HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Meeting 10-04-12 (Reso 2723-2012) - Entitlements 494 ForbesRESOLUTION NO. 2723-2012
PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
A RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE
A USE PERMIT, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT,
PRELIMINARY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT PLAN AND DESIGN REVIEW FOR A
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND OFFICE
DEVELOPMENT AT 494 FORBES BOULEVARD
WHEREAS, Slough Forbes, LLC (“Owner”) and HCP, Inc.(“Applicant”) have proposed
to construct two new office/research and development buildings, one four stories and one five
stories, totaling 326,020 square feet, a three-level parking structure, and surface parking areas
(“Project”) on a 7.48 acre vacant site, located at 494 Forbes Boulevard (“Project Site”) in the
City of South San Francisco (“City”); and
WHEREAS, Applicant seeks approval of a Use Permit, Development Agreement,
Preliminary Transportation Demand Management (“TDM”) Plan, and Design Review; and,
WHEREAS, approval of the Applicant’s proposal is considered a “project” for purposes
of the California Environmental Quality Act, Pub. Resources Code, §§ 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”);
and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and carefully considered the
information in the Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”), and by separate resolution,
recommends the City Council adopt the EIR, as an objective and accurate document that reflects
the independent judgment and analysis of the City in the discussion of the Project’s
environmental impacts; and,
WHEREAS, on October 4, 2012 the Planning Commission for the City of South San
Francisco held a lawfully noticed public hearing to solicit public comment and consider the EIR
and the proposed entitlements, take public testimony, and make a recommendation to the City
Council on the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before
it, which includes without limitation, the California Environmental Quality Act, Public
Resources Code §§ 21000, et seq. (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of
Regulations § 15000, et seq.; the South San Francisco 1999 General Plan and General Plan
Environmental Impact Report, including the 2001 updates to the General Plan and 2001
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report; the South San Francisco Municipal Code; the
Environmental Impact Report prepared for the Project; all reports, minutes, and public testimony
submitted as part of the Design Review Board meeting held on July 20, 2010; all reports,
minutes, and public testimony submitted as part of the Planning Commission’s meeting held on
October 4, 2012; and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code
§ 21080(e) and § 21082.2), the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby
finds as follows:
I. General Findings
A. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution.
B. The Exhibits attached to this Resolution, including the Conditions of Project
Approval (Exhibit A), the proposed Development Agreement (Exhibit B), and the preliminary
TDM plan (Exhibit C) are each incorporated by reference as part of this Resolution, as if each
were set forth fully herein.
C. The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings
are located at the Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco, 315 Maple Avenue,
South San Francisco, CA 94080, and in the custody of Chief Planner, Susy Kalkin.
II. Use Permit
A. The proposed Project is consistent with the standards and requirements of the
City's Zoning Ordinance and with the provisions of the Business Technology Park (“BTP”)
Zoning District. The Project meets or exceeds all of the general development standards of the
BTP Zoning District, with the exception of the parking and on-site loading requirement. The
exceptions for parking and on-site loading are permissible and warranted by the City’s Zoning
Ordinance.
B. The proposed Project, including the Use Permit, Development Agreement, and
Preliminary TDM Plan, are consistent and compatible with all elements in the City of South San
Francisco General Plan. The General Plan includes policies and programs that are designed to
encourage the development of research and development and office uses in the East of 101 Area.
Further, the land uses, development standards, densities and intensities, buildings and structures
proposed are compatible with the goals, policies, and land use designations established in the
General Plan (see Gov’t Code, § 65860), and none of the land uses, development standards,
densities and intensities, buildings and structures will operate to conflict with or impede
achievement of the any of the goals, policies, or land use designations established in the General
Plan.
Specifically, the proposed Project is consistent with the City's General Plan. The project site is
designated Business and Technology Park and zoned Business Technology Park (“BTP”). This
designation and zoning district accommodate R&D uses, subject to certain development and
FAR restrictions. The proposed Project complies with development restrictions and proposes a
FAR of 1.0, which conforms to the maximum allowable FAR in the Business and Technology
Park General Plan designation with a TDM.
