Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-08-16 e-packet@5:00Monday, August 16, 2021 5:00 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA TELECONFERENCE MEETING Housing Standing Committee of the City Council and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda August 16, 2021Housing Standing Committee of the City Council and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda TELECONFERENCE MEETING NOTICE THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE GOVERNOR’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS N-29-20 AND N-63-20 ALLOWING FOR DEVIATION OF TELECONFERENCE RULES REQUIRED BY THE BROWN ACT & PURSUANT TO THE ORDER OF THE HEALTH OFFICER OF SAN MATEO COUNTY DATED MARCH 31, 2020 AS THIS MEETING IS NECESSARY SO THAT THE CITY CAN CONDUCT NECESSARY BUSINESS AND IS PERMITTED UNDER THE ORDER AS AN ESSENTIAL GOVERNMENTAL FUNCTION. The purpose of conducting the meeting as described in this notice is to provide the safest environment for staff and the public while allowing for public participation. Mayor Addiego, Vice Mayor Nagales and essential City staff will participate via Teleconference. PURSUANT TO RALPH M. BROWN ACT, GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54953, ALL VOTES SHALL BE BY ROLL CALL DUE TO COUNCIL MEMBERS PARTICIPATING BY TELECONFERENCE. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC MAY VIEW A VIDEO BROADCAST OF THE MEETING BY: Via Zoom: Join Zoom meeting https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/82679266837 (Enter your email and name) Join by One Tap Mobile : US: +16699006833,,82679266837# or +13462487799,,82679266837# Join by Telephone: Dial (for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 346 248 7799 or +1 669 900 6833 or 833 548 0276 (Toll Free) Webinar ID: 826 7926 6837 Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/29/2021 August 16, 2021Housing Standing Committee of the City Council and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda American Disability Act: The City Clerk will provide materials in appropriate alternative formats to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please send a written request to City Clerk Rosa Govea Acosta at 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080, or email at [email protected]. Include your name, address, phone number, a brief description of the requested materials, and preferred alternative format service at least 24-hours before the meeting. Accommodations: Individuals who require special assistance of a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in the meeting, including Interpretation Services, should contact the Office of the City Clerk by email at [email protected], 24-hours before the meeting. Notification in advance of the meeting will enable the City of South San Francisco to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to the meeting. Call To Order. Roll Call. Agenda Review. Remote Public Comments. Speakers are allowed to speak on items on the agenda for up to three minutes. If there appears to be a large number of speakers, speaking time may be reduced subject to the Mayor ’s discretion to limit the total amount of time for public comments (Gov. Code sec. 54954.3.(b)(1).). Comments that are not in compliance with the City Council's rules of decorum may be summarized for the record if they are in writing or muted if they are made live. HOW TO SUBMIT WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENT BEFORE THE MEETING Members of the public are encouraged to submit public comments in writing in advance of the meeting via the eComment tab by 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date. Use the eComment portal by clicking on the following link: https://ci-ssf-ca.granicusideas.com/meetings or by visiting the City Council meeting's agenda page. eComments are also directly sent to the iLegislate application used by Committee Members and staff. Comments received by the deadline will be included as part of the meeting record but will not be read aloud during the meeting. Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/29/2021 August 16, 2021Housing Standing Committee of the City Council and Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda HOW TO PROVIDE PUBLIC COMMENT DURING THE MEETING Members of the public who wish to provide comment during the meeting may do so by using the “Raise Hand” feature: • To raise your hand on a PC or Mac desktop/laptop, click the button labeled "Raise Hand” at the bottom of the window on the right side of the screen. Lower your hand by clicking the same button, now labeled “Lower Hand.” • To raise your hand on a mobile device, tap “Raise Hand” at the bottom left corner of the screen. The hand icon will turn blue, and the text below it will switch to say "Lower Hand" while your hand is raised. To lower your hand, click on “Lower Hand.” • To raise your hand when participating by telephone, press *9. • To toggle mute/unmute, press *6. Once your hand is raised, please wait to be acknowledged by the City Clerk, or designee, who will call on speakers. When called upon, speakers will be unmuted. After the allotted time, speakers will be placed on mute. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION Motion to approve the Minutes for the meeting of December 21, 2020.1. Report regarding the third amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement for the property located at 432 Baden Avenue. (Julie Barnard, Economic Development Coordinator) 2. Study session for a Use Permit, Design Review, and Zoning Map Amendment to construct a Mixed-Use Development, consisting of 99 residential units, ground-floor parking and a 1,500 square foot restaurant at 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 & 213 Lux Avenue. (Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) 3. Adjournment. Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/29/2021 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:21-637 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:1. Motion to approve the Minutes for the meeting of December 21, 2020. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™ CALL TO ORDER 5:01 p.m. ROLL CALL Present: Mayor Addiego, Vice Mayor Nagales, Planning Commission Vice Chair Evans, Planning Commissioners Faria and Shihadeh. AGENDA REVIEW None. PUBLIC COMMENTS None. MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 1. Motion to approve the Minutes from the meeting of October 19, 2020. Motion – Planning Commission Shihadeh / Second – Planning Commissioner Faria to approve the Minutes from the meeting of October 19, 2020. Yes: Mayor Addiego, Commissioner Shihadeh, Commissioner Faria, Vice Chair Evans. Abstain: Vice Mayor Nagales. 2. Study session for a Use Permit and Design Review to construct a Mixed-Use Development, consisting of 27 residential units and 2,865 SF of retail, at 455-463 Grand Avenue. (Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) Associate Planner Skangos presented the item to the Housing Standing Committee and advised the application was submitted in June 2020. The existing conditions would be demolished to allow for the development. The project site consisted of two different parcels with the approximate project area being 4,000 square feet. There would be retail space on the ground floor, as well as a basement MINUTES REGULAR MEETING OF THE HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, California 94083 MONDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2020 5:00 p.m. Teleconference via Zoom Housing Standing Committee conducted this meeting in accordance with California Governor Newsom’s Executive Orders N-25-20 and N-29-20 and COVID-19 pandemic protocols. JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING DECEMBER 21, 2020 MINUTES PAGE 2 level parking area and the upper levels consist of 27 residential units consisting of 1-bedroom, 2- bedroom, and 3-bedroom floor plans with 32 parking spaces provided as parking stackers. Associate Planner Skangos stated the project was reviewed by the Design Review Board at their November meeting and appreciated the design of the building with some minor revisions that were requested. The revisions included some reworking of the façade, change in landscaping for the proposed courtyard terrace, and attention to any potential wind issues for the courtyard terrace. John Imhoff and Rajat Randev, Fractured9, Inc., listed the overall amenities, which included a courtyard, rooftop barbeque area with views going out to the south hill. All units would be under the Fair Housing accessibility guidelines. Elevator entries would all be electronically controlled to give a safe environment for the people living there. Vice Chair Evans inquired about the scale relative to the surrounding buildings and asked for the distance between the proposed building and the building next door. Mr. Imhoff estimated the distance to be 10 to 15 feet. Vice Chair Evans had encroachment concerns as they have had those issues on past projects. Vice Chair Evans inquired whether parking would have an additional fee. Mr. Randev advised that he was not privy to that information and advised the owner had not mentioned an additional fee for parking. Vice Chair Evans was against people in affordable units to have to then pay for additional parking because it skewed with the affordability formula. Commissioner Shihadeh inquired who gets to rent the affordable units and how would the City monitor that. Chief Planner Rozzi advised that it was coordinated with the Housing Division. They go through a process of advertising, having outreach for the rental for the affordable units. Anyone was eligible to apply, but the intention would be to administer and monitor on an ongoing basis as part of the affordable housing agreement. City Manager Futrell added that the City had a consultant that every year checks every unit to ensure it remained affordable. Vice Mayor Nagales asked City staff whether residents that lived in South San Francisco or working in South San Francisco had priority in the eligibility list. Associate Planner Skangos stated they had not but were still working through the details. She advised that was something they would discuss. Staff was primarily focused on the design portion of the project. Vice Mayor Nagales stated parking was very limited in terms of the number of spots and asked whether visitors would have to park on Grand Avenue. Mr. Randev confirmed that was correct. Commissioner Faria inquired whether each resident would have a code to use for the parking stacker and what the max size vehicle that could be used on the stacker. Mr. Randev advised a stacker could fit up to a mid-sized SUV. He stated there was only one way to enter, the resident would enter their code, the gate lifts and the resident would drive into the space, the resident would exit the vehicle, the stacker would then place the vehicle in an open space. JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING DECEMBER 21, 2020 MINUTES PAGE 3 Mayor Addiego stated the developer mentioned a property tax incentive to remain what it was today and for 25 years. He advised that was a big ask as they would not just impact the City, but also impact the schools and county government. 3. Study session for a preposed 480 unit multi-family residential project at 124 Airport Boulevard and 100 Produce Avenue (Tony Rozzi, AICP, Chief Planner) Chief Planner Rozzi gave a brief introduction on the project and stated it was interesting because it was kind of the first test case of a project moving forward after adopting a land use vision under the General Plan. The project was intended to follow in the general density requirements that were now allowed and accepted under the land use scenario. There remained a lot of questions and details that staff needed to work out with the applicant as far as specific zoning. Staff was bringing this project forward so the Housing Standing Committee could get a sense of the architecture, density, layout, site circulation, what was happening at the ground level and some of the significant improvements the applicant was proposing as part of their community benefits package. Staff requested feedback on two things: 1) What they were doing at the ground level and 2) The architecture and the broad strokes of their improvements that they were proposing for the community. This project had gone to the Design Review Board a couple of times and staff received a lot of good feedback and adjustments. Zack Anderson, Development Director for the Hanover Company, stated they had worked very closely with City staff to refine the project. The base project consisted of 400 units, plus a 20% density bonus in exchange for providing 10% low-income units on site. The 480 total project units were split between the two standalone buildings, Building 1 and Building 2, 294 and 186 units, respectively. Each building’s unit mix consisted of studios, 1-bedroom, 2-bedroom and 3-bedroom units. The parking ratio for the project was roughly 1.17 parking spaces per unit and would be providing double the City’s requirement for long term bike parking. Mayor Addiego inquired whether occupants that lived in one building also had access to amenities in another building. Mr. Anderson advised the idea was that there would be shared amenities between the two buildings, but they would have the ability to operate independently as well. Vice Chair Evans inquired whether parking would have an additional fee. Mr. Anderson advised that the City of South San Francisco allowed to unbundle up to 50% of the parking spaces per the City’s ordinance. Vice Chair Evans stated the point of her question was that if the project had affordable units and charged them additional rent for parking spaces, it took that rent out of the affordability range. Scott Youdall advised that the inverse of that is 50% would be bundled and they would make sure that all the affordable units in the project remained in the bundled category to address that concern. Commissioner Shihadeh was concerned the project site area would be overwhelmed with all the additional housing units. He suggested making improvements to the crosswalk and intersection as part of the community benefits enhancement. Mr. Anderson advised as part one of the community benefits mentioned that had been proposed, would be to upgrade the portion of the intersection between the two buildings. JOINT HOUSING STANDING COMMITTEE MEETING DECEMBER 21, 2020 MINUTES PAGE 4 Vice Mayor Nagales