development of the Central Campus and to ensure that future growth would be consistent with goals and policies of the East of 101 Area Plan and the South San Francisco General Plan.

The updated 2007 Master Plan outlines a potential expansion that would allow the Central Campus to grow up to approximately six million square feet during the ten-year planning period and serves several purposes:

Articulates vision and policies that will serve as a general guide for the placement and design of individual buildings and other campus elements, as well as an overall development program to provide the basis for future approvals.

Fosters development of a campus befitting its setting on the City’s eastern bay shore that capitalizes on views and access to the waterfront.

Promotes alternatives to individual automobile transportation to further the City’s transportation objectives, by emphasizing a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program, and pedestrian connectivity throughout the campus to promote ease of movement between buildings.

Establishes the basis for zoning provisions that have been included in an amended Genentech Master Plan District.

Provides design guidelines that will serve as a basis for design review and approval for development in the Master Plan area.


Purpose of the Annual Report

The Annual Report is required by the Genentech Master Plan District ordinance (SSF Municipal Code Section 20.260.005(e)). It must address, as appropriate, the status of facility-wide improvements, progress in completing the required tasks and benchmarks described in the Implementation Plan, anticipated new construction or renovation projects, projected changes in the facility usage and requirements, an update on TDM and parking needs, an update on mobile vendor (employee amenity) activities on the Genentech campus, an update on the security program, advance notice of any proposed changes to the facility-wide development standards or design guidelines, and notice of any changes that have been made to the Facility Master Plan since the most recent Annual Report.

Consistent with this requirement, this Annual Report is intended to accomplish several purposes: (1) provide background information and up-to-date data on the Genentech campus; (2) identify near-term projects to the extent possible; (3) provide a brief overview of Genentech’s Transportation Demand Management program and parking needs; and (4) summarize the status of the Implementation Plan.


GENENTECH 2013 CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDOUT

Development of a campus with a sense of identity


Current Campus Development Density

Genentech’s Master Plan District extends over 165 acres. In addition, Genentech continues to occupy leased space at 500 Forbes Blvd, 435 Forbes Blvd, the Gateway Business Park and Britannia East Grand development (South Campus). Genentech also holds a long term lease on the 1511 Grandview Dr. property. Like the Gateway Campus, the South Campus, 435 Forbes Blvd, 1511 Grandview Dr., 530 Forbes Blvd, and 500 Forbes Blvd properties are not included in the Master Plan District (see Figure 1, on page 7).

The Overlay District includes specific development standards for buildout in gross floor area, floor area ratio and lot coverage. The following tables summarize the 2013 campus conditions:

2013 Building Use Distribution in Genentech Master Plan District

Building Area (Square Feet)

Neighborhood Land Area (acres) Office Lab Mfg/WH Amenity Total Bldg

Area FAR

Lower 52.4 305,550 482,150 527,350 10,260 1,325,310

Mid 26.2 82,440 469,300 0 2,000 553,740

Upper 49.4 681,600 58,850 34,150 78,110 852,710

West 37.2 21,840 0 485,400 0 507,240

Total 165.2 1,091,430 1,010,300 1,046,900 90,370 3,239,000 0.450

B2 parcel split from Lower Campus adds 3 acres to Upper Campus

2013

Gen

ente

ch in

So

uth

San

Fra

nci

sco

Developmen

t Property

Gen

entech – owned buildings

Gen

entech M

aster Plan District

Figure 1

Gen

entech – leased buildings



2012-2013 Campus Development

Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR) was refreshed

B7, B21, and B26 parking areas repaved

Completed agreement with City of South San Francisco, and advanced six million dollars to the City to install the Forbes Blvd bike lane and median improvements

Over one and a half miles of landscape upgrades with large, mature trees along Forbes Boulevard and Grandview Drive

B36 office refresh and site landscape improvements was completed

Landscape upgrades along Forbes Boulevard

B36 site refresh

Planned improvements on Forbes Boulevard


Anticipated Campus Development (2013 – 2014)

Master Plan Amendments

Installation of modular data center units

Additional landscape improvements and tree densification along Pt. San Bruno Blvd

A new hilltop office building on the Upper Campus

Demolition of donut building and addition of new campus greenspace

New campus building signage, in progress

New hilltop office building

B 35

New building sign


TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT AND PARKING

Transportation Demand Management

As reported in the 2012 Annual Report, Genentech’s TDM program, named gRide, provides a variety of flexible and convenient programs and services to get employees to and from work, as well as around campus. Genentech’s commitment to gRide program is demonstrated by the significant number of program services and incentives provided for employees. There are fifteen GenenBus routes, which include two CalTrain/BART routes; four San Francisco routes; six East Bay routes; and three Peninsula/South Bay routes, and GenenBus ridership is up to about 4,500 rides per day.

The Cordon Count survey completed in October 2012 indicates that Genentech achieved an unprecedented success with over 44% alternative mode use. This is the highest alternate mode share since the start of the program, and represents a decrease of eleven percentage points for drive alone mode share from the previous year.

The impact of the gRide program is significant. In the last twelve months gRide has supported reducing over nine hundred thousand vehicle trips which equates to twenty-one million vehicle miles

traveled (VMT), and reduced nearly fifteen million pounds of CO2 emissions.

Most people would agree that the 93 million miles between our earth and sun is far, but gRide’s impact has gone even further. In July 2012, the gRide program surpassed a major milestone, having eliminated 100 million miles of driving since the program began in late 2006.

As required by the section 18.2 of the TDM Program, Appendix D of the Genentech Ten Year Master Plan, a TDM Annual Summary Report, prepared by an independent consultant, is submitted with this 2013 Annual Report (Attachment 1). The survey data is from the fourth quarter of 2012 and captures details on all alternate mode usage and trip reduction rates.


Parking Ratios

Office Lab Mfg/Other Warehouse

Parking Ratios (at 24% TDM) 2.75 1.40 0.90 0.50



Building Type

Parking

Per the Master Plan, parking demand is measured by changes in growth and multimodal transportation services. The parking ratios used to determine demand are derived by building functions and TDM participation rates. Buildings whose functions have lower employee densities require fewer parking stalls. Changes to building functions will be minor and have minimal impacts to the parking ratios, but increases in TDM participation will affect more noticeable impacts that proportionately decrease parking demand.

The function-based parking ratios approved with the Ten Year Master Plan are reflected in the table below. These ratios provide a 5% to 10% reserve.

The following table shows the parking demand at 32% TDM and the current supply.

100 parking stalls in the Forbes parking lot were eliminated last year to accommodate bus parking for the gRide program. However, the supply still significantly exceeds the parking demand, even at parking ratios based on only 32% TDM.

2013 Parking Supply and Demand (at 32% TDM based parking ratios)

Usable GSF Parking Demand Parking Supply

Total 2,892,000 4,765 5,798

Note: Usable space defined as Buildings occupied by Genentech in the R&D Overlay District (see Appendix C)


CHANGES TO USE, SECURITY, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, OR DESIGN GUIDELINES

No changes are projected at this time for the facility usage and security detailed in the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan. Similarly, no changes are proposed to facility-wide development standards or design guidelines under the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan.

Genent

MOB

MAS

The Ion thand tan up

Figu

tech Master Plan

BILE VEND

Consisprovidcafeteemplovendoemplovendo

STER PLAN

Implementate Genentech

the triggers fpdate on the

ure 2 – 2012/20

n Annual Report

DOR SERV

stent with thedes amenitieseria and foooyee support or services incoyee convenieor locations a

N IMPLEM

ion Plan setsh campus in for implemenstatus of the

CaW(F

013 mobile ven

VICES

e South San s for employod services,

services. Including carwence, and alre noted on

ENTATION

s forth the spconjunction wntation of thoe specific imp

ar Wash Fri)

ndor service loc

13

Francisco Geyees to supp

fitness, chin addition, G

wash, hair salso mitigate aFigure 2.

N PROGRA

pecific improwith the entose improvemprovements w

Dental(last Mon & TuHair Salon (Wed)

cation map

eneral Plan aport overall cildcare, conc

Genentech coon and dentagainst traffi

AM

ovements andire Genentecments and awithin the Im

ue)

and Zoning Ocampus funccierge, and ontinues to ptal services. Tic on local st

d public amech Facilities Tamenities. Tmplementatio

Car Wash

(Fri)

Ordinance, Gction. These

other miscprovide on-siThese servicetreets. Specif

enities to be Ten Year MaThe appendixn Plan.

Legend: Mobile Services L

Hair SDentaCar W

(2Ha

Genentech e include: cellaneous te mobile es are for fic mobile

provided ster Plan,

x contains

Locations Salon al Wash

Dental2nd Mon)

air Salon (Thu)


MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM

The Implementation Plan sets forth the specific improvements and public amenities to be provided on the Genentech campus in conjunction with the entire Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan, and the triggers for implementation of those improvements and amenities. The appendix contains an update on the status of the specific improvements over the last year; however proposed modifications to the Implementation Plan will be reviewed with the Master Plan Amendments.

Appendix A - Page 1

APPENDICES

Appendix A - Page 1

APPENDIX A

MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM LOWER CAMPUS

2013 UPDATE

IMPROVEMENT IMPLEMENTATION TRIGGER 2013 PROGRESS REPORT

Land Use And Structure

Public Amenities &

Bay Trail

Complete designation of existing employee shoreline parking lots for public use on evening and weekends as described in Attachment A (of the Master Plan).

Complete within 4 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update.

Completed in July 2007.

Install Bay Trail directional signage from intersection of Forbes & Allerton, Oyster Point & Gull Drive, and East Grand & Grandview Drive to the Bay Trail access points as described in attachment B (of the Master Plan).


Completed in July 2007.

Appendix A - Page 2

Provide Improvements consisting of constructing a food concession facility and public restrooms (approximately 3000 SF) and a recreational field and associated public parking on approximately .8 acres for public use along Forbes Blvd. as described in Attachment A (of the Master Plan).