C. The proposed use will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general
welfare of the community, nor detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements, because
the proposed use is consistent with the existing uses in the area, which are predominantly
research and development (“R&D”). The Project proposes R&D use on a site located in the
City's East of 101 Area, which is intended for this type of use. The East of 101 Area Plan and
General Plan have analyzed this type of use in the East of 101 Area, and concluded that office
and R&D uses in the East of 101 Area are not adverse to the public health, safety, or welfare. As
the proposed Project is consistent with surrounding land uses, approval of the Project will not be
detrimental to the nearby properties.
D. The proposed Project complies with applicable standards and requirements of the
City's Zoning Code, with the exception of on-site loading and on-site retail requirements. The
proposed Project is located in the BTP zoning district, and meets the minimum standards and
requirements for that district. The exception for the number of on-site loading and on-site retail
requirements is allowable and warranted under the City's Municipal Code.
The exception for on-site loading is allowable and warranted based on the City’s Municipal Code
Section 20.330.009(B)(1), which allows the Chief Planner and City Engineer to waive the
loading space requirement may be waived upon a finding by the Chief Planner and City Engineer
that the applicant has satisfactorily demonstrated that due to the nature of the proposed use, such
loading space will not be needed. Based on written materials submitted by the Applicant, and
based on the nature of the research and development use and previously approved projects,
which receive minimal deliveries, the Chief Planner and City Engineer find that the on-site
loading requirement will not be required.
The exception for on-site retail is allowable and warranted based on the City’s Municipal Code
Section 20.110.004(J)(1), which only requires the on-site retail, where feasible. The Applicant
has submitted a satisfactory written explanation as to why meeting this requirement is not
feasible for a small-scale R&D project such as this Project. Based on the size of the Project,
surrounding employer density, size of potential tenants, and lack of any other retail uses in the
area, on-site retail for this Project would be infeasible.
E. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed Project
are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity
because the Project proposes office and research and development uses in the East of 101 Area,
which is specifically intended for such uses.
F. The site is physically suitable for the type of development and density proposed,
as the research and development and office uses will benefit from being located in East of 101
Area, and the size of the development is appropriate for the location and meets the City’s land
use and zoning standards.
G. By Resolution No. ___, the Planning Commission, exercising its independent
judgment, has found that an EIR was prepared for the Project in accordance with CEQA, which
adequately analyzes the proposed Project’s potential environmental impacts. The Planning
Commission has further found that specific benefits of the Project outweigh the significant
environmental impacts associated with its implementation.
II. Development Agreement
A. The Owner and City have negotiated a Development Agreement pursuant to
Government Code section 65864 et seq. The Development Agreement, attached hereto as
Exhibit B, sets for the duration, property, project criteria, and other required information
identified in Government Code section 65865.2. Based on the findings in support of the Project,
the Planning Commission finds that the Development Agreement, vesting a project for an
office/R&D development, is consistent with the General Plan and consistent with the applicable
zoning regulations.
III. Transportation Demand Management (“TDM”) Plan
A. The Project proposes increasing the allowable Floor Area Ratio (“FAR”) for the
site 1.0, and is requesting approval of a Preliminary TDM Plan.
B. As required under State law, the South San Francisco General Plan, and the South
San Francisco Municipal Code, in support of the requested TDM Plan (TDM06-0001), the
Planning Commission finds as follows:
1. The proposed TDM measures are feasible and appropriate for the Project,
considering the proposed use or mix of uses and the Project’s location, size and hours of
operation. Sufficient measures have been included in the plan to achieve a projected 35%
alternative mode usage, as required.
2. The performance guarantees provided in the plan will ensure that the
target 35% alternative mode use will be achieved and maintained. Conditions of approval have
been included to require that the Final TDM Plan, which must be submitted for review and
approval prior to issuance of a building permit, shall outline the required process for on-going
monitoring including annual surveys and annual reports.