inquired how garbage pick up would occur on the site. Mr. Anderson advised the trash trucks would not drive into the buildings; property management would bring the trash bins out to the curb on trash days. Building 1 would potentially utilize the Uber pickup and drop off area on San Mateo Avenue so they wouldn’t block traffic. Vice Mayor Nagales inquired whether the developer had considered increasing the 10% affordable housing units for the site project. Mr. Anderson stated 10% of affordable units was what they were prepared to offer for the project. Otherwise, given everything going on in the market, there was a potential issue in terms of the finance ability of the project. Vice Mayor Nagales asked whether the developer considered splitting the 10% in terms of 5% for very low and 5% low income. Mr. Anderson advised that looking into the current San Mateo County Housing Authority rents, unfortunately, they could not amend the affordable housing units. Mayor Addiego liked the design of the proposed buildings and inquired whether the developer had constructed other projects in South San Francisco in the past. Chief Planner Rozzi confirmed they had; they were the architects for the first phase of the Sares Regis project. Mayor Addiego was concerned about other similar projects experiencing break ins into the bike locker area and inquired how they were planning to combat the same experience. Mr. Collins stated the bike locker area was a discreet secured locked room that was not part of the parking garage. Mayor Addiego questioned whether the proposed pool would come to fruition for the final plans. Mr. Youdall advised they were planning for the pool and had the appropriate clearances and access in the garage below. Mr. Anderson added they were very deliberate about the placement of the pool within the courtyard to ensure the pool had as much sunlight as possible year-round. Housing Standing Committee members were concerned the projects on Airport Boulevard would cause an abundance of traffic when accessing the northbound entrance to Highway 101. Mayor Addiego inquired when they would receive the traffic studies for the project. Chief Planner Rozzi stated they got a traffic study as part of the CEQA document that is currently in draft form but would share with the Housing Standing Committee members as soon as it was available. ADJOURNMENT Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:56 p.m. Submitted by: Approved by: _______________________________ ______________________________ Gabriel Rodriguez, Deputy City Clerk Mark Addiego, Mayor City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco Approved by the Housing Standing Committee: / / City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:21-622 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:2. Report regarding the third amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement for the property located at 432 Baden Avenue.(Julie Barnard, Economic Development Coordinator) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend that the Joint Housing Subcommittee provide a City Council recommendation to adopt a resolution approving the Third Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement (“PSA”)which includes: 1.Changing the developer from Baden Developments LLC to For the Future Housing, 2.The modification of the project scope from market rate to a fully-affordable housing product with thirty-six Below Market Rate (“BMR”) units, 3.Amend the timing for Close of Escrow, and 4.The reduction in purchase price from $1,100,000 to a land donation. BACKGROUND In 1997,the former Redevelopment Agency to the City of South San Francisco (“Redevelopment Agency”) purchased 432 Baden Avenue (“the Property”)for $270,000 for the development of a public parking lot to serve the 400 block of Grand Avenue.Previously,this section of the downtown had no public parking facilities, resulting in parking problems for the area.The Agency demolished the residential building that existed on the site and developed a 16-space surface parking lot. The City of South San Francisco (“City”)is responsible for the disposition of the former Redevelopment Agency properties in accordance with the procedures and requirements of the approved Long Range Property Management Plan (“LRPMP”).Under the LRPMP,the Property is required to be sold through a sale using a negotiated purchase and sale agreement.The City is required to select a buyer that proposes the highest net value to the taxing agencies through a combination of sale proceeds and future tax revenues.Reducing the price of the Property from $1.1 million to $0 will require an action by the San Mateo County Countywide Oversight Board (“Oversight Board”) to accept this lower sales price. In September 2018,Baden Development,LLC (then Sierra Investment Group)(“Baden Development”) purchased 428 Baden Avenue,for development of a small multi-family housing project.During the entitlement process for 428 Baden Avenue,the developer approached the City with a proposal to purchase the Successor Agency owned,adjacent site,432 Baden (or “the Property”),in order to assemble land for a larger housing project. Typically,the City would undergo a competitive bid process for the sale of properties.However,because the adjacent property owner made an offer on the Property with the intent to develop a project that is determined to be the highest and best use of the assembled properties,the City considered the proposal exclusively in order to determine whether or not a better offer might be made on the open market.In this case,this sole offer with the site assembly would provide a housing project with more housing units (rather than being developed individually). By assembling 428 and 432 Baden,the developer was able to pursue a project with better design and moreCity of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-622 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:2. By assembling 428 and 432 Baden,the developer was able to pursue a project with better design and more housing units,which included 10%Below Market Rate (“BMR”)units at the Very Low Income (“VLI”)level. On October 9,2019,the City Council considered the Letter of Intent (“LOI”)provided by Baden Development and agreed that the site had a far greater value if assembled with 428 Baden rather than disposing of it as a stand-alone site.The City Council accepted the offer price of $1,100,000,(which was $80,000 more than the November 2019 appraised value of $1,020,000),and directed staff to negotiate a Purchase and Sale Agreement (“PSA”)with Baden Development.The purchase price was confirmed by the Oversight Board on February 10, 2020. The PSA was executed on February 19, 2020. At its August 6,2020 meeting,the Planning Commission approved the entitlements for 36 rental residential units which include three BMR units affordable to households earning 50%or less of the area median income (otherwise known as very low income or VLI).Attachment 1 indicates the San Mateo County AMI levels for 2021. Due to the impacts of COVID-19 (“the pandemic”)and the Shelter in Place (“SIP”)order,the Developer initially experienced some delays to their due diligence contingency period,and further required additional time to investigate some small issues relating to their Density Bonus concessions and or waivers.The PSA allows for administrative extensions at the City Manager’s discretion,typically for six months at a time.Staff executed the First Amendment which extended the due diligence period administratively by six months (to October 18, 2020)and the Close of Escrow from August 17,2020 to February 16,2021.The Second Amendment which provided further extensions to the Close of Escrow,was considered and approved by Council at the January 21, 2021 City Council meeting. The developer is also afforded two paid extensions to the schedule of performance in the Second Amendment to the PSA.Baden Development have utilized one of these two 90-day extensions by paying the $15,000. Presently,their Close of Escrow date is August 16,2021.The second extension will need to be utilized and staff recommends waiving the $15,000 fee,which is City practice for affordable housing developers.Pursuant to the Second Amendment (and the first extension)the development was expected to start construction during the first quarter of 2022. DISCUSSION PSA Amendments Presently, the developer is requesting the following amendments to their PSA: 1.Change the development team from Baden Development to For the Future Housing, 2.Amend the scope from market rate (with a 10%affordable component)to a fully-affordable housing development, 3.Amend the timing for Close of Escrow, and 4.Reduce the purchase price to $1 (effectively a land donation)in recognition of the extraordinary costs associated with affordable housing development. Development Team Substitution While Baden Development were working through the building permit stages,they obtained several bids from general contractors.The bids they received were considerably higher than originally projected in their proforma.Construction costs (which include material costs and labor)were increasingly more expensive and were projected to rise further in the coming months.Further,the pandemic had also softened the potential rental rates,the development was likely to receive.These reasons made the advancing of the project more difficult to City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-622 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:2. secure financing with lenders. Baden Development was approached by an affordable housing developer,For the Future Housing (“FTF Housing”),who made an offer to purchase the entitled property and convert it to a 100%affordable housing development.The close proximity to downtown amenities and available transportation options,means that the development is best suited to an affordable housing project and that this would be considered favorably by the City of South San Francisco.Baden Development agreed to enter into contract with FTF Housing to assign Baden Development’s interest under the PSA to For the Future Housing. For the Future Housing’s mission is to deliver affordable,high-quality and safe housing.The company is a developer as well as a general contractor and has significant experience in the bay area,including entitling 78- units in Calistoga,70-units "Pacific Station"Downtown Santa Cruz,107-units "Library Mixed-Use" Downtown Santa Cruz and they are a partner in a 65 unit development on El Camino Real in Santa Clara. Delivery of affordable housing Under the new arrangement the developer would be delivering 35 Below Market Rate (“BMR”)units and one manager’s unit to the housing market for a total of 36 units.The final household Area Median Income (“AMI”) limits for the project have not yet been determined,as they will be driven by the final funding sources.The developer has indicated that the average across units will not exceed 50%AMI,with the highest AMI limit being 60% AMI. The attachment shows the existing AMI limits for San Mateo County for 2021. The Assignment Agreement between the two developers essentially hands all obligations that Baden Developments had with the City to FTF Housing.Since Baden Developments have not yet paid for the property,the City has discretion over the sale price and has the ability to reduce the sale price.Baden Developments is not receiving any additional financial gains if the City provides a land donation. Financing developments in the current housing market favors affordable housing developments.If Baden Developments were to sell their entitlements to a different developer,it would likely also be to another affordable housing developer who would, in turn, also request a land donation or financing from the City. Close of Escrow FTF Housing have made a request to close escrow on the property when they secure their acquisition financing for the adjacent property,428 Baden,which will be January 5,2022.Typically,the City does not close escrow on a property until all project financing has been secured.However,this project is entitled as one project over two sites,one of which is the City-owned site and the other a privately held site.The financers providing the acquisition financing for FTF Housing to buy 428 Baden from Baden Developments require both parcels as collateral so that the project, as entitled, can be developed. City Council,in closed session,recently considered a similar request from Eden Housing for the Firehouse site, relating to the City conveying the land to the developer ahead of all project financing being secured.Staff recommend approving FTF Housing closing escrow prior to full financing being in place because it will allow this affordable housing to be delivered quicker.If it is not approved,FTF Housing would have to find another way to finance the acquisition of 428 Baden and further delay seeking other construction and permanent financing.Staff will include post-closing obligations in the Third Amendment to the PSA to ensure that the project is developed as intended and in a timely manner. Project financing and land donation FTF Housing has requested that the City provide a land donation rather than providing financing.Cities City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-622 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:2. FTF Housing has requested that the City provide a land donation rather than providing financing.Cities typically need to provide a financial contribution to affordable housing developers in order for them to leverage other funding sources (such as County and State grants).In this case the City can donate the land which is considered a financial contribution to the development by other lenders.Since the property was owned by the former South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency,the land donation would incur a shared cost among the taxing entities, rather than the City providing a loan or grant at our exclusive cost. FTF Housing applied for $6 million in funding through the San Mateo County Department of Housing Affordable Housing Fund 9.0 (Measure K).They will also be applying for the Federal 9%tax credit funding which will occur in the first quarter of next year. Should FTF Housing not secure the County and Federal financing,they will pursue other financing sources, such as the State Infill Infrastructure Grant or the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities grant and other sources to fill the