Specific design concepts shall be submitted for Planning Commission review within 6 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. Pursuant to this review, the Planning Commission shall determine and approve design, phasing, and implementation aspects of the improvement(s). An aggressive implementation schedule will be pursued.

Specific design concepts were submitted & reviewed by the Planning Commission in November 2007.

Green space – additional sections at perimeter berming, seating, & more information on plant materials were submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission with the 2008 Annual Report.

Food concession – search for vendor/concession operator has been ongoing; no proposal has yet been received.

Detailed design will be submitted upon completion of a new Lower Campus parking structure.

Construct a History Hall for public use. Construct prior to the issuance of a C of O of the first building at the B4 redevelopment site.

To be implemented upon occurrence of implementation trigger.

Appendix A - Page 3

Enhance landscaping adjacent to the Bay Trail by expanding the green space along the Lower Campus parking lot (adjacent to UPS facilities) through reducing the number of cars and re-striping the parking lot as described in Attachment A (of the Master Plan).

Specific design concepts shall be submitted for Planning Commission review within 6 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. Pursuant to this review, the Planning Commission shall determine and approve design, phasing, and implementation aspects of the improvement(s). An aggressive implementation schedule will be pursued.

Specific design concepts were submitted & reviewed by the Planning Commission in November 2007.

Additional drawings to address Planning Commission comments to enhance the meandering sidewalk along Forbes Blvd were submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission with the 2008 Annual Report.

Detail design will be submitted upon completion of a new Lower Campus parking structure.

Enhance existing cross walk on DNA Way at B3 from type one (stripe only) to type two (controlled) as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan.

December 31, 2007 Completed in 2007.

Add cross walk type two (controlled) on DNA Way at B5 entry in proximity to the shuttle stops as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan.

December 31, 2007 Completed in 2007.

Appendix A - Page 4

Public shoreline parking.

Specific design concepts shall be submitted for Planning Commission review within 6 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. Pursuant to this review, the Planning Commission shall determine the appropriate number and location of dedicated public parking spaces and approve phasing, and implementation aspects of the improvement(s). An aggressive implementation schedule will be pursued.

Completed in 2007.

Urban Design

Pedestrian & Bike paths

Add class II bike lanes along Forbes Blvd., from the intersection of Forbes and Allerton to terminus of Forbes Blvd. by striping a 5 foot bike path on both sides of the street, adjusting the street median to 4 feet, and adjusting the outside traffic lane to 11 feet as described in Attachment D (the traffic lane adjustment requires and is pending City Council approval).

Complete by the earlier of (i) completion of the City’s planned sewer improvements along Forbes Blvd., or (ii) December 30, 2009. Genentech shall coordinate implementation & timing of this improvement with the City Engineer.

Detailed design & permit application was submitted in 2008.

Bike Lanes were striped along Allerton Ave. from East Grand to Forbes (2009)

Implementation of this improvement was extended by the Chief Planner to December 31, 2012. (see Attachment 2)

City Council approved the concept design, and funding and maintenance agreements on November 14, 2012. The funding deposit was completed in January 2013, effectively fulfilling the Master Plan obligation.

Appendix A - Page 5

Add bike lanes along DNA Way/ Grandview Drive, from intersection of Forbes and DNA Way to intersection of Grandview Drive and East Grand Blvd by striping a 4 foot bike lane on both sides of the street as described in Attachment D (of the Master Plan).

Complete by the earlier of (i) completion of the City’s planned sewer improvements along DNA Way and Grandview Drive, or (ii) December 30, 2009. Genentech shall coordinate implementation & timing of this improvement with the City Engineer.

Bike lane striping along DNA Way/Grandview Drive was completed in 2007.

Enhance landscape and pedestrian connectivity along the Lower Campus central spine from the parking structure to Building 6.

The location and design of the improvements on the north side of the central spine shall be submitted for Planning Commission review within 3 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. Improvements on the north side of the Central Spine between Building 7 and PS1 shall be completed prior to issuance of a C of O for Building 50. Improvements along the south side of the Central Spine between Building 6 and PS1 shall be completed by the earlier of (i) prior to issuance of a C of O for the redevelopment at Building 9, or (ii) six years following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. (This six year timeline may be extended by the Planning Commission, in its sole discretion, as part of the Annual Review in the event that Building 9 still exists four years after the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update.)

Design for the north side of the Central Spine between Building 7 and PS1 was submitted & approved in 2007 in conjunction with approval of Building 50.

Implementation will occur in conjunction with Building 50 construction.

Appendix A - Page 6

Connect the Lower and West Campuses by developing a pedestrian path/ service road from the Lower Campus Central Spine to B29 at Allerton as identified in Section 3.4 of the Master Plan.

Complete prior to issuance of a C of O for redevelopment of West Campus parcels at 301 East Grand and 342 Allerton (pending acquisition of remaining easement rights)

Completed in 2010.

Create Campus entry at Forbes Boulevard and DNA Way, (approximately 8000 SF) as identified in Section 3.2 of the Master Plan and described in Attachment A (of the Master Plan).

Design concepts shall be submitted for Planning Commission review within 6 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. Pursuant to this review, the Planning Commission shall determine and approve design, phasing, and implementation aspects of the improvement(s).

Design concepts were submitted & reviewed by the Planning Commission in November 2007. Concepts included enhanced landscaping, signage & introduction of a roundabout at Forbes Blvd/DNA Way intersection.

New campus monument sign and B5 plaza with landscape improvements on the corner of Forbes Blvd and DNA Way was completed in 2010.

Campus entry concept will be implemented with redevelopment of B4.

Provide public art throughout the Overlay District area at locations that are visible from the public parks and streets, at $1.00/SF of gross new development as identified in Section 3.2 of the Master Plan.

Schedule of phased installation to be submitted to Economic and Community Development (ECD) for approval, within 3 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan, and shall be reviewed in the first Annual Report.

Genentech’s proposed schedule & location of phased installation was submitted to ECD in July 2007 & reviewed by the Planning Commission in November 2007.

Two public art pieces were installed in 2010. One along Forbes Blvd at B7 courtyard, and the second along the Bay Trail at FRC courtyard.

Appendix A - Page 7

Transportation And Parking

Remove on-street parking along DNA Way, Grand View Drive, and Point San Bruno.


Completed in September 2007.

Enhance street lighting along DNA Way, Grandview Drive and Point San Bruno (on both sides of the street as described in Attachment C of the Master Plan).

Schedule of phased implementation shall be coordinated with and submitted to the City Engineering Division for approval within 3 Months following the effective date of adoption of the Master Plan.

Update, shall be reviewed in the first Annual Report. Improvement shall be completed no later than December 31, 2009.

Completed in January 2012.

Install new shuttle shelters (up to 2) with associated landscaping enhancement, and replace existing shuttle shelter along DNA Way as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan and figure 4.2-4 of the Master Plan.

December 31, 2007

Completed in 2007.

Appendix A - Page 8

MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM MID CAMPUS

2013 UPDATE

PLEME



Bay Trail Complete Bay Trail Phase II improvements. Complete by March 2007 Completed in 2007.

Urban Design

Pedestrian Walkw

ays

Create secondary pedestrian connection from Upper Campus to the Mid and South Campuses as identified in section 3.4 of the Master Plan.

Prior to issuance of C of O for the first new building on Mid Campus.

Pedestrian Connection from South Campus to Upper Campus was completed in 2007.

Design of Pedestrian Connection from Mid to Upper Campus was submitted and approved by Planning Commission with the Founders Research Center (FRC) III project in 2007.

Implementation will be in conjunction with FRC III construction.

Public Art



(Refer to Lower Campus section)

Appendix A - Page 9


Street Improvem

ent

Install shuttle shelters along Point San Bruno (up to 2) as identified in Section 3.1 of the Master Plan and figure 4.2-4 of the Master Plan.

Prior to issuance of C of O for the first new building on Mid Campus. Final design and location of improvements shall be subject to review and approval by City Engineer.

Proposed shuttle shelter location was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission with the FRC III project/approval in 2007.

Installation will be in conjunction with FRC III Construction.

Street lighting enhancement. (Refer to Lower Campus section) Completed in 2012.

TION

Appendix A - Page 10

MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM UPPER CAMPUS

2013 UPDATE

IMPROVEMENT



Crosswalks &

Sidewalks

Add type-one (striping only) cross walk on Grandview Dr. at B31 (one location), as identified in section 3.1 of the Master Plan.


Completed in 2009.

Add type-two (controlled) cross walk at B21/Hilltop Parking lot (one location), as identified in section 3.1 of the Master Plan.


Completed in 2007.

Urban Design

Add sidewalk on north side of Grandview Dr. from B2 to B39 to enhance Upper Campus pedestrian connectivity, as identified in Section 3.4 of the Master Plan and described in Attachment C, sidewalk A.


Completed in 2007.


Public Art






Removal of on street parking. (Refer to Lower Campus section) Completed in 2007.

Install shuttle shelters on Grandview Dr. at B24 & B21 (two locations), and enhance the associated landscaping as identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.2-4 of the Master Plan.

Prior to issuance of C of O for the first new building on Upper Campus. Final design and location of improvements shall be subject to review and approval by City Engineer.

Completed.


MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM WEST CAMPUS

2013 UPDATE LEMEN


Urban Design

Construct a Campus entry at East Grand Avenue and Grandview Drive as identified in Section 3.2 of the Master Plan.

Design concepts shall be submitted for Planning Commission review within 6 months following the effective date of adoption of the Genentech Facilities Ten Year Master Plan Update. Pursuant to this review, the Planning Commission shall determine and approve design, phasing, and implementation aspects of the improvement(s).

Design concept was reviewed by the Planning Commission in November 2007. Design concept included enhanced landscape & signage.

Detailed design will be submitted with West Campus development application for 400 Grandview Dr. (formerly 345 East Grand Avenue).