IV. Design Review
A. The Project, including Design Review, is consistent with Title 20 of the South
San Francisco Municipal Code for the reasons set forth in Findings II.A and II.D, above.
B. The Project, including Design Review, is consistent with the General Plan
because the proposed Research and Development buildings are consistent with the policies and
design direction provided in the South San Francisco General Plan for the BTP land use
designation.
C. The Project, including Design Review, is consistent with the design guidelines
adopted by the City Council in that the proposed Project is consistent with the Employment
District Standards included in Chapter 20.110.
D. The Project is consistent with the design guidelines adopted by the City Council
in that the proposed use is consistent with the Business and Technology Park District
Development Standards and Supplemental Regulations included in Sections 20.110.003 and
20.110.004.
E. The Project is consistent with the applicable design review criteria in Section
20.480.006 (“Design Review Criteria”) because the project has been evaluated against, and
found to be consistent with, each of the eight design review criteria included in the “Design
Review Criteria” section of the Ordinance.
V. Waivers and Modifications
As required by the South San Francisco Municipal Code, in support a waiver and modification to
the requirements of SSFMC Section 20.330.010(L)(8) Parking Garage Rooftop Planting, the
Planning Commission finds as follows:
A. The waiver or modification is necessary due to the physical characteristics of the
property and the proposed use or structure or other circumstances, including, but not limited to,
topography, noise exposure, irregular property boundaries, or other unusual circumstance, in
that the proposed design, which incorporates landscape trellises within the parking areas on the
top level and an architectural trellis at the Allerton Avenue street frontage, meets the intent of
the code regarding the elevations of the garage visible from the street.
B. The proposed alternative Parking Garage Rooftop Planting will not be a detriment
to surrounding owners and occupants or to the general public because, based on the location of
the garage structure and the proposed landscape trellises and architectural trellis, the intent of
the code requirement will be satisfied.
C. Due to the nature of the request, the granting of the requested waiver or
modification would not be detrimental to the health or safety of the public or the occupants of
the property or result in a change in land use or density that would be inconsistent with the
requirements of this title.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution, and recommends
that the City Council adopt a resolution approving the Use Permit, Preliminary TDM Plan for the
Project, Design Review and Waiver/Modification, subject to the Conditions of Approval
attached as Exhibit A.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of South San
Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution, and recommends that the City
Council adopt an ordinance approving the proposed Development Agreement, attached as
Exhibit B.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective immediately
upon its passage and adoption.
* * * * * * *
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on the 4th day of October, 2012 by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioner Giusti, Commissioner Gupta, Commissioner Martin,
Commissioner Prouty, Commissioner Sim, Vice Chairperson Ochsenhirt and
Chairperson Zemke
NOES:
ABSTENTIONS:
ABSENT:
Attest: /s/Susy Kalkin
SusyKalkin
Secretary to the Planning Commission
Exhibit A
DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P06-0025: UP06-0009 & DR06-0021, TDM06-0001, DA12-0002 & EIR06-0001
USE PERMIT, DESIGN REVIEW, AND TDM
494 FORBES BOULEVARD
(As recommended by City Staff October 4, 2012)
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 DES Architects, dated September 5, 2012.
3. All equipment (either roof or ground-mounted) shall be screened from view through
the use of integral architectural elements, such as enclosures or roof screens, and
landscape screening. Equipment enclosures and/or roof screens shall be painted to
match the building.
4. TDM
a. In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.120.070,
prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit a Final TDM
Plan for review and approval by the Chief Planner. The Final TDM Plan shall
substantially reflect the Preliminary TDM plan prepared by The Hoyt
Company and shall include shower facilities in each building. The Plan shall
be designed to achieve a minimum 35% alternative mode use over the life of
the project.
b. The Final TDM Plan shall outline the required process for on-going
monitoring including annual surveys and triennual reports as specified below:
i. Transportation Demand Management: Owner shall prepare an annual
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) report, and submit same
to City, to document the effectiveness of the TDM plan in achieving the
goal of 35% alternative mode usage by employees within the Project.