gap in their financing.There is always a risk that FTF Housing will not be able to secure all of the gap financing required to proceed to development.At that point,the developer could return to the City with a request for additional financing.Staff and the developer are working together to identify additional sources of funding and apply for that funding in a timely and competitive manner to reduce the likelihood additional City investment will be required. WAY FORWARD Should the Housing Subcommittee,and Council,in turn,opt not to approve the proposed land donation,the following scenarios may occur: 1.In efforts to secure a fully affordable housing development the developer would pay $1,100,000 but the City would likely be required to provide a subsidy from its housing funds.As mentioned earlier, housing developments are more competitive for alternative sources of funds with an injection of City/local financing, or 2.Baden Developments may opt to purchase the property for $1,100,000 and build the development but this would only provide three BMR units to the City. CONCLUSION Staff recommends that the Joint Housing Subcommittee provide a recommendation to City Council to adopt a resolution approving the Third Amendment to the Purchase and Sale Agreement, which includes: 1.Changing the developer from Baden Developments LLC to For the Future Housing, 2.The modification of the project scope from market rate to a fully-affordable housing product with 36 Below Market Rate (“BMR”) units, 3.Amend the timing for Close of Escrow, and 4.The reduction in purchase price from $1,100,000 to a land donation. Attachment: 1.San Mateo County Area Median Income Limits (2021) City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™ revised 04/30/2021 For HUD-funded programs, use the Federal Income Schedule. For State or locally-funded programs, you may use the State Income Schedule. For programs funded with both federal and state funds, use the more stringent income levels. Please verify the income and rent figures in use for specific programs. San Mateo County Income Limits (based on Federal Income Limits for SMC) Effective 4/30/2021 - Area median Income $149,600 (based on household of 4) Income Category 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Extremely Low (30% AMI) *38,400$ 43,850$ 49,350$ 54,800$ 59,200$ 63,600$ 68,000$ 72,350$ Very Low (50% AMI) *63,950$ 73,100$ 82,250$ 91,350$ 98,700$ 106,000$ 113,300$ 120,600$ Low (80% AMI) *102,450$ 117,100$ 131,750$ 146,350$ 158,100$ 169,800$ 181,500$ 193,200$ Median (100% AMI)104,700$ 119,700$ 134,650$ 149,600$ 161,550$ 173,550$ 185,500$ 197,450$ Moderate (120% AMI)125,650$ 143,600$ 161,550$ 179,500$ 193,850$ 208,200$ 222,600$ 236,950$ NOTES *2021 State Income limits provided by State of California Department of Housing and Community Development 2021 San Mateo County Income Limits as determined by HUD - effective June 28, 2021 Income Limits by Family Size ($) City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:21-628 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:3. Study session for a Use Permit,Design Review,and Zoning Map Amendment to construct a Mixed-Use Development,consisting of 99 residential units,ground-floor parking and a 1,500 square foot restaurant at 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 & 213 Lux Avenue.(Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Housing Standing Committee receive this staff report and provide input regarding the proposed Mixed-Use Development at 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 & 213 Lux Avenue. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION On February 18,2021,Peter Sodini submitted an application for a Mixed-Use Development consisting of 99 residential units over ground floor parking and a restaurant located at 421 Cypress Avenue,209 &213 Lux Avenue in the Downtown Transit Core (DTC)and Downtown Residential Core (DRC)sub-districts of the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan (DSASP).The project site consists of one corner and through-lot parcel with frontages on Lux and Cypress Avenues and Tamarack Lane and two through-lot parcels with frontages on Cypress Avenue and Tamarack Lane.Two of the lots are located within the DTC district and one within the DRC district.The three parcels are developed with an existing restaurant (Bertolucci’s),six residential units, and a surface parking lot, which will be demolished. The proposed building will contain six stories of residential units over a ground-floor parking garage and project amenities,including leasing offices.The parking garage will provide a total of 99 parking spaces,which will consist of 90 parking stalls in stackers and nine at-grade parking stalls,five of which are ADA-compliant. A 1,500 square foot restaurant and plaza will also be located on the ground floor at the corner of Cypress and Lux Avenues.The upper levels will provide a total of 99 for-rent residential units,consisting of a mix of studio, one-,and two-bedroom units,ranging in size from 560 square feet to 1,610 square feet.Along with the ground floor leasing and lounge areas,the project provides an additional interior amenity area at the podium level that flows out of a shared,south facing,landscaped podium with seating areas and water feature,and a smaller interior amenity area with terrace on the top level.Project plans are included in Attachment 1 to this staff report. The entitlements request for this project includes: ·A zoning map amendment (rezone) for a portion of the site to a higher-density district; ·Conditional Use Permit (for multi-family residential,use of the DSASP Increased Density Incentive Program, and a parking reduction); ·Design Review; ·Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan; and ·CEQA consistency with the DSASP Environmental Impact Report (EIR). ZONING CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS Proposed Use The project site consists of three parcels within the DSASP zoning districts.Two parcels are located in the City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 1 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-628 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:3. The project site consists of three parcels within the DSASP zoning districts.Two parcels are located in the Downtown Transit Core (DTC)sub-district,and one parcel is located in the Downtown Residential Core (DRC) sub-district.A Zoning Map Amendment to rezone the DRC-zoned parcel to DTC,which permits for higher density and building heights,is part of this application request.The applicant’s proposal is designed to be consistent with the regulations of the DTC sub-district, which would require approval of the rezone application. Per South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) Section 20.280.003 (Land Use Regulations-Downtown Station Area Specific Plan Sub-Districts),mixed-use development at high intensities is encouraged.Multi-unit residential development is allowed with the approval of a Use Permit,and a variety of commercial uses are allowed either by-right or with the approval of a Use Permit. Development standards for the DTC sub-district are outlined in SSFMC Section 20.280.004. As noted in the below table, the proposed project complies with most of the applicable development standards. The proposed deviations from the required development standards are requested as a Waiver/Reduction of Development Standards under the State Density Bonus Law, as described in the staff report section below. Table 1. DTC Development Standard Compliance Development Standard Proposal Min. Lot Size 5,000 sf ü(1) Floor Area Ratio Min. FAR Max. FAR 2.0 8.0 ü ü Residential Density (unit per acre)Min. Density Max. Density 80 100 ü X Height Max. Height Max. Ground Floor Height (residential uses) 85 feet 15 feet.ü ü Min. Yards Front Interior Side Street Side Rear 0 feet 0 feet 0 feet 0 feet ü ü ü ü Max. Lot Coverage 100%ü Min. Open Space (per residential unit) 100 sf X NOTES: 1. Compliance with development standard indicated with “ü“; exceptions requested indicated with “X”. Parking Requirements The number of required parking spaces for land uses within a Downtown District is regulated by SSFMC Section 20.330.007 (Required On-Site Parking Spaces,Downtown Districts).Pursuant to this section,the following parking requirements apply to the proposed project: City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 2 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-628 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:3. Table 2. Required Parking Land Use Classification Required Parking Spaces Multi-Unit Residential Studio and less than 500 sq. ft.1 space per unit max General Requirements for all Multi-Unit Residential Parking **: One covered space shall be designated for each unit. One-bedroom (up to 1,100 sq. ft.)1 space min, 1.5 spaces max per unit Two-bedroom (up to 1,100 sq. ft.)1.5 spaces min, 1.8 spaces max per unit Three or more bedrooms and 1,101 sq. ft. or larger 1.5 spaces min, 2 spaces max per unit Eating and Drinking Establishments* Restaurants, Full Service 1 per 100 sq. ft. of customer seating area. *No parking required for the first 1,500 sq. ft. of customer seating area, or floor area, as applicable. Restaurants, Limited Service 1 per 150 sq. ft. of customer seating area Based on the above requirements,a minimum of 112 parking spaces is required for the residential component of the proposed project.The proposed restaurant does not require parking as it will be less than 1,500 square feet.The applicant is proposing a total of 99 parking spaces in the ground-floor parking garage,which would require a parking reduction as part of the Conditional Use Permit,as it is 13 spaces less than what is required by the SSFMC. The applicant will submit a Parking Demand Study and Transportation Demand Management (TDM)Plan,as required by the Zoning Code,to support the parking reduction request.Staff will analyze the required documents and relevant discussion will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council as part of the full project entitlement proposal. Project Design The architecture harkens back to the historic character of the City with its brick base that grounds simple, straight-forward massing with hung balconies along Cypress and Lux Avenues.The building corner is expressed as a set-back to the corner restaurant with consistent window glazing above defining this corner element.A faithful reproduction of the original Bertolucci’s sign,located at the corner of the retail space gives the new project a strong identity,while acknowledging the historic significance of the site for the local community. State Density Bonus Law The Density Bonus Law (found in California Government Code Sections 65915-65918)provides developers with tools to encourage the development of affordable and senior housing,including up to a 50%increase in project densities for most projects,depending on the amount of affordable housing provided.The Density Bonus Law provides a package of incentives intended to help make the development of affordable and senior City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 3 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-628 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:3. Bonus Law provides a package of incentives intended to help make the development of affordable and senior housing economically feasible by providing incentives/concessions as well as additional forms of assistance which can have important benefits for a housing project. Per SSFMC Section 20.280.004 (Development Standards)the DTC sub-district permits a maximum base density of 100 dwelling units per acre (du/acre).The project site totals 25,395 square feet,therefore permitting 58 units at the base DTC density.To achieve the proposed 99 units,the project is seeking additional density under the State Density Bonus Law and the DSASP Increased Density Incentive Program.The requirements and applicant’s proposal for increased density under the DSASP Increased Density Incentive Program are discussed in the subsequent staff report section. The proposal qualifies for a density bonus of 20%under the Density Bonus Law by providing 5%very low income units.An additional 10%of the units will be provided at low Income,resulting in a total of 15%below market rate (BMR)units,which is in full compliance with the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (SSFMC Chapter 20.380)and discussed below.In addition to the density bonus,under the Density Bonus Law,the application is eligible to receive one incentive or concession,an unlimited number of waivers from required development standards,and reduced parking requirements.The applicant is seeking a waiver for the following development standards:minimum usable open space,build-to line,corner build area,and private storage requirements (see Attachment 2). Inclusionary Housing Regulations SSFMC Chapter 20.380 requires that “for rental”residential developments of five or more units provide a minimum of 15%of the dwelling units as inclusionary units affordable to very low,lower or moderate income households.The required 15 percent shall consist of two-thirds,or 10%,designated for lower income households and one-third,or 5%designated for very low income households.As mentioned above,the proposed project will provide the required number and proportion of affordable housing required by the City’s Inclusionary Housing Ordinance. Housing Accountability Act Considerations As previously mentioned,the project site currently has a split zoning;a portion of the site is within the DRC sub-district,and a portion of the site is within the DTC sub-district,both within the DSASP area.Within the DRC,the maximum base density is 80 du/ac,and the maximum building height is 65 feet.The DTC sub- district permits a maximum base density of 100 du/ac,and a maximum building height of 85 feet.Using underlying zoning and the base densities for the site,a developer would be permitted to build up to 55 units on the site, with a building height of up to 65 and 85 feet (depending on site configuration). The State Housing Accountability Act limits a city’s ability to deny a proposed residential project that is otherwise consistent with General Plan and Zoning standards.The proposed project is requesting a rezone for a portion of the site,to include the entire site within the DTC zone,and is also requesting a density bonus under the DSASP Increased Density Incentive Program,and thus is not subject to the requirements of the Housing Accountability Act.However,if a proposed project at this site were to meet these base zoning requirements (80 -100 du/ac and 65-85 feet tall)and all other objective standards,it would be subject to the requirements of the Housing Accountability Act, and State law would essentially require City approval of such a project. State Bill (SB)35 (Streamlining Provisions)would apply to a project that is proposing at least 50%affordable units.Currently,the SB 35 requirements would not apply to the proposed project since it is not proposing 50% affordability. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 4 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-628 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:3. COMMUNITY BENEFITS The application includes a request for additional units under the DSASP Increased Density Incentive Program. As mentioned previously,per SSFMC Section 20.280.004 (Development Standards),the maximum density allowed in the DTC sub-district is 100 du/ac.However,the maximum density can be increased to 180 du/ac by utilizing the DSASP Increased Density Incentive Program.Under this program,an increase to the maximum density may be permitted for buildings with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit by the City Council through the satisfaction of a combination of public benefits.To be eligible for an increase to the maximum density incentive,the public benefits that are included as part of a development project must demonstrate a positive contribution that is above and beyond the minimum required impact fees and other requirements of a particular project. Per SSFMC Section 20.280.005(A),the following preferences for public benefits to the Downtown community and the City may be considered as eligible to allow increased density standards for a project: a.Local Hire Program; b.Public art; c.Funding or construction of local streetscape enhancements as identified in the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan; d.Funding for enhanced public spaces; e.Funding for public safety facilities, community meeting rooms, child care or similar; f.Tenant space for local businesses or existing businesses in need of relocation; g.Provision of green building measures over and above the applicable green building compliance threshold required pursuant to Title 15 (“Building and Construction”)of the South San Francisco Municipal Code; h.Transit subsidy or other incentives for residents and/or employees; i.Family-friendly (two- and three-bedroom units); and j.Other developer proposed incentives achieving a similar public benefit. The applicant is requesting a density of 169 du/ac and has provided a preliminary community benefits proposal to achieve the desired density incentive.The applicant’s preliminary proposal includes public art,streetscape enhancements,and a new public plaza incorporated in the building.An explanation of proposed benefits and the relevant goals and guiding policies in the DSASP to support the density increase request is outlined in Attachment 2.City staff requests feedback from the Housing Standing Committee on the preliminary proposal and will further evaluate the preliminary proposal and work with the applicant to achieve a scale of community benefits suitable for the project scope and size, addressing the needs of the community. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD The Design Review Board (DRB)reviewed the proposal on June 15,2021,and recommended approval with some minor design revisions,including expanding the proposed corner plaza area to provide a larger area for outdoor seating and public use,and relocating the proposed reproduced Bertolucci’s sign to a higher elevation. Additionally,the DRB encouraged the incorporation of an art piece or plaque dedicated to the history of the area.(DRB meeting minutes are included as Attachment 3 to this staff report.)The DRB’s comments have been taken into consideration by the applicant and incorporated into the proposal. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project site is located within the area covered by the adopted DSASP Environmental Impact Report (EIR). An Environmental Consistency Analysis (ECA)will be required to analyze the project against the DSASP EIR, per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).The ECA is currently pending and City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 5 of 6 powered by Legistar™ File #:21-628 Agenda Date:8/16/2021 Version:1 Item #:3. per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).The ECA is currently pending and will be reviewed by City staff and the City Attorney’s Office for adequacy and consistency when submitted. Relevant discussion will be presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. CONCLUSION Staff requests that the Housing Standing Committee provide input regarding the proposed Mixed-Use Development at 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 & 213 Lux Avenue. ATTACHMENTS 1.Project Plans 2.Applicant’s Preliminary Incentive Program/Community Benefits Proposal 3.DRB Minutes - June 15, 2021 City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/13/2021Page 6 of 6 powered by Legistar™ BERTOLUCCI PARCEL 209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA FORMAL PLANNING APPLICATION #3 AUGUST 6, 2021 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 PROJECT SUMMARY VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX APPLICANT: Peter & Victoria Sodini 421 Cypress Avenue, South San Francisco, CA. 64080 Contact: Peter Sodini Phone: 650.759.4994 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: The Guzzardo Partnership Inc. 181 Greenwich Street San Francisco, CA. 94111 Contact: Paul Lettieri, Principal Phone: 415.433.4672 ARCHITECT / PLANNER: Studio T-Square 1970 Broadway, Suite 615 Oakland, CA. 94612 Contact: Chek Tang, Principal Phone: 510.451.2850 CIVIL ENGINEER: Wilsey Ham 3130 La Selva Street #100, San Mateo, CA. 94403 Contact: Randal Krejcarek Phone: 650.349.2151 GENERAL G0.0 PROJECT INFORMATION G1.0 NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT G2.0 EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS CIVIL C0.01 SITE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY C1.00 SITE BOUNDARY PLAN C2.00 EROSION CONTROL ROOM C3.00 GRADING PLAN C4.01 UTILITY PLAN ARCHITECTURAL A1.0 AERIAL PERSPECTIVE A2.0 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 1 A2.1 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 1.5 A2.2 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 2 A2.3 BUILDING PLAN - LEVELS 3-5 A2.4 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 6 A2.5 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 7 A2.6 BUILDING PLAN - ROOF LEVEL A3.0 NORTH ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.1 EAST ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.2 SOUTH ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.3 WEST ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.4 COLORS AND MATERIALS A4.0 BUILDING SECTION AA A5.0 UNIT PLANS A5.1 UNIT PLANS IM1.0 PRECEDENT IMAGES IM1.1 PRECEDENT IMAGES LANDSCAPE L1.1 LANDSCAPE GROUND FLOOR PLAN L1.2 LANDSCAPE PODIUM PLAN L1.3 LANDSCAPE ROOFDECK PLAN L1.4 LANDSCAPE IMAGERY L1.5 LANDSCAPE PLANTING IMAGERY L1.6 LANDSCAPE GOUND FLOOR LIGHTING PLAN L1.7 LANDSCAPE PODIUM LIGHTING PLAN L1.8 LIGHT SPECIFICATIONS PROJECT TEAM PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT GFA PROJECT INFORMATION G0.0 The proposed development is located on three parcels; 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 and 213 Lux Avenue, totaling 0.584 acres in the City of South San Francisco, CA The development program includes 99 units of for-rent, multi-family housing over ground floor parking, project amenities including leasing offices as well as 1,500 SF allocated for a restaurant at the corner of Lux and Cypress Avenues. Located within the Downtown Specific Plan the project is within 1/4 mile of the South San Francisco Cal Train Station. The architecture harkens back to the historic character of South San Francisco with its brick base that grounds simple, straight-forward massing with hung balconies along Lux and Cypress Boulevards. The building corner is expressed as a set-back to the corner restaurant with consistent window glazing above defining this corner element. A faithful reproduction of the original Bertolucci sign, located at the corner of the retail, gives the new project a strong identity acknowledging the historic significance of the site for the local community. Along with ground floor leasing and lounge areas the project provides additional interior amenity area at the podium level that flows out to a shared, south facing, landscaped podium with seating areas and water feature. Address 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 & 213 Lux Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080 APN: Existing Land Use Designations: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation:DTC (Downtown Transit Core), and DRC (Downtown Residential Core) Existing Use:Restaurant / Parking Lot Proposed Land Use Designations:Downtown Transit Core (DTC), State Density Bonus, City Incentives General Plan Designation:Downtown Transit Core (DTC), Residential Transit Core (RTC) Zoning Designation:DTC (Downtown Transit Core) Proposed Use:99 For‐Rent, Multi‐Family Residential, 1,500 sf Restaurant Building Code   Construction shall comply with the 2019 California Building Code.  Occupancy Groups Construction Types Residential Garage Restaurant Amenity R‐2 S‐2 A‐2 B R‐2 S‐2 A‐2 B Building Height (Allowable)  DTC (Downtown Transit Core)85'‐0" measured from Average Grade Plane Residential Density 169.8 DU/Acre Lot Area 0.583                    Acres 25,395 SF GFA (Units, Circulation, Leasing, and Amenity Spaces):119,257 SF Non GFA (Garage, Service, and Storage):22,995 SF Gross Building Area 142,252 SF F.A.R.*4.70 * FAR calculation does not include Garage, Service, and Storage SF Type I‐A & Type III‐A, Fully Sprinklered Type I‐A, Fully Sprinklered Type I‐A, Fully Sprinklered Type I‐A & Type III‐A, Fully Sprinklered PLANNING AND BUILDING CODE DATA 421 Cypress Ave (APN:012‐314‐090)   209 Lux Ave (APN: 012‐314‐080) 213 Lux Ave (APN: 012‐314‐070) 421 Cypress/209 Lux ‐ Downtown Transit Core 213 Lux ‐ Downtown Residential Core Unit Type Quantity % of Total NSF Parking @ 1/DU Parking Provided Studio 6 6% 3,000 1 6 1 BR 12 12% 9,000 1 12 1 BR + Den 56 57% 47,000 1 56 2 BR 9 9% 12,080 1 9 2 BR + Den 16 16% 22,860 1 16 Total DU 99 100% 93,940 Total Parking 99 99 Parking Provided: 99 Stalls, 90 in Mechanized Parking Lifts, 9 at-grade Provided 84 ADA 4 5 EV 10 99 Units Provided 99 10 99 26 Units Total Cu. Ft. 99 19,800 52 10,400 * ALLOWED EXEMPTION BY STATE DENSITY BONUS Units Total SF 99 9,900 Total SF 3,700 5,725 TOTAL 9,425 Total SF 1,615 Mail/ Package 445 Flexible 750 Amenity 2,450 Retail 1,500 TOTAL 6,760 0'-0" Minumum 0'-0" Minumum 0'-0" Minumum Parking Requirements Required Standard TOTAL 10% of Req. Car Private Decks Storage Requirements Required Courtyard Storage Requirements 200 Cu. Ft. / Unit Storage Provided *200 Cu. Ft. / Unit Front Cypress Ave Front Lux Ave Side Rear Tamarack LN 0'-0" Minumum 0'-0" Minumum Open Space Provided * Open Space Requirements Required 0'-0" Minumum Setbacks Allowed Proposed Bike Parking Requirements Required Short-Term Parking 10% of Req. Car Long-Term Parking 1 per 4 units Open Space SF 100 SF / Unit Amenity and Retail Programs Lobby/ Lounge/ Leasing 0'-0" Minumum0'-0" Minumum Gross Area Residential Amenity Circulation Total GFA Garage Service Storage Total Non GFA Total Level 1 ‐                   4,310               2,147               6,457               Level 1 14,990            2,185               ‐                   17,175            23,632             Level 1.5 ‐                   ‐                   1,105               1,105               Level 1.5 ‐                   ‐                   3,799               3,799               4,904                Level 2 13,809            1,480               3,625               18,914            Level 2 ‐                   266                  ‐                   266                  19,180             Level 3 15,954            ‐                   2,933               18,887            Level 3 ‐                   351                  ‐                   351                  19,238             Level 4 15,866            ‐                   2,933               18,799            Level 4 ‐                   351                  ‐                   351                  19,150             Level 5 15,866            ‐                   2,933               18,799            Level 5 ‐                   351                  ‐                   351                  19,150             Level 6 14,719            ‐                   2,933               17,652            Level 6 ‐                   351                  ‐                   351                  18,003             Level 7 14,719            970                  2,955               18,644            Level 7 ‐                   351                  ‐                   351                  18,995             TOTAL 90,933            6,760               21,564             119,257          TOTAL 14,990            4,206               3,799               22,995            142,252           GFA ‐ Residential Non GFA ‐ Garage, Service & Storage GRAND AVE E. GR A N D A V E N SITE 101 BAYSHORE FREEWAY101 BAYSHORE FREEWAYTAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 1/4 MI L E 5-MIN W A L K N LUX AVE CYPRESS AVETAMARACK LN LINDEN AVESPRUCE AVEPROJECTPROJECT SITESITE GRAND AVE CALTRAIN STATION101 BAYSHORE FWY101 BAYSHORE FWYS SAN FRANCISCO CITY HALL SIGH HILL NEIGHBORHOOD SPRUCE BUSINESS PARK 0.5 MILES 10-MIN WALK SPRUCE SCHOOL S SAN FRANCISCO BUSINESS CENTER EASTERN NEIGHBORHOOD DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT G1.0 E. GRAND A V E 3.5February 2015 Land Use & Urban Design 3 Downtown Transit Core This area lies within a 1/4 mile, or a five-minute walk, of the reconfigured Cal- train Station and undercrossing. It is bounded by Lux Avenue on the north, Second Lane on the south, Union Pacific Railroad/Caltrain tracks on the east, and properties on the west side of Linden Avenue on the west. The Downtown Transit Core is envisioned to be a vibrant, mixed-use area. Due to its proximity to the Caltrain Station and the relative abundance of de- velopable sites, the Downtown Transit Core is the area most suitable for the highest intensities of new development in the Downtown area. These higher intensities will help to support transit ridership since residential units will be within a short walk of the station. High-density housing will also provide the pedestrian activity needed to support downtown businesses and will increase activity day and night, add street life and improve safety. As the Downtown Transit Core area evolves, it will enhance the image of the Downtown and frame Grand Avenue—the centerpiece of the Downtown. The Downtown Transit Core allows up to 100 dwelling units per acre; a min- imum of 80 dwelling units per acre is required. A maximum of 120 dwelling units per acre would be allowed for development meeting specified criteria. Ground level retail uses will be encouraged throughout the area. Grand Avenue Core Grand Avenue will remain the historic retail center of the City. The Grand Ave- nue district extends from Airport Boulevard on the east to Spruce Avenue on the west. With a few exceptions, the district includes properties directly front- ing on Grand Avenue. At the east end, Grand Avenue and Airport Boulevard form an important gateway to the City and the historic core; at the west end, the district transitions to the residential Downtown Neighborhood described in the General Plan. Historically interesting buildings will be retained wher- ever possible. New mixed-use development of underutilized properties will be encouraged but guidelines will limit building heights directly along Grand Avenue in order to respect the historic character of some existing buildings and to create a comfortable pedestrian environment. Off Grand Avenue, on the rear portions of Grand-facing lots, taller allowable heights will help ac- commodate new residential uses and increase development opportunities. The Grand Avenue Core allows up to 60 dwelling units per acre and requires a minimum of 14 units per acre. If meeting specified criteria, residential den- sities can be up to 80 dwelling units per acre or 100 units per acre on corner sites or site over 1/2 acre in size. Retail is required on the ground floor. 