Public Art





Install shuttle shelters (up to 2) on Grandview Dr. at West Campus, as identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.2-4 of the Master Plan.

Install prior to issuance of C of O for first new building on West Campus. Final design and location of improvements shall be subject to review and approval by City Engineer.

To be implemented upon occurrence of implementation trigger.


Install shuttle shelters (up to 2) on Cabot Road, as identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.2-4 of the Master Plan.

Install prior to issuance of C of O for the first new building on West Campus. Final design and location of improvements shall be subject to review and approval by City Engineer.

One new shuttle shelter was installed on the north side of Cabot Road in 2007.

Shuttle shelter on south side of Cabot Road will be installed in conjunction with development of West Campus at 342 Allerton Avenue.


Bike paths

Add class II bike lane along Allerton Avenue by striping a Bike path on both sides of the street as identified in Section 3.1 and figure 4.6-1 of the Master Plan & described in Attachment D (of the Master Plan).

Complete by the earlier of (i) completion of the City’s planned sewer improvements along Allerton, or (ii) December 30, 2009. Genentech shall coordinate implementation & timing of this improvement with the City Engineer.

Completed in 2009.


APPENDIX B Genentech Occupied Buildings in the Research and Development Overlay District

Genentech Building Number Parcel Address Building Area (sf)

3 44 DNA Way 206,776

4 1 DNA Way 150,516

5 22 DNA Way 182,164

6 660 Forbes Boulevard 120,576







1,446,722

FRC I (10,11,12) 99 / 101 / 103 DNA Way 250,791

FRC III (13,14,15) 340 Point San Bruno 277,814

36 1776 Grandview Drive 25,253

553,858











852,790


29 410 Allerton Avenue 46,378

Childcare (71) 444 Allerton Avenue 52,740

202,227

2,892,000

WEST CAMPUS

Sub-total

TOTAL (rounded to nearest thousand)

LOWER CAMPUS

Sub-total

MID CAMPUS

Sub-total

UPPER CAMPUS

Sub-total

Genentech Master Plan Annual Report

ATTACHMENTS

Genentech Master Plan Annual Report

ATTACHMENT 1

(TDM and Parking Report)

South San Francisco Campus TDM and Parking Report

October 2012 Survey

SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MODE SHARE AND PARKING REPORT FALL 2012 Genentech, Inc.

Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | i

Table of Contents Page

Purpose ........................................................................................................... 1

Survey Methods ............................................................................................... 4

Cordon Count ..............................................................................................4

Surveyor Locations ......................................................................................5

Parking Survey .............................................................................................8

Survey Implementation ................................................................................8

Cordon Count Survey and Mode Share Analysis ................................................. 9

Drive Alone and Carpool ............................................................................14

Transit Access ...........................................................................................18

Pedestrian Access ......................................................................................21

Other Modes .............................................................................................21

Detailed Mode Split Changes 2005-2012 ..................................................21

Parking Survey ............................................................................................... 27

Location of Parking ....................................................................................27

Parking Occupancy ....................................................................................29

Bicycle Parking ..........................................................................................34

Conclusions ................................................................................................... 37

Appendix: Changes in Campus Data Collection since 2005


Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | ii

Table of Figures Page

Figure 1 Hilltop Parking Changes ...................................................................3

Figure 1 Cordon Count Locations ..................................................................7

Figure 2 Cordon Count History and Changes .................................................9

Figure 3 Main Campus Mode Choices, 2006 – Present .................................11

Figure 4 Gateway Campus Mode Choices, 2006 – Present ............................12

Figure 5 South Campus Mode Choices, April 2008 – Present ........................13

Figure 6 All Campuses Mode Choices, 2006 – Present .................................14

Figure 7 Drive Alone Mode Shore, All Cordon Counts (2006 – Present).........16

Figure 8 Drive Alone Mode Share, Fall Counts Only (2006 – Present) ............16

Figure 9 Drive Alone Rate and Gas Prices (2005 – Present) ...........................18

Figure 10 Transit Mode Share Changes ..........................................................19

Figure 11 BART, Caltrain, and GenenBus Ridership ........................................20

Figure 12 SSF Main Campus Mode Split Survey Results+ .................................23

Figure 13 SSF Gateway Mode Split Survey Results++ .......................................24

Figure 14 SSF South Campus Mode Split Survey Results+++ ............................25

Figure 15 SSF Mode Split Survey Results for All Three Campuses++++ .............26

Figure 17 Total Parking Supply ......................................................................28

Figure 18 Parking Occupancy Rates, 2007 to 2012 ........................................31

Figure 19 Parking Occupancy by Percentage ..................................................32

Figure 20 Parking Occupancy by Number of Vehicles .....................................33

Figure 21 Bicycle Parking Inventory by Type ..................................................34

Figure 22 Bicycle Occupancy ..........................................................................35

Figure 23 Total Bicycle Parking Supply ...........................................................36

Report issued January 2013


Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | 1

This report describes the mode split and parking conditions at Genentech's headquarters in South San Francisco. Both a parking and cordon count survey were conducted on October 16-18, 2012 as part of an ongoing review and analysis of how parking lots are utilized at Genentech's three South San Francisco campuses and, more generally, how people access those campuses. This report compares the Fall 2012 results with previous parking and cordon count surveys, with attention focused on long term trends between year-to-year surveys.

PURPOSE The visual cordon count survey implemented by Nelson\Nygaard records an accurate count of the transportation modes Genentech employees use to reach work on a typical weekday. The goal is to determine the share of each transportation mode used to get to the Main Campus, South Campus and Gateway Campus on typical weekdays.

Determining how employees and contractors reach work is important as it allows Genentech to best manage its land resources while the company continues to grow. Since a large portion of traffic on roadways is from people driving their cars alone, most demand management programs are designed to encourage people to travel by alternatives to the “single-occupant vehicle” (SOV), especially at peak hours when traffic is at its worst. A cordon count is used to measure the effectiveness of efforts to reduce SOV usage. The data collected can be used to measure the following:

Auto occupancy information in support of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) and carpooling initiatives

Degree of usage of public transit and alternative transportation modes

Monitoring growth and impacts on road and transit facilities

Genentech has over the years developed many programs giving employees alternatives to driving to work. The gRide Rewards Program is Genentech's incentive program to encourage South San Francisco employees to use alternative commute options. The program’s goal is to increase the percentage of employees using alternative forms of transportation to more than 30%, reducing the number of single occupancy cars coming to and parking on campus as called for in Genentech’s 10-Year Master Plan. Genentech rolled out the gRide Rewards Program in November 2006, so this October 2012 survey provides an opportunity to analyze the program's effectiveness after six years, long enough to determine the long term effects of the program. Launched primarily as a rider incentive that paid employees for not driving alone to work, gRide Rewards has expanded to include a host of incentives for employees who commute:

$120 Transit Subsidy - Genentech pays $120 a month towards the employee’s choice of vanpooling or Clipper cards for public transit. Prior to January 2009 the subsidy was $115.



Rider Incentive – Employees can earn $4 per day for BART, Caltrain, Carpool, Vanpool, Bike, Walk and Motorcycle, $2 for all Direct-GenenBus (reduced from $4 in May 2011)

Driver Incentive - Employees can earn $4 per passenger ($2 per passenger per way) for being a driver in a carpool or vanpool, up to $32 a day

Preferred Parking - Carpool or vanpool drivers can use Preferred Parking stalls conveniently located near several building entrances throughout the South San Francisco campus.

Guaranteed Ride Home Program – Provides a way for employees who commute to work by public transportation, carpool, vanpool, biking, or walking to travel home when an unexpected need to do so arises (such as a personal emergency or unscheduled overtime).

Beginning in 2010, Genentech also started offering a bicycle sharing program for all employees. Bicycle sharing provides employees with access to a fleet of shared bicycles from five stations distributed across campus, allowing them to attend business meetings, run errands or simply get some exercise during the day. While some employees use the bikes to go as far as downtown South San Francisco, the shared bikes are primarily for travel around the campus.

These transportation demand management (TDM) programs and policies seek to affect the travel choices commuters make. The modes measured in this survey include:

Drive alone (private auto)

Carpool (private auto) - includes employees dropped off

Vanpool

Walk

Bike

Transit & connecting work-end shuttle (BART, Caltrain, GenenBus, Ferry, and Alliance Shuttle)

Motorcycle

Taxi and Hotel/Airport Shuttles

In addition, the parking survey was conducted to determine the parking occupancy on campus, and how vehicles are distributed across the many surface lots and parking structures. Genentech’s success in encouraging employees to commute by transit over the last five years has allowed some surface lots to be replaced by new buildings (e.g. Building 31). This has affected where employees park, warranting continued data collection and review.

Figure 1 (below) shows how parking and buildings have changed on the upper campus of the past few years.



Figure 1 Hilltop Parking Changes

From left to right: Building 2, but no Building 31 (2007), Building 2 demolished and Building 31 completed (early 2011), and expanded lot U16 on site of Building 2 (late 2011) Source: Google Maps



SURVEY METHODS

Cordon Count Surveyors located at 13 key entrances to Genentech’s three South San Francisco campuses and at three key GenenBus stops conducted the visual cordon count survey. Following are key details of the survey implementation:

Genentech Security Staff were trained and utilized as surveyors by Nelson\Nygaard staff.

Surveyors were stationed at key roadway and bike/walkway entrances to the Main, South, and Gateway Campuses during the survey period on each of the three days (Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday).

Surveyors tallied modes of arrival to the campus in the same manner on each of the three days. This allowed surveyors to ensure that if any single day had unusual counts (due to unusual circumstances, e.g. bad weather, a freeway traffic jam, public transit problems, etc.), their effect would be reduced due to the counting of three mid-week days.