The TDM report will be prepared by an independent consultant,
retained by City with the approval of Owner (which approval shall not
be unreasonably withheld or delayed) and paid for by Owner, which
consultant will work in concert with Owner’s TDM coordinator. The
TDM report will include a determination of historical employee
commute methods, which information shall be obtained by survey of all
employees working in the buildings on the Property. All nonresponses
to the employee commute survey will be counted as a drive alone trip.
c. TDM Reports: The initial TDM report for each building on the Property will
be submitted two (2) years after the granting of a certificate of occupancy with
respect to the building, and this requirement will apply to all buildings on the
Property except the parking structure. The second and all later reports with
respect to each building shall be included in an annual comprehensive TDM
report submitted to City covering all of the buildings on the Property which
are submitting their second or later TDM reports.
d. Report Requirements: The goal of the TDM program is to encourage
alternative mode usage, as defined in Chapter 20.120 of the South San
Francisco Municipal Code. The initial TDM report shall either: (1) state that
the applicable property has achieved 35% alternative mode usage, providing
supporting statistics and analysis to establish attainment of the goal; or (2)
state that the applicable property has not achieved the 35% alternative mode
usage, providing an explanation of how and why the goal has not been
reached, and a description of additional measures that will be adopted in the
coming year to attain the TDM goal of 35% alternative mode usage.
e. Penalty for Non-Compliance: If after the initial TDM report, subsequent
annual reports indicate that, in spite of the changes in the TDM plan, the 35%
alternative mode usage is still not being achieved, or if Owner fails to submit
such a TDM report at the times described above, City may assess Owner a
penalty. The penalty shall be established by City Council resolution on the
basis of project size and actual percentage alternative mode use established in
the TDM Plan.
f. Application of the Penalty: In determining whether a financial penalty is
appropriate, City may consider whether Owner has made a good faith effort to
meet the TDM goals. If a penalty is imposed, such penalty sums shall be used
by the City toward the implementation of the final TDM Plan.
5. The applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program costs associated
with monitoring and enforcing the TDM program.
6. Prior to the final occupancy of each building, the developer shall pay Childcare
Impact Fee in effect at the time as required by SSFMC Section 20.310 for the
Research and Development space. The current fee per square foot is $0.57. The total
fee for both buildings is estimated to be $60,155.52 ($0.57/sf x 105,536 sf).
7. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation monitoring measures and the
Mitigation Monitoring Program associated with Mitigated Negative Declaration
ND07-0002.
8. A Master Sign Program for the 494 Forbes Boulevard project shall be submitted for
review and approval by the Chief Planner.
9. The applicant shall submit the location and proposed screening (if applicable) for all
required utilities. Plans shall be reviewed and approved by the Chief Planner prior to
submittal for building permits.
10. The applicant shall submit a parking demand analysis justifying the need for the
increased on-site to the Chief Planner for review and approval prior to the
development of the parking reserve as surface parking.
Planning Division contact Linda Ajello, Associate Planner, (650) 877-8353
B. Fire Prevention Division:
1. Install fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13/SSFFD requirements under separate fire
plan check and permit for overhead and underground.
2. Fire sprinkler system shall be central station monitored per California Fire Code
section 1003.3.
3. Install a standpipe system per NFPA 14/SSFFD requirements under separate fire plan
check and permit.
4. Install exterior listed horn/strobe alarm device, not a bell.
5. Elevator if provided shall not contain shunt-trips.
6. At least one elevator shall be sized for a gurney the minimum size shall be in
accordance with the CFC.
7. Fire alarm plans shall be provided per NFPA 72 and the City of South San Francisco
Municipal Code.
8. Buildings 4 stories or more will require a modified smoke control system. A rational
analysis is required before building plans are approved.
9. All Non parking space curbs to be painted red to local Fire Code Specifications
10. Access road shall have all weather driving capabilities and support the imposed load
of 75,000 pounds.