1/4-mile radiu s 1/2-mile radius c c 101 101 FOURTH LANE SIXTH LANE SEVENTH LANE EIGHTH LANE JUNIPER AVE NINTH LANE TAMARACK LANE CYPRESS AVENUECYPRESS AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUECEDAR PL.LINDEN AVE N U E BL V D .MAPLE AVENUEMAPLE AVENUEWALNUT AVENUEMAGNOLIA AVENUESPRUCE AVENUESPRUCE AVENUEHAWTHORNE PLACEHICKORY PLACEOLIVE AVENUESCHOOL ST.LERC H A V E N U E BEECH A V E N U E GRAND AVENUE E GRAND A V E E GRAN D A V E GRAND AV E N U EPOLETTI WAYDUBUQUE AVENUEFORBES BLVDHARBOR WAYGATEWAY BLVDGATEWAY BLVDMILLER AVENUEPALM AVENUEELM COURTLUX AVENUE VILLAGE WAY CALIFORNIA AVENUE PAR K W A Y PINE AVENUE ASPEN AVENUE ARMO U R A V E N U E BADEN AVENUE COMMERCIAL AVE RAILROAD AVE FIRST LANE SECOND LANE THIRD LANE N CANAL STREET S CANAL STREET MAYFAIR AVENUE AIRPORT BOULEVARDAIRPORT BOULEVARDS A IRPORT BLVD MITCHELL A V E UTAH AVECORPORATE D R I V E HE MLOCK AVENUE SPRUCE AVENUES AIRPO RT . HILLSIDE Spruce School Church Martin School Cypress & Pine Park Sign Hill Park Sister Cities Park Paradise Valley Park Para d i s e V a l l e y Poc k e t P a r k PG&E Irish Town Greens Jack Drago P a r kTotlot Mitchell Ave Green Spot PG&ESUBSTATION Department of Public Works Colma Cre e k C a n al Colma Creek Canal City Hall Hillside Plaza Lowe’s Home Improvement South San Francisco Business Center GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD EASTERN NEIGHBORHOOD GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PARADISE VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD LINDENVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD LEGEND 0250 500 1000’ c N c STUDY AREA BOUNDARY RAILROAD TRACKS LESS ACTIVE RAIL SPUR EXISTING CALTRAIN STATION PROPOSED CALTRAIN PLATFORM EXTENSION AND UNDER CROSSING PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY GRAND AVENUE CORE DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL LINDEN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER EASTERN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONES 1/4-mile radiu s 1/2-mile radius c c 101 101 FOURTH LANE SIXTH LANE SEVENTH LANE EIGHTH LANE JUNIPER AVE NINTH LANE TAMARACK LANE CYPRESS AVENUECYPRESS AVENUELINDEN AVENUELINDEN AVENUECEDAR PL.LINDEN AVE N U E BL V D .MAPLE AVENUEMAPLE AVENUEWALNUT AVENUEMAGNOLIA AVENUESPRUCE AVENUESPRUCE AVENUEHAWTHORNE PLACEHICKORY PLACEOLIVE AVENUESCHOOL ST.LERC H A V E N U E BEECH A V E N U E GRAND AVENUE E GRAND A V E E GRAN D A V E GRAND AV E N U EPOLETTI WAYDUBUQUE AVENUEFORBES BLVDHARBOR WAYGATEWAY BLVDGATEWAY BLVDMILLER AVENUEPALM AVENUEELM COURTLUX AVENUE VILLAGE WAY CALIFORNIA AVENUE PAR K W A Y PINE AVENUE ASPEN AVENUE ARMO U R A V E N U E BADEN AVENUE COMMERCIAL AVE RAILROAD AVE FIRST LANE SECOND LANE THIRD LANE N CANAL STREET S CANAL STREET MAYFAIR AVENUE AIRPORT BOULEVARDAIRPORT BOULEVARDS A IRPORT BLVD MITCHELL A V E UTAH AVECORPORATE D R I V E HE MLOCK AVENUE SPRUCE AVENUES AIRPO RT . HILLSIDE Spruce School Church Martin School Cypress & Pine Park Sign Hill Park Sister Cities Park Paradise Valley Park Para d i s e V a l l e y Pock e t P a r k PG&E Irish Town Greens Jack Drago P a r kTotlot Mitchell Ave Green Spot PG&ESUBSTATION Department of Public Works Colma Cre e k C a n al Colma Creek Canal City Hall Hillside Plaza Lowe’s Home Improvement South San Francisco Business Center GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD EASTERN NEIGHBORHOOD GATEWAY NEIGHBORHOOD SIGN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD PARADISE VALLEY NEIGHBORHOOD DOWNTOWN NEIGHBORHOOD LINDENVILLE NEIGHBORHOOD LEGEND 0 250 500 1000’ c N c STUDY AREA BOUNDARY RAILROAD TRACKS LESS ACTIVE RAIL SPUR EXISTING CALTRAIN STATION PROPOSED CALTRAIN PLATFORM EXTENSION AND UNDER CROSSING PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY GRAND AVENUE CORE DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL LINDEN NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER EASTERN NEIGHBORHOOD ZONES DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 SITE SITESITE 55 22 33 11 33 TO CALTRAINTO CALTRAIN TO DOWNTOWNTO DOWNTOWN TO DOWNTOWNTO DOWNTOWNPEDESTRIAN CONNECTION BUILDING ENTRY OPEN SPACE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL CORE DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE 44 55 11 22 33 CADENCE PROJECT PARCEL A UNDER CONSTRUCTION EXISTING CAL TRAIN STATION PROPOSED CAL TRAIN PLATFORM EXTENSION AND UNDERCROSSING PARCEL D UNDER CONSTRUCTION SITESITE EXISTING SITE CONDITIONS G2.0 LUX AVE CYPRESS AVETAMARACK LN EX BUILDING SITE AREA = 25,395 SF 0 5 10 20 30 0 1 2 3 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --05/13/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.Engineering, Surveying & Planning WILSEY HAM 3130 La Selva Street, Suite 100 San Mateo, CA 94403 650.349.2151 wilseyham.com C0.01 SITE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY CYPRESS AVELUX AVE TAMARACK LN REMOVE & REPLACE PCC SIDEWALK, CURB& GUTTER REMOVE & REPLACE ACCESSIBLE CURB RAMP ROW WIDTH 25.0'ROWWIDTH20.0'ROW WIDTH 25.0' D DCYPRESS AVELUX AVE TAMARACK LN RETAIL 1500 SF +26.00 99 STALLS + 27.60 + 25.80 + 26.00 + 28.46 (E)+ 24.11 (E) + 27.80 2%2% + 28.53 7.0% 4.5% + 25.00 + 26.00 + 24.12 + 30.19 +26.18 8.3% +27.80 + 27.80 + 26.14 LOBBY / LOUNGE 720 SF +27.80 UTILITY 235 SF +28.25ELECTRICAL 375 SF +27.80 UTILITY 470 SF +29.85 + 29.85 FLEXIBLE 750 SF +24.40 TRASH 670 SF +24.12 LOBBY 515 SF +24.40 UTILITY 120 SF +25.00 UTILITY / STORAGE 315 SF +26.00 8.3% MAIL / PACKAGE 445 SF +26.00 + 24.50 ROLL-UP GATESROLL-UP GATES EVEV EV EV LEASING 380 SF +26.18 + 26.18 + 26.00UP + 24.50 18'9'22'-6"17'-1" 14'-3"43'-2"22'-11"22'-6"32'-1"47'-3"29'-9"20'-6"19'-9"15'19'-4" 46'-5" 22'-8"25'22'-8"22'-8"25'18'DRIVEWAYDRIVEWAY RIGHT TURN ONLYRIGHT TURN ONLY4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX PLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX25'-10"4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOX4.8%+ 26.90 ROWWIDTH30.0'DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --05/13/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.Engineering, Surveying & Planning WILSEY HAM 3130 La Selva Street, Suite 100 San Mateo, CA 94403 650.349.2151 wilseyham.com C1.00 SITE BOUNDARY PLAN 0 5 10 20 30 0 1 2 3 + 27.60 + 25.80+ 28.46 (E)+ 24.11 (E) + 28.53 + 24.12 + 30.19 + 27.80 + 26.14+ 29.85 + 24.50 + 26.18 UP4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX PLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOXCYPRESS AVELUX AVE TAMARACK LN FIBER ROLL (TYP)CYPRESS AVELUX AVE TAMARACK LN D DINLET PROTECTION (TYP) 0 5 10 20 30 0 1 2 3 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.C2.00 EROSION CONTROL PLAN RETAIL 1500 SF +26.00 99 STALLS + 27.60 + 25.80 + 26.00 + 28.46 (E)+ 24.11 (E) + 27.80 2%2% + 28.53 7.0% 4.5% + 25.00 + 26.00 + 24.12 + 30.19 +26.18 8.3% +27.80 + 27.80 + 26.14 LOBBY / LOUNGE 720 SF +27.80 UTILITY 235 SF +28.25ELECTRICAL 375 SF +27.80 UTILITY 470 SF +29.85 + 29.85 FLEXIBLE 750 SF +24.40 TRASH 670 SF +24.12 LOBBY 515 SF +24.40 UTILITY 120 SF +25.00 UTILITY / STORAGE 315 SF +26.00 8.3% MAIL / PACKAGE 445 SF +26.00 + 24.50 ROLL-UP GATESROLL-UP GATES EVEV EV EV LEASING 380 SF +26.18 + 26.18 + 26.00UP + 24.50 18'9'22'-6"17'-1" 14'-3"43'-2"22'-11"22'-6"32'-1"47'-3"29'-9"20'-6"19'-9"15'19'-4" 46'-5" 22'-8"25'22'-8"22'-8"25'18'DRIVEWAYDRIVEWAY RIGHT TURN ONLYRIGHT TURN ONLY4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX PLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX25'-10"4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOX4.8%+ 26.90 CYPRESS AVELUX AVE TAMARACK LN TC 29.4 FL 29.0 MATCH EX TC 26.4 FL 25.9TC 28.4 FL 27.9 TC 24.7 FL 24.4 TC 24.4 FL 23.9 TC 24.3 FL 24.8 TC 23.9 FL 23.4 FP 25.8FP 27.6 BOW 28.5 BOW 27.8 BOW 26.1 BOW 24.7 BOW 24.1 BOW 24.1 TC 24.0 FL 23.5 FP 28.5 BOW 29.7 D DNEW SDMH RIM 25.5± NEW SDI TG 23.5±0 5 10 20 30 0 1 2 3 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --05/13/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.Engineering, Surveying & Planning WILSEY HAM 3130 La Selva Street, Suite 100 San Mateo, CA 94403 650.349.2151 wilseyham.com GRADING PLAN C3.00 RETAIL 1500 SF +26.00 99 STALLS + 27.60 + 25.80 + 26.00 + 28.46 (E)+ 24.11 (E) + 27.80 2%2% + 28.53 7.0% 4.5% + 25.00 + 26.00 + 24.12 + 30.19 +26.18 8.3% +27.80 + 27.80 + 26.14 LOBBY / LOUNGE 720 SF +27.80 UTILITY 235 SF +28.25ELECTRICAL 375 SF +27.80 UTILITY 470 SF +29.85 + 29.85 FLEXIBLE 750 SF +24.40 TRASH 670 SF +24.12 LOBBY 515 SF +24.40 UTILITY 120 SF +25.00 UTILITY / STORAGE 315 SF +26.00 8.3% MAIL / PACKAGE 445 SF +26.00 + 24.50 ROLL-UP GATESROLL-UP GATES EVEV EV EV LEASING 380 SF +26.18 + 26.18 + 26.00UP + 24.50 18'9'22'-6"17'-1" 14'-3"43'-2"22'-11"22'-6"32'-1"47'-3"29'-9"20'-6"19'-9"15'19'-4" 46'-5" 22'-8"25'22'-8"22'-8"25'18'DRIVEWAYDRIVEWAY RIGHT TURN ONLYRIGHT TURN ONLY4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX PLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX25'-10"4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOX4.8%+ 26.90 PROP LIGHT POLE DESIGNED BY OTHERS (TYP) EX LIGHT POLE (TYP)15" SD 15" SD CYPRESS AVELUX AVE TAMARACK LN D ~ ~~~DPROP SS SERVICE POC TO BLDG PROP 4'x8' MEDIA FILTER INSTALL SDI BUBBLE UP STRUCTURE PROP SD SERVICE POC TO BLDG WYEE CONNECTION PROP DW POC TO BLDG WM FROM CALWATER PROP SDMH PROP FS POC TP BLDG CONNECT DOMESTIC & FIRE SERVICES TO EX 6" W INSTALL NEW STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN CONVERT EX SDI TO SDMH INSTALL NEW SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT INSTALL 27 LF OF 12" SD PIPE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --05/13/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.Engineering, Surveying & Planning WILSEY HAM 3130 La Selva Street, Suite 100 San Mateo, CA 94403 650.349.2151 wilseyham.com UTILITY PLAN C4.01 0 5 10 20 30 0 1 2 3 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 AERIAL PERSPECTIVE VIEW A1.0 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.RETAIL 1500 SF +26.00 99 STALLS + 26.00+ 27.80 2%2% 7.0% 4.5% + 25.00 + 26.00 +26.18 8.3% TAMARACK LN +27.80 LOBBY / LOUNGE 720 SF +27.80 UTILITY 235 SF +28.25ELECTRICAL 375 SF +27.80 UTILITY 470 SF +29.85 FLEXIBLE 750 SF +24.40 TRASH 670 SF +24.12 LOBBY 515 SF +24.40 UTILITY 120 SF +25.00 UTILITY / STORAGE 315 SF +26.00 8.3% MAIL / PACKAGE 445 SF +26.00 ROLL-UP GATESROLL-UP GATES LUX AVE CYPRESS AVEEVEV EV EV 3'-6"LEASING 380 SF +26.18 + 26.00 6'50'-3"36'-812"UP+ 24.5015'-6"18'12'-8"18'9'13'-8"12'-912" 13'-912" 22'-6"17'-1" 14'-3"43'-2"22'-11"22'-6"32'-1"47'-3"34'-11"29'-7"29'-9"20'-6"19'-9"15'19'-4"23'-11"105'-11"9'-6"23'-8"25'46'-5"25'52'-5" 22'-8"25'22'-8"22'-8"25'18'DRIVEWAYDRIVEWAY 11' 14'-10" RIGHT TURN ONLYRIGHT TURN ONLY4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX PLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOXPLC BOX25'-10"4LP W/PIT10 CARS4LP W/PIT10 CARSPLC BOXPLC BOX3'-11"4.8%4.8%5'-5"+ 26.90 N A-2002LEVEL 1 SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" LEVEL 1 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 1 A2.0 VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE AS NOTED DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.52 STORAGE 2940 SF BIKE ROOM 380 SF 26 BIKES TAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVE2'-012"2'6'2'DN6'5'7' HEIGHT, TYP. N A-2012LEVEL 1.5 SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" LEVEL 1.5 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 1.5 A2.1 AS NOTED VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.1BR AMENITY 1480 SF 2BR 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR COURTYARD 3700 SF S TAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVE1BR+DEN 22'-9"22'-2"5'-7"5'-7"5'-7"5'-7"5'-7"22'-8"22'-8"22'-2"22' 17'-6"7'-2"8'-8"10'-10"11'-5"24'22'-2"16'-9"5'-9" 7'-5" 10'-1" 3'-8" 51'-7"32'-9"43'-5"79'-112"8'-8"10'-10"11'-5"89'-412"HORIZONTAL EXIT 20'29'-1112" PASSAGEWAY PASSAGEWAY 20' 14'-8" N A-2012LEVEL 2 SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" LEVEL 2 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 2 A2.2 AS NOTED VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.2BR 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR 2BR 1BR+DEN S 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR TAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVE10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'6'10'-11"11'-6"6'10'-11"11'-6"15'-10"6'6'15'-10"10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-9"2'-4" N