Surveyors conducted counts on October 16, 17 and 18, 2012 from 6 AM to 10 AM, during morning peak hours when most dayshift workers arrive. Only mornings were surveyed, as afternoon traffic is much more likely to include non-commute travelers.1

The traffic data was collected in 15-minute intervals.

Genentech Security Surveyors were located at three additional locations to determine how many transit riders reach the South Campus on BART, Caltrain and GenenBus shuttles.

Transit data was collected in a different way for this survey. Because the transit operators no longer collect boarding information on campus, Genentech’s badge-swipe data was used to determine which part of campus GenenBus riders travel to.

Due to a technical difficulty with the Genentech data system, we were not able to use current vanpool information for the last two surveys. The vanpool numbers presented in this report are from the October 2010 survey.

Following is a summary of the various trip types that were tallied and calculated:

Drive Alone: All personal automobiles entering the three campuses were visually surveyed. Single-occupant vehicles were counted as such.

Carpool: All personal automobiles entering the three campuses were visually surveyed. If multiple passengers were traveling together in a car, each passenger, including the

1Surveys from April 2005 to January 2007 were conducted from 5 AM to 10 AM. Although the 5 o'clock hour accounted for 8% of employees accessing campus, the cordon count period was shortened from five to four hours to accommodate the added parking survey that takes approximately one hour to conduct.



driver, was counted under the carpool category. People dropped off in the immediate vicinity of a surveyor were included as carpool passengers.

Vanpool: Genentech vanpool vehicles were counted by vanpool drivers instead of surveyors. Note that a problem with the Genentech database prevented them from providing new data for this survey. Vanpool data from October 2010 was therefore used.

Walk: All pedestrians entering the campus were tallied. Surveyors were stationed and trained to differentiate between commuter and intra-campus pedestrians.

Bike: All bicyclists entering the campus were counted.

Taxi and Hotel/Airport Shuttles: All taxis, hotel shuttles, and airport shuttles, with passengers entering the campus, were counted by the number of passengers. If a taxi or shuttle passed the cordon point with only a driver, no data was collected. If, for example, a taxi or shuttle passed with one driver and 2 passengers, the vehicle was noted, and the number of passengers excluding the driver was counted.

Transit: Genentech provided transit ridership information over the course of the entire month of September, which was used to extrapolate ridership over the course of the count days. Overall mode split did not include ridership on DNA or Gateway intra-campus shuttle services, since these employees had already arrived by another mode. Surveyors counted the number of passengers alighting from non-Genentech shuttles such as the Alliance Utah-Grand Shuttle that serves the South Campus.

Surveyor Locations Surveyors were located at the following 16 sites, which are also indicated in Figure 22.

Main Campus Forbes entryways: (#1a and #1b) second floor of PS-1 along Forbes Boulevard to

capture lower campus trips, (#11) along Forbes Boulevard at Building 54 across from Allerton Avenue, and (#12) along Forbes Boulevard, between Allerton Avenue and Gull Drive.

Grandview and Upper Campus entrances: (#3) along Grandview Drive between Buildings 28 and 39 to capture upper campus trips. The area between Buildings 80 and 26 (#4), is intended to capture commuters entering “the back way” via a driveway from East Grand Avenue near Haskins Way – however this site was closed during this survey period due to construction.

South Campus Transit Surveyors: (#B) at the Upper Campus Shuttle Stop along Grandview near B24, (#C) at the top of the stairs leading from the Upper Campus to the South Campus, behind Building 24. The two surveyors captured the number of transit riders going to South Campus, which does not have a GenenBus bus stop.

2 Note that sites 2 and 13 are no longer used, but the remaining sites use their original numbering to avoid confusion and simplify comparison with old data.



Gateway North Side: (#5) Executive Drive, NW corner of parking garage, (#6) Gateway

Boulevard, North site near Building 84.

South Side: (#7) Executive Drive, SW corner of parking garage, (#8) Gateway Boulevard, near childcare facility and Bank of America, (#9) Executive Drive at Corporate Drive, and (#10) Gateway Boulevard at Corporate Drive.

South Campus Transit Surveyors: (#A) at the Gateway Campus Shuttle Stop next to the Parking Structure and across from Building 83.The surveyors captured the number of transit riders transferring to the DNA shuttle to South Campus, which does not have a GenenBus bus stop.

South Campus East Grand Avenue (#14) where it ends and meets Building 44. All drivers heading

into campus were counted. Since April 2009, vehicles entering south of Building 44 towards Parking Structure B and Building 45 were also counted since these structures are now completed. The Alliance Utah-Grand shuttles are the only transit, apart from intra-campus DNA shuttles, that go to this campus at this time.

South Campus employees taking the GenenBus to work were counted by three surveyors at sites A, B, and C to determine when shuttle riders alighting at Gateway and the Main Campus, in fact walk or take the DNA shuttle to South Campus.



Figure 2 Cordon Count Locations



Parking Survey The parking survey was conducted at 10 AM on October 16, 17 and 18, 2012. Each surveyor or surveyor pair was assigned a series of adjacent parking zones to count. Parking spaces were counted by space type, including the following:

General employee vehicles

gRide parking spaces

Vanpool spaces

Company and service vehicles

Motorcycles

Disabled

Visitors

Public Access (e.g. Bay Trail)

Loading spaces

Illegal parking (marked with a red curb, no parking, or any vehicle not in a designated parking space)

Bicycle racks/cages

Other specialized parking spaces

Survey Implementation The survey was carried out as planned on all three days. Overall, surveyors performed as trained. About half of the officers had participated in previous cordon counts at least once during the past five years. However, few officers attended training on Monday. This meant that some officers reporting on Tuesday morning had not received any training, because this was their first time participating in the survey. Each surveyor was assigned his or her own cordon count locations. The larger parking survey areas (i.e. those with large parking structures) were typically split between two surveyors, while the smaller parking survey areas were assigned to single surveyors.

The weather was unseasonably warm for October; temperatures ranged from 72 degrees to 84 degrees, with sunshine on all three days. This survey included non-Genentech parking lots, such as Lithotype and Rich’s Donuts, in order for these vehicles to be removed from the Genentech transportation mode share calculation.



CORDON COUNT SURVEY AND MODE SHARE ANALYSIS Results from the visual cordon count survey provided a breakdown of the commute mode shares. Nelson\Nygaard has previously conducted surveys starting with the Main Campus in April 2005, both Main Campus and Gateway from February 2006 to present, and the South Campus since April 2008. Since 2006, surveys have been conducted twice a year, normally in April, and in October; however, in 2012 only an October survey was conducted. Including the new October 2012 survey, all fourteen surveys conducted to date are generally comparable although some factors should be acknowledged. Figure 3 shows the evolution of the cordon count survey over the past 5 years. A full account of all variations in the cordon count data collection can be found in the Appendix of this report.

Figure 3 Cordon Count History and Changes

Year Month Main Campus

Gateway South Campus

Count Start Time

Notes

2005 April Surveyed Not included N/A 5:00 AM

2006

February Surveyed Surveyed N/A 5:00 AM

Insufficient parking at the Main Campus may have affected mode splits at each campus.

November Surveyed Surveyed N/A 5:00 AM

Sufficient parking at Main Campus allowed for accurate mode splits. gRide program introduced.

2007

January Surveyed Surveyed N/A 5:00 AM gRide fully implemented.

October Surveyed Surveyed N/A 6:00 AM Start time shifted from 5 AM to 6 AM.

2008

April Surveyed Surveyed Northern half surveyed

6:00 AM Northern half open, while southern half closed so only north counted.

October Surveyed Surveyed Northern half surveyed

6:00 AM Northern half open, while southern half closed so only north counted.

2009 April Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM

Southern half of South Campus opened. Entire campus counted.

October Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM

2010

April Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM

October Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM South Campus GenenBus riders counted for first time.



Year Month Main Campus

Gateway South Campus

Count Start Time

Notes

2011

April Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM

Parking Survey was not conducted. Vanpool numbers are from the Oct. 2010 survey.

October Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM

Site 4 closed due to construction. Vanpool numbers are from the Oct. 2010 survey.

2012 October Surveyed Surveyed Surveyed 6:00 AM

April survey not conducted. Change in GenenBus boarding location methodology.

Figure 4 and Figure 5 show the mode share changes before and after the gRide program was implemented in late 2006 at the Main and Gateway Campuses respectively. Figure 6 shows the mode share changes of the South Campus from April 2008 to the present. Figure 7 shows the mode share changes of all campuses combined. All results are based on an average of the mode split over the three-day period.

It should be noted that this year’s cordon count shows a precipitous drop in transit ridership at the Gateway Campus, and a significant increase in transit ridership at the Main Campus. This is almost certainly due to a change in how on-campus trip distribution was calculated. Previously Compass Transportation was able to report both the total number of riders, and also where those riders boarded the bus on campus in the afternoons – from this it was extrapolated that they would disembark at the same locations in the morning.

Starting this year, Compass Transportation was only able to report the total number of riders. Badge swipe data was used to establish location.



Figure 4 Main Campus Mode Choices, 2006 – Present

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Nov '06 Oct '07 Apr '08 Oct '08 Apr '09 Oct '09 Apr '10 Oct '10 April '11 Oct '11 Oct '12

Co

mm

ute

r M

od

e S

ha

re

Drive Alone Carpool Transit Vanpool Walk



Figure 5 Gateway Campus Mode Choices, 2006 – Present

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%


Co

mm

ute

r M

od

e S

ha

re




Figure 6 South Campus Mode Choices, April 2008 – Present

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Apr '08 Oct '08 Apr '09 Oct '09 Apr '10 Oct '10 April '11 Oct '11 Oct '12

Co

mm

ute

r M

od

e S

ha

re




Figure 7 All Campuses Mode Choices, 2006 – Present

The mode shares shown in the graphs above are documented in the tables in Figure 13 through Figure 16.