11. Road gradient and vehicle turning widths shall not exceed maximum allowed by fire
department. Local Fire Code and vehicle specifications and templates available at
http://www.ssf.net/depts/fire/prevention/fire_permits.asp
12. Provide fire extinguishers throughout the building.
13. Provide fire hydrants with an average spacing of 400 feet between hydrants.
14. The fire hydrants shall have a minimum fire flow of 3000 gpm at 20 psi residual
pressure for duration of 4 hours.
15. All buildings shall provide premise identification in accordance with SSF municipal
code section 15.24.100.
16. Provide Knox key box for each building with access keys to entry doors,
electrical/mechanical rooms, elevators, and others to be determined.
17. Provide Fire Department access to the West and South side of the parking structure in
accordance with the California Fire Code.
18. The minimum road width is 20 feet per the California Fire Code.
19. Project must meet all applicable Local (SSF Municipal Code, Chapter 15.24 Fire
Code), State and Federal Codes
20. All buildings shall have Emergency Responder Radio Coverage throughout in
compliance with Section 510 of the California Fire Code.
Fire Prevention Contact, Luis Da Silva, (650) 829-6682
C. Engineering Division
I. STANDARD CONDITIONS
The applicant shall comply with all of the applicable conditions of approval detailed
in the Engineering Division’s "Standard Conditions for Commercial and Industrial
Developments”, contained in our “Standard Development Conditions” booklet dated
January 1998. A copy of this booklet is available at our Engineering Division office at
no charge to the applicant.
II. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
A. The Building Permit site plans shall show all existing and proposed frontage
improvements, lot boundaries, easements, utilities, and existing contours and drainage
patterns within the subject property.
B. The utility plan for the new development shall show the existing and proposed
sanitary sewer laterals for each building, their clean-outs and their point of connection
to City sewer main. If the existing sewer lateral to the site will not be re-used, it shall
be sealed and abandoned in accordance with City standards. If the existing sewer
lateral will be re-used, it shall be inspected and tested as required by the City’s Public
Works Inspector. Any required repairs of the site’s sewer lateral (or its replacement if
necessary) shall be accomplished by the applicant at no cost to the City.
A sanitary sewer manhole shall be installed onsite, near the property line, to serve as a
cleanout for the lateral as it connects to the City’s sanitary sewer system. All
sewerlines located on-site shall remain private and the developer shall be responsible
to maintain those lines.
C. The developer shall provide the City with a soils report, preliminary grading plan and
a cash deposit of $5,000 for peer review. Any grading in excess of 50 cubic yards
shall require a grading permit. The developer shall be responsible to pay all fees, a
$30,000 cash deposit for environmental compliance/SWPPP inspections, and bonds.
D. The developer shall provide the City with a traffic study to evaluate how the project
and parking structure will affect the Forbes Boulevard/Allerton Avenue Intersection.
The traffic study should also identify any off-site related improvements to ensure safe
ingress/egress to the project. The traffic study should include and evaluate area for
pullouts for shuttle service along Forbes Boulevard, Allerton Avenue or on-site. All
mitigations measures identified by the traffic study shall be designed to City standards
by the developer’s engineer and approved by the Engineering Division. The
mitigation measures shall be constructed by the developer at no cost to the City.
E. The developer shall hire a licensed land surveyor to set the property lines and
determine the setback lines. The surveyor shall all stake all foundations and stamp
and submit a letter to the Engineering Division stating the property lines have been
properly established and the new structures are located away from the setback area.
F. Any work performed in the City’s right-of-way shall require an encroachment permit.
The encroachment permit can be obtained at the Engineering Division. The
developer shall pay for all permit fees, inspection fees and deposits.
G. The developer shall remove and replace all sidewalks fronting the project. The new
sidewalk shall comply with the City’s standard detail and the developer shall provide
any required ADA handicap ramps. All work shall be done at no cost to the City.
