Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-17-22 Planning Commission AgendaThursday, November 17, 2022 7:00 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA Virtual Meeting Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda 1 November 17, 2022Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda WELCOME If this is the first time you have been to a Commission meeting, perhaps you'd like to know a little about our procedure. This meeting is being held in accordance with the Brown Act as currently in effect under the provisions of Assembly Bill 361 which allows attendance by members of the Planning Commission, City staff and the public to participate and conduct the meeting by teleconference. Teleconference locations are not open to the public. Planning Commissioners teleconferencing: Michele Evans, Norm Faria, JulieAnn Murphy, Sam Shihadeh, Alex Tzang, Luis De Paz Fernandez, Sarah Funes. You may need to also install the Zoom app on your device prior to joining the meeting: Please click the link below to join the webinar: https://ssf-net.zoom.us/j/82584801637 Or One tap mobile: US: +16699006833,,82584801637# or +13462487799,,82584801637# Or Telephone: Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): US: +1 669 900 6833 or +1 346 248 7799 or +1 253 215 8782 or +1 929 205 6099 or +1 301 715 8592 or +1 312 626 6799 or 888 475 4499 (Toll Free) or 833 548 0276 (Toll Free) or 833 548 0282 (Toll Free) or 877 853 5257 (Toll Free) Webinar ID: 825 8480 1637 International numbers available: https://ssf-net.zoom.us/u/kcIkA6wMWz Please note that dialing in will only allow you to listen in on the meeting. To make a public comment during the Zoom Meeting session, join the meeting from your computer or mobile device, enter your name, and request to comment through the “Chat” function and a staff person will add you to the queue for comments and unmute your microphone during the comment period. In the alternative, you may also provide email comments received during the meeting will be read into the record. Under Oral Communications, at the beginning of the meeting, persons wishing to speak on any subject not on the Agenda will have 3 minutes to discuss their item. The Clerk will read the name and type of application to be heard in the order in which it appears on the Agenda. A staff person will then explain the proposal. The first person allowed to speak will be the applicant, followed by persons commenting on the proposal. The Commission has adopted a policy that applicants and their representatives have a maximum time limit of 20 minutes to make a presentation on their project. Non-applicants may speak a maximum of 3 minutes on any Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022 2 November 17, 2022Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda agenda item. Questions from Commissioners to applicants or non-applicants may be answered by using additional time. Remote Public Comments: Members of the public wishing to participate are encouraged to submit public comments in writing in advance of the meeting. The email and phone line below will be monitored during the meeting and public comments received will be read into the record. The City encourages the submission of comments by 6:00pm on the date of the Public Hearing to facilitate inclusion in the meeting record. A maximum of 3 minutes per individual comment will be read into the record. Comments that are not in compliance the Planning Commission’s rules of decorum may be summarized for the record rather than read verbatim. Email: PCcomments@ssf.net Electronic Comments received by email will be monitored during the meeting and read into the record. We ask that you limit your electronic comments so that they comply with the 3-minute time limitation for public comment. Planning Division Hotline: (650) 829-4669 Voice messages will be monitored during the meeting, and read into the record. Your voicemail should be limited so that it complies with the 3 minute time limitation for public comment. Observing the Meeting: This teleconference meeting may be observed via livestream: https://www.ssf.net/government/city-council/video-streaming-city-and-council-meetings/planning-commission Additional Meeting Materials: Additional meeting materials received or provided after initial publication of the Public Hearing agenda may be found here : https://www.ssf.net/departments/economic-community-development/planning-division/planning-commission Any interested party will have 15 calendar days from the date of an action or decision taken by the Planning Commission to appeal that action or decision to the City Council by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk as provided under Chapter 20.570 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. In the event an appeal period ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or any other day the City is closed, the appeal period shall end at the close of business on the next consecutive business day. If any interested party, other than the applicant, wishes to obtain a copy of a Notice of Action for any Planning Commission action or decision at a hearing, the interested party must file a written request of such notification with the Planning Division in advance of that Planning Commission hearing. When the Commission is not in session, we'll be pleased to answer your questions if you will go to the Planning Division, City Hall, 315 Maple Avenue or telephone (650) 877-8535 or by e-mail at planning@ssf.net. Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022 3 November 17, 2022Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Sam Shihadeh, Chairperson Alex Tzang, Vice Chairperson Norm Faria, Commissioner JulieAnn Murphy, Commissioner Michele Evans, Commissioner Sarah Funes, Commissioner Luis De Paz Fernandez, Commissioner Tony Rozzi, Secretary to the Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Staff Tony Rozzi, Chief Planner Adena Friedman, Principal Planner Billy Gross, Principal Planner Christopher Espiritu, Senior Planner Christy Usher, Senior Planner Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner Victoria Kim, Associate Planner Kelsey Evans, Clerk Individuals with disabilities who require auxiliary aids or services to attend and participate in this meeting should contact the ADA Coordinator at (650) 877-8505, five working days before the meeting. In accordance with California Government Code Section 54957.5, any writing or document that is a public record, relates to an open session agenda item, and is distributed less than 72 hours prior to a regular meeting will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk’s Office located at City Hall. If, however, the document or writing is not distributed until the regular meeting to which it relates, then the document or writing will be made available to the public at the location of the meeting, as listed on this agenda. The address of City Hall is 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, California 94080. Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022 4 November 17, 2022Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS AGENDA REVIEW The Planning Commission will inquire and staff will report on any change or order, deferral and/or removal of items on this meeting agenda. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for comment on items not on the agenda. Under the Brown Act, the Commission cannot act on items raised during public communications, but may respond briefly to statements made or questions posed; request clarification; refer the item to staff; or place the item on the next meeting agenda. DISCLOSURE OF EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for Planning Commissioners to disclose any communications, including site visits, they have had on current agenda items, or any conflict of interest regarding current agenda items. CONSENT CALENDAR Consideration of draft minutes from the November 3, 2022 Planning Commission1. 11-03-22 Final MinutesAttachments: PUBLIC HEARING Report regarding a Conditional Use Permit Modification to approved Conditions of Approval to allow extended business hours, indoor live entertainment, and private events at Hometown Bowl located at 237 El Camino Real in the El Camino Real Mixed Use (ECRMX) Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, and determination that the project modification is consistent with the previously adopted CEQA exemption. (Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) 2. Attachment 1 - Planning Commission Approved Conditions of Approval as of June 18, 2020 Attachment 2 - Proposed Conditions of Approval with modifications as of November 17, 2022 Attachment 3 - Applicant Write-up of Compliance with Conditions of Approval, October 2022 Attachments: Page 5 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022 5 November 17, 2022Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Report regarding consideration of a Use Permit to allow Indoor Entertainment at 608 Dubuque Avenue in the Freeway Commercial Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). (Victoria Kim, Associate Planner) 3. Attachment 1_Draft Findings.pdf Attachment 2_Conditions of Approval.pdf Attachment 3_Site Plans.pdf Attachment 4_Planning Application with Project Description.pdf Attachment 5_DRB Application Record.pdf Attachment 6_Building Permit Record.pdf Attachment 7_580 Dubuque Pedestrian and Traffic Control Plan.pdf Attachments: Report regarding consideration of an application for Design Review, Use Permit, Development Agreement, and Transportation Demand Management Plan to construct a new 12-story, 165 foot tall, 350 room, 261,000 square foot hotel building, with 232 surface parking spaces and site improvements, located at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan zone district, and determination that the project is within the scope of a previously adopted Programmatic EIR under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168. (Christy Usher, Senior Planner) 4. Attachment 1 Applicant's Written Project Narrative Attachment 2 Applicant's Response to DRB letter Attachment 3 Public Comment from OneShoreline dated July 5, 2022 Attachments: Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council determine that the environmental effects of the proposed Oyster Point Hotel at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan Area is consistent with the adopted Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and would not necessitate the need for preparing a subsequent environmental document pursuant to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168, and is eligible for streamlining per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. 4a. Exhibit A - Environmental Checklist Exhibit B - MMRP OP Hotel Exhibit C - 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR Attachments: Page 6 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022 6 November 17, 2022Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve entitlements for the proposed hotel project including Design Review (DR22-0005), Use Permit (UP22-0001), and Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0006) and adopt an ordinance approving Development Agreement (DA22-0001) to construct a new 12-story, 165 foot tall, 350 room, 261,000 square foot hotel building, with 232 surface parking spaces and site improvements, located at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan zone district 4b. Exhibit A - Conditions of Approval OP Hotel Exhibit B - Project Plans OP Hotel Exhibit 2 - TDM Plan OP Hotel Exhibit D - Parking Management Plan OP Hotel Exhibit E- Transportation Assessment Memo OP Hotel Exhibit F - Draft Development Agreement Exhibit G - DRB letter OP Hotel Attachments: ITEMS FROM STAFF Staff may report on items of general interest. ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION The Commission may report on items of general interest. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC This portion of the meeting is reserved for additional comment on items not on the agenda. ADJOURNMENT Page 7 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022 7 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:22-953 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:1. Consideration of draft minutes from the November 3, 2022 Planning Commission City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™8 November 3, 2022 Minutes Page 1 of 3 MINUTES November 3, 2022 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TIME: 7:01 PM AGENDA REVIEW No changes. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Consideration of draft minutes from the October 6, 2022 Planning Commission 2. Report regarding making findings and determining that the vacation of a portion of Cypress Avenue in relation to the Firehouse Work and Firehouse Live projects located at 201 Baden Avenue in the Downtown Transit Core (DTC) Zoning District is in conformity with the South San Francisco adopted General Plan in accordance with provisions of State Planning Law (Govt. Code Section 65402). (Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) Motion to approve Consent Calendar – Commissioner Faria, Second – Vice Chair Tzang, approved by roll call (6-0-1) Meeting Video: Planning Commission on 2022-11-03 7:00 PM (granicus.com) PUBLIC HEARING 3. Report regarding consideration of a Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, and ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS PRESENT: Chair Shihadeh, Vice Chair Tzang, Commissioners: Evans, Faria, Fernandez, Funes, ABSENT: Murphy STAFF PRESENT: Tony Rozzi - Chief Planner – Adena Friedman – Principal Planner - Associate Planner – Victoria Kim – Associate Planner 9 November 3, 2022 Minutes Page 2 of 3 Transportation Demand Management Plan for the repurposing of a structure into commercial and office space and a Parking Reduction at 201 Baden Avenue in the Downtown Transit Core (DTC) Zoning District and a Class 1, Section 15301 categorical exemption under CEQA in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. (Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) Public Hearing opened 7:08 pm Public Hearing closed 7:48 pm Motion to approve: Commissioner Faria, Second – Commissioner Evans, approved by roll call (6-0-1) Meeting Video: Planning Commission on 2022-11-03 7:00 PM (granicus.com) 4. Report regarding consideration of an application for Design Review, Use Permit, Development Agreement, and Transportation Demand Management Plan to construct a new 12-story, 165 foot tall, 350 room, 261,000 square foot hotel building, with 232 surface parking spaces and site improvements, located at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan zone district, and determination that the project is within the scope of a previously adopted Programmatic EIR under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168. (Christy Usher, Senior Planner) 4a. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council determine that the environmental effects of the proposed Oyster Point Hotel at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan Area is consistent with the adopted Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and would not necessitate the need for preparing a subsequent environmental document pursuant to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168, and is eligible for streamlining per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. 4b. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve entitlements for the proposed hotel project including Design Review (DR22-0005), Use Permit (UP22-0001), and Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0006) and adopt an ordinance approving Development Agreement (DA22-0001) to construct a new 12-story, 165 foot tall, 350 room, 261,000 square foot hotel building, with 232 surface parking spaces and site improvements, located at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan zone district Public Hearing opened 7:59 pm – Continued item to date certain November 17, 2022 Public Hearing closed 7:59 pm Motion to approve: Chair Shihadeh, Second - Commissioner Faria, approved by roll call (6-0-1) Meeting Video: Planning Commission on 2022-11-03 7:00 PM (granicus.com) ADMINISTRATIVE BUSINESS 10 November 3, 2022 Minutes Page 3 of 3 • None. ITEMS FROM STAFF 5. Discussion of Planning Commission Alternative Start Times and Return to In-Person Meetings (Tony Rozzi, Chief Planner) a) Commissioner Funes prefers 7pm and remote meetings for health and carbon emissions. b) Vice Chair Tzang assumes in person will be typical eventually but Zoom has been very convenient, open to returning to in person or hybrid, flexible on time could do 6pm or 7pm; when do you eat if we start at 6pm – can you look into this? c) Commissioner Evans – I’d like an earlier start given Agendas are going to be quite full, likes remote but also prefers in person meetings. d) Commissioner Fernandez likes remote, particularly when it is super late; but prefers in person stuff and is back in office at work; could we plan ahead to do once a month in person meetings ad plan around it? Open to new start times – 6pm is better but flexible to start at 7pm, too. e) Commissioner Faria likes in person meeting, good flow for meeting, I miss a lot by not seeing the reaction of presenters. f) Chair Shihadeh – we should go back to in person, we haven’t met in person, open to hybrid; like idea of 6pm meeting. ITEMS FROM THE PUBLIC • None. ADJOURNMENT Chair Shihadeh adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:20PM. Tony Rozzi, Chief Planner, AICP Sam Shihadeh, Chairperson or Alex Tzang, Vice Chairperson Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning Commission City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco TR/tr 11 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:22-862 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:2. Report regarding a Conditional Use Permit Modification to approved Conditions of Approval to allow extended business hours,indoor live entertainment,and private events at Hometown Bowl located at 237 El Camino Real in the El Camino Real Mixed Use (ECRMX)Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code,and determination that the project modification is consistent with the previously adopted CEQA exemption.(Stephanie Skangos, Associate Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission open a public hearing,receive this staff report with staff proposed modifications to Condition of Approval No.13 and No.18,and then approve the Use Permit Modification and accept completion of Condition of Approval No.16,requiring regular four-,eight-,and twelve-month reviews regarding the approved Conditional Use Permit (UP19-0020)to allow extended business hours, indoor live entertainment, and private events at Hometown Bowl. MOTION TO ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION (1)Accept the twelve-month review and determine that Condition No.16 issued on June 18,2020 has been satisfied,and approve Use Permit Modification modifying Conditions Nos.13 and 18 issued on June 18, 2020 as recommended by staff and included in Attachment 2. BACKGROUND On June 18,2020,a Conditional Use Permit was approved by the Planning Commission for Hometown Bowl, located at 237 El Camino Real,allowing extended business hours,indoor live entertainment,and private events at the bowling center.Hometown Bowl,formerly known as Brentwood Bowl,which was originally approved by the City Council in 1951,consists of 16 bowling lanes,amusement arcade with 10 amusement devices (arcade and video games),six pool tables,a bar,and a restaurant/café.The approved business hours are Monday through Thursday,3 p.m.to 12 a.m.;Friday,3 p.m.to 2 a.m.;Saturday,10 a.m.to 2 a.m.;and Sunday, 10 a.m.to 12 a.m.Live entertainment and special events are subject to the approval of an event permit from the Police Department at least 30 days in advance of each event. Approval of Hometown Bowl’s Use Permit included several Conditions of Approval (see Attachment 1)to ensure proper management of the bowling center operations and help mitigate any negative impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhood,including the requirement for four-,eight-,and twelve-month reviews and the ability to modify and/or revoke the Use Permit if full compliance is not met. On April 21,2022,the Planning Commission conducted the required eight-month review of Hometown Bowl’s Use Permit.Although the Use Permit was approved in June 2020,Hometown Bowl was not able to commence full operations until a year later on June 15,2021,due to State and local restrictions on businesses as a result of the COVID pandemic.This review constitutes the required twelve-month,and final,review of Hometown Bowl’s operations and compliance with the Conditions of Approval. City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 1 of 4 powered by Legistar™12 File #:22-862 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:2. DISCUSSION Compliance with Conditions of Approval Staff has reviewed each of the approved Conditions of Approval for compliance.The applicant was also tasked with providing compliance information to staff for each Condition of Approval (see Attachment 3). Since the completion of the required eight-month review in April 2022,the applicant has continued to successfully comply with most of the approved Conditions of Approval, and only two remain outstanding. Below are the approved Conditions of Approval that have yet to be complied with, followed by staff discussion. Planning Division Condition No. 13 Text of condition:“The business owner/operator shall repaint the exterior façade along El Camino Real and explore options to incorporate the previous bowling mural.Paint samples for the exterior shall be submitted to the Planning Division within 30 days from the date of approval of the Use Permit.” Staff Response:The applicant is still working with the City to repaint the exterior façade of the establishment along El Camino Real.The applicant has attempted to raise funds to restore the Astro Boy mural to no avail;if project funding is established, the applicant is open to revisiting the project. Due to the outstanding nature of this Condition, staff recommends revising the language to read as follows: No. 13: The business owner/operator shall explore opportunities to repaint the exterior façade along El Camino Real and explore options to incorporate the previous bowling mural as funding becomes available. Paint samples for the exterior shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review prior to completion.within 30 days from the date of approval of the Use Permit. Planning Division Condition No. 18 Text of condition:“The business owner/operator shall obtain sound readings from four separate areas adjacent to the establishment,including near the main entrance,within the alleyway,and across the street,to demonstrate compliance with SSFMC Chapter 8.32,Noise Regulations.The sound readings shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to hosting live entertainment or within 30 days from the date of the Use Permit approval,whichever occurs first,and should reflect accurate noise levels during amplified live music events.If the sound readings are above the permissible sound levels outlined in SSFMC Chapter 8.32,Noise Regulations, the business owner/operator shall install noise attenuation measures,as discussed in Condition No.7 above. Sound readings shall be obtained from the same locations after implementation of noise attenuation measures and submitted to the Planning Division.” Staff Response:In the applicant’s write-up of compliance with the approved Conditions of Approval (see Attachment 3),it is mentioned that work with an AV team to ensure that noise requirements are met have been continuous;however,copies of any completed sound readings have not been provided to Planning staff. Therefore,compliance with this condition is still outstanding and shall be submitted within 30 days of the twelve-month review. Staff recommends revising the language to read as follows: No.18:The business owner/operator shall obtain sound readings from four separate areas adjacent to the City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 2 of 4 powered by Legistar™13 File #:22-862 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:2. No.18:The business owner/operator shall obtain sound readings from four separate areas adjacent to the establishment,including near the main entrance,within the alleyway,and across the street,to demonstrate compliance with SSFMC Chapter 8.32,Noise Regulations.The sound readings shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to hosting live entertainment or within 30 days from the date of the Use Permit approval,whichever occurs first,and should reflect accurate noise levels during amplified live music events.If the sound readings are above the permissible sound levels outlined in SSFMC Chapter 8.32,Noise Regulations, the business owner/operator shall install noise attenuation measures,as discussed in Condition No.7 above. Sound readings shall be obtained from the same locations after implementation of noise attenuation measures and submitted to the Planning Division within 30 days of acceptance of the twelve-month review. Safety and Security Concerns Since the eight-month review of Hometown Bowl’s Use Permit in April 2022,the South San Francisco Police Department (SSFPD)has responded to Hometown Bowl 37 times,with 34 of those being self-initiated contacts by officers,a further decrease in calls for service compared to the period covering the required eight-month review (November 2021 to April 2022).Calls for service from April 2022 to present are down 40%from the previous review period (November 2021 to April 2022)and down 85%from the initial review period (June to October 2021). While there are still concerns related to large crowds of customers loitering outside the business and spilling into the neighboring residential area and/or nearby businesses,customers leaving intoxicated,and loud noise, either emanating from the business or by customers loitering in the area because of the nature of the use,safety and security issues are continuously being addressed due to compliance with the approved Conditions of Approval. ZONING CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The project site is located in the El Camino Real Mixed Use (ECRMX) Zoning District. Per South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) Section 20.090.002 (Land Use Regulations-Commercial, Office, and Mixed-Use Districts), Commercial Entertainment and Recreation uses are allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Additionally, pursuant to SSFMC Section 20.490.002 (Us ZONING CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The project site is located in the El Camino Real Mixed Use (ECRMX)Zoning District.Per South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC)Section 20.090.002 (Land Use Regulations-Commercial,Office,and Mixed-Use Districts),Commercial Entertainment and Recreation uses are allowed subject to approval of a Conditional Use Permit.Additionally,pursuant to SSFMC Section 20.490.002 (Use Permit Applicability),Use Permit approval is required for any use with hours of operation between midnight and 6 a.m.,except for properties within the Mixed Industrial Zone District that do not directly abut another zone district,and for any commercial use with live entertainment. The required use permits have been secured by Hometown Bowl. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The General Plan Land Use Designation for the project site is El Camino Real Mixed Use.This designation is intended to accommodate high-intensity active uses and mixed-use development in the South El Camino Real area. Commercial recreation is an encouraged use within this land use designation. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW At the time of Use Permit approval in June 2020,the project was determined to be categorically exempt under the provisions of CEQA,Class 1,Section 15301,Existing Facilities.This exemptionCity of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 3 of 4 powered by Legistar™14 File #:22-862 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:2. exempt under the provisions of CEQA,Class 1,Section 15301,Existing Facilities.This exemption covers the operation,repair,maintenance,permitting,leasing,licensing,or minor alteration of existing public or private structures,facilities,mechanical equipment,or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use.This twelve-month review of the approved Use Permit for Hometown Bowl is not subject to the provisions of CEQA,as the review does not include any changes to the project. CONCLUSION On June 18,2020,a Conditional Use Permit was approved by the Planning Commission for Hometown Bowl, allowing extended business hours,indoor live entertainment,and private events at the bowling center.Approval of Hometown Bowl’s Use Permit included several Conditions of Approval to ensure proper management of the bowling center operations and help mitigate any negative impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhood. Staff has reviewed Hometown Bowl’s operations and compliance with the Conditions of Approval and finds that since the required eight-month review of the approved Use Permit in April 2022,the applicant has continued to successfully comply with the majority of the approved Conditions of Approval and address safety and security concerns with significant investment in on-site security and customer management during peak weekend evenings. Therefore,staff recommends that the Planning Commission open a public hearing,receive this staff report with staff proposed modifications to Condition of Approval No.13 and No.18,and then approve the Use Permit Modification and accept completion of Condition of Approval No.16,requiring regular four-,eight-,and twelve-month reviews regarding the approved Conditional Use Permit (UP19-0020)to allow extended business hours, indoor live entertainment, and private events at Hometown Bowl. Attachments 1.Planning Commission Approved Conditions of Approval as of June 18, 2020 2.Proposed Conditions of Approval with modifications as of November 17, 2022 3.Applicant Write-up of Compliance with Conditions of Approval, October 2022 City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 4 of 4 powered by Legistar™15 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P19-0064: UP19-0020 Hometown Bowl 237 EL CAMINO REAL (As approved by the Planning Commission on June 18, 2020) A) Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: General 1. The applicant/business owner/operator shall comply with the City's Standard Conditions of Approval for Commercial, Industrial, Mixed-Use and Multi-Family Residential Projects and with all the requirements of all affected City Divisions and Departments as contained in the attached conditions, except as otherwise amended by the following conditions of approval. 2. Any modification to the approved use, plans or conditions of approval shall be subject to SSFMC Section 20.450.012 (“Modification”), whereby the Chief Planner may approve minor changes. All exterior design modifications, including any and all utilities, shall be presented to the Chief Planner for a determination. 3. The applicant/business owner/operator shall obtain all required permits for the initiation and operation of the proposed use. 4. The business owner/operator shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all conditions of approval. 5. The applicant/business owner/operator shall operate the business substantially as outlined in the project description and submitted plans, as part of the Planning Application. 6. Hours of Operation shall be as follows, unless otherwise modified by the Chief Planner. Failure to adhere to the following hours of operation will be grounds for revocation of the Use Permit: a. Monday through Thursday: 3pm to 12am b. Friday: 3pm to 2am c. Saturday: 10am to 2am d. Sunday: 10am to 12am e. Private Events: As approved by the South San Francisco Police Department’s Community Relations Sergeant, or his or her designee, as part of the private event permit process, prior to the events of taking place. 7. The business owner/operator shall implement and maintain noise attenuation measures, including curtains in front of doorways, double-paned windows, and/or insulation techniques, to minimize and limit noise emissions from the establishment. The business shall comply with SSFMC Section 8.32, Noise Regulations, during normal business hours 16 Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 9 and private events. Such measures shall be reviewed and approved by the Chief Planner prior to operation under the Use Permit provisions. 8. The business owner/operator shall ensure that parking by patrons of the establishment be located along El Camino Real and within the adjacent public parking lot, and discourage parking within the surrounding residential neighborhood by posting parking information on their website, posting signage near the entrances, including parking information in private event promotional flyers and announcements, and implementing ridesharing promotional offers with various ride sharing platforms. 9. The business owner/operator shall be responsible for maintaining the premises and surrounding area within 500 feet of the establishment, including the adjacent neighborhood, parking lots and alleyway, in a clean and orderly manner during and after regular business hours and any private events. The adjacent neighborhood shall be checked the morning after regular business operations and private events. In providing such maintenance, the business owner/operator shall send notification to property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the establishment advising that staff maintenance and cleanup of the adjacent neighborhood will be performed in the mornings after regular business operations and private events. The notice shall contain contact information for the establishment, as well as information about any upcoming events, and shall be sent every 60 days. The first set of such notice shall be sent within 30 days of the date of the Use Permit approval. 10. The business owner/operator shall establish and maintain a dedicated complaint line for the establishment. A complaint log shall be maintained, and any complaints received shall be logged and include the following information: date, time and description of complaint; name and contact information for complainant; and date, time and description of response, along with staff information. The complaint log shall be kept up-to-date and be made readily available to the Planning Division upon request. 11. The business owner/operator shall secure an event permit for each private event with the Police Department at least 30 days in advance. Failure to secure an event permit for any private event will be grounds for revocation of the Use Permit. 12. The business owner/operator shall establish and maintain a record and timeline of all private events with the following information: date, time and brief description of event; number of people in attendance (actual or anticipated); and any incidents or issues that occurred. The private event record and timeline shall be kept up-to-date, contain copies of approved event permits, and be made readily available to the Planning Division upon request. 13. The business owner/operator shall repaint the exterior façade along El Camino Real and explore options to incorporate the previous bowling mural. Paint samples for the exterior shall be submitted to the Planning Division within 30 days from the date of approval of the Use Permit. 17 Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 9 14. The existing wooden roof sign at the northwestern corner of the existing building shall be removed. Any required permits for the removal of the sign shall be applied for within 30 days from the date of approval of the Use Permit. 15. The business shall be subject to a four-, eight-, and twelve-month review by the Planning Commission for compliance with Conditions of Approval from the date of Use Permit approval by the Planning Commission. 16. The business owner / operator shall provide to the Chief Planner for review an operational record and statement one month prior to the required four-, eight-, and twelve-month reviews. The operational record and statement shall include information regarding how compliance with each of the required Conditions of Approval have been met and copies of the business complaint log and private event record and timeline. The Planning Commission will review the operational record and statement at the required four-, eight- and twelve-month reviews. 17. The business owner/operator shall require that all staff conducting maintenance and/or cleanup of the premises and surrounding area wear identifiable clothing, such as traffic vests, jackets, or other clothing, with the name of the establishment visible and clearly identifying the individual wearing them to be the establishment’s staff. 18. The business owner/operator shall obtain sound readings from four separate areas adjacent to the establishment, including near the main entrance, within the alleyway, and across the street, to demonstrate compliance with SSFMC Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulations. The sound readings shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to hosting live entertainment or within 30 days from the date of the Use Permit approval, whichever occurs first, and should reflect accurate noise levels during amplified live music events. If the sound readings are above the permissible sound levels outlined in SSFMC Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulations, the business owner/operator shall install noise attenuation measures, as discussed in Condition No. 7 above. Sound readings shall be obtained from the same locations after implementation of noise attenuation measures and submitted to the Planning Division. Contact: Stephanie Skangos, Planning Division, at (650) 877-8535 or stephanie.skangos@ssf.net B) Fire Department requirements shall be as follows: 1. During special events and music release parties etc., the maximum occupancy shall not be exceeded for the specific area in the building where the event is held and the event shall not exceeded the total maximum occupancy for the entire building. 2. Provide portable fire extinguisher in accordance with CFC Section 906. 3. Provide Knox key box for building with access keys to entry doors, electrical/mechanical rooms, and others to be determined. 18 Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 9 Contact: Craig Lustenberger, Fire Marshal, at (650) 829-6645 C) Police Department requirements shall be as follows: 1. All construction must conform to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070 Minimum-security standards for nonresidential buildings, (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). 2. The applicant shall install and maintain a central station silent intrusion alarm (burglary alarm) per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070(i)(2)(Q), (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). 3. The applicant shall install and maintain a central station silent robbery alarm per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapters 15.48.070(h)(1)(G), 15.48.070(h)(1)(H), and 15.48.070(h)(1)(M), (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). Robbery alarm activation buttons shall minimally be placed in the point of sale areas in the bar, the restaurant, and the bowling alley. 4. A security guard(s) shall be charged with preventing violations of law and enforcing compliance by patrons of the requirements of these regulations as well as controlling behavior and reporting all criminal offenses to the Police Department. Security guards shall be uniformed in such a manner so as to be readily identifiable as a security guard by the public and shall be duly licensed as a security guard as required by applicable provisions of the state and the City. No security guard required pursuant to this Condition of Approval shall act as a door person, ticket seller, ticket taker, admittance person, sole occupant of the manager's station, or have other ancillary duties while acting as a security guard. The Police Chief reserves the right to determine; 1) the appropriate number of guards, which may be increased or decreased as determined by the Police Chief or his or her designee, and 2) the hours of operation for said guards, which may be increased or decreased as determined by the Police Chief. 5. The applicant shall install and maintain a camera surveillance system that meets the technical specifications outlined in South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.66.050, (Ord. 1515 § 1, 2016). Views and angles of all surveillance cameras must be approved by the South San Francisco Police Department’s Planning Sergeant. There must be enough cameras to provide the intended coverage of the specified intended areas. Cameras shall be placed minimally in the following areas: • all entrances and all exits • bar • restaurant • arcade • bowling alley point of sale • fire exit near lane #1 • each private or semi-private event room 19 Conditions of Approval Page 5 of 9 6. No doors within the premises shall be locked during business hours, and the on-site manager shall be responsible to see that any room or area on the premises shall be readily accessible at all times and shall be open to view in its entirety for inspection by any law enforcement officer upon request. 7. The exit doors (closest to lane #1) shall be constructed of a solid material, shall be marked “Emergency Exit Only – Alarmed” or of similar wording, and shall be equipped with an audible alarm that is activated when one or both of the doors are opened. The alarm should be loud enough so employees working at the bowling alley’s point of sale can hear it during the normal course of business. The doors shall have panic hardware installed on the interior side, and NO hardware installed on the exterior. 8. The alleyway, outside the doors listed above in #7, shall have a minimum of a six-foot tall gate on each the El Camino Real and the Northwood Drive sides. The gates shall have exit panic hardware on the interior side. The exterior of the gates shall be keyed and a corresponding key shall be secured in a KnoxBox at each gate location that is mounted in compliance with the Fire Department. 9. No private or semi-private event rooms shall have doors that are lockable. All doors to such rooms shall have a minimum of 144 square inches of transparent glass or similar material that allows viewing through the door. The view into and out of said rooms shall be clear and unobstructed by any items or materials and shall remain so at all times. 10. If applicant intends to operate four or more coin operated amusement machines, the applicant shall first obtain an arcade permit as required by South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 6.44. Applicant is responsible for following all sections of the above ordinance. 11. All private or semi-private event rooms shall have surveillance cameras installed that provide live and recorded monitoring of events by the business’ surveillance camera system. The business shall provide the ability to monitor live events in the private or semi-private event rooms by a peace officer upon request by means of the business’ surveillance camera system. 12. Special Events. Except for corporate events and events that are held in a private residence and not open to the public, every person, firm, partnership, corporation, organization, association, society, club, individual or group of individuals that intend to host, hold, allow, maintain, organize, conduct, promote or advertise any event, activity, or function that is reasonably expected to be attended by at least seventy-five people, regardless of whether the event, activity, or function is a “private event” or “special event” as defined in Section 6.48.010, the applicant/business owner/operator shall notify the city police department at least thirty days prior to the event. Notification shall include the location, date(s) and time(s) of the event, the names and addresses of the persons charged with managing the event, the type of event, and the anticipated numbers of attendees. (Ord. 1497 § 2, 2015; Ord. 1430 § 1, 2010). (Please note the term “corporate events” refers to events sponsored by corporate entities using their own facilities, NOT corporate events occurring at Hometown Bowl.) 20 Conditions of Approval Page 6 of 9 13. The applicant/business owner/operator shall contact the South San Francisco Police Department’s Community Relations Sergeant (650-877-8922) to obtain a private event permit for all special events. The Community Relations Sergeant, or his or her designee, shall evaluate each special event and determine if security is needed, and if so, specify whether private security or police officers are required. The applicant shall abide by all requirements set forth by the Community Relations Sergeant for any special events. 14. The applicant/business owner/operator shall comply with the requirement that commercial establishments having one hundred dollars or more in cash on the premises after closing hours shall lock such money in an approved type of money safe with a minimum rating of TL-15. 15. "No Loitering" signs shall be posted conspicuously throughout the parking area in locations designated by the Police Department. 16. The Police Department reserves the right to review and comment upon the submission of revised and updated plans. Contact: Sgt. Michael Rudis, Police Department, at (650) 877-8927 or mike.rudis@ssf.net 21 Conditions of Approval Page 7 of 9 STANDARD CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, MIXED USE, AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS Entitlement and Permit Status 1. Unless the use has commenced or related building permits have been issued within two (2) years of the date this permit is granted, this permit will automatically expire on that date. A one-year permit extension may be granted in accordance with provisions of the SSFMC Chapter 20.450 (Common Procedures). 2. The permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the property owner or a duly authorized representative files an affidavit, prior to the issuance of a building permit, stating that the property owner is aware of, and accepts, all of the conditions of the permit. 3. The permit shall be subject to revocation if the project is not operated in compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. Minor changes or deviations from the conditions of approval of the permit may be approved by the Chief Planner and major changes require approval of the Planning Commission, or final approval body of the City, per SSFMC Chapter 20.450 (Common Procedures). 5. Neither the granting of this permit nor any conditions attached thereto shall authorize, require or permit anything contrary to, or in conflict with any ordinances specifically named therein. 6. Prior to construction, all required building permits shall be obtained from the City’s Building Division. 7. All conditions of the permit shall be completely fulfilled to the satisfaction of the affected City Departments and Planning and Building Divisions prior to occupancy of any building. Any request for temporary power for testing equipment will be issued only upon substantial completion of the development. Lighting, Signs, and Trash Areas 8. All exterior lights shall be installed in such a manner that is consistent with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards), and there shall be no illumination on adjacent properties or streets which might be considered either objectionable by adjacent property owners or hazardous to motorists. 9. No additional signs, flags, pennants or banners shall be installed or erected on the site without prior approval, as required by SSFMC Chapter 20.360 (Signs). 22 Conditions of Approval Page 8 of 9 10. Adequate trash areas shall be provided as required by SSFMC 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 11. Trash handling area must be covered, enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit. If being installed in a food service facility the drain must be connected to a grease interceptor prior to the connection to the sanitary sewer. Landscaping, Construction, & Utilities 12. The construction and permitted use on the property shall be so conducted as to reduce to a minimum any noise vibration or dust resulting from the operation. 13. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted. 14. All sewerage and waste disposal shall be only by means of an approved sanitary system. 15. Prior to any on-site grading, a grading permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer. 16. All existing utility lines, underground cable conduits and structures which are not proposed to be removed shall be shown on the improvement plans and their disposition noted. 17. All landscape areas shall be watered via an automatic irrigation system which shall be maintained in fully operable condition at all times, and which complies with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 18. All planting areas shall be maintained by a qualified professional; the landscape shall be kept on a regular fertilization and maintenance program and shall be maintained weed free. 19. Plant materials shall be selectively pruned by a qualified arborist; no topping or excessive cutting-back shall be permitted. Tree pruning shall allow the natural branching structure to develop. 20. Plant materials shall be replaced when necessary with the same species originally specified unless otherwise approved by the Chief Planner. Parking Areas, Screening, & Drainage 21. All ducting for air conditioning, heating, blower systems, accessory mechanisms and all other forms of mechanical or electrical equipment which are placed on or adjacent to the building shall be screened from public view, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 23 Conditions of Approval Page 9 of 9 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 22. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turn-around areas and landscaping areas shall be kept free of debris, litter and weeds at all times. Site, structures, paving, landscaping, light standards, pavement markings and all other facilities shall be permanently maintained. 23. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, and turn-around areas must drain and be plumbed to the sanitary sewer. 24. The onsite stormwater catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay). Public Safety 25. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the Municipal Code, “Minimum Building Security Standards” Ordinance revised May 1995. The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.24 of the Municipal Code, “Fire Code” Ordinance. The Fire Department reserves the right to make additional safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 27. All fire sprinkler test and/or drain lines shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. 24 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P19-0064: UP19-0020 Hometown Bowl 237 EL CAMINO REAL (As recommended by staff on November 17, 2022) A) Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: General 1. The applicant/business owner/operator shall comply with the City's Standard Conditions of Approval for Commercial, Industrial, Mixed-Use and Multi-Family Residential Projects and with all the requirements of all affected City Divisions and Departments as contained in the attached conditions, except as otherwise amended by the following conditions of approval. 2. Any modification to the approved use, plans or conditions of approval shall be subject to SSFMC Section 20.450.012 (“Modification”), whereby the Chief Planner may approve minor changes. All exterior design modifications, including any and all utilities, shall be presented to the Chief Planner for a determination. 3. The applicant/business owner/operator shall obtain all required permits for the initiation and operation of the proposed use. 4. The business owner/operator shall be responsible for ensuring compliance with all conditions of approval. 5. The applicant/business owner/operator shall operate the business substantially as outlined in the project description and submitted plans, as part of the Planning Application. 