Drive Alone and Carpool Overall, the drive alone mode share saw a decrease of 5.6 percentage points as compared to October 2011. The current drive alone mode share for all three campuses is 58.8%. Main Campus experienced the sharpest decline in drive alone rates, while the Gateway Campus saw a moderate decrease in its drive alone rate. The South Campus saw a moderate increase in its drive alone rate. See Figure 7 (above) for the overall average changes. As stated above, the drive alone and transit mode shares at Main and Gateway campuses should be viewed in light of the methodology change – less weight should be

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%





attached to the individual mode shares at Main and Gateway (because they are estimated), instead more emphasis should be placed on the mode share at South Campus and combined for all campuses because they were observed directly.

The Main Campus’ drive alone rate decreased 11.2 points from October 2011 and 9.6 points from April 2011. The Main Campus experienced the most significant decrease in its drive alone rate during the past year and is currently at its lowest since Genentech began tracking commute mode splits. Drive alone rates have fluctuated on the Main Campus over the last four years, ranging between 56% - 67%. See Figure 3 (above) for the overall changes.

The drive alone rate at South Campus also decreased between October 2011 and October 2012, but it is still the highest of all three campuses. The South Campus drive alone rate is likely higher due to the fact that it has no direct GenenBus service. Most South Campus employees who take the GenenBus alight at the Main Campus, and then walk down the hillside stairway to the South Campus. A smaller portion take the GenenBus to Gateway, where they board a DNA shuttle bound for South Campus.

Gateway experienced a modest increase in drive alone mode share, and while in 2011 it was to date the only Genentech campus with a drive alone rate lower than 60% (57.8%), it is now almost back above 60% (59.2%). In the last year, Gateway’s drive alone rate increased 3.4 percentage points. While mode share increased in 2012, the campuses' downward trend represents a sustained trend in employee commuting behavior.

The relative changes in drive alone mode share for the Gateway and Main campuses can also be seen in Figure 8.

As shown in Figure 9, drive alone shares for all campuses combined have decreased over the past six years. The All Campuses drive alone rate dropped 8.4 points from 2006 to 2008. From 2008 to present, the All Campuses rate has dropped 11.3 points. The changes in drive alone rates, compared to October 2011, may be due to several factors including gas prices, traffic congestion, transit improvements, and toll changes on the Bay Bridge. As shown in Figures 3 to 6, the carpool rate for all three campuses has increased in October 2012. In July 2010, tolls for the Bay Bridge were raised and restructured and carpools were no longer allowed to cross the bridge for free. According to a study by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, charging a discounted carpool toll of $2.50 caused 4,365 vehicles to abandon the carpool lanes daily - a 26% decline3. This resulted in a steep decrease in carpool mode share between 2010 and 2011 on the Genentech Campus, but it seems as if the effects of this change are now stabilizing and are perhaps being reversed.

3San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/11/free-fee-charge-takes-toll-sf-bay-bridge-carpools#ixzz1fhcFRXgn



Figure 8 Drive Alone Mode Shore, All Cordon Counts (2006 – Present)

Figure 9 Drive Alone Mode Share, Fall Counts Only (2006 – Present)

R² = 0.8942

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

Feb'06

Nov'06

Jan'07

Oct'07

Apr'08

Oct'08

Apr'09

Oct'09

Apr'10

Oct'10

April'11

Oct'11

Oct'12

Main

Gateway

AllCampuses

Linear (AllCampuses)

R² = 0.8896

50%

55%

60%

65%

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

Nov '06 Oct '07 Oct '08 Oct '09 Oct '10 Oct '11 Oct '12

Main

Gateway



Drive Alone and Carpool Summary:

Drive alone share of all trips averaged 58.8% for all three campuses. This is a 5.6 point decrease since October 2011 when the drive alone share was 64.4%. Since gRide was implemented in late 2006, the drive alone share has dropped 15.2 percentage points.

Carpools had an 8.1% share overall, a 0.9 point increase from 7.2% one year ago. The carpool share has ranged from just over 7% to just over 12%. In July 2010, peak period toll pricing was introduced on the Bay Bridge, along with the introduction of tolling carpool vehicles, which may have attributed to the recent decrease in the number of carpools, though the affects of this change may have stabilized and even reversed.

All campuses saw small increases in carpool participation. In the last year, carpool mode share has increased slightly by 0.9 percentage points on the Main Campus, 1.2 percentage points on the South Campus, and 0.6 percentage points on the Gateway Campus. Year to year carpool rates are up at all three campuses.

A clear link between drive alone rates and California gas prices4 can be seen in Figure 10. Drive alone rates appear to react and change several months after gas prices significantly rise or fall. Gas prices climbed above $3 per gallon in early 2007 and above $4 by the middle of 2008. Drive alone commuters appear to have responded to the rising gas prices and the gRide incentive, with a noticeable lag of several months. Six months after gas prices rose to more than $4 a gallon, drive alone rates dipped by 4 percentage points. Conversely, the drive alone rate increased 2 percentage points three months after gas prices fell by $2.66 to $1.82 per gallon. While the graph below shows California Indexed Gas Prices, the price of gas in the Bay Area5 was actually higher in September and October 2012 than it was during the 2008 gas price spike, which may have contributed to the continued decline in drive-alone mode share.

4 Source: http://energyalmanac.ca.gov/gasoline/retail_gasoline_prices2.html 5 http://www.sanfrangasprices.com/retail_price_chart.aspx

SOU

Figur

TraGeneservicnew WshowGenesincepointover As shGene

6 US Ind

http://d7 Points

UTH SAN F

re 10 Drive

ansit Accentech has mce, and contWETA ferry

ws 23 daily rienBus servicee November 2ts since Octo2 percentage

hown in Figuentech’s Sout

dex Gas Prices ba

ata.bls.gov/cgi-bin

s refer to the differ

FRANCISCO

Nelson

e Alone Rate

cess made transit

inued shuttl service fromders using the has seen a 2006. Trans

ober 2010. Te points ever

ure 11, the Octh San Franc

ased on Bureau of

n/surveymost?ap:

ence in mode sha

O MODE SHGen

n\Nygaard Co

and Gas Pric

access a priole services fr

m the East Bahe ferry serv 14.4 percensit mode shaTransit modery year, thouctober 2012 cisco campu

f Labor Statistic’s

are percentage.

HARE ANDnentech, Inc.

onsulting Asso

ces (2005 – P

ority throughrom Caltrainay to Oyster vice to access

ntage point7 iare is up 4.7 pe share is larugh this year transit rate

uses.

US City Average,

D PARKING

ociates Inc. | 1

Present)6

h dramatic in and BART Point has sts Genentechincrease to Spoints sincergely followir saw a some is the highes

unleaded gasolin

REPORT F

18

increases in stations. In tarted, and t

h. The expanSouth San Fre October 20ing an upwarewhat steepest ever recor

e.

FALL 2012

GenenBus addition, thtransit data

nded rancisco 11 and 7.3 rd trend of er growth. rded at

e



Figure 11 Transit Mode Share Changes

GenenBus (Direct Service)

GenenBus combined services now provide the greatest transit share (69.8%) to South San Francisco compared to BART, Ferry and Caltrain shuttles.

GenenBus ridership continues to grow, with a growing route system. South San Francisco ridership nearly doubled between October 2009 and October 2010, from 676 to 1,257 riders. In October 2012, ridership grew by a smaller margin (28%) to 1,603 riders.

Since October 2009, new GenenBus routes (SF Noe Valley, Danville, Los Gatos/Palo Alto, Cupertino and others) have been added.

South Campus does not have direct GenenBus service at this time. However, employees working at the South Campus who use the GenenBus were counted this year.

Caltrain

Ridership via Caltrain experienced a dramatic decrease. Ridership is down 22% from October 2011, to 216 riders in October 2012.

Caltrain ridership from this survey does not discern whether the Utah-Grand Shuttle service came from BART or Caltrain. Genentech does not provide its own direct shuttle service from Caltrain to South Campus. However, riders

6.50%

11.10%11.00%

14.10%13.40%

18.20%

16.43%

20.41%

19.77%

21.52%

22.87%24.13%

28.82%

R² = 0.9516

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

Feb'06

Nov'06

Jan'07

Oct'07

Apr'08

Oct'08

Apr'09

Oct'09

Apr'10

Oct'10

April'11

Oct'11

Oct'12

Transit

Linear(Transit)



walking from the Upper Campus bus stops at Building 31 and Building 24 down to the South Campus were counted.

In terms of actual ridership, Caltrain ridership increased steadily from 265 riders in November 2006, 343 riders in October 2007, to a peak of 405 riders in October 2008. In October 2011, ridership declined to 278. In October of this year, ridership decreased to 216.

This likely reflects that direct GenenBuses or BART to Glen Park and the shuttle from there are faster or more convenient than taking Caltrain.

BART

Glen Park BART Shuttle continues to provide the greatest transit share (19.4%) for a single shuttle service, as indicated in Figure 11. The second busiest route is the GenenBus Cupertino route in San Francisco with a 9.4% share of transit riders followed by the Millbrae Caltrain shuttle (8.9% share).

Overall BART ridership increased by 1% since October 2011 to 452 daily riders. In terms of actual ridership, BART ridership increased from 483 riders in November 2006 to a high of 528 riders in October 2009. This year, it increased to 452. The Glen Park BART shuttle is the transit “workhorse” of GenenBus services with the greatest ridership of any of the GenenBus routes.

Genentech does not provide its own direct shuttle service from BART to South Campus.