Root barriers shall be installed by the developer to protect the sidewalk from being
damaged by trees adjacent to the sidewalk.
H. Any monument signs shall be placed completely on private property. The footing of
such signs shall remain on private property, out of the City’s right-of-way. The
developer shall provide the Engineering Division with lines of sight analyses for each
monument sign in close proximity of any project driveway.
I. The Developer shall provide new ninety-degree angle driveways for the proposed
egress and ingress access to the proposed buildings and parking structure. Project
driveways shall be the City’s standard detail for a commercial driveway. The grade
of each driveway cannot exceed a 12% grade. Unless controlled by a traffic signal,
the developer shall install a R1 “STOP” sign at each exit driveway from the project.
J. Due to construction vehicle traffic, the developer shall overlay the street fronting their
development with new asphalt. A plan shall be submitted to the Engineering Division
for review and approval.
K. The developer shall coordinate work with California Water Service for all water
utility work.
L. The developer shall confirm the capacity of the sewer trunk lines located in the City’s
right-of-way to determine that the existing infrastructure will be able to accommodate
the new flows generated by the project.
M. The developer shall submit a drainage report for review and approval by the
Engineering Division. The report shall include pre- and post-development flows.
Should the post-development flows increase, the developer shall confirm the capacity
of the storm drain trunk lines downstream from the project is adequate for the
increase flow.
N. The developer shall incorporate bio-grassy swales and other Best Management
Practices as stormwater measures within the project and shall be approved by the
Engineering Division and the Environmental Compliance Manager. The developer
shall submit all required stormwater forms and application to the Environmental
Compliance Manager.
O. During the construction of the project, the developer shall ensure all dust mitigation
measures are enforced. The Environmental Compliance Officers shall conduct site
visits to inspect all environmental mitigation measures are in place and are effective.
P. The developer shall at no cost to the City underground any overhead utilities fronting
the property. The developer shall coordinate all work and pay all fees and permits
with the respective overhead utility companies to underground said utilities.
Q. The developer shall replace and install all lighting along the frontage of the subject
property within the City’s right-of-way with the approved light standard for the East
of 101 Area at no cost to the City.
R. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the
Oyster Point Overpass Contribution Fee, East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee and Sewer
System Capacity and Improvement Fee.
III. OYSTER POINT OVERPASS CONTRIBUTION FEE
Prior to receiving a Building Permit for the proposed new office/R&D development, the
applicant shall pay the Oyster Point Overpass fee, as determined by the City Engineer, in
accordance with City Council Resolutions 102-96 and 152-96. The fee will be calculated
upon reviewing the information shown on the applicant's construction plans and the latest
Engineering News Record San Francisco Construction Cost Index at the time of payment.
The estimated fee for the entire subject 326,020 GSF office and R&D development is
calculated below. (The number in the calculation, "10,364.34", is the September 2012
Engineering News Record San Francisco Construction Cost Index (CCI), which is revised
each month to reflect local inflation changes in the construction industry.)
Oyster Point Overpass Fee - $155,660.61
326,020 gsf R&D Use @ 5.30 trips per 1,000 gsf = 1,728 new vehicle trips
Less credit for an existing 115,601 gsf Warehouse @ 4.5 trips per 1000 gsf = 520
trips
Less credit for an existing 46,244 gsf Office @ 12.3 trips per 1000 gsf = 569 trips
Total existing trips = 520 +569 = 1,089 trips
Total new trips = 1,728 – 1,089 = 639 new vehicle trips
Contribution Calculation: 639 X $154 X (10,364.34/6552.16) = $155,660.61
IV. EAST OF 101 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE
Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for any building within the proposed
project, the applicant shall pay the East of 101 Traffic Impact fee, in accordance with
the resolution adopted by the City Council at their meeting of May 23, 2007.