A-2022LEVELS 3-5 SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" LEVELS 3-5 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - LEVELS 3-5 A2.3 AS NOTED VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.2BR 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN OPEN TO BELOW1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR 1BR+DEN S 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR TAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVE10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'6'10'-11"11'-6"6'10'-11"11'-6"15'-10"6'6'15'-10"10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-9"2'-4" N A-2032LEVEL 6 SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" LEVEL 6 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 6 A2.4 AS NOTED VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.2BR 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 2BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR 1BR+DEN S 1BR+DEN 1BR+DEN 1BR TAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVETERRACE 350 SF AMENITY 400 SF 8'-3"8'-8"24'-11"25'-312"6'-9"6'-212"18'-81 2"21'-512"10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'6'10'-11"11'-6"6'10'-11"11'-6"15'-10"6'6'15'-10"10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-4"6'10'-9"2'-4"2'-5"2'-5" N A-2042LEVEL 7 SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" LEVEL 7 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 7 A2.5 AS NOTED VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.LOWER ROOF ELEVATOR OVERRUN ELEVATOR OVERRUN STAIRS TO ROOF STAIRS OVERRUN TAMARACK LN LUX AVE CYPRESS AVEN A-2052ROOF LEVEL SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" ROOF LEVELDESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 BUILDING PLAN - ROOF LEVEL A2.6 AS NOTED VERTICAL CIRCULATION AMENITY AREA LEGEND UNIT RETAIL SPACE DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT = 85' +111.75 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT = 85'-0"LEVEL 6 LEVEL 7 ROOF LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 22' - 6" 32' - 6" 42' - 6" 52' - 6" 62' - 6" 72' - 6" 83' - 6"BUILDING HEIGHT TO ROOF = 84'-8"⅊⅊10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"11'-0"A1-1B1-3C1-3 A1-1 A1-2 A1-3A1-4 B1-2B1-1 A2-1C1-1 C1-2A1-4 BUILDING HEIGHT TO ELEVATORS & STAIR TOWERS = 90'-4"12'-0"10'-6"87'-0"GRADE PLANE AVERAGE+26.75 CYPRESS AVE. LEVEL 1 12' - 0" LEVEL 1.56'-0"Brick Veneer A1-1 A2-1 Stucco - Tan Retractable Swing DoorsB1-3 Vinyl Window MATERIALS Aluminum StorefrontB1-1 B1-2 A1-2 Stucco - Brown A1-3 Stucco - Dark Brown A1-4 Stucco - Grey C1-1 Sun Shade - Metal Awning C1-2 Metal Handrail C1-3 Glass Guardrail D1-1 Perforated Metal Panel A-3001NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" NORTH ELEVATION DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED KEY MAP 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 NORTH ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.0 AS NOTED DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.GRADE PLANE AVERAGE DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT = 85' +111.75 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT = 85'-0"LEVEL 6 LEVEL 7 ROOF LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 1 12' - 0" 22' - 6" 32' - 6" 42' - 6" 52' - 6" 62' - 6" 72' - 6" 83' - 6"BUILDING HEIGHT TO ROOF = 84'-8"⅊⅊12'-0"10'-6"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"11'-0"87'-0"TAMARACK LN.LUX AVE. LEVEL 1.5 C1-1A1-1A1-1A1-2 A1-3 A1-4A2-1 B1-1 B1-2 B1-3C1-2 C1-3A1-4 BUILDING HEIGHT TO ELEVATORS & STAIR TOWERS = 90'-4"6'-0"+26.75 Brick Veneer A1-1 A2-1 Stucco - Tan Retractable Swing DoorsB1-3 Vinyl Window MATERIALS Aluminum StorefrontB1-1 B1-2 A1-2 Stucco - Brown A1-3 Stucco - Dark Brown A1-4 Stucco - Grey C1-1 Sun Shade - Metal Awning C1-2 Metal Handrail C1-3 Glass Guardrail D1-1 Perforated Metal Panel A-3011EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" EAST ELEVATION DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED KEY MAP 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 EAST ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.1 AS NOTED DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.GRADE PLANE AVERAGE+26.75 DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT = 85' +111.75 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT = 85'-0"LEVEL 6 LEVEL 7 ROOF LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 1 12' - 0" 22' - 6" 32' - 6" 42' - 6" 52' - 6" 62' - 6" 72' - 6" 83' - 6"BUILDING HEIGHT TO ROOF = 84'-8"⅊⅊12'-0"10'-6"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"11'-0"87'-0"CYPRESS AVE. LEVEL 2 LEVEL 1.5 A1-1A1-2 A1-3 A2-1B1-2 C1-2D1-1 BUILDING HEIGHT TO ELEVATORS & STAIR TOWERS = 90'-4"19'-0"30'-1"4'-11"36'-6"5'-0"25'-1"4'-0"20'-1"19'-6"8'-0" GARAGE ENTRY GARAGE ENTRYUTILITY/ STORAGE UTILITY TRASH 9'-2"STAIR TOWER 92' - 8" Brick Veneer A1-1 A2-1 Stucco - Tan Retractable Swing DoorsB1-3 Vinyl Window MATERIALS Aluminum StorefrontB1-1 B1-2 A1-2 Stucco - Brown A1-3 Stucco - Dark Brown A1-4 Stucco - Grey C1-1 Sun Shade - Metal Awning C1-2 Metal Handrail C1-3 Glass Guardrail D1-1 Perforated Metal Panel A-3021SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" SOUTH ELEVATION DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED KEY MAP 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 SOUTH ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.2 AS NOTED DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.GRADE PLANE AVERAGE DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT = 85' +111.75 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT = 85'-0"LEVEL 6 LEVEL 7 ROOF LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 1 12' - 0" 22' - 6" 32' - 6" 42' - 6" 52' - 6" 62' - 6" 72' - 6" 83' - 6"BUILDING HEIGHT TO ROOF = 84'-8"⅊⅊12'-0"10'-6"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"11'-0"87'-0"TAMARACK LN.LUX AVE. LEVEL 1.5 A1-1 A1-2A1-3 A2-1C1-2 B1-2 BUILDING HEIGHT TO ELEVATORS & STAIR TOWERS = 90'-4"9'-2"STAIR TOWER 92' - 8" +26.75 Brick Veneer A1-1 A2-1 Stucco - Tan Retractable Swing DoorsB1-3 Vinyl Window MATERIALS Aluminum StorefrontB1-1 B1-2 A1-2 Stucco - Brown A1-3 Stucco - Dark Brown A1-4 Stucco - Grey C1-1 Sun Shade - Metal Awning C1-2 Metal Handrail C1-3 Glass Guardrail D1-1 Perforated Metal Panel A-3031WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" WEST ELEVATIONDESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.AS NOTED KEY MAP 0 15 30 60 90 08/06/2021 WEST ELEVATION & PERSPECTIVE A3.3 AS NOTED DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 COLORS AND MATERIALS A3.4 A1-1 STUCCO TAN A1-2 STUCCO BROWN A1-3 STUCCO DARK BROWN A1-4 STUCCO GREY A2-1 BRICK VENEER B1-1 STOREFRONT ALUMINUM C1-2 METAL HANDRAIL C1-1 SUN SHADE METAL AWNING C1-3 GLASS GUARDRAIL B1-2 VINYL WINDOW B1-3 RETRACTABLE SWING DOORS COLORS AND MATERIAL WINDOWS AND STOREFRONT RAILING AND TRELLIS D1-1 PERFORATED METAL PANELS GARAGE SCREEN SYSTEM DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.GRADE PLANE AVERAGE+26.75 DOWNTOWN TRANSIT CORE BUILDING HEIGHT LIMIT = 85' +111.75 MAX BUILDING HEIGHT = 85'-0"UNIT LEVEL 6 LEVEL 7 ROOF LEVEL 5 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 1 12' - 0" 22' - 6" 32' - 6" 42' - 6" 52' - 6" 62' - 6" 72' - 6" 83' - 6"BUILDING HEIGHT TO ROOF = 84'-8"UNIT UNITUNIT UNITUNIT UNITUNIT UNITUNIT UNITUNIT BIKE / STORAGE UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT UNIT LOWEST FLOOR LEVEL +24.1' EXISTING HIGHEST POINT+30.19' ⅊⅊ LOUNGE +24.40' PARKING +26.00' PARKING +27.80'5'-5"10'-6"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"10'-0"11'-0"CYPRESS AVE.18'-1"19'-11"LEVEL 1.5TYPE IACONSTRUCTIONTYPE IIIACONSTRUCTIONMAIL / PACKAGE +26.00' HIGHEST LEVEL OF OCCUPIED FLOOR ABOVE LOWEST LEVEL OF FIRE DEPARTMENT VEHICLE ACCESS IS: 72.8' TO LOWEST FLOOR LEVEL 73.0' TO LOWEST ADJACENT CURB 73.6' TO LOWEST ADJACENT STREET LOWEST ADJACENT STREET ELEVATION +23.3'12'-0"87'-0"LOWEST CURB GRADE +23.9' Wd 5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO 5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO 5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO 5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO 5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO5A 250V ACTZ-8107REAL TEND NC01 20NCN003 40NO 18' Wu Wu MIN. 6'-6 34 " Wu 58 " 6'-8 12 " 5'-3 14 " 5'-4 78 " A-4001BUILDING SECTION AA SCALE: 1" = 10' - 0" @ 22" x 34" BUILDING SECTION AA DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.1" = 10' - 0" KEY MAP AA AA' 0 15 30 60 90 CITY LIFT ELEVATIONCITY LIFT SECTION 08/06/2021 BUILDING SECTION AA A4.0 AS NOTED DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.1A BEDROOM 11'-6" x 10'-9"LIVING ROOM 17'-9" x 10'-4" DINING KITCHEN BATHROOM W/D CC BB BB DW P REF DEN 10'-1" x 8'-1" CLOSET REMOVABLE ISLAND 22'-4"34'-3"1A2 BEDROOM 13'-0" x 10'-4" LIVING ROOM 15'-5" x 10'-9" DINING KITCHEN BATHROOM W/D CC BB BB DW P REF DEN 10'-1" x 8'-1" CLOSET REMOVABLE ISLAND 22'-4"31'-9"3'1A3 BEDROOM 11'-6" x 10'-9" LIVING ROOM 17'-9" x 10'-4" DINING KITCHEN BATHROOM W/D CC BB BB DW P REF DEN 10'-1" x 8'-1" CLOSET REMOVABLE ISLAND 11'-112"11'-212"40'-1"1B BATHROOM CLOSET REF P LIVING ROOM 14'-1" x 13'-8" KITCHEN BEDROOM 13'-6" x 11'-5" DEN 9'-0" x 9'-0" CC W/D BB DW BB 19'-534"11'-9"34'-3"5'-10"BBBBDWP REF W/D CC CLOSET BATHROOM1C DINING BEDROOM 11'-11" x 10'-11" LIVING ROOM 17'-6" x 14'-0" 39'-834"19'-034"13'-814"S1 LIVING ROOM CLOSET W/D BB BB DW P REF CC BATHROOM 17'-2"32'-9"1A UNIT RSF: 765 SF 1A2 UNIT RSF: 730 SF DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.1A3 UNIT RSF: 830 SF 1B UNIT RSF: 1,060 SF 1C UNIT RSF: 800 SF S1 UNIT RSF: 560 SF A-500 UNIT PLANS 3/16" = 1' - 0" 08/06/2021 UNIT PLANS A5.0 3/16” = 1’-0” @ 22” x 34” DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.2B BATHROOM BEDROOM 11'-6" x 11'-3" CLOSET BATHROOM M.BEDROOM 12'-2" x 12'-0" DW REF P BB BB LIVING ROOM 21'-8" x 13'-8" KITCHENCLOSET CCW/D DINING 35'34'-11"2CLIVING ROOM17'-1" x 15'-8"M.BEDROOM13'-11" x 11'-0"BEDROOM13'-8" x 11'-4"BATHROOMBATHROOMCLOSETCCDEN14'-0" x 7'-7"PREFBBBBDWW/DCLOSETBALCONYDININGSTORAGE7'-10" x 7'-9"TV21'-3"40'-1"24'-334"9'-4"2A BATHROOM CLOSETBB DW REF P LIVING ROOM 14'-1" x 13'-8" KITCHEN M.BEDROOM 14'-7" x 11'-0" BEDROOM 13'-6" x 11'-5" BATHROOM CLOSET DEN 9'-0" x 9'-0" CC W/D BB 26'-1034"11'-9"5'-10"34'-3"2C1LIVING ROOM17'-1" x 15'-8"BEDROOM13'-8" x 11'-4"BATHROOMBATHROOMCLOSETCCDEN14'-0" x 7'-7"PREFBBBBDWW/DCLOSETDININGSTORAGE7'-10" x 7'-9"M.BEDROOM12'-1" x 11'-0"TVBALCONY27'-1"34'-3"24'-334"9'-4"2A UNIT RSF: 1,370 SF DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.2B UNIT RSF: 1,220 SF 2C UNIT RSF: 1,610 SF 2C1 UNIT RSF: 1,510 SF A-500 UNIT PLANS 3/16" = 1' - 0" 08/06/2021 UNIT PLANS A5.1 3/16” = 1’-0” @ 22” x 34” DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 PRECEDENT IMAGES IM1.0 DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATIONSheet Title: Scale: Job No. Drawn By: Date: Sheet No: 20028 THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS INFORMATION PROPRIETARY TO STUDIO T-SQ, INC. AND IS FURNISHED IN CONFIDENCE FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF EVALUATION OR REVIEW. THIS DOCUMENT OR ITS CONTENTS MAY NOT BE USED FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE AND MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISCLOSED TO OTHERS WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF STUDIO T-SQ., INC. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, COPYRIGHT 2010. : Architecture : Planning : Urban Design --01/21/2021BERTOLUCCI PARCEL209, 213 LUX AVE & 421 CYPRESS AVESOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA.08/06/2021 PRECEDENT IMAGES IM1.1 PLANTER POTSACCENT PAVINGTREE GRATEPLANTER POTSCITY STANDARD BIKE RACKSACCENT PAVINGPLANTER WALLS GROUNDFLOOROUTDOOR DINING AREAPODIUM AND ROOFDECKWATER FOUNTAINTRELLISSTREET TREE IN PLANTER POTLOUNGE FURNITURELOUNGE FURNITURE BBQ COUNTERPLANTER WALLSPEDESTRIAN SCALE LIGHT POLE FRUITLESS OLIVE TREENEW ZEALAND CHRISTMAS TREEBRIGHT 'N TIGHT CAROLINA LAUREL Pedestrian Pole LightSternberg Gallery 1960 on 16' Pole Downlight Bega 66 976 Catenary Light Bega 84 405 Wall Light Bega 33 163 Custom Finishes11• CM Custom Match• OI Old Iron• RT Rust• WBR Weathered Brown• CD Cedar• WBK Weathered Black• TT Two Tone 11 Custom colors require upcharge.Sternberg Select Finishes• VG Verde Green• SI Swedish Iron• OWGT Old World Gray TexturedSpecificationsFixtureThe 1960 Gallery series is a medium scale, decorative downlight fixture with a spun aluminum shade. The dome is available with two types of shades: straight (S) and flared (F) styles. The luminaire measures 16-1/2” outside diameter with a variety of heights depending on the options. The Luminaire shall be UL listed in US and Canada.ElectricalHID ballasts shall be high power factor with lamp starting down to -30 degrees C. Medium base and mogul base porcelain sockets are 4KV rated. The ballast/socket assembly shall be pre-wired when ballast is located in the fit-ter. Ballasts shall be DOE EISA compliant.Optical OptionsNIGHTSKY® STAR-SHIELD® Sealed Roof Optics shall be a roof mounted, an IP66 rated reflector systems which eliminate up light and provide cut-off distribution. The reflector cavity shall be made of a sealed, one piece hydro formed reflector with semi specular finish. Distribution types 2, 3, 4 and 5 are available with a horizontally mounted lamp. Mounting Configuration (Click here to link to mounting configuration specification page)• 1W • 2A90 • 4A • SH441• 1A • 3A • 1AM • CH441• 2A • 3A90 • 2AM W = Wall Mount A = Arm Mount AM = Arm Mid-Mount PB = Pier Base SH = Stem Hung CH = Chain Hung 1 Include overall drop length in inches after designation for Stem/Chain application (IE: CH44-48”)Fixtures• 1960Shade Edge• S (Straight Edge) • F (Flared Edge)Top Feature• BF (Base Fixture)• BT (Blank Top)• HW (Horizontal Window)• GW (Glow Window)• CW (Custom Window)• BTSR (Blank Top Solid Rings)• GTSR (Glow Top Solid Rings)• GR (Glow Rings, Clear)• GRB (Glow Rings, Blue)• GRG (Glow Rings, Green)Ballast2, 3• 35HPS4 • 100HPS • 100MHP• 50HPS • 50MHP •INCAND• 70HPS • 70MHP (100w MAX) 2 Medium base sockets standard.3 Metal halide systems are pulse start.4 35HPS is 120 volt only. Volts• 120 • 208 • 240 • 277 • 347 • 480 Socket• MED Optic (IP66 SEALED OPTIC)• RO25 • RO3 • RO45 • RO5 5 MED base socket only.Lens• FG (Flat Glass) • FFG (Frosted Flat Glass) • SG (Sag Glass) • FSG (Frosted Sag Glass) • OPL (Opal Acrylic) 6 6 RO5 only, Type 5. Options (Click here to view accessories sheet)• R7 3-Pin control receptacle only• PE8 Twist-Lock Photocontrol (120V-277V)• PE37 Twist-Lock Photocontrol (347V)• PE47 Twist-Lock Photocontrol (480V)• SC7 Shorting Cap• PEC Electronic Button Photocontrol (120V-277V)• PEC4 Electronic Button Photocontrol (480V)• FHS9 Single Fuse and Holder (120V, 277V & 347V)• FHD8 Double Fuse and Holder (208V, 240V & 480V)• HSHS Standard Horizontal Hangstraight, Spike Finial• HSHN Standard Horizontal Hangstraight, No Finial• HSHB Standard Horizontal Hangstraight, Ball Finial• EZ Vertical Hangstraight, Large, “EZ” Mount• HSS 120° House Side Shield 7 For use with “HSH_” hang-straight only.8 Requires control receptacle.9 Ships loose for installation in base.Arm (Click here to link to arm specification page) See Arms & Wall Brackets specification sheets.