Figure 12 BART, Caltrain, Ferry, and GenenBus Ridership

Route

Ridership

(daily average) Share of Transit Riders

Glen Park BART 452 19.7%

Oyster Point Ferry 25 1.1%

San Francisco GenenBuses

Church & Market, Marina, Pac Heights, SoMa, and Noe Valley

505 22.0%

Caltrain

Main & Gateway; includes Mid-Day

216 9.4%

Alameda County GenenBuses:

Pleasanton, Danville, Castro Valley, Hayward, Newark, San Ramon, Pleasant Hill, Rockridge, Orinda

570 24.8%

South Bay/ Peninsula GenenBuses:

San Mateo, Mountain View, Cupertino, San Jose

377 16.4%

Contra Costa/ Solano GenenBuses:

Vacaville, Fairfield, Richmond, Vallejo

151 6.6%

Transit Summary

Transit service has seen an increase in mode share over the past few years. Overall South San Francisco transit mode share increased by 4.7 percentage



points since October 2011. Total ridership numbers increased from 2,010 riders per day on average in 2011 to 2,359 riders per day.

Less emphasis should be placed on the drive alone and transit mode share at Gateway and Main campuses, due to a change in the way distribution of transit trips was calculated. This does not affect the accuracy of overall mode share, or the transit mode share at South Campus. For reference:

The transit share at the Main Campus is currently 33.1%. This is an increase of 10.8 points from October 2011, giving it the highest transit rate of all three campuses. Overall, transit mode share on the Main Campus has increased by 19.2 points since November 2006, just before gRide was instituted.

The transit share at Gateway is 26.1%. This is a decrease of 4.6 points from October 2011. Since November 2006, however, transit share at Gateway has increased by 13.1 points.

Transit share at South Campus is 18.5%, an increase of 2.4 points from October 2011. Transit mode share has grown substantially since April 2010, primarily due to a change in survey methodology, allowing the cordon count to capture GenenBus riders going to South Campus for the first time.

Pedestrian Access Walking continues to be of limited use as a commuting method to Genentech due to the long distances from residential neighborhoods. Most walking comes from hotel patrons going to Gateway.

Overall, walking mode share decreased over the past year from a 2.3% mode share in October 2011 to a 1.1% share for all three campuses in October 2012.

Walking at Gateway Campus fell from 4% in October 2011 to 2.1% in October 2012. Main Campus walking mode share decreased in the past year from 2.0% to 0.8%, while the South Campus increased slightly from 0.0% to 0.2%.

Other Modes Since vanpool information was not available for the October 2012 cordon count,

October 2010 numbers were used. Using these numbers, it is estimated that vanpool mode share was 1.1% in October 2012. This represents no change in mode share from October 2011. Between November 2006 and October 2012, vanpool mode share held steady between 1.0% and 1.5%.

Taxi, bike and motorcycle shares all remained relatively constant for both campuses. Note that the sum of these modes remains below 1.0% of all mode shares.

Detailed Mode Split Changes 2005-2012 Figures 12 through 15 provides detailed data on the changes in mode split since 2005.



Figure 13 SSF Main Campus Mode Split Survey Results+ Mode Apr-2005 Feb-2006 Nov-2006 Jan-2007 Oct-2007 Apr-2008 Oct-2008 Apr-2009 Oct-2009 Apr-2010 Oct-2010 Apr-2011 Oct-2011 Oct-2012

Drive Alone 79.2%6 77.8% 74.9% 75.1% 73.2% 70.8% 64.8% 65.3% 63.7% 64.5% 63.8% 65.5% 67.1% 55.9%

gRide Modes* 20.6% 21.8% 24.8% 24.7% 26.6% 28.9% 35.0% 34.3% 35.8% 35.5% 35.7% 33.9% 32.6% 43.6%

Carpool

2-Person Carpool 11.7% 10.0% 9.9% 8.9% 8.6% 10.9% 11.9% 10.6% 10.0% 9.9% 9.3% 9.1% 6.2% 6.5%

3-Person Carpool

1.2% 0.8% 0.9% 0.9% 0.7% 1.2% 0.9% 1.3% 0.8% 1.1% 1.2% 1.0% 0.7% 0.9%

4 or more Persons

0.5% 0.2% 0.6% 0.4% 0.5% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% 0.5%

Carpool Total 13.3% 11.1% 11.3% 10.2% 9.8% 12.5% 13.2% 12.4% 11.0% 11.3% 11.0% 10.2% 7.0% 7.9%

Transit

BART n/a 4.8% 5.1% 6.2% 5.6% 5.1% 5.7% 7.3% 5.8% 5.3% 4.2% 6.5% 6.0% 5.8%

Caltrain n/a 1.9% 2.8% 3.2% 4.5% 4.2% 5.5% 4.9% 5.5% 4.6% 2.8% 2.7% 3.0% 0.0%

GenenBus n/a n/a 1.9% 1.9% 3.8% 4.7% 7.7% 7.5% 10.7% 11.1% 15.9% 11.9% 13.3% 20.8%

Oyster Point Ferry

n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.3%

Transit Total

5.3% 6.7% 9.8% 11.3% 13.9% 14.1% 18.8% 19.8% 22.3% 21.1% 22.9% 21.1% 22.3% 33.1%

Other Modes

Vanpool 0.8% 0.9% 1.8% 1.3% 1.4% 1.1% 1.3% 1.1% 1.1% 1.5% 0.9% 1.1% 1.0% 1.1%

Motorbike 0.5% 0.8% 0.4% 0.5% 0.5% 0.4% 0.7% 0.6% 0.7% 0.2% 0.5% 0.5% 0.2% 0.3%

Bike 0.4% 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4%

Taxi 0.2% 0.4% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.5% 0.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.3% 0.5%

Walk8 0.2% 2.1% 1.4% 1.1% 0.6% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.5% 0.6% 0.2% 0.5% 2.0% 0.8%

Other Modes Total

2.2% 4.4% 3.9% 3.4% 3.1% 2.7% 3.2% 2.5% 3.0% 3.0% 2.3% 3.1% 3.7% 3.1%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Footnote explanations provided in Figure 15. + Confidence interval +/- 0.78% * gRide Modes include transit, carpool, vanpool, motorbike, bicycling and walking



Figure 14 SSF Gateway Mode Split Survey Results++ Mode Feb-2006 Nov-2006 Jan-2007 Oct-2007 Apr-2008 Oct-2008 Apr-2009 Oct-2009 Apr-2010 Oct-2010 Apr-2011 Oct-2011 Oct-2012

Drive Alone 76.7% 72.5% 73.5% 67.2% 66.5% 64.3% 67.8% 61.2% 63.2% 62.7% 58.2% 55.8% 59.2%

gRide Modes* 23.1% 27.3% 26.3% 32.7% 33.1% 35.3% 31.9% 38.5% 36.2% 36.6% 40.9% 43.4% 38.5%

Carpool

2-Person Carpool 11.3% 8.9% 9.5% 10.1% 8.6% 8.0% 9.3% 7.0% 7.7% 7.7% 6.1% 5.9% 5.6%

3-Person Carpool 2.3% 2.6% 1.1% 1.7% 1.7% 0.9% 1.0% 0.8% 0.9% 1.5% 0.9% 0.9% 1.1%

4 or more Persons 0.5% 0.4% 1.2% 0.7% 0.8% 0.4% 0.7% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% 0.3% 0.6%

Carpool Total 14.0% 11.9% 11.8% 12.6% 11.7% 9.6% 11.0% 8.3% 8.9% 9.6% 7.8% 7.2% 7.8%

Transit

BART 4.2% 7.8% 6.6% 7.9% 7.3% 10.1% 6.6% 10.9% 7.6% 4.1% 9.1% 8.3% 4.6%

Caltrain 2.1% 4.2% 2.9% 4.0% 4.7% 5.7% 5.2% 5.2% 2.9% 2.7% 3.8% 4.1% 0.0%

GenenBus n/a 1.0% 1.2% 2.4% 3.2% 4.9% 5.1% 8.4% 13.9% 15.4% 16.7% 18.4% 16.4%

Oyster Pt Ferry n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.3%

Transit Total 6.3% 13.0% 10.7% 14.3% 15.1% 20.8% 17.0% 24.8% 24.4% 22.2% 29.7% 30.7% 26.1%

Other Modes

Vanpool 0.9% 0.6% 0.7% 1.0% 1.5% 1.3% 2.0% 1.1% 1.5% 0.9% 1.1% 1.2% 1.1%

Motorbike 0.5% 0.2% 0.3% 0.5% 0.8% 0.5% 0.5% 0.2% 0.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.5%

Bike 0.1% 0.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.4% 0.1% 0.5% 0.4% 0.1% 0.9%

Taxi 0.1% 0.2% 0.1% 0.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.6% 0.8% 0.9% 0.8% 2.3%

Walk8 1.3% 1.5% 2.6% 4.0% 3.8% 2.9% 1.4% 3.7% 1.2% 2.5% 1.5% 4.0% 2.1%

Other Modes Total 2.9% 2.6% 4.0% 6.0% 6.8% 5.3% 4.2% 5.7% 3.5% 5.1% 4.3% 6.3% 6.9%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.00% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Footnote explanations provided in Figure 15. ++ Confidence interval +/- 0.97 % * gRide Modes include transit, carpool, vanpool, motorbike, bicycling and walking



Figure 15 SSF South Campus Mode Split Survey Results+++ Mode Apr-2008 Oct-2008 Apr-2009 Oct-2009 Apr-2010 Oct-2010 Apr-2011 Oct-2011 Oct-2012 Note: Percentage may not total 100% due

to rounding

6 Conservative estimates, which includes Park-&-Ride Shuttle riders. The Shuttle provides service between the main campus and the Gateway parking lot. It is unclear, however, how many shuttle riders are parking at Gateway and commuting to the Main Campus, versus those who are simply shuttling between campuses, their arrivals having been counted elsewhere.

8 Walk percentages may be high due to employees parking in remote lots and walking onto campus

* gRide modes incorporate all modes apart from Drive Alone (Carpool, transit, vanpool, motorbike, etc.