6. Hours of Operation shall be as follows, unless otherwise modified by the Chief Planner. Failure to adhere to the following hours of operation will be grounds for revocation of the Use Permit: a. Monday through Thursday: 3pm to 12am b. Friday: 3pm to 2am c. Saturday: 10am to 2am d. Sunday: 10am to 12am e. Private Events: As approved by the South San Francisco Police Department’s Community Relations Sergeant, or his or her designee, as part of the private event permit process, prior to the events of taking place. 7. The business owner/operator shall implement and maintain noise attenuation measures, including curtains in front of doorways, double-paned windows, and/or insulation techniques, to minimize and limit noise emissions from the establishment. The business shall comply with SSFMC Section 8.32, Noise Regulations, during normal business hours 25 Conditions of Approval Page 2 of 9 and private events. Such measures shall be reviewed and approved by the Chief Planner prior to operation under the Use Permit provisions. 8. The business owner/operator shall ensure that parking by patrons of the establishment be located along El Camino Real and within the adjacent public parking lot, and discourage parking within the surrounding residential neighborhood by posting parking information on their website, posting signage near the entrances, including parking information in private event promotional flyers and announcements, and implementing ridesharing promotional offers with various ride sharing platforms. 9. The business owner/operator shall be responsible for maintaining the premises and surrounding area within 500 feet of the establishment, including the adjacent neighborhood, parking lots and alleyway, in a clean and orderly manner during and after regular business hours and any private events. The adjacent neighborhood shall be checked the morning after regular business operations and private events. In providing such maintenance, the business owner/operator shall send notification to property owners and tenants within 500 feet of the establishment advising that staff maintenance and cleanup of the adjacent neighborhood will be performed in the mornings after regular business operations and private events. The notice shall contain contact information for the establishment, as well as information about any upcoming events, and shall be sent every 60 days. The first set of such notice shall be sent within 30 days of the date of the Use Permit approval. 10. The business owner/operator shall establish and maintain a dedicated complaint line for the establishment. A complaint log shall be maintained, and any complaints received shall be logged and include the following information: date, time and description of complaint; name and contact information for complainant; and date, time and description of response, along with staff information. The complaint log shall be kept up-to-date and be made readily available to the Planning Division upon request. 11. The business owner/operator shall secure an event permit for each private event with the Police Department at least 30 days in advance. Failure to secure an event permit for any private event will be grounds for revocation of the Use Permit. 12. The business owner/operator shall establish and maintain a record and timeline of all private events with the following information: date, time and brief description of event; number of people in attendance (actual or anticipated); and any incidents or issues that occurred. The private event record and timeline shall be kept up-to-date, contain copies of approved event permits, and be made readily available to the Planning Division upon request. 13. The business owner/operator shall explore opportunities to repaint the exterior façade along El Camino Real and to incorporate the previous bowling mural as funding becomes available. Paint samples for the exterior shall be submitted to the Planning Division for review prior to completion. 26 Conditions of Approval Page 3 of 9 14. The existing wooden roof sign at the northwestern corner of the existing building shall be removed. Any required permits for the removal of the sign shall be applied for within 30 days from the date of approval of the Use Permit. 15. The business shall be subject to a four-, eight-, and twelve-month review by the Planning Commission for compliance with Conditions of Approval from the date of Use Permit approval by the Planning Commission. 16. The business owner / operator shall provide to the Chief Planner for review an operational record and statement one month prior to the required four-, eight-, and twelve-month reviews. The operational record and statement shall include information regarding how compliance with each of the required Conditions of Approval have been met and copies of the business complaint log and private event record and timeline. The Planning Commission will review the operational record and statement at the required four-, eight- and twelve-month reviews. 17. The business owner/operator shall require that all staff conducting maintenance and/or cleanup of the premises and surrounding area wear identifiable clothing, such as traffic vests, jackets, or other clothing, with the name of the establishment visible and clearly identifying the individual wearing them to be the establishment’s staff. 18. The business owner/operator shall obtain sound readings from four separate areas adjacent to the establishment, including near the main entrance, within the alleyway, and across the street, to demonstrate compliance with SSFMC Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulations. The sound readings shall be submitted to the Planning Division prior to hosting live entertainment or within 30 days from the date of the Use Permit approval, whichever occurs first, and should reflect accurate noise levels during amplified live music events. If the sound readings are above the permissible sound levels outlined in SSFMC Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulations, the business owner/operator shall install noise attenuation measures, as discussed in Condition No. 7 above. Sound readings shall be obtained from the same locations after implementation of noise attenuation measures and submitted to the Planning Division within 30 days of acceptance of the twelve-month review. Contact: Stephanie Skangos, Planning Division, at (650) 877-8535 or stephanie.skangos@ssf.net B) Fire Department requirements shall be as follows: 1. During special events and music release parties etc., the maximum occupancy shall not be exceeded for the specific area in the building where the event is held and the event shall not exceeded the total maximum occupancy for the entire building. 2. Provide portable fire extinguisher in accordance with CFC Section 906. 3. Provide Knox key box for building with access keys to entry doors, electrical/mechanical rooms, and others to be determined. 27 Conditions of Approval Page 4 of 9 Contact: Craig Lustenberger, Fire Marshal, at (650) 829-6645 C) Police Department requirements shall be as follows: 1. All construction must conform to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070 Minimum-security standards for nonresidential buildings, (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). 2. The applicant shall install and maintain a central station silent intrusion alarm (burglary alarm) per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070(i)(2)(Q), (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). 3. The applicant shall install and maintain a central station silent robbery alarm per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapters 15.48.070(h)(1)(G), 15.48.070(h)(1)(H), and 15.48.070(h)(1)(M), (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). Robbery alarm activation buttons shall minimally be placed in the point of sale areas in the bar, the restaurant, and the bowling alley. 4. A security guard(s) shall be charged with preventing violations of law and enforcing compliance by patrons of the requirements of these regulations as well as controlling behavior and reporting all criminal offenses to the Police Department. Security guards shall be uniformed in such a manner so as to be readily identifiable as a security guard by the public and shall be duly licensed as a security guard as required by applicable provisions of the state and the City. No security guard required pursuant to this Condition of Approval shall act as a door person, ticket seller, ticket taker, admittance person, sole occupant of the manager's station, or have other ancillary duties while acting as a security guard. The Police Chief reserves the right to determine; 1) the appropriate number of guards, which may be increased or decreased as determined by the Police Chief or his or her designee, and 2) the hours of operation for said guards, which may be increased or decreased as determined by the Police Chief. 5. The applicant shall install and maintain a camera surveillance system that meets the technical specifications outlined in South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.66.050, (Ord. 1515 § 1, 2016). Views and angles of all surveillance cameras must be approved by the South San Francisco Police Department’s Planning Sergeant. There must be enough cameras to provide the intended coverage of the specified intended areas. Cameras shall be placed minimally in the following areas: • all entrances and all exits • bar • restaurant • arcade • bowling alley point of sale • fire exit near lane #1 • each private or semi-private event room 28 Conditions of Approval Page 5 of 9 6. No doors within the premises shall be locked during business hours, and the on-site manager shall be responsible to see that any room or area on the premises shall be readily accessible at all times and shall be open to view in its entirety for inspection by any law enforcement officer upon request. 7. The exit doors (closest to lane #1) shall be constructed of a solid material, shall be marked “Emergency Exit Only – Alarmed” or of similar wording, and shall be equipped with an audible alarm that is activated when one or both of the doors are opened. The alarm should be loud enough so employees working at the bowling alley’s point of sale can hear it during the normal course of business. The doors shall have panic hardware installed on the interior side, and NO hardware installed on the exterior. 8. The alleyway, outside the doors listed above in #7, shall have a minimum of a six-foot tall gate on each the El Camino Real and the Northwood Drive sides. The gates shall have exit panic hardware on the interior side. The exterior of the gates shall be keyed and a corresponding key shall be secured in a KnoxBox at each gate location that is mounted in compliance with the Fire Department. 9. No private or semi-private event rooms shall have doors that are lockable. All doors to such rooms shall have a minimum of 144 square inches of transparent glass or similar material that allows viewing through the door. The view into and out of said rooms shall be clear and unobstructed by any items or materials and shall remain so at all times. 10. If applicant intends to operate four or more coin operated amusement machines, the applicant shall first obtain an arcade permit as required by South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 6.44. Applicant is responsible for following all sections of the above ordinance. 11. All private or semi-private event rooms shall have surveillance cameras installed that provide live and recorded monitoring of events by the business’ surveillance camera system. The business shall provide the ability to monitor live events in the private or semi-private event rooms by a peace officer upon request by means of the business’ surveillance camera system. 12. Special Events. Except for corporate events and events that are held in a private residence and not open to the public, every person, firm, partnership, corporation, organization, association, society, club, individual or group of individuals that intend to host, hold, allow, maintain, organize, conduct, promote or advertise any event, activity, or function that is reasonably expected to be attended by at least seventy-five people, regardless of whether the event, activity, or function is a “private event” or “special event” as defined in Section 6.48.010, the applicant/business owner/operator shall notify the city police department at least thirty days prior to the event. Notification shall include the location, date(s) and time(s) of the event, the names and addresses of the persons charged with managing the event, the type of event, and the anticipated numbers of attendees. (Ord. 1497 § 2, 2015; Ord. 1430 § 1, 2010). (Please note the term “corporate events” refers to events sponsored by corporate entities using their own facilities, NOT corporate events occurring at Hometown Bowl.) 29 Conditions of Approval Page 6 of 9 13. The applicant/business owner/operator shall contact the South San Francisco Police Department’s Community Relations Sergeant (650-877-8922) to obtain a private event permit for all special events. The Community Relations Sergeant, or his or her designee, shall evaluate each special event and determine if security is needed, and if so, specify whether private security or police officers are required. The applicant shall abide by all requirements set forth by the Community Relations Sergeant for any special events. 14. The applicant/business owner/operator shall comply with the requirement that commercial establishments having one hundred dollars or more in cash on the premises after closing hours shall lock such money in an approved type of money safe with a minimum rating of TL-15. 15. "No Loitering" signs shall be posted conspicuously throughout the parking area in locations designated by the Police Department. 16. The Police Department reserves the right to review and comment upon the submission of revised and updated plans. Contact: Sgt. Michael Rudis, Police Department, at (650) 877-8927 or mike.rudis@ssf.net 30 Conditions of Approval Page 7 of 9 STANDARD CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, MIXED USE, AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS Entitlement and Permit Status 1. Unless the use has commenced or related building permits have been issued within two (2) years of the date this permit is granted, this permit will automatically expire on that date. A one-year permit extension may be granted in accordance with provisions of the SSFMC Chapter 20.450 (Common Procedures). 2. The permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the property owner or a duly authorized representative files an affidavit, prior to the issuance of a building permit, stating that the property owner is aware of, and accepts, all of the conditions of the permit. 3. The permit shall be subject to revocation if the project is not operated in compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. Minor changes or deviations from the conditions of approval of the permit may be approved by the Chief Planner and major changes require approval of the Planning Commission, or final approval body of the City, per SSFMC Chapter 20.450 (Common Procedures). 5. Neither the granting of this permit nor any conditions attached thereto shall authorize, require or permit anything contrary to, or in conflict with any ordinances specifically named therein. 6. Prior to construction, all required building permits shall be obtained from the City’s Building Division. 7. All conditions of the permit shall be completely fulfilled to the satisfaction of the affected City Departments and Planning and Building Divisions prior to occupancy of any building. Any request for temporary power for testing equipment will be issued only upon substantial completion of the development. Lighting, Signs, and Trash Areas 8. All exterior lights shall be installed in such a manner that is consistent with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards), and there shall be no illumination on adjacent properties or streets which might be considered either objectionable by adjacent property owners or hazardous to motorists. 9. No additional signs, flags, pennants or banners shall be installed or erected on the site without prior approval, as required by SSFMC Chapter 20.360 (Signs). 31 Conditions of Approval Page 8 of 9 10. Adequate trash areas shall be provided as required by SSFMC 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 11. Trash handling area must be covered, enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit. If being installed in a food service facility the drain must be connected to a grease interceptor prior to the connection to the sanitary sewer. Landscaping, Construction, & Utilities 12. The construction and permitted use on the property shall be so conducted as to reduce to a minimum any noise vibration or dust resulting from the operation. 13. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted. 14. All sewerage and waste disposal shall be only by means of an approved sanitary system. 15. Prior to any on-site grading, a grading permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer. 16. All existing utility lines, underground cable conduits and structures which are not proposed to be removed shall be shown on the improvement plans and their disposition noted. 17. All landscape areas shall be watered via an automatic irrigation system which shall be maintained in fully operable condition at all times, and which complies with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 18. All planting areas shall be maintained by a qualified professional; the landscape shall be kept on a regular fertilization and maintenance program and shall be maintained weed free. 19. Plant materials shall be selectively pruned by a qualified arborist; no topping or excessive cutting-back shall be permitted. Tree pruning shall allow the natural branching structure to develop. 20. Plant materials shall be replaced when necessary with the same species originally specified unless otherwise approved by the Chief Planner. Parking Areas, Screening, & Drainage 21. All ducting for air conditioning, heating, blower systems, accessory mechanisms and all other forms of mechanical or electrical equipment which are placed on or adjacent to the building shall be screened from public view, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 32 Conditions of Approval Page 9 of 9 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 22. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turn-around areas and landscaping areas shall be kept free of debris, litter and weeds at all times. Site, structures, paving, landscaping, light standards, pavement markings and all other facilities shall be permanently maintained. 23. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, and turn-around areas must drain and be plumbed to the sanitary sewer. 24. The onsite stormwater catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay). Public Safety 25. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the Municipal Code, “Minimum Building Security Standards” Ordinance revised May 1995. The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.24 of the Municipal Code, “Fire Code” Ordinance. The Fire Department reserves the right to make additional safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 27. All fire sprinkler test and/or drain lines shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. 33 Review November 2022 Section A - Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: General: 8) We have posted and noted the parking area for Hometown Bowl. Visible signs are located inside the bowling alley, noted in our emails to customers reserving bowling lanes and security informs guests upon arrival. 9) We have taken extra measures to ensure the surrounding area within 500 feet of the establishment, including the adjacent neighborhood, parking lots and alleyway, in a clean and orderly manner during and after regular business hours and any private events. We have also hired additional security personnel to assist. 10) We have established a phone line and comment box - located at the front desk, to address any concerns. 11) Vince and Trung are in contact with special events officers, especially when big events are booked. 12) We have a log that includes historical event data that is kept for all events. 13) In partnership with Liza Normandy from the SSF Chamber of Commerce, we were not able to reach our Go Fund Me Goal of $7K to bring back the Astro Boy mural. We are open to revisiting this project if funding is established. 14) The wooden roof sign at the northwestern has been removed on October 20, 2021. 16) We have been responsive and have participated in all reviews asked of us from the Planning Department. 17) Hometown Bowl uniform has been provided to all our staff including security guards. They are all required to wear this while working. 18) We have worked and continue to work with our Audio/Video team to ensure we meet the sound decibel measurements set forth by SSF. In compliance with SSFMC Chapter 8.32, Noise Regulations. 34 Section B - Fire Department requirements shall be as follows: 1)Compliant 2)Fire Extinguishers have been inspected/approved as of August 2022 3)Compliant - Keys have been provided Section C Police Department requirements shall be as follows: 1)Compliant 2)Compliant 3)Compliant 4)Compliant - We have hired security guards to ensure the safety of our guests. They have established a relationship with police officers that come onsite. There has been minimal disturbances and police calls to the business since the last planning meeting. 5)Complaint - We have Active Security Cameras to cover the premises a)all entrances and all exits b)bar c)restaurant d)arcade e)bowling alley point of sale f)fire exit near lane #1 g)each private or semi-private event room 6)Compliant 7)Compliant - Installed Emergency Alarm Bar Doors 8)Complicated - Installed 6 ft exit doors in alley on November 2021, located on El Camino Real and the Northwood Drive 9)Compliant 10)Arcade Permit - being established by our Arcade Room Vendor 11)Private Room - Camera System Active 12)Trung and Vince are in contact with the special events police team and will inform the police in advance of any special events 13)Will comply 14)Compliant - Safe onsite 15)Compliant - "No Loitering" signs are located all around the premises Lighting/ Signs/ Trash 8) Additional light have been installed along the gas station parking side 9) None. 10) There is a built and locked area for the trash bins in the adjacent gas station parking lot 11) All Trash bins have a padlock and are locked when not in use, with overhead covering. 35 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:22-919 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:3. Report regarding consideration of a Use Permit to allow Indoor Entertainment at 608 Dubuque Avenue in the Freeway Commercial Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC)and determination that the project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).(Victoria Kim, Associate Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the Use Permit (UP22-0007),based on the attached Draft Findings and subject to the attached Draft Conditions of Approval,and determine that the Project is categorically exempt under the provisions of CEQA, Class 1, Section 15301, Existing Facilities. MOTION TO ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1.Make CEQA findings and approve the Use Permit,subject to the attached draft Findings and draft Conditions of Approval. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The applicant (Irene Li)submitted an application on May 26,2022 for a Use Permit proposing live entertainment activities at an existing restaurant named HL Peninsula.Prior to the current restaurant use,the project building was used for retail and warehousing.In 2017,the applicant obtained a business license (No. 110185)to open the current restaurant use permitted by right.The Use Permit request is solely for adding the use of Indoor Entertainment with the existing restaurant services.The project would not change the existing building exterior and site conditions. Site Overview The subject property is located at 608 Dubuque Avenue in the Freeway Commercial (FC)Zoning District.A large commercial parking lot is situated next to the subject property on the north and the east.The Project is in the East of 101 area bordered by Dubuque Avenue on the west and a new research and development office building which is currently under construction on the south.The site has a one-story restaurant building (approximately 13,900 square feet)with parking spaces mainly on the south with a couple of standard parking and accessible parking spaces. Proposed Project The applicant proposes to have live entertainment incident to the current restaurant building and a Use Permit is required for the indoor entertainment in the FC Zoning District.Restaurant visitors are utilizing the shared parking lot on site and the project would not need to modify the existing parking conditions and use.The proposed use would not expand the present building footprint or increase the current occupancy. Operation Plan The proposed indoor entertainment would be within HL Peninsula restaurant building during business hours between 10:30 a.m.and 2:30 p.m.and 5:00 p.m.to 9:30 p.m.,Monday through Sunday.According to the submitted operation plan (Ref.Attachment 3),the maximum number of employees would be 21 in the morning and afternoon shifts and customers would be no more than 350 presumably.The live entertainment activitiesCity of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™36 File #:22-919 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:3. and afternoon shifts and customers would be no more than 350 presumably.The live entertainment activities encompass live band playing and live singing performance for social meetings such as birthday parties, wedding banquets,family gathering,and work events.The incidental entertainment use to the restaurant would create indoor recreational opportunities and provide a social amenity to the neighborhood in the East of 101 area. ZONING CONSISTENCY Land Use The project property is located in the Freeway Commercial (FC)Zoning District.According to South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC)Section 20.110.002 (Land Use Regulations),a broad range of commercial and employment uses are allowed or with the approval of a Minor or a Use Permit.The proposed live entertainment is considered as an indoor entertainment which is an allowed use after review and approval of a Use Permit. Parking Requirements The current ingress and egress access to the project parking lot is from Dubuque Avenue with two driveways on western part of the property.The project parking lot located between the existing restaurant building and adjacent building in the northeast from the project site (previously Lowe’s)were developed jointly and have been shared interchangeably for visitors to both properties (Ref.Attachment 5 and 6).The Lowe’s building is vacant at present and a large portion of the shared parking lot is leased to a construction company to access and utilize the current construction project at 580 Dubuque Avenue.There would be 102 parking spaces for the restaurant,Monday to Friday and 230 parking spaces during weekends according to the Traffic Control Plan (Ref. Attachment 7). Pursuant to SSFMC Section 20.330.004 (Required Parking Spaces),a total of 185 parking spaces are required for the HL Peninsula restaurant (1 per 75 square feet)and 247 parking spaces for the Lowe’s building as 1 parking space required per 500 square feet.The existing shared parking spaces provide sufficient spaces with 670 parking stalls and would be in accordance with the parking requirements and development standards. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The project site is designated as Business Commercial consistent with the City’s General Plan adopted in 1999. The land use designation is intended to provide a diverse range of non-residential uses including business, visitor-oriented,and regional commercial activities,and intended for business and professional offices,and visitor service establishments,and retail.The project includes Indoor Entertainment at the restaurant which is a commercial activity use and meets the intent of the adopted General Plan designation.The proposed live entertainment activities would be an ancillary use to the existing restaurant serving for the neighborhood in the East of 101 area to hold community and office events. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Based on staff’s assessment,the Applicant’s request for Indoor Entertainment at the project site would be within an existing restaurant building and no physical expansion in the current use and proposed use.The project,as conditioned,would not result in substantial changes to traffic,air quality,water or noise on the surrounding community and would not have any significant effect on the existing environment.Therefore,it is staff’s assessment that the project is categorically exempt under the provision of CEQA (Class 1,Section 15301, Existing Facilities). City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™37 File #:22-919 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:3. CONCLUSION The proposed Indoor Entertainment for live entertainment activities at the existing restaurant complies with the SSFMC,General Plan,and Zoning Ordinance including Land Use Regulations and Development Standards. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission make CEQA findings and approve a Use Permit (UP22-0007) request under the Planning Project File (P22-0054),subject to the attached draft Findings and draft Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1.Draft Findings 2.Draft Conditions of Approval 3.Site Plans 4.Planning Application with Project Description 5.Design Review Board Application Record (File No. DR-S-83-132) 6.Building Permit Record (File No. B07-1356) 7.580 Dubuque Pedestrian and Traffic Control Plan City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™38 FINDINGS OF APPROVAL P22-0054: UP 22-0007 608 DUBUQUE AVENUE (As recommended by City Planning Staff on November 17, 2022) As required by the Use Permit Procedures (SSFMC Chapter 20.490), the following findings are made in support of a Use Permit to allow Indoor Entertainment at 608 Dubuque Avenue in Freeway Commercial Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC), based on materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Division which include, but are not limited to: Application materials prepared by applicant, submitted August 19, 2022; Use Permit staff report dated November 17, 2022; and Conditions of Approval. REQUIRED FINDINGS A. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this Ordinance and all other titles of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. Supportive Evidence: The project site is located within the Freeway Commercial (FC) Zoning District. Pursuant to the land use regulations in Sections 20.110.002, indoor entertainment is permitted in FC Zoning Districts with a Use Permit. B. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan. Supportive Evidence: The project is consistent with the General Plan which designates the site as Business Commercial. C. The proposed use will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. Supportive Evidence: The project will not adversely impact to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, or detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. The indoor entertainment will be operated within an existing building and no exterior alteration is proposed. D. The proposed use complies with any design or development standards applicable to the zoning district or the use in question as may be adopted by a resolution of the Planning Commission and/or the City Council. Supportive Evidence: The project complies with design and development standards applicable to the FC Zoning District and use. No exterior modification is proposed, and the proposed use would be operated within the existing facility. E. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity would be compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity. 39 Findings of Approval Supportive Evidence: The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the project would be compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity. The project would be within the existing structure and no exterior change is proposed. F.The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints. Supportive Evidence: The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of the project use, including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints. The access to the project site would remain the same from Dubuque Avenue and no physical expansion of the existing building is proposed. G.An environmental determination has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Supportive Evidence: In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, staff has assessed and the Planning Commission finds that the proposed project is Categorically Exempt per the provisions of Section 15301, Class 1, Existing Facilities. 40 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P22-0054: UP 22-0007 608 DUBUQUE AVENUE (As recommended by City Planning Staff on November 17, 2022) A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: 1. The applicant shall comply with the City of South San Francisco, Department of Economic and Community Development – Planning Division, standard Conditions and Limitations for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Family Residential Projects. 2. The construction drawing shall substantially comply with the approved plans dated July 11, 2022, prepared by Xu Engineering as approved by the Planning Commission for UP 22-0007, as amended by the Conditions of Approval. The final plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the Chief Planner. 3. The applicant shall maintain the existing landscape for the site and all landscaped areas shall be permanently maintained in compliance with Chapter 20.300.007 of the Zoning Ordinance. 4. Any exterior business signage will require a sign application pursuant to Chapter 20.360 of the Zoning Ordinance. Submitting a sign permit application for the exterior signage is required prior to a final Building Permit. 5. The business shall be operated substantially as outlined in the Operation Plan (Ref. Attachment 3) and Project Description submitted by Irene Li dated May 26, 2022 (Ref. Attachment 4). 6. The Use Permit (UP22-0007) shall be solely for the Indoor Entertainment use and any live entertainment activities outside of the restaurant building shall require a special event permit in compliance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 6.48, Special Event Permits. 7. All parking areas shall be maintained clear of litter and storage at all the time. No outdoor storage of materials is allowed, and no work shall be conducted outside of a building. (Planning Division contact person: Victoria Kim, Associate Planner (650) 877-8535) 41 B. Fire Department requirements shall be as follows: After review of application and plans provided for this project, the Fire Department has the following comments. This plan is being returned APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOTED BELOW. 1. Projects shall be designed in compliance with established regulations adopted by the City of South San Francisco affecting or related to structures, processes, premises, and safeguards regarding the following: 2. New and existing buildings shall be provided with approved illuminated or other approved means of address identification. The address identification shall be legible and placed in a position that is visible from the street or road fronting the property. Address identification characters shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numerals or alphabetic letters. Numbers shall not be spelled out. Character size and stroke shall be in accordance with CFC Section 505.1.1 through 505.1.2. Where required by the fire code official, address identification shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response in accordance with this code and CFC Section 505.1.3. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way or when determined by the fire code official, a monument, pole, or other approved illuminated sign or other approved means shall be used to identify the structure(s). Address identification shall be maintained. 3. A Fire Department key box shall be provided on the front of each structure for access to fire protection equipment within the building. 4. A change of occupancy shall not be made unless the use or occupancy is made to comply with the requirements of the City adopted California Fire Code and the California Existing Building Code. 5. A Fire Inspection of that facility shall be performed to verify appropriate compliance with fire and life safety conditions are met and maintained prior to the new use. (Fire Department contact person: Ian Hardage, Battalion Chief Fire Marshal at (650) 829-6645) 42 C. Fire Department requirements shall be as follows: 1. The above referenced Planning Commission agenda item has been reviewed and the following are the conditions from the Police Department: 2. All construction must conform to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070 Minimum-security standards for nonresidential buildings, (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995) 3. The applicant shall install and maintain a central station silent intrusion alarm (burglary alarm) per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070(i)(2)(Q), (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995) 4. The applicant shall install and maintain a central station silent robbery alarm per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapters 15.48.070(h)(1)(G), 15.48.070(h)(1)(H), and 15.48.070(h)(1)(M), (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995). 5. A security guard(s) shall be charged with preventing violations of law and enforcing compliance by patrons of the requirements of these regulations as well as controlling behavior and reporting all criminal offenses to the Police Department. Security guards shall be uniformed in such a manner to be readily identifiable as a security guard by the public and shall be duly licensed as a security guard as required by applicable provisions of the state and the City. No security guard required pursuant to this Condition of Approval shall act as a door person, ticket seller, ticket taker, admittance person, sole occupant of the manager's station, or have an other ancillary duties while acting as a security guard. The Police Chief reserves the right to determine; 1) the appropriate number of guards, which may be increased or decreased as determined by the Police Chief or his or her designee, and 2) the hours of operation for said guards, which may be increased or decreased as determined by the Police Chief. As of June 8, 2022, zero (0) security guards are required. 6. The applicant shall install and maintain a camera surveillance system that meets the technical specifications outlined in South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.66.050, (Ord. 1515 § 1, 2016). Views and angles of all surveillance cameras must be approved by the South San Francisco Police Department’s Planning Sergeant. There must be enough cameras to provide the intended coverage of the specified intended areas. Cameras shall be placed minimally in the following areas: • all entrances and all exits • all points of sale • the entire parking lot where restaurant customers park their vehicles 7. No doors within the premises shall be locked during business hours and the on-site manager shall be responsible to see that any room or area on the premises shall be readily 43 accessible at all times and shall be open to view in its entirety for inspection by any law enforcement officer upon request. 8. No private or semi-private event rooms shall have doors that are lockable. All doors to such rooms shall have a minimum of 144 square inches of transparent glass or similar material that allows viewing through the door. The view into and out of said rooms shall be clear and unobstructed by any items or materials and shall always remain so. 9. Special Events. If HL Peninsula Restaurant intends to host, hold, allow, maintain, organize, conduct, promote or advertise any event, activity, or function that is reasonably expected to be attended by at least seventy-five people, regardless of whether the event, activity, or function is a “private event” or “special event” as defined in Section 6.48.010, shall notify the city police department at least thirty days prior to the event. Notification shall include the location, date(s) and time(s) of the event, the names and addresses of the persons charged with managing the event, the type of event, and the anticipated numbers of attendees. (Ord. 1497 § 2, 2015; Ord. 1430 § 1, 2010). 10. The applicant shall contact the South San Francisco Police Department’s Community Relations Sergeant (650-877-8922) to obtain a private event permit for all special events. The Community Relations Sergeant, or his or her designee, shall evaluate each special event and determine if security is needed, and if so, specify whether private security or police officers are required. The applicant shall abide by all requirements set forth by the Community Relations Sergeant for any special events. 11. Commercial establishments having one hundred dollars or more in cash on the premises after closing hours shall lock such money in an approved type of money safe with a minimum rating of TL-15. 12. "No Loitering" signs will be posted conspicuously throughout the parking area in locations designated by the Police Department. 13. The Police Department reserves the right to review and comment upon the submission of revised and updated plans. (Police Department contact person: Michael Rudis, Planning Sergeant at (650) 877-8927) 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: Report regarding consideration of an application for Design Review,Use Permit,Development Agreement,and Transportation Demand Management Plan to construct a new 12-story,165 foot tall,350 room,261,000 square foot hotel building,with 232 surface parking spaces and site improvements,located at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan zone district,and determination that the project is within the scope of a previously adopted Programmatic EIR under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168. (Christy Usher, Senior Planner) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1.Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council make findings and a determination that the 367 Marina Boulevard Oyster Point Hotel is consistent with the adopted Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and would not necessitate the need for preparing a subsequent environmental document pursuant to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168,and is eligible for streamlining per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. 2.Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council make findings and approve the entitlements request for Project P22-0014 including Use Permit (UP22-0001),Design Review (DR22-0005), Development Agreement (DA22-0001)and Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0006), subject to the attached draft Conditions of Approval. MOTIONS FOR THE COMMISSION TO ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATION: (1) Move to adopt the resolution recommending a CEQA determination. (2) Move to adopt the resolution recommending entitlements. PROJECT OVERVIEW The project includes construction of a new 12-story,350-room hotel building,site improvements,and surface parking at 367 Marina Boulevard.The proposed hotel building is approximately 261,00 sf and 165 feet in height.An additional 14,200 square feet of building space is anticipated as a future expansion phase to include an event ballroom and additional meeting space for a total square footage of 275,200.The project would include approximately 232 surface parking spaces. The Project is located along Marina Boulevard near the eastern terminus of Oyster Point Boulevard,which connects to US-101 and major arterials within South San Francisco.The Project includes three driveways or vehicle access points along Marina Boulevard and a public access trail along the eastern edge of the site connecting to the Bay Trail. The project site is 204,742 square feet or 4.7 acres.The project site is currently vacant and maintained as anCity of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 1 of 8 powered by Legistar™70 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: The project site is 204,742 square feet or 4.7 acres.The project site is currently vacant and maintained as an active construction site after relocation of some landfill material and the regrading of the remaining refuse and landfill cap and cover. Land uses in the project vicinity include a mixture of industry,warehousing,retail,offices,hotels,marinas,and bioscience research and development facilities.The area is also currently separated from most of South San Francisco’s residential uses by U.S.101 (the closest of which are about 3,500 feet to the west)though some live -aboard boats are located at the two marinas located on Oyster Point and Oyster Cove marinas in the OPSP area. The site is flanked by the existing marina to the north and the San Francisco Bay to the south.The Bay Trail extends along the southern edge of the site and connects around the end of the peninsula.To the west of the site a dedicated public open space is planned while to the east are existing commercial buildings and parking lots with access to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal.The site is a “Brownfield site”that has been regraded and capped by Kilroy Realty,the master developer of the specific plan,and is currently sitting vacant,ready for development. Proposed hotel amenities include a restaurant,lobby lounge,event ballroom,meeting rooms,fitness facilities, and roof top bar.Hotel amenities,specifically the restaurant,lounge,and roof top bar,are intended to be available to the public and provide views both north and south across the San Francisco Bay. The project site is proposed to be landscaped around the perimeter and throughout the proposed hotel building. The planting palette focuses on evergreen,dense screening trees and shrubs along the perimeter of outdoor spaces to protect against the cold winds while still providing a lush,water-wise garden aesthetic in the central program areas.When possible,materials such as permeable pavers,flag stone,decomposed granite and gabion walls will be used as part of the design vocabulary.These planting and hardscape design philosophies are seen throughout the site. BACKGROUND The Project is located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan area,an 81 acre redevelopment in South San Francisco approved in 2011.The OPSP included replacing the existing 403,212 square feet of light industrial/office space known as the Oyster Point Business Park with an up to 2,300,000 square foot office/research and development (R&D)development,improvements to the site circulation,utilities,and the landfill cap,provision of a flexible use recreation area and bay-front open space,and replacement of uses in the Oyster Point Marina area,potentially including one or two hotels with an aggregate of up to 350 rooms.The Specific Plan’s Phase One buildings (660,000 square feet)were completed in early 2022,while remaining phases are underway. The approximately 85-acre OPSP site is located about 3/4 of a mile east of U.S.101,at the eastern end (Bay side)of Oyster Point and Marina Boulevards.The OPSP is part of the City of South San Francisco’s “East of 101”planning area,the traditional and continued core of South San Francisco’s industrial and technological businesses.The East of 101 area consists of roughly 1,700 acres of land bound by San Francisco Bay on the east side,U.S.101 and railway lines on the west,the City of Brisbane and San Francisco Bay on the north,and San Francisco International Airport on the south. City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 2 of 8 powered by Legistar™71 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: ZONING CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The site is zoned Oyster Point Specific Plan and the project is consistent with the development standards established for the Oyster Point Specific Plan zoning district.While the project requires a Use Permit for the hotel reduced parking;these entitlement requests are permitted in the City’s code when a project satisfies the findings to approve the entitlements.The Findings for approval of the requested entitlements for the hotel project are supported and documented in the staff report,findings,and conditions of approval for the project. As conditioned,the proposed project is compliant with all development standards and regulations and provisions for entitlements in the City’s Municipal Code. Table 1. Development Standard Compliance Proposed Project Development Standard Minimum Lot Size 204,742 sf (4.7 acres)10,000 sf Floor Area 261,000 sf 327,587-450,432 sf Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR)1.3 1.6-2.2* Height 165 ft FAA regulations Setbacks**n/a n/a Maximum Lot Coverage 27%60% *FAR Maximum Floor Area Ratio with Incentives Program (20.110.003)allows the permitted FAR of 1.6 to be increased to 2.2 (Table 20.110.003(C))based on Specified Trip Reduction Standards (See Chapter 20.400. Table 20.400.003, Transportation Demand Management) ** No setbacks are required in OPSP zone district. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS The proposed project is consistent with the following General Plan goals,policies,and implementation measures of the General Plan because the project as proposed and conditioned will minimize the effects of traffic,parking,storm water run-off,and construction dust and emissions,on adjacent land uses and properties in the project vicinity. ·Allow parking reductions for projects that have agreed to implement trip reduction methods (4.3-I-18, Transportation Element); ·Strive to maintain LOS D or better at all intersections (4.2-G-15, Transportation Element); ·Require new development pay a fair share of the cost of street and other traffic and transportation improvements (4.2-I-7, Transportation Element); ·Require provision of secure covered bicycle parking (4.3-I-7, Transportation Element) ·Methodology to determine eligibility for land use intensity bonus for TDM programs and ensure continued maintenance of measures (4.3-I-15, Transportation Element). ·Require off-site improvements that are directly necessary as a result of development (4-35, Transportation Element) ·Minimize the risk to life and property from seismic activity and geologic hazards in South San Francisco. (8.1-G-1, Safety Element) ·Adopt the standard construction dust abatement measures included in BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines. These measures would reduce particulate emissions from construction and grading activities.