• OA • OES • OI • OQ • OBS • OFS • OJ • HPT-S • OC • OGS • OL • GLPT-S • ODS • OH • ONS • CBAPole (Click here to link to pole specification page)See Pole specification sheets.Finish (Click here to view paint finish sheet)Standard Finishes10• BKT Black Textured• WHT White Textured• PGT Park Green Textured• ABZT Architectural Medium Bronze Textured• DBT Dark Bronze Textured10 Smooth finishes are available upon request8/18 STERNBERG LIGHTING. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PRINTED IN THE USA.800-621-3376555 Lawrence Ave., Roselle, IL [email protected] next pageHID1960 GALLERY SERIESJOB NAMEFIXTURE TYPEMEMOEPA0.50 (ft2)WEIGHT19 LBS5 YEAR WARRANTYUL LISTEDCLICK FOR FAQ’sIP RATINGBUILD A PART NUMBERORDERING EXAMPLE: 2A-1960-S-GR-100HPS120-MED-RO5-OPL-PEC-HSV/ONPT/3212P4/BKTMounting Config.FixturesShade EdgeTop FeatureBallast Volts Socket Optic LensOption Control ReceptacleOption ControlOption FuseOption HangstraightOption House Side ShieldArmSee Arm Spec SheetsPoleSee Pole Spec SheetsFinish 1202082402773474808/18 STERNBERG LIGHTING. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. PRINTED IN THE USA.800-621-3376555 Lawrence Ave., Roselle, IL [email protected] GALLERY SERIESPhotocontrolsButton Style: The photocontrol shall be mounted on the fixture and pre-wired to the ballast. The electronic button type photocontrol is instant on with a 5-10 sec-ond turn off, and shall turn on at 1.5 footcandles with a turn-off at 2-3 footcandles. Photocontrol is 120-277 volt and warranted for 6 years. See pole spec sheet for pole mounted version.WarrantyFive-year limited warranty. See product and finish warranty guide for details.FinishRefer to website for details. Fixture Examples1960-S-BF-OPL1960-S-GTSR-OPL1960-F-CW-OPLSStraightFFlared1960-F-GW-OPL1960-S-BTSR-OPL1960-S-BT-FG1960-S-GR-OPL1960-S-HW-OPL14-1/2” 17-1/8” 17-1/8” 17-1/8” Optical Systems16-1/2”16-1/2”16-1/2”16-1/2”16-1/2”16-1/2”16-1/2”16-1/2”Shades17” 17” 17” 17” HIDR02 R03 R04 R05Roof OpticOptical Systems LO3LO5Louver OpcRE3RE5RefractorFMFrostMissiChimnFHCFrosted Hurricane ChimneyRO2 RO3R04 RO5Roof OpcApplication LED recessed wall luminaire with unshielded light for use as location luminaires for means of way finding.Materials Luminaire housing constructed of die-cast aluminum marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy White safety glass Silicone applied robotically to plasma treated casting for increased adhesion High temperature silicone gasket Mechanically captive stainless steel fasteners Stainless steel screw clamps Composite installation housing NRTL listed to North American Standards, suitable for wet locations Protection class IP65 Weight: 1.8 lbsElectrical Operating voltage 120-277V AC Minimum start temperature -40° C LED module wattage 2.7 W System wattage 5.0 W Controlability 0-10V Color rendering index Ra > 80 Luminaire lumens 239 lumens (3000K) Lifetime at Ta=15°C 120,000 h (L70) Lifetime at Ta=40°C 78,000 h (L70)LED color temperature 2700K - Product number + K27 3000K - Product number + K3 3500K - Product number + K35 400K - Product number + K4BEGA can supply you with suitable LED replacement modules for up to 20 years after the purchase of LED luminaires - see website for detailsFinish All BEGA standard finishes are matte, textured polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness.Available colors Black (BLK) White (WHT) RAL: Bronze (BRZ) Silver (SLV) CUS:LED recessed wall luminaires - unshielded location luminairesBEGA 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805) 684-0533 [email protected] to the dynamic nature of lighting products and the associated technologies, luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA North America. For the most current technical data, please refer to bega-us.com © copyright BEGA 2018 Updated 01/21/19Type:BEGA Product:Project:Modified:LED recessed wall luminaires · unshielded location luminaires LED A B C33 1632.7 W10 1⁄8 2 3⁄4 5ABCBCFully enclosed luminaire with installation housing ensures seamless integration and weathertight operation.5°BCAApplication LED pendant luminaire for catenary systems with shielded, downward directed light distribution. The cable hanger system is suitable of transverse suspension systems and longitudinal chain systems. The luminaires are designed specifically to illuminate plazas, passageways and pedestrian zones. Materials Luminaire housing constructed of die-cast marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy Stainless steel hanger clamp suitable for 3/16” to 7/16” diameter cable adjustable up to 5° off level Cable glands will accept electrical supply cable with diameter 3/8” to 1/2” Clear safety glass Reflector made of pure anodized aluminum High temperature silicone gasket Mechanically captive stainless steel fastenersNRTL listed to North American Standards, suitable for wet locations Protection class IP 65 Effective projection area: 1.0 sq. ft. Weight: 14.8 lbsElectrical Operating voltage     120-277V AC Minimum start temperature   -30° C LED module wattage   35.7 W System wattage     40.0 W  Controllability     0-10V dimmable Color rendering index   Ra > 80 Luminaire lumens     4,207 lumens (4000K) Lifetime at Ta = 15° C   > 500,000 h (L70) Lifetime at Ta = 30° C   269,000 h (L70)LED color temperature 4000K - Product number + K4  3500K - Product number + K35  3000K - Product number + K3  2700K - Product number + K27BEGA can supply you with suitable LED replacement modules for up to 20 years after the purchase of LED luminaires - see website for detailsFinish All BEGA standard finishes are matte, textured polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness.Available colors   Black (BLK)   White (WHT)  RAL:   Bronze (BRZ)    Silver (SLV)  CUS:LED pendant luminaire for catenary systems - shielded lightBEGA 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805) 684-0533 [email protected] to the dynamic nature of lighting products and the associated technologies, luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA North America. For the most current technical data, please refer to bega-us.com © copyright BEGA 2018 Updated 08/06/18Type:BEGA Product:Project:Modified:LED pendant luminaire · for catenary systems LEDA B C84 40535.7 W7 1⁄219 1⁄8 20 3⁄4Application This compact LED ceiling mounted downlight is designed for down lighting atriums, canopies, passages, and other interior and exterior locations featuring a symmetrical narrow beam light distrubtion. Materials Luminaire housing constructed of die-cast marine grade, copper free (≤ 0.3% copper content) A360.0 aluminum alloy Clear safety glass Reflector made of pure anodized aluminum High temperature silicone gasketNRTL listed to North American Standards, suitable for wet locations Protection class IP 65 Weight: 2.2 lbsElectrical Operating voltage     120-277V AC Minimum start temperature   -30° C LED module wattage 4.9 W System wattage     7 W  Controllability     0-10V dimmable Color rendering index   Ra > 80 Luminaire lumens     557 lumens (3000K) Lifetime at Ta = 15° C   >500,000 h (L70) Lifetime at Ta = 40° C   425,000 h (L70)LED color temperature 4000K - Product number + K4  3500K - Product number + K35  3000K - Product number + K3 (EXPRESS)  2700K - Product number + K27BEGA can supply you with suitable LED replacement modules for up to 20 years after the purchase of LED luminaires - see website for detailsFinish All BEGA standard finishes are matte, textured polyester powder coat with minimum 3 mil thickness.Available colors   Black (BLK)   White (WHT)  RAL:   Bronze (BRZ)    Silver (SLV)  CUS:LED ceiling mounted downlight - narrow beamβ = Beam angleBEGA 1000 BEGA Way, Carpinteria, CA 93013 (805) 684-0533 [email protected] to the dynamic nature of lighting products and the associated technologies, luminaire data on this sheet is subject to change at the discretion of BEGA North America. For the most current technical data, please refer to bega-us.com © copyright BEGA 2018 Updated 07/11/18Type:BEGA Product:Project:Modified:LED ceiling mounted downlight · narrow beam LEDβ A B66 9764.9 W24 °5 4 3⁄8AB SMRH:4834-6168-6516.3 -1- Incentive Program/Community Benefits Proposal Bertolucci’s Project August 6, 2021 The South San Francisco Downtown Station Area Specific Plan (DSASP) was adopted in February of 2015. The DSASP’s goal was to guide future development in downtown; it provides a blueprint for future change and improvements in downtown and adjoining areas. The business that occupied the site for 93 years would be considered a “legacy” business. Bertolucci’s was established by the Bertolucci family in 1928. Peter Sodini bought the restaurant in 2005 and ran it successfully. In March 2020, due to numerous factors, Peter decided to temporarily close the restaurant. He decided in May 2021 to redevelop the site with a new building, which would contain a smaller restaurant space, as well 99 dwelling units and onsite parking. There are several benefits—both codified and not—that will be gained as part of this proposed development. A. Incentive Program The proposed 99 dwelling units equates to roughly 169 du/acre, which is above the base density of 80 du/acre and below the maximum density of 180 du/acre allowed by the ordinance. The following is an explanation of benefits and relevant goals and guiding policies in the DSASP to support our density increase request. 1. Public Art and Historic Recognition As part of the project, the applicant will install a plaque on the wall along Cypress Avenue, recognizing the old Bertolucci’s site, its founders, and its significance to downtown, South San Francisco. Moreover, a representative and respectful version of the existing “Bertolucci’s” neon sign will be included in an appropriately scaled form into the new building façade. The visage of this sign has tremendous importance to Mr. Sodini and the community at-large. Prior to the Cadence development, the existing sign was visible from Highway 101, attracted many customers and, over time, became iconic. Both of these endeavors were strongly encouraged by the Design Review Board (DRB) as well. The ground floor of the proposed building will have a tenant space for the new Bertolucci’s restaurant. The restaurant will have an expansive outdoor dining area, which is intended to activate the pedestrian realm. In addition to other design features, the restaurant will have a three-foot tall fence with a historic theme incorporated into the fence itself. Once the final design is developed, the applicant will share it with staff, who can then share it with the Cultural Arts Commission. SMRH:4834-6168-6516.3 -2- 2. Streetscape Enhancements The project will provide several onsite and offsite improvements along all three frontages (Cypress, Lux and Tamarack Lane). The offsite improvements also achieve the goals and guiding polices stated in the DSASP: · 3.1-G-2: Encourage development of downtown as a pedestrian friendly, mixed use activity center. As part of the project, new sidewalks, curbs and gutters will be installed along Lux and Cypress Avenues and Tamarack Lane will be repaved along the project frontages. · 3.1-G-4: Enhance linkages between downtown and transit centers and increase street connectivity with surrounding neighborhood. The current sidewalks are narrow and not pedestrian friendly. Nor are there bulb-outs at the corner of Lux and Cypress Avenues. the project intends to construct these improvements, thereby significantly enhancing the pedestrian linkages to and from, not only downtown and “Old Town”, but also the new Caltrain Station and Plaza, as well as the bus routes along Grand Avenue, Linden Avenue and Airport Boulevard. With this project and the completion of Cadence I & II, the linkages to and from downtown, along Cypress Avenue and Airport Boulevard will have been dramatically improved with new, wider sidewalks, street and pedestrian lights, safer crosswalks and bulb-outs. · Guiding Principle 17: Provide an attractive public realm that is accessible to persons of all abilities. As stated before, the project will include improvements to the public realm, including new curb ramps and crosswalks along with new sidewalks, curbs, and gutters. These improvements will enhance the safety and pedestrian experience for all those that use it. Moreover, the project will provide for the following enhancements as stated in the DSASP and Pedestrian Priority Zone: o Increased sidewalk width: The new sidewalks along both frontages will vary in width from 12’-9” to 13’-5”. o Pedestrian scaled lighting: new pedestrian lights, as well as street lights, will be installed along the project frontages. o Street trees and planting: Street trees will be installed planted at face of curb along the Lux Avenue frontage as well as the cypress Avenue frontage. In addition, planters will be installed along Cypress Avenue as well. o Street furniture and amenities: Street furniture, such as benches, bike racks, trash and recyclable receptacles will be installed along the two main frontages. o The ground floor uses achieves the goals of policy L.U.-3 – require ground floor level retail or active uses to ensure activity and vitality in the downtown. · Guiding Principle 18: Within the Pedestrian Priority Zone, implement street and intersection improvements to create a safe, attractive, and accessible environment for all pedestrians. The proposed project furthers this principle in the following ways: o There are two curb-cuts along Lux Avenue, which will be eliminated, thereby, removing any conflict with vehicles and pedestrian/bicycle movements. Also, as SMRH:4834-6168-6516.3 -3- a result, on-street parking spaces will be created with the removal of these curb- cuts. o Existing, monolithic, narrow sidewalks will be replaced with nearly 13-foot wide sidewalks with pedestrian lighting and street trees. All of these efforts achieve the goals of the DSASP and Pedestrian Master Plan (PMP) to identify opportunities and make the community more walkable. o The DSASP and PMP focus on properties within a ¼ and ½ mile radius— considered a convenient walk—of the new Caltrain Station. Moreover, Land Use Policy L.U.