Drive Alone 78.9% 82.6% 85.0% 84.6% 86.2% 73.4% 73.4% 74.3% 69.7%

gRide Modes* 20.5% 17.3% 14.6% 14.4% 13.4% 25.9% 26.2% 25.3% 29.3%

Carpool

2-Person Carpool 11.1% 9.3% 11.5% 9.5% 10.2% 9.3% 9.5% 7.7% 8.0%

3-Person Carpool 0.9% 1.4% 0.3% 0.6% 0.4% 0.3% 0.6% 0.0% 0.6%

4 or more Persons 0.3% 2.9% 0.4% 0.3% 0.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.3%

Carpool Total 12.3% 13.9% 12.2% 10.3% 11.2% 9.9% 10.3% 7.7% 8.9%

Transit

GenenBus n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 13.5% 14.5% 16.0% 17.6%

Alliance Utah-Grand Shuttle n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.9% 0.0% 0.1% 1.0%

Transit Total 3.9% 1.0% 0.0% 1.7% 0.4% 14.4% 14.5% 16.1% 18.5%

Other Modes

Vanpool 3.0% 1.3% 1.1% 1.1% 1.5% 0.9% 0.9% 1.0% 0.9%

Motorbike 0.2% 0.2% 0.5% 0.7% 0.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.1% 0.5% Bike 0.5% 0.5% 0.7% 0.6% 0.1% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% Taxi 0.6% 0.2% 0.4% 1.0% 0.4% 0.6% 0.4% 0.4% 1.0% Walk8 0.5% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% 0.2% Other Modes Total 4.8% 2.6% 2.9% 3.5% 2.2% 2.3% 1.8% 1.8% 2.9%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% +++ Confidence interval +/- 2.45% * gRide Modes include transit, carpool, vanpool, motorbike, bicycling and walking



Figure 16 SSF Mode Split Survey Results for All Three Campuses++++ Mode Feb-2006 Nov-2006 Jan-2007 Oct-2007 Apr-2008 Oct-2008 Apr-2009 Oct-2009 Apr-2010 Oct-2010 Apr-2011 Oct-2011 Oct-2012

Drive Alone 77.4% 74.0% 74.4% 70.8% 70.1% 65.9% 68.8% 65.6% 66.7% 64.7% 64.4% 64.4% 58.8%

gRide Modes* 22.3% 25.8% 25.4% 28.9% 29.6% 33.8% 30.9% 33.8% 32.8% 34.6% 35.0% 35.1% 40.1% Carpool

2-Person Carpool 10.50% 9.50% 9.20% 9.20% 10.10% 10.4% 10.3% 9.0% 9.2% 8.8% 8.2% 6.4% 6.5%

3-Person Carpool 1.40% 1.60% 1.00% 1.10% 1.30% 0.9% 1.1% 0.8% 0.9% 1.2% 0.9% 0.7% 0.9%

4 or more Persons 0.30% 0.50% 0.70% 0.60% 0.50% 0.6% 0.5% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% 0.1% 0.5%

Carpool Total 12.3% 11.5% 10.9% 10.8% 12.2% 12.0% 11.9% 10.1% 10.4% 10.5% 9.4% 7.2% 8.1%

Transit

BART 4.50% 6.20% 6.40% 6.50% 5.60% 6.8% 6.1% 6.7% 5.5% 4.8% 4.9% 5.4% 5.7%

Caltrain 2.00% 3.40% 3.00% 4.30% 4.10% 5.2% 4.5% 4.8% 3.5% 2.7% 3.6% 3.3% 2.7%

GenenBus n/a 1.50% 1.60% 3.30% 3.70% 5.4% 5.0% 8.6% 10.8% 14.1% 14.4% 15.4% 20.1%

Oyster Pt Ferry n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.3%

Transit Total 6.50% 11.10% 11.00% 14.10% 13.40% 18.2% 16.4% 20.4% 19.8% 21.5% 22.9% 24.1% 28.8%

Other Modes

Vanpool 0.90% 1.30% 1.10% 1.30% 1.40% 1.3% 1.1% 1.1% 1.5% 0.9% 1.1% 1.1% 1.1%

Motorbike 0.70% 0.30% 0.40% 0.50% 0.50% 0.6% 0.5% 0.5% 0.2% 0.4% 0.4% 0.2% 0.4%

Bike 0.20% 0.20% 0.30% 0.30% 0.40% 0.4% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% 0.2% 0.6%

Taxi 0.30% 0.20% 0.20% 0.20% 0.30% 0.3% 0.3% 0.5% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.5% 1.1%

Walk8 1.80% 1.40% 1.80% 1.90% 1.70% 1.3% 0.6% 1.4% 0.7% 0.9% 0.8% 2.3% 1.1%

Other Modes Total 3.8% 3.4% 3.7% 4.2% 4.3% 3.9% 2.8% 3.9% 3.1% 3.3% 3.3% 4.2% 4.3%

Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Footnote explanations provided in Figure 15. ++++ Confidence interval +/- 0.56% * gRide Modes include transit, carpool, vanpool, motorbike, bicycling and walking



PARKING SURVEY Genentech's three campuses8 have a total of 10936 parking spaces. Approximately 10,620 of these spaces are designated for employees. The parking counts showed that at 10 AM on weekdays, considering all parking types, an average of 6,530 vehicles were parked.

Location of Parking Genentech is made up of three campuses: the Main Campus on DNA Way and Forbes Boulevard along San Francisco Bay, the new South Campus at the east end of East Grand Avenue, and the Gateway Campus near Highway 101. No changes in parking supply were reported to Nelson\Nygaard staff between this parking survey and last quarter’s (Q2) survey. Parking supplies at the various campuses include:

Main Campus has a total of about 4,830 parking spaces.

South Campus has a total of 2,395 parking spaces.

Gateway Campus has a total of 2,642 parking spaces.

Parking is divided into several areas to distinguish trends in different parts of the campuses. The Main Campus has four major sub-campus parking areas with two smaller parking areas. The major areas are: Lower Campus West, Lower Campus East, Middle Campus, and Upper Campus. The South Campus and Gateway campuses make up the rest of the South San Francisco Genentech campuses. Remote Lots, most of which were not counted during the survey, include parking lots at the daycare facility on Allerton Avenue and buildings at East Grand and Grandview. The lots at Building 54 (which is generally counted with the Main Campus) are included. Within the areas are distinct parking zones delineating each parking lot or parking structure. Parking zones are named by their Parking Area and a Zone number, so the parking lot surrounding Building 51 is known as Zone L5 because it is in the Lower Area and is numbered the fifth lot in the Lower Campus. The parking zones and their parking supply are shown in Figure 17.

Genentech currently has five parking structures: one (PS-1) in the Lower Campus, one (PS-2) between the Middle and the Upper Campus, one at Gateway (Gateway Parking Structure), and two structures (PS-A and PS-B) in the South Campus.

8 Genentech areas not included in parking survey were lots at B27, B29, B71, B75, and B80.



Figure 17 Total Parking Supply



Parking Occupancy Parking occupancy was determined by counting the total number of vehicles parked in each parking zone. The map in Figure 20 shows parking occupancy as the number of vehicles parked in each lot. All vehicles were counted even if parked illegally or in a loading zone. Figure 18 shows the occupancy levels by percentage and parking inventory. It is more instructive to look at percentage occupancy, because it gives an indication of how hard it is to find an empty space. In general, for employee parking it is acceptable to reach up to 95% occupancy; more than 95% means that employees have a harder time finding parking and may search in different lots to park. A 90-100% (or above) parking occupancy rate indicates that these lots are at or near a stressed level.

Parking Lots One parking lot exceeded 100% average occupancy – L4 (Main Campus). This was due to a few cars parked in red no-parking zones during the Wednesday and Thursday survey days. Ignoring these vehicles, occupancy averaged 98% across the three survey days.

Several parking lots were filled to capacity with 95% or greater occupancy, including: L1, L4, L5, U16, U19, U21, M12, S2, and G9. Most of these lots are located very close to higher density uses such as large office buildings. The remaining surface lots throughout the campuses were occupied at rates between a low of 27% (S9) and a high of 90% (M12), as shown in Figure 19.

Parking Structures Among the parking structures (PS) studied there is a great variety of occupancy levels; some had higher rates than last quarter, while others had lower rates. The Lower Campus' PS-1 (L3) was fairly full at 67% occupancy, a 1% decrease from the last survey in Quarter 1. In contrast, the Gateway Parking Structure (G7_8), the largest in number of available spaces and in actual cars parked, was only 45% occupied. This is a higher rate than found in the previous survey, when the structure was 37% occupied. The Middle/Upper Campus structure, PS-2 (M14) decreased to 65% occupied in Quarter 3 from 73% in Quarter 2. The original South Campus Structure, PS-A (S4) was 41% full, 7% lower than it was in the last survey. The newer structure, PS-B (S7), was also 40% full, two percentage points lower over the previous survey. This occupancy level is down from the 50% occupancy in April 2009 when it opened.

Overall Occupancy The overall occupancy of 60% is two percentage points higher than the last survey, though the previous October survey in 2011 revealed the same (60%) rate. Since the last survey, inventory has remained the same with almost no change in total occupancy. Quarter 3’s occupancy rate is four percentage points lower than the all-time high of 64% in April 2008. The downward trend shows the maintained success of the gRide program in attracting more employees to commute by transit. While there was a modest change in



overall occupancy as compared to Quarter 2 of this year, specific lots and garages did see some fluctuations in demand.

The overall occupancy is low enough to suggest that finding parking should be easy. However, parking demand is unevenly distributed; some lots are at, or near capacity while other lots and parking structures nearby have ample space, as seen in Figure 19. Several of the big lots on upper/middle campus are starting to see occupancy rates in the range of 80-90% with two of the most popular reaching 90-100% full. For a Genentech commuter the increased occupancy is no doubt noticeable, and with increased parking demand over time it may start to feel like it is harder to find parking. However, most of the popular lots that are currently near capacity are close to lots with plenty of available capacity.