(7.3-I-3, City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 3 of 8 powered by Legistar™72 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: Conservation and Open Space Element) ·Encourage land use and transportation strategies that promote use of alternatives to the automobile for transportation,including bicycling,bus transit,and carpooling (7.3-G-4,Conservation and Open Space Element) REQUESTED ENTITLEMENTS As required by the South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC),the proposed project requires the following entitlements: ·Design Review for the proposed hotel building and site improvements; ·Use Permit for the proposed parking reduction, ·Transportation Demand Management plan for a nonresidential project resulting in more than 100 average daily trips. ·Development Agreement for business terms All signage for the proposed hotel will be applied for under separate permits. Design Review (SSFMC 20.480) The project was reviewed by the City’s Development Review Board (DRB)on May 17,2022.The DRB liked the design concept and recommended approval with conditions due to the project’s well thought out architecture and landscape design as evident in the building elevations and landscape materials.The Board commented the design is beautiful,the lighting is wonderful,and the outdoor space is well designed for wind and the SSF climate The DRB also provided input and feedback to the applicant regarding landscaping,screening service areas and parking stalls and ramps,landscaping and retaining walls.The applicant has revised the plans in response to the DRB’s comments and concerns. The proposed project was reviewed and recommended for approval to the Planning Commission by the DRB because the proposed hotel building and site improvements are consistent with the City’s applicable design guidelines, including but not limited to the following: ·The proposed hotel building includes adequate design features to create architectural interest and avoid a large-scale, bulky and “box-like” appearance. ·Long facades are broken up into smaller visual components through variations in form and texture. ·Wall planes are varied and exterior building walls vary in depth and/or direction. ·Building walls exhibit offsets,recesses,or projections with significant depth,or a repeated pattern of offsets, recesses, or projections of smaller depth. ·There is variety in height and roof forms.Building height is varied so that portions of the building have a change in height and are varied over different portions of the building through changes in the roof parapets, elevators and stairway projections. ·The building façade incorporates details such as window recesses and changes in material.The use of materials, textures, and colors enhance architectural interest and emphasize details and changes in plane. ·Some of the architectural features of the main façade are incorporated into the rear and side elevations. The hotel is designed in such a way to maximize bay views while providing protected amenity spaces from the prevailing winds.The hotel massing steps back as it raises to the higher floors,providing suite terraces and a City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 4 of 8 powered by Legistar™73 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: break from the vertically on the ends. The proposed materials consist of two-tones of darker bronze and champagne bronze anodized metal panels accented through darker grey metal panels.Two different glazing tints are considered,a vision glass to pair with the bronze panels and a darker blue glazing to pair with the dark grey metal.The combination of these materials provide contrast in the massing forms and help further break up the façade of the tower.At the base of the hotel,a split face,dry stacked stone base helps break up massing and integrate it into the landscape amenities.Site walls are executed using gabion walls to prevent site settlement cracks that may occur due to the nature of the soil’s conditions. While the location and views are a premium resource,the environmental factors of harsh winds,cold climate and poor soil conditions were also taken into account by the design.To work with these conditions,the planting palette focuses on evergreen,dense screening trees and shrubs along the perimeter of outdoor spaces to protect against the cold winds while still providing a lush,water-wise garden aesthetic in the central program areas. When possible,materials such as permeable pavers,flag stone,decomposed granite and gabion walls will be used as part of the design vocabulary.These planting and hardscape design philosophies are seen throughout the site Use Permit for Reduced Parking for Airport-Oriented Hotels and Motels 20.330.006(C) For airport-oriented hotels a Use Permit may be approved for a reduced off-street parking ratio if the applicant provides substantial justification. Justification shall take into account the following factors and conditions: 1.Distance the hotel or motel is located from the airport.Airport-oriented hotels and motels are usually located no further than three miles from the San Francisco International Airport.The proposed Hotel would be located within three miles of the San Francisco International (SFO) Airport’s border. 2.Availability of airport bus and/or limousine service.The location of this hotel will be served by various airport shuttle, bus and limousine services. 3.Proximity of auto rental agencies to the site.Additional parking may be required for rental facilities on the site.Since San Francisco International Airport is located in close proximity to the hotel there are many rental car services nearby.There are approximately 6-8 car rental facilities all within less than 3 miles of the proposed hotel. 4.Availability of parking facilities adjoining the site which have peak use hours different from peak hours of the hotel or motel.In the project vicinity there is a combination of several large scale public and private surface parking lots which would have alternate parking peaks from the hotel. 5.Documentation of actual use of parking spaces at an existing and comparable facility for an extended period of time.Parking demand estimated using standard rates published by ITE in Parking Generation,5th Edition is expected to be 259 parking spaces,a deficit of 27 spaces.However,with the implementation of the TDM plan measures,discussed further in the following section,the proposed parking supply is expected to be adequate. 6.Availability of on-site meeting rooms and conference facilities.The project as proposed would provide approximately 14,300 square feet of on-site meeting rooms and conference facilities. City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 5 of 8 powered by Legistar™74 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: 7.Designation of additional parking spaces to allow for extended parking for guests using the airport.As proposed,the Hotel would not be providing extended parking (e.g.,for long-term airport parking).As proposed, the Hotel would not be providing extended parking (e.g.,for long-term airport parking).As proposed,the parking stalls would be solely for overnight guests and employees. 8.In determining the required number of off-street parking spaces needed for an airport-oriented hotel or motel,the Planning Commission shall include provisions for additional off-street parking spaces to serve employee needs at the rate of one-half space per employee and for related uses such as restaurants and conference/meeting rooms.As calculated the provided parking includes parking spaces to serve employee needs and any ancillary uses. As documented above, the project satisfies the conditions for reduced parking for airport oriented hotels. The project proposes a reduction in the number of required parking spaces on site and is projected to be able to meet parking demand with the implementation of the Transportation Demand Management plan and as discussed in the Parking Study. Transportation Demand Management Plan (20.400.006) A Transportation Demand Management program is required for a nonresidential project resulting in more than 100 average daily trips to reduce the amount of traffic generated by new nonresidential development. According to the transportation assessment,the proposed project is expected to generate an average of 2,798 trips per day, including 161 total trips during the a.m. peak hour and 207 total trips during the p.m. peak hour. The Transportation Demand Management plan for the proposed hotel outlines numerous trip reduction measures applicable to both guests and employees including but not limited to subsidized transit passes for employees encouraging uses of Caltrain,BART,SF Bay Ferry and SamTrans services,bicycle storage showers and lockers and repair,and strategies to reduce employee commutes such as carpool/vanpool ridematching, guaranteed ride home programs,and free parking for carpool/vanpools just to name a few.All of these and more trip reduction measures discussed in the project TDM plan are feasible and relevant to the operation of the proposed hotel land use and it’s guests and employees. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The Applicant and the City are negotiating a Development Agreement to clarify and obligate Project features and mitigation measures.The parties are still engaged in active negotiations and many of the deal points are still outstanding.However,all outstanding deal points relate to business terms;the parties are in agreement on the nature and density of the development.A draft of the Development is attached to the entitlements resolution. Key features of the Development Agreement where the parties are in agreement include: ·The term of the Development Agreement is ten (10) years. ·Execute and Implement an Operation and Maintenance Agreement with the City providing the City and/or the Water Board with financial assurance for completion of Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures. ·Developer to enter into a Transient Occupancy Tax Rebate Agreement with the City providing for 50% City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 6 of 8 powered by Legistar™75 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: ·Developer to enter into a Transient Occupancy Tax Rebate Agreement with the City providing for 50% TOT rebate for fifteen years with a total TOT rebate cap of $44,530,000.If hotel exceeds profitability forecasts at time of sale, the City will receive a percentage of the sale proceeds. ·Developer commits to participate in CFD assessments up to $1 per square foot of development. ·Developer will contribute $250,000 towards the construction of a new sewer pump station. ·Developer will undertake certain ongoing mitigation and monitoring activities required due to the fact that the site is a closed landfill. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The project site is within the area planned for development as a part of the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan and associated 2011 Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number 2010022070).The current project is located on the eastern peninsula portion of the 85-acre OPSP area,including the area identified in the in the OPSP as the Future Hotel Site. Consistent with the OPSP and its associated EIR,a 350-room hotel is currently being proposed.The current project proposes up to 275,200 square feet of area,including approximately 12,000 square feet of restaurant space plus other amenities common for a hotel use including an entry lobby with lounge,meeting rooms, fitness facilities,roof top bar,and the associated back of house facilities to service the amenities.This total square footage also includes an additional 14,200 square feet of building space proposed as a future expansion phase to include an event ballroom and additional meeting space.The exterior space includes parking and circulation elements, landscaping, and outdoor terraces and event spaces. California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168 provide that when a Programmatic EIR has been prepared and certified,later activities (such as the current project)determined by the lead agency as being within the scope of the that EIR do not require subsequent environmental review when the project meets the criteria outlined in Section 15162. CEQA Guidelines section 15183 provides that projects consistent with the development density established by existing zoning policies or community plan for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review,except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects that are peculiar to the project or its site. The environmental checklist prepared for the project dated October 2022 concludes that the project is within the analysis outlined in the 2011 EIR and that as applied to the project, the criteria outlined in Sections 15162 and 15168 do not necessitate preparation of an additional environmental document. The environmental checklist also demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 as there are no project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. The checklist serves as substantial evidence that the current project is within the scope of the previous analysis and that subsequent CEQA analysis is not required for the proposed project. CONCLUSION The project,as conditioned,is compliant with the City’s Municipal Code,Development Standards and Design City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 7 of 8 powered by Legistar™76 File #:22-954 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #: The project,as conditioned,is compliant with the City’s Municipal Code,Development Standards and Design Criteria, General Plan and Oyster Point Specific Plan. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1.Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council make findings and a determination that the 367 Marina Boulevard Oyster Point Hotel is consistent with the adopted Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and would not necessitate the need for preparing a subsequent environmental document pursuant to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168,and is eligible for streamlining per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. 2.Adopt a resolution recommending that the City Council make findings and approve the entitlements request for Project P22-0014 including Use Permit (UP22-0001),Design Review (DR22-0005), Development Agreement (DA22-0001)and Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0006), subject to the attached draft Conditions of Approval. Attachments 1.Applicant’s Written Project Narrative 2.Applicant response to the DRB Recommendations, dated June 30, 2022 3.Public Comment from OneShoreline, dated July 5, 2022 Associated Resolutions and Exhibits to Resolutions I.CEQA Resolution (File ID# 22-902) A.Environmental Checklist, dated October 2022 B.Mitigation Monitoring Report C.2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR (available online at <https://weblink.ssf.net/WebLink/0/doc/270123/Page1.aspx> II.Entitlements Resolution (File ID#22-903) A.Conditions of Approval B.Project Plans, dated September 28, 2022 C.Transportation Demand Management Study, dated October 3, 2022 D.Parking Study, dated October 17, 2022 E.Transportation Assessment Memo, dated October 21, 2022 F.Draft Development Agreement, dated November 3, 2022 G.Design Review Board letter City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 8 of 8 powered by Legistar™77 Scott A. Lee, AIA, LEED AP Bruce A. Wright, AIA, LEED AP Mark S. Sopp, AIA, LEED AP Jorey S. Friedman N. Pinar Harris, AIA, LEED AP Project Description - Oyster Point Hotel Revised: June 27, 2022 Prepared by SB Architects on behalf of Ensemble Real Estate Investments 1. Introduction: Ensemble Real Estate Investments (“Applicant”) proposes to develop a full-service hotel on the peninsula of Oyster Point designated within South San Francisco specific plan (formal address yet to be assigned). The applicant seeks approval of the Precise Plan (“Entitlements”) by the end of 2022 with the intent of submitting to the building department for permit approval by the end of 2023. The project intends to service the Oyster Point developments currently under construction or planned to be built by Kilroy Reality while also providing public amenities to the broader community East of the 101 area. 2. Setting: The property is approximately 204,742 square foot parcel (4.70 acres; APN: 015-011-350) that sits on the peninsula of the Oyster Point specific plan and is dedicated for a future hotel development. The site is flanked by the existing marina to the north and the San Francisco Bay to the south. The Bay Trail extends along the southern edge of the site and connects around the end of the peninsula. To the west of the site a dedicated public open space is planned while to the east are existing commercial buildings and parking lots with access to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The site is a “Brownfield site” that has been regraded and capped by Kilroy Reality, the master developer of the specific plan, and is currently sitting vacant, ready for development. 3. Proposed Project a. Project Features The proposed project would consist of 350 hotel rooms, restaurant, lobby lounge, event ballroom, meeting rooms, fitness facilities, roof top bar and the associated back of house facilities to service the amenities. Hotel amenities, specifically the restaurant, lounge, and roof top bar, are intended to be available to the public and provide views both north and south across the San Francisco bay. A dedicated arrival for the restaurant from outside guests is currently considered adjacent to a new pedestrian connection that connects the southern Bay Trail to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. 78 In total the gross building area is approximately 254,000 square feet in habitable area and will provide a total of 207 parking spaces of which 148 will be uncovered surface parking spaces and 59 covered parking spaces (40 of which will be valet operated as a mechanically stacked system). A screened loading dock with space allocated for two dedicated service trucks is provided adjacent to the back of house facilities with access through the central parking lot. The building will be classified high-rise at 12 habitable floors with the last floor served sitting at 119ft above grade. Additional height is considered at the top of the building for mechanical equipment screening and elevator overruns that will put the overall height of the building at approximately 148 feet above grade. Landscape & Site Design Narrative Oyster Point Hotel is nestled in prime real estate along the east bay of South San Francisco city. While the location and views are a premium resource, the environmental factors of harsh winds, cold climate and poor soil conditions allow for creative design solutions. To work with these conditions, the planting palette will focus on evergreen, dense screening trees and shrubs along the perimeter of outdoor spaces to protect against the cold winds while still providing a lush, water-wise garden aesthetic in the central program areas. When possible, materials such as permeable pavers, flag stone, decomposed granite and gabion walls will be used as part of the design vocabulary. These planting and hardscape design philosophies are seen throughout the site and are key to the cohesive hotel guest experience. The start of the landscape experience begins at the main hotel entry drive flanked by specimen trees that greet you into the arrival courtyard. The courtyard features an elegant porte-cochere and outdoor living room space that transitions guest into the hotel lobby. This space can also be reached by foot from the street or the adjacent public BCDC trail to the east through the enhanced pedestrian links. To the west of the building entrance is the valet parking lot that doubles as a flexible event space with a pre-function terrace attached to the lobby. The ground plane is a combination of enhanced concrete pavers, grasscrete and turf lawn which help soften the look of the valet parking area and provide permeable surfaces for water quality control opportunities. The edges are wrapped by a mixture of pine, specimen and accent trees which protect the space from harsh winds and screen any unwanted views of the off-site facilities to the south-west. From inside the lobby, guest can look out to the south-east over the hotel’s art garden and toward the beautiful bay views. This garden area acts as a retreat for the hotel guest which includes a variety of amenities such as a breakout lawn, fire pit, spa terrace, art moments 79 and group seating clusters. The landscape design in this area is also a much more diverse and colorful California Coastal Garden Palette that features variety of flowing shrubs and plant textures. To the east of the art garden is the multi-purpose event court. This area is mostly a passive reflection space that can be set up to host a variety of events including wedding receptions, bayside garden dining, and small concerts. Views are set up along two axes orientated toward a background of either large specimen trees or open views of the bay. The ground plane is a mixture of enhanced concrete pavers, flagstone and decomposed granite which give the space a more organic, natural feel. Overall, the landscape design aims to welcome guest to experience the outdoor program as an extension of the hotel’s interior spaces. Architecture & Materiality: The hotel is positioned in such a way to maximize bay views while provided protected amenity spaces from the prevailing winds. The tower steps the massing as it raises to the higher floors, providing suite terraces and a break from the vertically on the ends. Guests arrive at an outdoor living room and are oriented on view through the transparent lobby to the bay beyond. The materiality of the tower consists of two-tones of darker bronze and champagne bronze anodized metal panels accented through darker grey metal panels. Two different glazing tints are considered, a vision glass to pair with the bronze panels and a darker blue glazing to pair with the dark grey metal. The combination of these materials provide contrast in the massing forms and help further break up the façade of the tower. As the tower lands on the site, a split face, dry stacked stone base helps receive the tower and integrate it into the landscape amenities. Site walls are executed using gabion walls to prevent site settlement cracks that may occur due to the nature of the soil’s conditions. b. Requested Approvals The applicant plans to submit the Precise Plan application by May 1, 2022 and is seeking approval of the project’s Precise Plan by the end of calendar year 2022. Pending approval of the precise plan, the Applicant intends to submit the project plans for construction permit by the end of 2023. Additional review will be submitted to the FAA for confirmation of building height with respect to the airport approach corridors. 80 c. Public Benefits The Project aims to fill the market need, providing a 4-star hotel to service the growing business developments within the Oyster Point specific plan and surrounding areas. The project will provide additional function and meeting space while being positioned at an International Audience for business travelers. The project amenities will provide an anchor for the community with its food and beverage offerings as well as gathering opportunities within the lounge and bar spaces. The hotel can further support the potential for a future ferry terminal proposed by the South San Francisco City within the marina to the north of the hotel while providing employment and career opportunities for the South San Francisco workforce. The estimated tax revenue for the city is projected at $146,349,000 over a 20-year period. 81 Scott A. Lee, AIA, LEED AP Bruce A. Wright, AIA, LEED AP Mark S. Sopp, AIA, LEED AP Jorey S. Friedman N. Pinar Harris, AIA, LEED AP Oyster Point Hotel - DRB Comment Responses June 30, 2022 Prepared by SB Architects & IMA on behalf of Ensemble Real Estate Investments Narrative documents the Design Review Board comments addressed from the Precise Plan Submittal dated 04/29/2022. Design Team responses to the Design Review Board Recommendations dated June 1, 2022 Project No: P22-0014: UP22-0001, DR22-005, DA22-0001 Please see below our corrections in response to the comments. Item No. Description Design Review Board Response Narrative 1. The Board liked the rise, terraces, porte-cochere, shape, and flow of the proposed design concept, and throughout the design was well articulated. The Board commented that the architecture and landscape design are both thoughtful as evident in the building elevations and landscaping materials. Response: • Comment noted, no response needed. 2. The Board also commented the design is beautiful, the lighting is wonderful, and the outdoor space is well designed for the wind. The Board stated the proposed project is the best design of a hotel the city has seen in many years. Response: • Comment noted, no response needed. 3. The development has an excellent outdoor space for individuals to utilized and is well planned for the wind conditions. Response: • Comment noted, no response needed. 82 4. Review the landscaping plans, as some species will not survive the SSF elements due to wind and cold issues. • Holly Oak will not work well on this site. • Coast Redwood will not survive the harsh wind. • Arbutus unedo is more of a shrub, consider using Arbutus unedo ‘Marina’, which is a successful evergreen tree in SSF. • Leyland Cypress is often a short-lived tree in the area. • Myoporum laetum are attacked by thrips and many of them died or died back severely during the last big frost. • Cistus, Rockrose will need good sandy soil, and is often short lived. • Clematus armandii vine will not take wind. Take care of the orientation if used. • Liriope suffers from snail infestations and requires additional maintenance. Response: • Quercus ilex, Sequoia sempervirens, Cupressocyparis x leylandii, Myoporum laetum, Cistus salvifolius ‘Prostratus’, Clematus armandii and Liriope spp. will all be removed from the current planting palette. • Arbutus unedo will be replaced with Arbutus unedo ‘Marina’. • The above is a condition of approval at future design phase. 5. Consider planting clusters of trees off-site on the adjacent vacant parcel and coordinate with the City to plant beyond the south edge, if possible, for a more organic look and feel rather than a strict line of trees at the perimeter of the site and parking area. Response: • Proposed trees along the perimeters on the hotel site will be laid out more informally and have irregular spacing to create an organic appearance. o Adjacent Open Space Parcel: Design Team is working with Kilroy, SSF City and BCDC to incorporate the required North/South pedestrian connection and will provide landscaping on the hotel property long side of this. Note that the latest interim design of the open space access locates a public parking lot and access to Marina Blvd. at the northeast corner of the open space and would prevent the design team from planting any cluster of trees like what has been planned adjacent to Kilroy’s Phase 1. o Northeast Hotel Parcel: Fire Lane access is being revised to provide additional planting at the northeast corner. Planting along the entire east property line may be limited due to increased width of fire lane, although the design team is working with the fire marshal for potential alternative fire access measures. 