Fee Calculation (effective July 1, 2012)
326,020 gsf Office/R&D @ $5.22 per each square foot =$ 1,701,824.40
East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee = $ 1,701,824.40
V. SEWER SYSTEM CAPACITY STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT FEE
The City of South San Francisco has identified the need to investigate the condition
and capacity of the sewer system within the East of 101 area, downstream of the
proposed office/R&D development. The existing sewer collection system was
originally designed many years ago to accommodate warehouse and industrial use
and is now proposed to accommodate uses, such as offices and biotech facilities, with
a much greater sewage flow. These additional flows, plus groundwater infiltration
into the existing sewers, due to ground settlement and the age of the system, have
resulted in pumping and collection capacity constraints. A study and flow model is
proposed to analyze the problem and recommend solutions and improvements.
The applicant shall pay the East of 101 Sewer Facility Development Impact Fee, as adopted
by the City Council at their meeting of October 23, 2002. The adopted fee is $3.99 per gallon
of discharge per day. As of July 1, 2012, the updated fee is $4.25. It is determined that
Office/R&D generate 400 gallons per day per 1000 square feet of development. Based upon
this calculation, the potential fee would be, if paid this month:
0.4 g/sf (400 gpd/1000 sq. ft.) x $4.25 per gallon x 326,020 sq. ft. =
$554,234.00
East of 101 Sewer Improvements Fee = $554,234.00
The sewer contribution shall be due and payable prior to receiving a
building permit for the development.
Total estimated fees:
Oyster Point Overpass Fee $ 155,660.61
East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee $1,701,824.40
East of 101 Sewer Improvements Fee $ 554,234.00
Total $2,412,719.01
Engineering Division Contact, Sam Bautista, (650) 877-6652
D. Water Quality Division
The following items must be included in the plans or are requirements of the Stormwater and/or
Pretreatment programs and must be completed prior to the issuance of a permit:
1. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted.
2. Encourage the use of pervious pavement where possible.
3. The onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide
Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay).
4. Source Control Requirements
The project must implement source control measures Onsite that at a minimum shall
include the following:
(a) Minimization of stormwater pollutants of concern in urban runoff through
measures that may include plumbing of the following discharges to the sanitary
sewer, subject to the local sanitary sewer agency’s authority and standards:
• Discharges from indoor floor mat/equipment/hood filter wash
racks or covered outdoor wash racks for restaurants;
• Dumpster drips from covered trash, food waste and compactor enclosures;
• Discharges from covered outdoor wash areas for vehicles, equipment, and
accessories;
• Fire sprinkler test water, shall be discharged to the sanitary sewer;
(b) Properly designed covers, drains, and storage precautions for outdoor material
storage areas, loading docks, repair/maintenance bays, and fueling areas;
(c) Properly designed trash storage areas;
(d) Landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration,
minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and
incorporates other appropriate sustainable landscaping practices and
programs such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping;
(e) Efficient irrigation systems; and
(f) Storm drain system stenciling or signage.
5. Implement Site Design and Stormwater Treatment Requirements
The project must implement at least the following design strategies onsite:
(i) Limit disturbance of natural water bodies and drainage systems; minimize
compaction of highly permeable soils; protect slopes and channels; and minimize
impacts from stormwater and urban runoff on the biological integrity of natural
drainage systems and water bodies;
(ii) Conserve natural areas, including existing trees, other vegetation, and soils;
(iii) Minimize impervious surfaces;
(iv) Minimize disturbances to natural drainages; and
(v) Minimize stormwater runoff by implementing one or more of the
following site design measures:
• Direct roof runoff into cisterns or rain barrels for reuse.
• Direct roof runoff onto vegetated areas.
• Direct runoff from sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios onto vegetated areas.
• Direct runoff from driveways and/or uncovered parking lots onto vegetated areas.
• Construct sidewalks, walkways, and/or patios with permeable surfaces.3
• Construct driveways, bike lanes, and/or uncovered parking lots with permeable
surfaces.
6. Stormwater from the entire project must be included in the treatment system design.
(Stormwater treatment systems must be designed to treat stormwater runoff from the
entire project.)