One way to counter the perception of parking shortages is to help direct commuters to lots with spare capacity. Since the distribution of parking does not change much, signs could inform eastbound drivers on Grandview that U16 tends to fill and U15 has capacity. A more flexible solution may include electronic signs to inform commuters about which lots have capacity. On Forbes, for example, a sign could read: “L1: 0 spaces, L2: 21 spaces, L3: 143 spaces, L9: 15 spaces, etc.,” indicating how many spaces are available in each facility. Similarly, signs at either end of the Main Campus hill on DNA Way would help commuters decide which parking lot or structure is most convenient based on the time it might take to find a space in a nearly full lot close to their destination versus the increased walking time from a lot slightly further away with more available spaces. Existing technology to achieve this varies in its complexity from simple counters connected to the entry barriers of parking structures to various types of sensor networks that might be employed in parking lots. If necessary, Genentech may also consider offering various incentives to employees to encourage them to park in facilities with excess capacity. Better distributing parking demand will reduce the strain on current parking hot-spots.



Figure 18 Parking Occupancy Rates, 2007 to 2012

Zone Oct-07 Apr-08 Oct-08 Apr-09 Oct-09 Apr-10 Oct-10 Oct-11 May-12 July-12 Oct-12

Main Campus

66% (5,651)

73% (5,021)

65% (5,021)

64% (5,113)

64% (5,164)

67% (4,880)

71% (4,677)

70% (4,983)

69%

(4,830)

69%

(4,830)

69%

(4,830)

Gateway 59% (2,580)

64% (2,613)

53% (2,613)

62% (2,613)

65% (2,613)

74% (2,613)

66% (2,642)

58% (2,642)

52%

(2,642)

55%

(2,642)

60%

(2,642)

South N/A 53%

(1,294) 40%

(1,296) 49%

(2,410) 41%

(2,410) 38%

(2,555) 42%

(2,414) 45%

(2,414) 49%

(2,395)

47%

(2,395)

44%

(2,395)

Other 17% (743)

15% (743)

27% (743)

39% (743)

37% (650)

52% (650)

42% (1,065)

47% (1,065)

50%

(1,065)

45%

(1,065)

53%

(1,065)

Total 61% (9,321)

64% (9,651)

56% (9,653)

59% (10,859)

59% (10,837)

61% (10,698)

61% (10,798)

60% (11,104)

59%

(10936)

58%

(10936)

60%

(10936)

E.g. 60% (10936) means 60% parking occupancy, total inventory is 10936.



Figure 19 Parking Occupancy by Percentage



Figure 20 Parking Occupancy by Number of Vehicles



Bicycle Parking The inventory of bike lockers was supplied by Genentech, while the inventory of cages and racks was taken by Nelson\Nygaard during previous surveys. See Figure 21 for a table and Figure 23 for a map of the location of bike parking on campus. There are several different kinds of facilities available:

Bike lockers: lockers provide secure, weatherproof, storage for an individual bike and are assigned when available through Genentech. These are being phased out, with only 20 now remaining.

Bike cages: bike cages are located in parking structures 1, 2, and 3, and both parking structures on South Campus. They provide a storage area for multiple bikes in an access-controlled cage.

Wave racks: wave racks (also known as multi-bend racks) are the most common form of rack on campus. They provide a secure locking point, but only support the bicycle frame in one place.

U-racks: U-racks are the preferred bike rack solution, featuring both secure locking and support for the bicycle frame at multiple points.

Ground anchors: ground anchors are featured in one location at the center of the Gateway campus. These low profile devices provide a secure locking point, but do not support the bicycle frame.

The campus features 357 bicycle parking spaces, of different types, as broken down in Figure 21. Since the last survey, the majority of bike lockers were worn out and have been removed, with only ten remaining at Gateway and ten remaining at Building 56. Three new bike cages have been added, one each at PS1, PS2 and PS3.

Figure 21 Bicycle Parking Inventory by Type

Bicycle occupancy levels were taken during the 2012 Q3 survey. The occupancy of racks and cages is easy to determine visually for surveyors, but since bicycle lockers are fully enclosed occupancy cannot be established visually. Bicycle locker occupancy was provided by Genentech.

Figure 22 shows bicycle occupancy for each campus area. The majority of bicycles were parked in cages. Throughout the survey, there were very few bicycles observed parked at racks, indicating that secure parking in the form of cages or lockers is preferred for all day parking.

According to a bicycle club member survey taken in September 2011 by Genentech, 54% of respondents said they store their bicycles in the office. Therefore the low parking

South Campus Capacity Lower Campus Capacity Upper Campus Capacity Gateway CapacityU-racks 42 U-racks 0 U-racks 0 U-racks 0Wave racks 0 Wave racks 27 Wave racks 36 Wave racks 23Bike lockers 0 Bike lockers 0 Bike lockers 10 Bike lockers 10Bike cages 62 Bike cages 32 Bike cages 89 Bike cages 0Sub-Total 104 Sub-Total 59 Sub-Total 135 Ground Anchors 26

Sub-Total 59



occupancy is not an indication that people are not riding to work – merely that many people find it more convenient to park in their office. As long as that remains acceptable to Facilities Management, it is a good solution for user convenience. Overall occupancy of bicycle facilities increased from 9% last quarter, to 10% in Quarter 3. This is still lower than the 2012 high of 14% occupancy in Quarter 1.

Figure 22 Bicycle Occupancy

Zone Inventory Occupancy Percent Occupied

Main Campus 184 15 8%

Gateway 59 10 6%

South 104 10 10%

Other 10 0 0%

Total 357 35 10%



Figure 23 Total Bicycle Parking Supply



CONCLUSIONS Based upon the data presented above, the following conclusions can be drawn:

Mode of Travel to Campus Transit service has seen an increase in mode share over the past few years.

Overall South San Francisco transit mode share increased by 4.7 percentage points since October 2011. Total ridership numbers increased from 2,010 riders per day on average in 2011 to 2,359 riders per day.

All campuses saw small increases in carpool participation. In the last year, carpool mode share has increased slightly by 0.9 percentage points on the Main Campus, 1.2 percentage points on the South Campus, and 0.6 percentage points on the Gateway Campus. Year to year carpool rates are up at all three campuses.

Drive alone share of all trips averaged 58.8% for all three campuses. This is a 5.6 point decrease since October 2011 when the drive alone share was 64.4%. Since gRide was implemented in late 2006, the drive alone share has dropped 15.2 percentage points.

Overall, employees seem to be decidedly moving away from drive alone commute options, and towards gRide modes. This reflects positively on the quality of alternative commute services and programs employed by Genentech.

Parking Parking occupancy on campus overall remained constant since the previous

survey, and parking distribution patterns were also similar to the May 2012 survey.

With abundant parking available at this time, parking conditions do not likely affect employee decisions on whether to drive or use alternative modes given current commute mode splits.

There are a few hot-spots of high parking demand, but all are located immediately adjacent to facilities with significant available capacity. Accordingly, it may be worth considering wayfinding signs to efficiently distribute parking demand to all available lots, as the campus densifies with infill development like Building 31 and the company continues to grow. Genentech may also consider offering incentives to employees to use less utilized facilities further from their destinations.


Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | A-1

APPENDIX: CHANGES IN CAMPUS DATA COLLECTION SINCE 2005

April 2005 The cordon count was conducted only at the Main Campus, and not at Gateway. All subsequent surveys have been conducted at both the Main Campus and Gateway.

February 2006 The February 2006 cordon count mode shares for both campuses were similar, but counts for the Main Campus included a total of 6% of arrivals on the shuttle between Gateway and the Main Campus. It is unclear, therefore, how many shuttle riders were parking at Gateway and commuting to the Main Campus, versus those who were simply shuttling between campuses, their arrivals having been counted elsewhere. For that survey, Genentech and Nelson\Nygaard primarily used the Gateway results.

November 2006 to present Since the November 2006,the Main Campus and Gateway cordon counts more accurately represent Genentech employee travel behavior, since most employees parked at the campus where they work, unlike in February 2006.

Cordon Count Start Time Surveys from April 2005 to January 2007 were conducted from 5 AM to 10 AM. From October 2007 to present, surveys have been conducted from 6 AM to 10 AM. Although the 5 o'clock hour accounted for 8% of employees accessing campus in the years it was surveyed, the cordon count period was shortened from five to four hours to accommodate the added parking survey that takes approximately one hour to conduct.

South Campus Added – April 2008 Since the April 2008 survey, the South Campus has been included as a separate campus. The Utah-Grand Caltrain and BART shuttles, provided by the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance (Alliance), serve the South Campus. The shuttles originate at the South San Francisco Caltrain and BART stations. In April 2008 and October 2008, only the north half of the South Campus was counted. Counting of the southern portion did not begin until it opened in April 2009, which was the first time the entire South Campus was counted, included Parking Structure B.


Nelson\Nygaard Consulting Associates Inc. | A-2

South Campus Transit – October 2010 Previous to October 2010, transit to South Campus was only counted from the Alliance Utah-Grand shuttles. No GenenBus lines stop at the South Campus. However, Genentech and Nelson\Nygaard determined that many GenenBus riders were in fact going to the South Campus by alighting at Gateway or the Main Campus, then taking a DNA Shuttle or walking down the stairs to the South Campus. By measuring this, the proportion of transit riders going to Gateway declined by several riders. The Main Campus proportion of transit riders dipped more since most South Campus transit riders alight at the B31 and B24 bus stops and walk down the stairway to South Campus.

Transit – October 2012 Transit data was provided as a monthly sum. These figures were divided by the number of working days in the month to obtain an average daily ridership rate. This should be more accurate, by averaging out the effect of any special events or unusual weather that might have affected ridership during the survey.

Employees’ destinations on campus was previously provided by Compass Transportation. But since they were no longer able to supply this data, badge counts were used instead. This change in methodology has affected the distribution of trips between Main and Gateway campuses, but has not affected overall transit mode share calculations.

Annual Report 2013 - Granicus

Documents

Transcript of Annual Report 2013 - Granicus