6. Consider adding ground floor solar panels. Response: • Photovoltaic/Solar panels placement are currently considered integrated as part of the roof parapet screening at the top of the hotel tower. Additional areas can be identified for solar ready locations pending additional need on lower, southern facing, roof expanses. 83 7. Screen service areas on the façade including but not limited to the trash enclosure. Response: • Gabion site walls with operated gates will screen the hotel service dock & employee parking zone. These will only be opened when vehicles arrive or leave from the service area and will be promptly closed once able. • Dedicated loading dock is provided to keep trucks screened further from the service zone. • Design will provide hedges and vines around trash enclosure, service, and MEP areas in conjunction with proposed site walls and gates for maximum screening. 8. Maintain the curved corners on the future development and building out on site to continue the nautical look and feel. Response: • Noted, future Phase 2 expansion will include rounded corner conditions, rounded shade canopies and materiality to match the current hotel design. 9. BCDC will also review and comment on the proposed project including but not limited to the lighting. Response: • Design team has coordinated with BCDC on position and design requirements of the required north/south connector trail. Revised design based on discussion held on June 15, 2022, is being prepared for distribution to BCDC. 84 July 5, 2022 City of South San Francisco Planning Division 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Subject: Development Review Comments on Oyster Point Hotel (Project) April 29, 2022 Project Precise Plan Staff at the San Mateo County Flood and Sea Level Rise Resiliency District (OneShoreline) have reviewed the Project documents and offer the following comments: 1. So that the Project and adjacent public and private assets can function under long-term future climate-driven conditions, the Project’s stormwater conveyance infrastructure should be designed with those conditions in mind. For areas adjacent to San Francisco Bay, OneShoreline’s objective assumes six feet of sea level rise. 2. As another aspect of climate change in our area is the occurrence of infrequent, but more extreme, storm events, the Project should ensure that the first 1.25 inches of rainwater from an individual storm event remains on the Project site rather than impact adjacent properties. Please provide documentation of the Project’s stormwater storage capacity. 3. The Applicant should expect that sea level rise protection and enhancements related to trails and the environment in the Project area will be aligned with adjacent areas of the shoreline. To ensure that alignment and avoid the need to retrofit and disrupt the Project site, the Applicant should coordinate with staff of OneShoreline and the City. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input for the long-term viability and success of this important project. Sincerely, Len Materman Chief Executive Officer 85 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:22-955 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4a. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council determine that the environmental effects of the proposed Oyster Point Hotel at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan Area is consistent with the adopted Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and would not necessitate the need for preparing a subsequent environmental document pursuant to the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168, and is eligible for streamlining per CEQA Guidelines Section 15183. WHEREAS,Oyster Point Holdco,LLC (“Applicant”)has proposed construction of an approximately 261,00 square foot hotel.An additional 14,200 square feet of building space is anticipated as a future expansion phase to include an event ballroom and additional meeting space for a total square footage of 275,200 at 367 Marina Boulevard (“Project Site”); and WHEREAS, the proposed Project is located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan (OPSP) zoning district; and WHEREAS,the applicant seeks approval of a Design Review (DR22-0005),Use Permit (UP22-0001), Development Agreement (DA22-0001)and Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0006)for the Project; and WHEREAS,approval of the applicant’s proposal is considered a “project”for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§21000, et seq.) (“CEQA”); and WHEREAS,the City Council approved the Oyster Point Specific Plan in 2011,which articulates the vision for growth and development throughout Oyster Point; and WHEREAS,the City Council certified the Oyster Point Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”)in March,2011 (State Clearinghouse number 2010022070)in accordance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines,which analyzed the potential environmental impacts of the development of Oyster Point; and WHEREAS,the City and applicant prepared an environmental checklist for the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c)(4).Such environmental checklist concluded that per CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 and CEQA Guidelines 15162,the Project is within the scope of the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and development of the Project does not require the preparation of an additional environmental document; and WHEREAS,CEQA Guidelines section 15183 provides that projects consistent with the development density established by existing zoning policies or community plan for which an EIR was certified shall not require City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™86 File #:22-955 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4a. established by existing zoning policies or community plan for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental review,except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects that are peculiar to the project or its site.The environmental checklist also demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 as there are no project- specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. WHEREAS,on November 17,2022,the Planning Commission for the City of South San Francisco held a lawfully noticed public hearing to solicit public comment and consider the proposed entitlements and environmental effects of the Project and take public testimony; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission exercised its independent judgment and analysis,and considered all reports, recommendations, and testimony before making a determination on the Project. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it,which includes without limitation,the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§21000,et seq.) (“CEQA”)and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§15000,et seq.);the South San Francisco General Plan and General Plan EIR;the Oyster Point Specific Plan,and the Oyster Point Specific Plan Program EIR;the Oyster Point Hotel Environmental Checklist,all site plans,and all reports,minutes,and public testimony submitted as part of the Planning Commission’s duly noticed November 17,2022 meeting; and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code Sections 21080(e)and 21082.2),the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows: SECTION 1 FINDINGS A.General Findings 1.The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution. 2.Exhibit A attached to this Resolution,The Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist, is incorporated by reference and made a part of this Resolution, as if set forth fully herein. 3.The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco,315 Maple Avenue,South San Francisco,CA 94080, and in the custody of the Chief Planner, Tony Rozzi. B.CEQA Findings 1.For the reasons stated in this Resolution,there is not substantial evidence in the record to support a fair argument that approval of the Project will result,as contemplated in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162,in significant environmental effects beyond those adequately evaluated and addressed by the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR nor are there new or alternative mitigation measures that the applicant declines to impose.Therefore,the Project is within the scope of the City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™87 File #:22-955 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4a. measures that the applicant declines to impose.Therefore,the Project is within the scope of the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR and may be used for this later activity pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 because the Project is a subsequent project within the scope of the Project Description as analyzed in the Program EIR for the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan.All applicable regulations and mitigation measures (Exhibit B)identified in the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR will be applied to the Project or otherwise made conditions of approval of the Project. 2.For the reasons stated in this Resolution,the proposed Project is consistent with the development density established by existing zoning,community plan,or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified and therefore,the Project does not require additional environmental review,except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site.The environmental checklist demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183,as there are no project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. SECTION 2 DETERMINATION NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution and recommends that the City Council make a determination that the environmental effects of the proposed Project were sufficiently analyzed under the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR (EIR)pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168 and no additional environmental review is required.The environmental checklist also demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, as there are no project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. ******* City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™88 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE PROJECT IS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN EIR SCH# 2010022070     Lead Agency: City of South San Francisco Economic & Community Development Department 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94083-0711          Prepared By: Lamphier–Gregory, Inc. 4100 Redwood Road Ste 20A - #601 Oakland, CA 94619 October 2022 89   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page i Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ i  I.  Project Characteristics ....................................................................................................... 1  II.  Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 2  III.  Background, Purpose, and Organization ............................................................................ 3  IV.  Project Description ............................................................................................................ 6  V.  Summary of CEQA Findings .............................................................................................. 22  VI.   Environmental Checklist .................................................................................................. 23  A. Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................ 24  B. Agricultural and Forest Resources ...................................................................................... 26  C. Air Quality ............................................................................................................................ 27  D. Biological Resources ............................................................................................................ 31  E. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources ................................................................................ 35  F. Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................. 36  G. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................. 39  H. Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Wildfire ................................................................. 42  I. Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................... 46  J. Land Use ............................................................................................................................... 49  K. Mineral Resources ............................................................................................................... 50  L. Noise .................................................................................................................................... 51  M. Population & Housing ........................................................................................................ 53  N. Public Services & Recreation .............................................................................................. 54  O. Transportation and Circulation ........................................................................................... 55  P. Utilities and Service Systems and Energy ............................................................................ 58    Attachments  A:   Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program  B:   Fehr & Peers Transportation Assessment      90   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 1 I. Project Characteristics 1. Project Title:  Oyster Point Hotel Project   2. Lead Agency Name and Address:   City of South San Francisco        Economic & Community Development Department         315 Maple Avenue        South San Francisco, CA 94083‐0711  3. Contact Person and Phone Number:    Christy Usher, Senior Planner        City of South San Francisco, Economic & Community        Development Department         315 Maple Avenue        South San Francisco, CA 94083‐0711        Phone: 650‐829‐6633  4. Project Location:        367 Marina Boulevard, South San Francisco, CA         Assessor’s Parcel Number: 015‐011‐350  5. Project Sponsors’ Names and Addresses:   Oyster Point Holdco, LLC        Contact: Randy McPherson        444 W. Ocean Blvd., Suite 650  Long Beach, CA 90802        Phone: 602‐327‐1305        rmcpherson@ensemble.net  6. Existing General Plan Designations:     Coastal Commercial   7. Existing Zoning:        Oyster Point Specific Plan District (OPSPD)   8. Requested Approvals:       Precise Plan Approval           91 Page 2 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist II. Executive Summary The project site is within the area planned for development as a part of the 2011 Oyster Point  Specific Plan and associated 2011 Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse Number  2010022070). The current project is located on the eastern peninsula portion of the 85‐acre OPSP  area, including the area identified in the in the OPSP as the Future Hotel Site.   Consistent with the OPSP and its associated EIR, a 350‐room hotel is currently being proposed. The  current project proposes up to 275,200 square feet of area, including approximately 12,000 square  feet of restaurant space plus other amenities common for a hotel use including an entry lobby with  lounge, meeting rooms, fitness facilities, roof top bar, and the associated back of house facilities to  service the amenities. This total square footage also includes an additional 14,200 square feet of  building space proposed as a future expansion phase to include an event ballroom and additional  meeting space. The exterior space includes parking and circulation elements, landscaping, and  outdoor terraces and event spaces.   California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15168 provides that when a  Programmatic EIR has been prepared and certified, later activities (such as the proposed project)  determined by the lead agency as being within the scope of the that EIR do not require subsequent  environmental review, unless the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 triggering  subsequent environmental review are met. This document serves as substantial evidence that the  proposed project is within the scope of the OPSP EIR and that subsequent environmental review is  not required since the project would not have effects that were not examined in the program EIR,  and no substantial changes or new information has arisen that would result in new significant  environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant  impacts.  This document also examines the proposed project’s consistency with the OPSP EIR pursuant to  CEQA Guidelines Section 15183, which allows for streamlining the environmental review process for  projects that are consistent with the development density established by existing zoning,  community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified.           92 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 3 III. Background, Purpose, and Organization Background The project site is within the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan (OPSP) area. The OPSP was originally  approved in March 2011, together with amendments to the South San Francisco General Plan and  the South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 20.230), and the associated EIR was certified  (2011 EIR). The OPSP included replacing the existing 403,212 square feet of light industrial/office  space known as the Oyster Point Business Park with an up to 2,300,000 square foot office/research  and development (R&D) development, improvements to the site circulation, utilities, and the landfill  cap, provision of a flexible use recreation area and bay‐front open space, and replacement of uses in  the Oyster Point Marina area, potentially including one or two hotels with an aggregate of up to 350  rooms.  The OPSP, being a specific plan, was analyzed in the 2011 EIR (State Clearinghouse Number  2010022070) as a whole on a programmatic level. The 2011 EIR additionally analyzed the Phase 1  development on a project level, as project‐level details were proposed for that phase at the time.  Development of office/R&D in the Phase 1 area, including refuse relocation and regrading of this  hotel site, consistent with the 2011 EIR has previously been approved and was completing  construction at the time of this report.   The 2011 EIR for the OPSP is hereby incorporated by reference and can be obtained from the City of  South San Francisco Economic & Community Development Department at 315 Maple Avenue in  South San Francisco, and on the City of South San Francisco website at: http://weblink.ssf.net under  Planning Division/Environmental Reports/Oyster Point Specific Plan.  Purpose This Environmental Checklist examines the environmental effects of the proposed project to  determine whether the proposed project is within the scope of the 2011 EIR for the OPSP or  whether further environmental review is required. This document has been prepared in accordance  with the relevant provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines as implemented by the City of South  San Francisco.      CEQA Guidelines section 15168 provides that later activities in the program must be examined in the  light of the program EIR to determine whether an additional environmental document must be  prepared and specifies how a program EIR is used with those later activities.    (1) If a later activity would have effects that were not examined in the program EIR, a new  initial study would need to be prepared leading to either an EIR or a negative declaration.  That later analysis may tier from the program EIR as provided in Section 15152.    (2) If the agency finds that pursuant to Section 15162, no subsequent EIR would be required,  the agency can approve the activity as being within the scope of the project covered by the  program EIR, and no new environmental document would be required. Whether a later  activity is within the scope of a program EIR is a factual question that the lead agency  determines based on substantial evidence in the record. Factors that an agency may  consider in making that determination include, but are not limited to, consistency of the  93 Page 4 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist later activity with the type of allowable land use, overall planned density and building  intensity, geographic area analyzed for environmental impacts, and covered infrastructure,  as described in the program EIR.    (3) An agency shall incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in  the program EIR into later activities in the program.    (4) Where the later activities involve site specific operations, the agency should use a  written checklist or similar device to document the evaluation of the site and the activity to  determine whether the environmental effects of the operation were within the scope of the  program EIR.    (5) A program EIR will be most helpful in dealing with later activities if it provides a  description of planned activities that would implement the program and deals with the  effects of the program as specifically and comprehensively as possible. With a good and  detailed project description and analysis of the program, many later activities could be  found to be within the scope of the project described in the program EIR, and no further  environmental documents would be required.   CEQA Guidelines section 15183 provides that projects consistent with the development density  established by existing zoning policies or community plan for which an EIR was certified shall not  require additional environmental review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there  are project‐ specific significant effects that are peculiar to the project or its site. In such cases, the  City must limit its examination of environmental effects to those that the agency determines, in an  initial study or other analysis:     (1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would be located,    (2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning   action, general plan or community plan with which the project is consistent,    (3) Are potentially significant off‐site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not  discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general plan, community plan or zoning action, or    (4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new  information which was not known at the time the EIR was certified, are determined to have  a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the prior EIR. Notably, If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed as a  significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by the imposition of uniformly  applied development policies or standards, then an EIR is not required.  This Environmental Checklist demonstrates that none of the conditions described in CEQA  Guidelines sections 15162 or 15168 have occurred because as proposed, the project would not  result in new or substantially more severe significant environmental effects than what was analyzed  in the 2011 EIR; therefore, no further environmental review is required. This Environmental  Checklist also demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA  94 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 5 Guidelines section 15183 as there are no project‐specific significant effects which are peculiar to the  project or its site.  Organization Section I, Project Characteristics presents a quick reference of the project details.   Section II, Executive Summary includes a summary of conclusions of this document.   Section III, Purpose and Organization (this section).   Section IV, Project Description details the proposed project.  Section V, Summary of CEQA Findings explains the findings of this document.   Section VI, Environmental Checklist details the potential environmental impacts of the project,  including the impact findings of the 2011 EIR and relevant Mitigation Measures (MMs) and explains  whether the current project would cause new or more significant environmental impacts than those  identified in the 2011 EIR.   Attachment A includes full text of the MMs applicable to the current project in the proposed  Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.    95 Page 6 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist IV. Project Description Project Site and Vicinity The approximately 85‐acre OPSP site is located about 3/4 of a mile east of U.S. 101, at the eastern  end (Bay side) of Oyster Point and Marina Boulevards. The OPSP is part of the City of South San  Francisco’s “East of 101” planning area, the traditional and continued core of South San Francisco’s  industrial and technological businesses. The East of 101 area consists of roughly 1,700 acres of land  bound by San Francisco Bay on the east side, U.S. 101 and railway lines on the west, the City of  Brisbane and San Francisco Bay on the north, and San Francisco International Airport on the south.  The area has a mix of land uses, including industry, warehousing, retail, offices, hotels, marinas, and  bioscience research and development facilities. The area is also currently separated from most of  South San Francisco’s residential uses by U.S. 101 (the closest of which are about 3,500 feet to the  west) though some live‐aboard boats are permitted at the two marinas located on Oyster Point and  Oyster Cove marinas in the OPSP area.  The currently proposed project consists of one 4.7‐acre parcel on the eastern peninsula of the 85‐ acre OPSP area, including the area identified in the OSPS as the Future Hotel Site (APN 015‐011‐ 350). The project site is flanked by the existing marina to the north and the San Francisco Bay to the  south. The Bay Trail extends along the eastern and southern edges of the site. Existing commercial  buildings and parking lots with access to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal are located to the  east. While currently vacant following recent landfill debris relocation and recapping/covering, a  dedicated public open space is planned to the west between the project site and the Phase 1  office/R&D development under construction during preparation of this document. The location of  the current project is shown in Figure 1.  