The project is required to treat 100% of the amount of runoff identified in provision
C.3.d for the Regulated Project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures onsite or
with LID treatment measures at a joint stormwater treatment facility.
(i) LID treatment measures are harvesting and re-use, infiltration,
evapotranspiration, or biotreatment.
(ii) A properly engineered and maintained biotreatment system may be considered
only if it is infeasible to implement harvesting and re-use, infiltration, or
evapotranspiration at a project site.
(iii) Infeasibility to implement harvesting and re-use, infiltration, or
evapotranspiration at a project site may result from conditions including the
following:
• Locations where seasonal high groundwater would be within 10 feet of the base of
the LID treatment measure.
• Locations within 100 feet of a groundwater well used for drinking water.
Treatment devices must be sized according to the WEF Method or the Start at the Source
Design. Please state what method is used to calculate sizing.
The applicant must submit a signed Operation and Maintenance
Information for Stormwater Treatment Measures form for the stormwater pollution
prevention devices installed.
7. The applicant must submit a signed maintenance agreement for the stormwater pollution
prevention devices installed. Each maintenance agreement will require the inclusion of
the following exhibits:
a. A letter-sized reduced-scale site plan that shows the locations of the treatment
measures that will be subject to the agreement.
b. A legal description of the property.
c. A maintenance plan, including specific long-term maintenance tasks and a
schedule. It is recommended that each property owner be required to develop its
own maintenance plan, subject to the municipality’s approval. Resources that
may assist property owners in developing their maintenance plans include:
i. The operation manual for any proprietary system purchased by the
property owner.
8. The owner or his representative must file this agreement with the County of San Mateo
and documentation that the County received it must be sent to the Technical Services
Supervisor.
9. Applicant must complete the Project Applicant Checklist and C3 and C6 Collection Form
and Project Applicant Stormwater Checklist prior to issuance of a permit and return to the
Technical Services Supervisor at the WQCP.
10. Condensate and/or blowdown from rooftop equipment must be routed to the sanitary
sewer.
11. If there is underground parking, water from the groundwater infiltration/foundation drain
must be plumbed to the sanitary sewer.
12. Landscaping shall meet the following conditions related to reduction of pesticide use
on the project site:
a. Where feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat stormwater
runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain, and infiltrate runoff. In
areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil
conditions and prolonged exposure to water shall be specified.
b. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such
as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing
winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and
plant interactions to ensure successful establishment.
c. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and
incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent practicable.
d. Proper maintenance of landscaping, with minimal pesticide use, shall be the
responsibility of the property owner.
e. Integrated pest management (IPM) principles and techniques shall be
encouraged as part of the landscaping design to the maximum extent
practicable. Examples of IPM principles and techniques include:
i. Select plants that are well adapted to soil conditions at the site.
ii. Select plants that are well adapted to sun and shade conditions at the
site. In making these selections, consider future conditions when plants
reach maturity, as well as seasonal changes.
iii. Provide irrigation appropriate to the water requirements of the selected
plants.
iv. Select pest-resistant and disease-resistant plants.
v. Plant a diversity of species to prevent a potential pest infestation from
affecting the entire landscaping plan.
vi. Use “insectary” plants in the landscaping to attract and keep beneficial
insects.
13. No decorative bark shall be used in landscaping.
14. Trash handling area must be covered, enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This
must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit.
15. Install a separate water meter for each commercial unit.
16. Install a separate water meter for landscaping.
17. A construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan must be submitted and approved
prior to the issuance of a permit.
18. Plans must include location of concrete wash out area and location of entrance/outlet of
tire wash.
19. A grading and drainage plan must be submitted.
20. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted.
21. Applicant must pay sewer connection fee at a later time based on anticipated flow, BOD
and TSS calculations.
22. Must file a Notice of Termination with the WQCP when the project is completed.
Water Quality Division contact, Cassie Prudhel, (650) 829-3840.
Exhibit B
Development Agreement
Exhibit C
Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan
1975007.1