-4 seeks to establish the highest intensity of uses within ¼ mile of the Caltrain Station. The project site is approximately 1,100 feet or 0.2 mile from the new Caltrain Plaza. 3. Enhanced Public Spaces As part of the project, both the Lux and Cypress Avenue frontages will have predominantly active uses. The lobby, leasing office, mail room and restaurant spaces will comprise the active uses. The 1,500 square foot restaurant space will also have a substantial outdoor dining area, as well as a sidewalk dining area. These outdoor dining areas will be complimented with unique paving, three-foot tall fence enclosures pursuant to the Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) rules and other amenities, such as raised planters, heaters, lighting, umbrellas, awnings and high- grade outdoor dining furniture. These enhancements will result in the new Bertolucci’s becoming a friendly, neighborhood-serving trattoria. 4. Provision of Green Building Measures The project will provide 10% above the applicable building compliance threshold required pursuant to Title 15 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. By virtue of being built in the downtown, close to transit and amenities and the biotech employment cluster, the project will be “green”. We also anticipate the project to achieve the equivalent of LEED Silver status. The project will include the provision of electric vehicle charging stations, a stacking parking system to maximize efficiency, and will be wired for future solar. The project will also be in compliance with the City’s REACH Codes. 5. Transportation Incentives for Residents and/or Employees In addition to bicycle repair and parking facilities—both on and offsite—the developer will voluntarily offer a combination of the following: o Zipcar or rideshare membership for tenants to use on an as-needed basis o The provision of 99 Caltrain passes for the first year’s lease for each unit o The restaurant operator may offer three shared bicycles to employees SMRH:4834-6168-6516.3 -4- 6. Family-friendly Units The project will provide two bedroom and two bedroom plus den units for both the market- rate and the BMR components. These units will be interspersed throughout the building and the BMR units will have the same finishes as the market-rate units. 7. Other developer proposed incentives achieving similar benefits. Policy 3.1-G-3, states that infill development, intensification and reuse of currently underutilized sites should be promoted. The site, which is underutilized, will be redeveloped with 99 new dwelling units, adding to the City’s housing stock. These units will also help the City in meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals. As stated above, retaining Bertolucci’s will be another benefit to the residents of the City. We focused on celebrating the history of South San Francisco by keeping fragments of the historical aspects of its downtown and its blend of the adjacent industrial neighborhood, and to create a project with a strong identity that acknowledges the historic significance of the site for the local community. The original Bertolucci sign has been redesigned to a more pedestrian scale at the corner retail. For more visibility, another new Bertolucci sign, a representative and respectful version of the existing “Bertolucci’s” neon sign, will be included in an appropriately scaled form, to be located at the corner building façade right below the roof terrace. This creates a strong contrast to the neighboring developments while still retaining familiarity in the local community. The grounded brick base emphasizes pedestrian scaled details on the ground level with activations of the public realm using the corner restaurant, enlarged outdoor dining area, leasing and lounge areas. On the upper floors, the simple, straight-forward massing is further enhanced with hung balconies and the careful use of symmetry, proportions, and recesses to achieve a façade with just the right amount of variation. To further break down the roof line, the top floor has been setback with enlarged windows, contrasting colors, and balconies. Along with the ground floor leasing and lounge areas, the project provides an additional interior amenity area at the podium level that flows out to a shared, south facing, landscaped podium with seating areas and water feature. Additional amenities are brought up to the top level where the corner of Cypress and Lux Ave. is further activated with the use of an outdoor roof terrace that overlooks the view of the Bay. This corner element keeps a consistent architectural language that ties together with the ground floor corner restaurant. B. State Density Bonus Law In addition to seeking an increase in dwelling units per acre under the City’s Incentive Program, the project also will invoke State Density Bonus Law to seek incentives and/or waivers for the following development standards. SMRH:4834-6168-6516.3 -5- · Minimum usable open space requirement; · Build-to line requirement: · Corner build area requirement; · Private storage space requirement. Since the adoption of the DSASP, the City has adopted and updated an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (20.380.005). The proposed project will provide 10% low income units and 5% very low income units, for a total of 15% below market rate (BMR) units, in full compliance with the ordinance. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MINUTES CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DATE: June 15, 2021 TIME: 4:00 PM MEMBERS PRESENT: Sean Winchester, Chair David W. Nelson, Vice Chair Chris Mateo, Michael Nilmeyer & Frank Vieira MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Adena Friedman, Principal Planner Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner Gaspare Annibale, Associate Planner 1. Adminstrative Business – None 2. OWNER Peter Sodini TR. APPLICANT Studio T-Square ADDRESS 421 Cypress Avenue PROJECT NUMBER P21-0009: UP21-0002, DR21-0005, ND21-0002, RZ21-0002 & TDM21-0002 PROJECT NAME New Residential Campus (Case Planner: Stephanie Skangos) DESCRIPTION Use Permit and Design Review to construct a Mixed-Use Development, consisting of 99 residential units with ground floor parking and a 1,500 sq. ft. restaurant at 421 Cypress Avenue, 209 & 213 Lux Avenue in the Downtown Transit Core (DTC) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC), and determination that the project is consistent with the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan (DSASP) Environmental Impact Report (EIR), per the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board liked the overall proposed project. 2. The elevation facing the lane is lacking some articulation. 3. Will project include solar panels? 4. The proposed landscaping plan looks great and will work well on-site. 5. The site needs larger landscaping species in the proposed planter pots along Cypress Avenue to better scale with the height of the building. Consider incorporating larger volume planters which will support small columnar trees, such as Columnar Oak, columnar form of crabapple, columnar cherry, Crape Myrtle, or smaller such as Raphiolepis 'Majestic Beauty', along Cypress Avenue. 6. For the corner plaza, consider expanding the area to create a larger outdoor seating area by removing existing parallel parking spaces at the curb and pushing the curb out further. A larger area for more tables, chairs and other outdoor activities would allow for a more prominent usable area to attract people to the space, while also shorten crosswalk distances allowing for a safer and more accessible crosswalk area. 7. With the expanded design of item 6, consider relocating one of the proposed trees from Lux Avenue onto Cypress Avenue to better frame the corner plaza. 8. Consider incorporating an art piece, plaque, or special pavers in the pavement dedicated to the history of the area. 9. The top of the structure is well articulated and meets the setback requirements. 10. The current location of the sign is out of scale with the building and too close to the sidewalk level. Consider relocating the sign to a higher elevation for more visibility. Explore options to relocate the sign to the top of the building, similar to the existing conditions, or at the terrace level. Also consider etching the sign in the glass at the upper terrace level and have the sign light from behind with an enhancing color. 11. The Board liked the use of the bricks with the change of planes and balconies. Make sure to incorporate a thicker brick to allow for more shadow lines and visual interest. 12. Consider framing out the front entrance with trees to help create a sense of arrival to the site. 13. Consider adding a pedestrian sign over both front entrances. 14. Confirm that the exhaust shaft has efficient room for all the required duct equipment and has efficient air flow. 15. The DRB board does not recommend venting the restaurant into the street level. Consider a vertical vent hood and placed all way through the roof. 16. Consider incorporating expansion joints in the stucco along the interior side and rear facades to allow for more visual interest and shadow lines. Recommend Approval with Conditions and proceed to Planning Commission. 3. OWNER Evangelina Arapeles APPLICANT Luis Furushio ADDRESS 132 Adrian Avenue PROJECT NUMBER P21-0022: DR21-0021 PROJECT NAME Rear addition (Case Planner: Gaspare Annibale) DESCRIPTION Design Review to construct a rear addition at 132 Adrian Avenue in the Low Residential Density (RL-8) in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. The Board had the following comments: 1. The DRB board is concerned with the blank wall on the right elevation. 2. Consider a design element to add some articulation to the area. 3. Continue to carry down the blue belly band around the side of the house. 4. Add an awning over the side door. 5. Consider clad vinyl windows to match the existing dwelling unit. 6. The roof plan has some potential issues that could result in water, trash and debris collecting in the area. 7. The roof plan is too flat, and a new design needs to be resolved before DRB can approve the plan. 8. There is potential for future roof damage. 9. The existing roof plan has the potential to damage adjacent walls by not properly draining rain and debris against the level 2 walls. 10. Consider a redesign with a double, single gable or shed roof style. 11. If a cricket is built in the asphalt or a rolled roofing is considered, it may help with standing water, but it will not eliminate debris forming in the area. 12. Review the landscaping plan, as the proposed deer grass will not grow as expected in the cool SSF climate. Select another clumping grass that will work well for the site. 13. Consider alternative species as the proposed Marigolds is not a long-lasting perennial and will not survive through all the weather seasons. 14. Add a street tree, 24” box on one of the sides in the backyard. 15. Consider adding a good sealant to the redwood deck to protect the deck from the weather elements. Recommend resubmittal. 4. OWNER Felix G. Villafuerte Jr. TR. APPLICANT Henry Huang ADDRESS 1201 Baywood Drive PROJECT NUMBER P21-0025: DR21-0011 PROJECT NAME Rear Addition (Case Planner: Gaspare Annibale) DESCRIPTION Design Review to construct a rear addition to an existing single- family dwelling at 1201 Baywood Drive in the Low Residential Density (RL-8) in accordance with Title 20 of the Municipal Code and determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. The Board had the following comments: 1. The Board is concerned with the grading and drainage issues on the parcel. 2. Provide a Civil Engineering or in absence of a Civil plan, provide the site information below on the Architectural site plan to include grading and drainage plan to identify the applicable characteristics on the plan such as, but not limited to:  Site slope greater than 10% in any direction  Proposed grade changes resulting in a cut or fill exceeding 24”  Retaining walls, earth slopes or any changes to surface elevations on the subject site which alter the existing flow or surface drainage towards the adjacent properties.  Collection of drainage at the garage entry and where it will be piped.  Any improvement that changes the elevation of the existing surface within the dripline of the existing trees with a 12” diameter or greater 3. The applicant needs to provide more detail information about the garage and side yard to evaluate the design of the house. 4. Provide information about the slope and driveway that will be accessed from Sequoia. 5. Provide details about the concrete retaining wall and driveway access. 6. Include the retaining wall material and color to match with the existing dwelling unit. Match the old and new stucco colors. 7. Confirm that there will not be any trench drain issues, as a backflow preventer may be required. 8. Add a street tree on each frontage, a minimum of 2 trees, 24” box trees. Recommend resubmittal 5. OWNER Summit Holding Company Inc. APPLICANT Jake Muldoon ADDRESS 206 Utah Avenue PROJECT NUMBER P21-0031: Signs21-0019 & DR21-0014 PROJECT NAME Type “B” Sign Permit (Case Planner: Gaspare Annibale) DESCRIPTION Type "B" Sign Permit for a commercial building at 206 Utah Avenue in the Mixed Industrial (MI) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and determination that the project is categorically exempt from CEQA. Item was removed from the Agenda. 6. Miscellaneous – 2211/2245 Gellert Blvd / Sign Permits  The proposed signs are in scale with building.  Consider adding some barriers to keep sparrows from building bird nests around the connection points of signs to the buildings.  Add a long-term maintenance plan to the design.  What is the foundation for the monument sign?  Recommend the concrete foundation to come up above the grass line or make the foundation bigger to come around both of the pylons, like a big rectangular plinth.  Please update the address on the plans, as the city is incorrectly noted on the plans. Recommend Approval with Conditions and proceed to Planning Commission for approval.