The project site is currently vacant and maintained as an active construction site after relocation of  some landfill material and the regrading of the remaining refuse and landfill cap and cover. While  there had been existing buildings partially located at this site that were mentioned in the 2011 EIR,  these were previously removed as part of the prior activities at the site.   Proposed Project Figures follow the descriptive text showing the project site plan (Figure 2), site programming (Figure  3), grading and drainage (Figure 4), floor plans (Figures 5 through 10), and elevations (Figures 11  through 14).   The OPSP originally envisioned demolition of the existing building and construction of one or two  hotels with a total of no more than 350 rooms plus up to 40,000 square feet of restaurant/retail  uses.  In that same general area, the current project proposes preparation of the site for development by  adding approximately 9 feet of fill on top of the landfill cap followed by the construction of one 350  room hotel. In addition to hotel rooms and related circulation and support, this square footage  includes about 12,000 square feet of restaurant space plus other amenities common for a hotel use  including an entry lobby with lounge, meeting rooms, fitness facilities, roof top bar, and the  associated back of house facilities to service the amenities.   96 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 7 The exterior space includes parking and circulation elements, landscaping, and outdoor terraces and  event spaces.   The above proposal totals approximately 261,000 square feet. An additional 14,200 square feet of  building space is proposed as a future expansion phase to include an event ballroom and additional  meeting space for a total square footage of 275,200.   Consistent with existing hotels in the vicinity, the project would be anticipated to primarily serve  nearby business and the San Francisco International Airport.   Building Height and Massing  The proposed project would be 12 stories tall, reaching a height of 119 feet above grade, with  allowable rooftop equipment and projections reaching a height of approximately 146 feet above  grade (165 feet above sea level).  The proposed building footprint is 43,043 square feet, which would be expanded to 56,631 with the  proposed future ballroom expansion, equating to about 28% of the site.   Access and Circulation  Vehicular Access: The project proposes three vehicular driveways along Marina Boulevard and a  fourth connection that would act as a fire and service lane.   Bicycle & Pedestrian Circulation: Pedestrian links are proposed between the hotel and Marina  Boulevard and the Bay Trail, which is located adjacent to the east of the project site.  Transit Facilities & Network Configuration: Except for the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal, the  project site is not within walking distance of regional transit service, such as Caltrain and BART.  Access to these services are provided by feeder shuttles operated by Commute.org. Currently, three  commute.org shuttle routes provide service along and to the northern end of Oyster Point  Boulevard and connect the project site with the South San Francisco BART and Caltrain stations and  the South San Francisco Ferry terminal. During the weekday AM and PM peak period, each shuttle  route operates on approximately 30‐minute headways in the peak direction and are timed to  connect with arriving or departing ferries and Caltrain service. Service is limited to weekday  commute periods and directions.   Parking: Approximately 232 vehicle parking spaces would be provided, including 29 tandem spaces  and 33 valet spaces. Parking for 35 bikes is proposed, including 10 for employees and 25 public  spaces. A screened loading dock and yard with space allocated for two dedicated service trucks  would be provided adjacent to the back of house facilities with access through the central parking  lot.            97 Page 8 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                                                 Figure 1: Project Location  Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22 98  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 9                     Figure 2: Site Plan Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  99  Page 10 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                     Figure 3: Site Programming Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22   100  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 11                     Figure 4: Preliminary Grading and Drainage Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  101  Page 12 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                     Figure 5: Floor Plan, Ground Floor Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  102  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 13                    Figure 6: Floor Plan, Floor 2 Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22 (see Legend on Figure 5) 103  Page 14 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                      Figure 7: Floor Plan, Floor 3 Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22 (see Legend on Figure 5) 104  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 15                    Figure 8: Floor Plan, Floors 4 through 7 (these floors would have substantially similar floor plans) Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  (see Legend on Figure 5) 105  Page 16 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                     Figure 9: Floor Plan, Floors 9 through 11 (these floors would have substantially similar floor plans) Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  (see Legend on Figure 5) 106  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 17                      Figure 10: Floor Plan, Floor 12 Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  (see Legend on Figure 5) 107  Page 18 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                      Figure 11: Building Elevation, North Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  108  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 19                     Figure 12: Building Elevation, South Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  (see Legend on Figure 11) 109  Page 20 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist                     Figure 13: Building Elevation, East Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  (see Legend on Figure 11)  110  Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 21                   Figure 14: Building Elevation, West Source: SB Architects, Project Plan Set, dated 9/28/22  (see Legend on Figure 11) 111   Page 22 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist V. Summary of CEQA Findings Given the substantial evidence included in this document and attachments and the 2011 EIR for the  OPSP, the current project would not require subsequent analysis to the 2011 EIR per CEQA Guidelines  Section 15162, as confirmed by the following statements:    (1)  The current project would not result in new significant environmental effects or a substantial  increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;   (2)  There are no changes in circumstances that would result in the involvement of new significant  environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant  effects; or   (3)  There is no new information resulting in a new significant effect or a substantial increase in the  severity of previously identified significant effects, or a change in the feasibility (or acceptance) of  mitigation measures.     While specific details of the hotel development within the OPSP area have now been proposed, this  assessment has determined that no further documentation is required per CEQA Guidelines Section  15162. The 2011 EIR for the OPSP continues to serve as the applicable environmental review document  pursuant to the requirements of CEQA for approval of the current project.       112   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 23 VI. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST This Environmental Checklist compares potential environmental impacts of the project to the findings of  the 2011 EIR, notes whether the project would result in new significant impacts or impacts substantially  greater or more severe than those previously identified in the 2011 EIR, and includes an explanation  substantiating the findings for each topic. It uses the abbreviation SU for significant and unavoidable,  LTS for less‐than‐significant, LTS w/ MMs for impacts that are reduced to LTS with implementation of  identified mitigation measures (MMs), and NI for when No Impact was identified in the 2011 EIR.  The checklist also lists applicable mitigation measures from the 2011 EIR. A full list of the MMs  applicable to the current project can be found in Attachment A, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting  Program (MMRP). More detail regarding the significance criteria used in this document and the  environmental impacts of implementation of the OPSP is available in the OPSP Draft and Final EIR  available from the City of South San Francisco Economic & Community Development Department at 315  Maple Avenue in South San Francisco, and on the City of South San Francisco website at:  http://weblink.ssf.net under Planning Division/Environmental Reports/Oyster Point Specific Plan.  When a dash (‐‐) appears in the checklist below, it means that the OPSP EIR did not identify any MMs  related to that environmental impact. N/A appears when an MM was identified but it does not apply to  the current project (e.g., the project characteristics do not meet the criteria specified in the MM).   As discussed below, the proposed project was designed to be in general compliance with the  development, design, and performance standards of the OPSP, and the project is therefore consistent  with the 2011 EIR. There is no evidence of substantial changes to the circumstances under which  impacts were analyzed in the 2011 EIR, and no evidence of new information of substantial importance,  which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the  time the 2011 EIR was certified, that would show a new or more severe significant impact resulting from  the project relative to the analysis included in the 2011 EIR.     113   Page 24 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist A. Aesthetics   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required) PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs Project Level  of Significance Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a.  Scenic Vistas   LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐ LTS  b. Scenic Resources  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐ NI  c. Visual Character   NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐ NI  d.  Light or Glare  LTS w/ MM ☒ ☐ MM Vis‐2a: Lighting Plan  MM Vis‐2b: Glare Reduction  LTS w/ MM  Discussion Aesthetic Changes from the 2011 EIR   Consistent with the OPSP, the existing building previously located on the project site has already been  demolished as part of prior activities at the site.   Visual models and renderings of the proposed development can be seen in Figures 3 through 5. The full  description of the proposed changes can be found in Section IV: Project Description and was used to  assess aesthetic impacts. The proposed changes can be summarized as follows:  The 2011 EIR did not have any details about a proposed hotel design, other than the OPSP allowing for 1  or 2 hotels with a maximum of 350 rooms. The 2011 EIR included a possible hotel project in the visual  modeling, which included a lower height (75 feet compared to the proposed height of 119 feet) and a  larger footprint than currently proposed. This visual modeling was conducted for demonstrative  purposes prior to details being available and was not intended to represent constraints on the actual  development. The 2011 EIR noted that actual heights would be restricted only to those allowable under  Federal Aviation Regulations Part 77, which this project would be required to be in compliance with.   Scenic Vistas   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Vis‐1 or the  less‐than‐significant conclusion as there are no scenic vista viewpoints in the area and therefore the  potential to impact views is generally the same as under the 2011 EIR despite revisions to the height of  the building.   While both the San Francisco Bay and San Bruno Mountains are visible from portions of the site and  surrounding area, there are no designated public viewpoints for scenic vistas.  The topography of the  area and existing development already fully or partially blocks views from U.S. 101 and surrounding  development. The conclusion of less‐than‐significant in regard to scenic vistas would remain the same  even with the taller building proposed with the current project.  114   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 25 Scenic Resources   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion related to scenic highways, as the lack of scenic designation of the nearby highways is the  same as under the 2011 EIR.  Visual Character   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no adverse impact  conclusion as commercial development consistent with applicable design criteria is not considered a  degradation of character or quality of the environment.   The visual character of the East of 101 area consists of a mixture of older and newer office, industrial,  and hotel buildings, with differing amounts of associated landscaping. Development of the current  project would involve new construction of a modern building with a high‐quality design including private  and public landscaping and pedestrian improvements. While the height would substantially increase  over the existing vacant conditions, the proposed conditions are within that allowed under the zoning  and consistent with other development in the East of 101 area. Therefore, consistent with conclusions  of the 2011 EIR, while the site would look different following construction, the construction of a modern  building meeting or exceeding the City’s design criteria would not result in any new or substantially  more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Light and Glare   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impact Vis‐2,  mitigation measures Vis‐2a and Vis‐2b, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion as the  proposed lighting levels and potential for light and glare would be substantially the same as under the  2011 EIR.   While the development proposed with the current project has different specific building massing and  location than that included in the visual model for the 2011 EIR, as specified in the 2011 EIR, the project   will be required to adhere to a lighting plan (mitigation measure Vis‐2a) and incorporate exterior  surfaces intended to reduce glare (mitigation measure Vis‐2b). The potential for light and glare impacts  would remain substantially the same as under the 2011 EIR, and therefore the project would not result  in any new or substantially more severe impacts related to light and glare than previously analyzed in  the 2011 EIR.        115   Page 26 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist B. Agricultural and Forest Resources Impacts  Related To: OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of Significance Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Convert Farmland  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  b. Conflict with  Agricultural  Designation  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  c. Conflict with  Forest Designation  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  d.  Convert Forest  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  e.  Indirect  Conversion of  Agricultural or  Forest Land  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  Discussion Same Conclusion (NI): There have been no changes in circumstance or new information related to  agriculture and forest resources, which do not occur in the project area, and there would be no change to  the no impact conclusion related to these topics.     116   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 27 C. Air Quality   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Conflict with Air  Quality Plan  SU w/MM ☒ ☐ MM Traf‐1: Transportation Demand  Management Plan  LTS w/MM  b. Criteria Air  Pollutants  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ MM AIR‐4a: Implement BAAQMD‐ Recommended Measures to Control  Particulate Matter Emissions during  Construction  MM Traf‐1: Transportation Demand  Management Plan  LTS w/MM  c. Sensitive  Receptors  LTS w/ MM ☒ ☐ MM AIR‐4a: Implement BAAQMD‐ Recommended Measures to Control  Particulate Matter Emissions during  Construction    LTS w/ MM  d. Odors  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  Discussion Air Quality Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Since the 2011 EIR, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) has updated its CEQA Air  Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD Guidelines), which assist lead agencies in evaluating and mitigating air  quality impacts. The 2011 EIR was being prepared as the 1999 BAAQMD Guidelines were being updated  for the 2010 draft and the 2011 EIR compared the OPSP to both thresholds. The latest draft of the  BAAQMD guidelines was issued in May 2017 and includes thresholds consistent with the 2010 draft  BAAQMD Guidelines assessed in the 2011 EIR. Since the 2011 EIR, the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan  updated the 2010 Clean Air Plan utilized in the 2011 EIR assessment. The latest update to the Clean Air  Plan revises the way in which projects are assessed for consistency and no longer considers the ratio of  population increase to vehicle use of a project to be a consistency factor.   Conflict with Air Quality Plan   Less Significant Conclusion (SU reduced to LTS w/ MM): There have been no changes in circumstance or  new information related to the applicable air quality plans, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation  conclusion as the potential impacts would be substantially the same as under the 2011 EIR. In addition,  the Clean Air Plan has been updated since the 2011 EIR and now includes different standards with which  to assess a project; while no further analysis is required by CEQA, consistency with the updated Clean Air  Plan is nonetheless evaluated for informational purposes below. Mitigation measure Traf‐1, requiring  implementation of TDM plans, remains applicable and unchanged from the 2011 EIR and would apply to  the project.  The significant and unavoidable impact in the 2011 EIR was based on the previous Clean Air Plan’s  requirement to consider the relative increase in population and vehicle use. This is no longer a threshold  in the current Clean Air Plan. Under the current Clean Air Plan, a project’s impact would be significant if  117   Page 28 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist the project would conflict with or obstruct attainment of the primary goals or implementation of the  control measures.  The primary goals of the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan are:  • Attain all state and national air quality standards  • Eliminate disparities among Bay Area communities in cancer health risk from toxic air  contaminants  • Reduce Bay Area GHG emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, and 80 percent  below 1990 levels by 2050. [This standard is addressed in Section G: Greenhouse Gas  Emissions.]  The current project would be consistent with all applicable rules and regulations related to emissions  and health risk and would not result in a new substantial source of emissions or toxic air contaminants  or otherwise conflict with the primary goals of the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan.  Many of the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan’s control measures are targeted to area‐wide improvements,  regional policies, or large stationary source reductions, and these are not directly applicable to the  project. However, the current project is consistent with all rules and regulations related to construction  activities and the proposed development would meet current standards of energy and water efficiency  (Energy Control Measure EN1 and Water Control Measure WR2) and recycling and green waste  requirements (Waste Management Control Measures WA3 and WA4). The required TDM plans (MM  Traf‐1) will contribute to trip reduction programs (Transportation Control Measure TR2), and improving  access/connectivity for bicycles and pedestrians (Transportation Control Measure TR9).   Therefore, the project does not conflict with applicable control measures, is generally consistent with  the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan, and would not create any new or substantially more severe impacts  than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR. The project would also be subject to mitigation measure Traf‐1  requiring TDM plans for development, which would require trip reductions that would also reduce  resultant emissions.  Criteria Air Pollutants   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impact Air‐4  and the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion related to construction‐period impacts or Impact  Air‐5 and the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion related to operational‐period impacts.  Mitigation measure Air‐4b relates to refuse relocation, which has already been completed on the project  site, and is therefore not applicable.  As noted in the 2011 EIR, short‐term degradation of air quality may occur due to the release of fugitive  dust, criteria pollutants, and diesel exhaust particulate matter generated by grading, hauling, and other  construction related activities. Construction emissions from redevelopment were quantified based on  overall areas and building square footages and were found to be below thresholds levels with  implementation of applicable controls detailed in MM Air‐4a. (MM Air‐4b relates to refuse relocation  from the Phase 1 site, which has already occurred on the project site and is not a part of the current  project.)  As noted in the 2011 EIR, development of the OPSP would generate operational emissions from vehicle  emissions and building/site operation and maintenance. Operational emissions were quantified and  118   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 29 found to be below applicable threshold levels. While not discussed in the 2011 EIR, MM Traf‐1 would  further reduce this less‐than‐significant impact by reducing vehicle trips and related emissions. For these  reasons, the project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than previously  analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Sensitive Receptors  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impact Air‐4  and the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion related to construction‐period health risk. As has  become standard practice for construction projects with nearby receptors, mitigation measure Air‐4c  would be added to further reduce construction‐period health risk. The current project would not  introduce new sensitive receptors such as a daycare facility, which would negate the need for mitigation  measure Air‐2.  Regarding Impact Air‐2 and operational‐period emissions, the 2011 EIR concluded that while the  increased traffic and generators would contribute to area health risks, the contribution would be less‐ than‐significant. The 2011 EIR also concluded that any proposed new sensitive uses (such as if Day Care  Facilities were proposed as uses ancillary to office/R&D developments) would need to implement Air‐2  requiring a site‐specific health risk assessment and implementation of any necessary measures to  reduce toxic air contaminant exposures. A hotel use is not considered to be a sensitive receptor, so  mitigation measure Air‐2 would not be applicable to the current project.   Regarding construction‐period health risk, the 2011 EIR concluded that with implementation of  applicable construction‐period emissions controls identified in MM Air‐4a (and MM Air‐4b which applied  only to refuse relocation activities on the Phase 1 site that are not applicable to the current project), the  impact of the project would be less‐than‐significant. The project would comply with MM Air‐4a and  would therefore not create any new or substantially more severe impacts related to construction  emission impacts on sensitive receptors. In addition, as a best practice, the applicant is committing to  further reduce construction emissions by utilizing construction equipment with engines that meet or  exceed either U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB)  Tier 4 Final off‐road emission standards. This voluntary improvement measure will be memorialized as a  condition of approval.  Improvement Measure: Construction Equipment Standards and Construction Emissions Minimization  Plan. All off‐road construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower shall have engines that meet or  exceed either U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB)  Tier 4 Final off‐road emission standards. If a particular piece of off‐road equipment that meets these  standards is technically not feasible; the equipment would not produce desired emissions reduction due  to expected operating modes; installation of the equipment would create a safety hazard or impaired  visibility for the operator; or, there is a compelling emergency need to use off‐road equipment that does  not meet these standards, the Contractor shall use the next cleanest piece of off‐road equipment (i.e.,  Tier 3 Engine with Level 3 Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy (VDECS), Tier 3 Engine with Level 2  VDECS, Tier 3 Engine with alternative fuel), and the Contactor shall develop a Construction Emissions  Minimization Plan (CEMP) to describe the process used to identify the next cleanest piece of off‐road  equipment and the steps that will be taken to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants to the greatest  extent practicable. The CEMP shall be submitted the City’s Planning Department for review and approval  prior to using the equipment.  119   Page 30 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Odors  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Air‐3 and the  less‐than‐significant conclusion related to odors.   As noted in the 2011 EIR, hotel uses are not the types of uses that generate frequent or substantial  odors and the impact related to odors would be less than significant. Odors from construction activities  would be transient and temporary in nature and also less‐than‐significant; therefore, the project would  not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.       120   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 31 D. Biological Resources Impacts  Related To:    OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Special‐Status  Species  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Bio‐6: Pre‐Construction Nesting Bird  Survey  LTS w/MM  b. Riparian/Sensitive  Habitat  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  c. Wetlands  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Bio‐3a: Incorporate Best Management  Practices for Water Quality During  Construction  Bio‐3b: Minimize Soil Disturbance  Adjacent to Wetland and Marsh  Habitat  Bio‐4: Ensure Adequate Stormwater  Run‐off Capacity  LTS w/MM  d. Wildlife Corridors/  Nursery Sites  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Bio‐10a: Lighting Measures to Reduce  Impacts to Birds  Bio‐10b: Building Design Measures to  Minimize Bird Strike Risk  LTS w/MM  e. Conflict with Local  Biological Policies  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐ LTS  f. Conflict with  Adopted  Conservation Plans  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐ NI  Discussion Biological Resources Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   The 2011 EIR identified the following categories of biotic habitat/land use on the current project site:     Developed/Landscaped: Comprised of hardscaped roads, buildings, parking lot surfaces, paved trail  surfaces, ornamental, and landscaped areas (typically irrigated with a mulch base), and irrigated  turf, developed/landscaped area provide low or very low suitability for special status species or  habitat. This land use occurs over the totality of the current project area.  California Annual Grassland/Coyote Brush Scrub:  Approximately 18.90 ac of the OPSP area are  dominated by California annual grassland/coyote brush scrub. These areas vary in composition  based on water availability and soil characteristics. Non‐native annual grass species are dominant  throughout the annual grassland. Native purple needlegrass, (Nassella pulchra) is becoming  established south of Marina Boulevard near the road along with herbaceous species such as birds‐ foot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus), flax (Linum sp.), and blue eyed grass (Sisyrinchium bellum).  However, this patch of native grass is too small to be distinguished as a separate habitat type. Some  shrubs such as coyote brush (Baccharis pilularis), toyon (Heteromeles arbutifolia), and big saltbush  (Atriplex lentiformis) have become established along the slopes above the estuarine canal south of  Marina Boulevard.  121   Page 32 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist The grassland and scrubby habitats within the Project boundaries host a variety of common  invertebrates, which in turn provide food for widespread reptiles and for a number of bird and  mammal species. A western meadowlark (Sturnella neglecta) and a Say’s phoebe (Sayornis saya)  were observed foraging at the southwestern corner of the OPSP area. Although other grassland‐ associated species occur in the Project vicinity and may forage in the OPSP area on occasion, this  patch of grassland is likely too small to support nesting pairs of these species. Small mammals and  mesocarnivores including house mice, striped skunks, and raccoons may forage in these habitats,  and several valley pocket gopher (Thomomys bottae) burrows were observed in the grassland in the  southwestern corner of the OPSP area.  Since the 2011 EIR, the project site has undergone identified Phase 1 activities including landfill refuse  relocation and recapping and regrading across the entire project site. The site would currently be  considered an active construction site that was recently fully disturbed and that does not therefore have  the potential to contain significant biological resources.     Special‐Status Species   Same Conclusion or Less than Significant Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM for some species  and LTS for others or is reduced from LTS w/ MM to LTS): The current project would not change Impact  Bio‐6, mitigation measure Bio‐6, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion related to nesting  birds. The current project would also not change Impacts Bio‐8 and Bio‐9 and the significance  conclusions of less‐than‐significant in relation to indirect impacts on special‐status species through  recreational disturbance and increased lighting. These impacts and conclusions remain substantially the  same as under the 2011 EIR, as the current project would disturb the same area, involve substantially the  same intensity of development, and would not therefore result in any new or substantially more severe  impacts. Impact Bio‐7 and mitigation measures Bio‐7a, Bio‐7b, and Bio‐7c relate to burrowing owl, which  would not be likely to be present on the project site due to its status as a currently active construction  site and landfill cap and cover and therefore would now be reduced to a less‐than‐significant conclusion  rather than requiring mitigation.  Consistent with conclusions in the 2011 EIR, some special‐status bird species could potentially nest in or  adjacent to the project area but are not expected to be significantly impacted by the OPSP. These  species include the white‐tailed kite and loggerhead shrike, for which there is a very low probability of  nesting, as well as the San Francisco common yellowthroat, Alameda song sparrow, and Bryant’s  savannah sparrow, which have a somewhat higher probability of nesting in wetland vegetation at the  nearby bay margins. The loss of any active nests due to construction noise and activity of protected  birds would be in violation of federal and state laws so would require pre‐construction surveys and  buffers if necessary (Bio‐6), which has not substantially changed since the 2011 EIR.  The project could increase area light levels and recreational usage of the area, which could disturb  sensitive species. However, consistent with conclusions of the 2011 EIR, substantial urban lighting levels  and human activity already occurs in the area and the potential impact of increased recreational activity  and increased light levels consistent with City requirements would be less‐than‐significant.   Burrowing owls occur at scattered locations throughout the South San Francisco Bay Area where low  grasslands and ruderal habitats support ground squirrel colonies. There is no grassland habitat on the  current project site, which is an active construction site and landfill cap and cover. Therefore, there  would not be the potential for a significant impact to burrowing owls due to development of the project  site and mitigation measures Bio‐7a through Bio‐7c would not be applicable to the current project.  122   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 33 For these reasons, the project would not result in any new or substantially more severe impacts than  previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Riparian/Sensitive Habitat   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Bio‐1 or Bio‐5  or the less‐than‐significant conclusion as the loss of common terrestrial habitats and habitat for non‐ breeding special‐status wildlife species remains substantially the same as under the 2011 EIR.   As noted in the 2011 EIR, the OPSP site does not contain riparian habitat. Wetland/aquatic and related  habitat is discussed under the Wetland and Aquatic Habitat topic below.   Development of the project site involves already disturbed areas which would not represent a biological  impact. This project site is an active construction site that has been recently and fully disturbed by  landfill refuse relocation and recapping and therefore does not represent a sensitive, valuable (from the  perspective of providing important wildlife habitat), or exemplary habitat type, and so the loss of  potential nesting, roosting, and foraging opportunities at the site is considered a less‐than‐significant  impact consistent with the analysis in the 2011 EIR. The project would not therefore create new or  substantially more severe impacts on riparian or sensitive habitat than previously the analyzed in the  2011 EIR.   Wetlands or Aquatic Habitats  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impacts Bio‐3  and Bio‐4, mitigation measures Bio‐3a and ‐3b and ‐4, and the significance conclusions of less‐than‐ significant with mitigation as the potential for indirect impact of nearby wetland and aquatic habitat  remains substantially the same as under the 2011 EIR. Impact Bio‐2 and mitigation measures Bio‐2a  through Bio‐2d would not apply to this project as there are no shoreline improvements involved. Impacts  Bio‐12, Bio‐13, Bio‐14, Bio‐15 and associated mitigation measures Bio‐12, Bio‐13a and b, Bio‐14a  through c, and Bio‐15a through c are related to in‐water construction are not applicable to the current  project because no in‐water construction is proposed.  Development occurring throughout the site will be in close proximity to, and upslope from, sensitive  aquatic habitats. There is thus some potential for operational and construction‐related runoff to have  indirect effects on these habitats and on water quality in adjacent aquatic habitats. Mitigation measures  to reduce these potential impacts to less‐than‐significant levels (mitigation measures Bio‐3a and ‐3b and  ‐4) as previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR would apply to the proposed project. The project would not  therefore create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Wildlife Corridors/Nursery Sites   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impact Bio‐10,  mitigation measures Bio‐10a and Bio‐10b, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion as with  mitigation requiring appropriate design to minimize bird strikes, impacts and conclusions would be  substantially the same as under the 2011 EIR.   As noted in the 2011 EIR, the OPSP area is located along the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds, and the  juxtaposition of wetland, shoreline, and open water habitats used by birds results in large‐scale  movements of birds along the edge of San Francisco Bay, both during long‐distance movements (such as  migration) and during daily movements between roosting and foraging habitats.   123   Page 34 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Within the current project site and as previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR, there is some potential for  birds to collide during daytime and nocturnal flights with structures such as windows of proposed  buildings. Although proposed buildings are likely to be at a lower height than most migrating birds will  be flying, the 2011 EIR explained that the OPSP would create potential bird strike hazards at elevations  that do not currently exist, and depending on the design of the buildings there is some potential for such  mortality to occur in the absence of mitigation measures. The project would comply with MM Bio‐10a  and Bio‐10b and would not therefore have any new or substantially more severe impacts than  previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.   For informational purposes, while industry‐standards for how to reduce the potential for bird strikes  have evolved since the 2011 EIR, the examples included in the measures are not proscriptive and allow  for implementing measures to current standards.  Conflict with Local Policies or Conservation Plans  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Bio‐11 and the  less‐than‐significant conclusion as there are no conservation plans that cover the site and there are no  protected trees in the current project site, which is unchanged from the 2011 EIR.          124   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 35 E. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs   Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a‐e. Historical  Resources,  Archaeological,  Paleontological,  and Tribal  Cultural  Resources and  Human Remains  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ N/A  LTS   Discussion Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   There have been no changes to the cultural and tribal cultural resources environmental setting of the  project site.  Since the 2011 EIR, the Native American Historic Resource Protection Act (Assembly Bill 52) was passed,  which is intended to minimize conflict between Native American and development interests. AB 52 adds  "tribal cultural resources" to the specific cultural resources analyzed under CEQA. As had been standard  practice at the time, the 2011 EIR considered tribal cultural resources as part of the cultural resources  analysis, so they are discussed here.   As the current project is being built over capped landfill debris and does not have the potential to  disturb native soil, no additional record searches or tribal contacts were made for this project.     Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources and Human Remains  Less Significant Conclusion (LTS w/ MM reduced to LTS): The current project would not change the less‐ than‐significant conclusion as the site is entirely over capped landfill.  As under the 2011 EIR, the project site is located over a capped landfill site. Construction activities are  not expected to disturb native soils. As noted in the 2011 EIR, there are no known historic resources in  the OPSP area and while currently unknown underground resources could be unexpectedly discovered  during ground disturbance, such discoveries are required to be handled appropriately according to  Section 21083.2 of the Public Resources Code dealing with the treatment and handling of underground  cultural/tribal cultural resources, Section 21084.1 dealing with the treatment of handling of historical  resources, and Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code/ Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources  Code dealing with discovery of human remains. With adherence to applicable regulations and the low  chance of disturbing native soils on the project site, impacts related to accidental discovery of  cultural/tribal cultural resources would be less than significant. The project would therefore not create  new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.    125   Page 36 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist F. Geology and Soils    Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Seismic Hazards   LTS w/ MM ☒ ☐ Geo‐2a: Compliance with California  Building Code  Geo‐2b: Compliance with a design‐ level Geotechnical Investigation and  with Structural Design Plans  Geo‐2c: Obtain a Building Permit  Geo‐3a: Compliance with a design‐ level Geotechnical Investigation and  with Structural Design Plans  Geo‐3b: Obtain a Building Permit  Geo‐4: Compliance with  recommendations of a Geotechnical  Investigation  LTS w/ MM  b. Soil Erosion  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Geo‐14: Storm Water Pollution  Prevention Plan  LTS w/MM  c. Unstable Soil  LTS w/ MM ☒ ☐ Geo‐5a: Deep Foundations  Geo‐5b: Predrilling and/or Pile  Configuration  Geo‐5c: Indicator Pile Program  Geo‐6: Account for Drag Load on Deep  Foundations  Geo‐7: Incorporate Systems for  Landfill Gas Control  Geo‐8a: Avoid Significant New Loads  on Landfill Waste and Bay Mud  Geo‐8b: Design Building‐Soil Interface  to Allow Free Movement  Geo‐9a: Monitoring and Testing  Geo‐9b: Locate Underground Utilities  in Soil Cap  Geo‐9c: Seal Trenches and  Underground Structures  Geo‐10: Provide For Continuity of  Landfill Cap  Geo‐11: Common Trenches and Vaults  Geo‐12: Flexible Materials and Joints  Geo‐13: Increase Flow Gradient  LTS w/ MM  d. Expansive Soil  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐ LTS  e. Septic Tanks  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐ NI  f. Geologic Features 1 NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐ NI  1 Note that the current CEQA Guidelines include paleontological resources in this section. These have been addressed  under Section E. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources as they were in the 2011 EIR. 126   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 37 Discussion Geology and Soils Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. prepared an updated Geotechnical Investigation,  dated October 19, 2017, which is available as part of the project application on file with the City of South  San Francisco Economic & Community Development Department. Refuse materials from the nearby  Phase 1 office site were removed as a part of that development and relocated to the project site and  surroundings. Refuse that could be reused was utilized as the foundation layer, as well as the former cap  material that was removed in the excavation. Additional fill was imported from off‐site for the clay cap  and erosion protection layers. The current project would be required to meet current rules and  regulation, including the updated California Building Code. These regular updates to regulatory  documents would not change the conclusions of the 2011 EIR.   Seismic Hazards   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impacts Geo‐2  through Geo‐4, mitigation measures Geo‐2a through Geo‐4, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation  conclusion as the known seismically active character of the region and potential for seismically induced  ground failure has not changed since the 2011 EIR. The current project would also not change Impact  Geo‐1 or the less‐than‐significant conclusion related to fault hazards as there are no known faults at the  site, and this has not changed since the 2011 EIR.   Consistent with conclusions in the 2011 EIR, while there are no known faults at the project site, the  region is known to be seismically active and the project will need to comply with the California Building  Code and project‐specific geotechnical recommendations and building permit requirements as detailed  in the mitigation measures (Geo‐2a through Geo‐4). The project would therefore not create new or  substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Soil Erosion  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impact Geo‐ 14, mitigation measure Geo‐14, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion as the potential  for soil erosion and requirement to include best management practices to reduce soil erosion potential  have not changed since the 2011 EIR.   While the site has been graded and the previous structures have been demolished, there will still be soil  movement for landscaping, paving, and other construction activities requiring mitigation, which is  addressed by mitigation measures Geo‐14. The project would therefore not create new or substantially  more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Unstable and Expansive Soils  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impacts Geo‐5  and Geo‐6, mitigation measures Geo‐5a through Geo‐6, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation  conclusion as the need to account for variable subsurface conditions and potential for settling have not  changed since the 2011 EIR. The current project would also not change the no impact conclusion related  to landslides as the lack of potential for landslides at the site has not changed since the 2011 EIR. 2011  EIR impacts Geo‐7 through Geo‐13 and associated mitigation measures Geo‐7 through Geo‐13 are  related to construction in landfill areas and are applicable to the current project site as well. 2011 EIR  impact Geo‐16 and associated mitigation measure are related to Crescent Park and Beach, which is  located outside the current project area and is therefore not applicable to the current project.  127   Page 38 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist As noted in the 2011 EIR, soil layers at the project site include regraded refuse and a landfill cap over  varying thicknesses of Bay Mud and sloping bedrock surface, which could result in settlement following  building construction. These variable subsurface conditions will influence the design, performance, and  constructability of foundation systems for the proposed buildings and are mitigated through appropriate  foundation design as detailed in the mitigation measures.   The geotechnical reports conclude that the project site would undergo significant settlement caused by  the decomposition of the refuse, and consolidation and compression of the refuse and Bay Mud from  the weight of refuse, existing cover soil, new fill, and/or structural loads associated with the proposed  development. These processes could result in significant total and differential settlements of the ground  surface and the site improvements. To reduce the potential for settlement of the structure, the  proposed hotel would be supported on deep foundations gaining support in the dense to very dense  sand layer or bedrock beneath the weak refuse and Bay Mud layers. Due to the thickness and depth of  the Bay Mud, extending in some areas as much as 120 feet below ground surface, driven steel piles are  recommended by the geotechnical investigation, with careful implementation to address the potential  for disturbance of the landfill cover and preserve the integrity of the landfill components.  The impact related to the wave susceptibility of the proposed Crescent Park and Beach is not applicable  to the current project because this area is not within the current project site.  Expansive Soils  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Geo‐15 or the  less‐than‐significant conclusion related to expansive soils as soil conditions are the same and the low  potential for expansive soils has not changed since the 2011 EIR.   Septic Tanks  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion related to septic systems as the project area is serviced by the City’s sewer system, which has  not changed since the 2011 EIR.  Geologic Features  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion related to unique geologic features as the lack of unique geologic features at the site has not  changed since the 2011 EIR.           128   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 39 G. Greenhouse Gas Emissions   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. GHG Emissions  SU  ☒ ☐ N/A  SU  b. Conflict with GHG  Reduction Plans  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  Discussion Greenhouse Gas Emissions Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   As discussed above in connection with air quality impacts, since the 2011 EIR was certified, BAAQMD has  updated its CEQA Air Quality Guidelines (BAAQMD Guidelines), which assist lead agencies in evaluating  and mitigating emissions impacts. The 2011 EIR was being prepared as the 1999 BAAQMD Guidelines  were being updated for the 2010 draft. The 2011 EIR compared the OPSP to those in the 2010 draft. The  latest draft of the BAAQMD Guidelines was issued in May 2017 and includes thresholds consistent with  the 2010 draft BAAQMD Guidelines assessed in the 2011 EIR.  Since the 2011 EIR, the City adopted a qualified GHG reduction plan in 2014, the City of South San  Francisco Climate Action Plan, which includes various reduction measures to meet 2020 reduction goals.   In 2016, SB 32 was passed, which codifies additional target GHG emissions reductions by 2030. In April  2022, BAAQMD issued a new GHG threshold, revising the threshold from the quantifiable level used in  the 2011 EIR to a checklist of compliance, requiring consistency with either criterion A or B as follows:  A.  Projects must include, at a minimum, the following project design elements:   1.  Buildings   a.  The project will not include natural gas appliances or natural gas plumbing (in both residential  and nonresidential development).   b.  The project will not result in any wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary electrical usage as  determined by the analysis required under CEQA Section 21100(b)(3) and Section 15126.2(b)  of the State CEQA Guidelines.   2.  Transportation   a.  Achieve compliance with electric vehicle requirements in the most recently adopted version of  CALGreen Tier 2.   b.  Achieve a reduction in project‐generated vehicle miles traveled (VMT) below the regional  average consistent with the current version of the California Climate Change Scoping Plan  (currently 15 percent) or meet a locally adopted Senate Bill 743 VMT target, reflecting the  recommendations provided in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research’s Technical  Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA:   i.   Residential projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per capita   129   Page 40 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist ii.  Office projects: 15 percent below the existing VMT per employee   iii.  Retail projects: no net increase in existing VMT   B.  Be consistent with a local GHG reduction strategy that meets the criteria under State CEQA  Guidelines Section 15183.5(b).  Since the 2011 EIR, the Bay Area 2017 Clean Air Plan updated the 2010 Clean Air Plan that was utilized in  the 2011 EIR assessment. The latest update to the Clean Air Plan revises the way in which projects are  assessed for consistency and no longer considers the ratio of population increase to vehicle use of a  project to be a consistency factor.   The purpose of this document, however, is to determine whether the project is within the scope of the  2011 EIR. Accordingly, this document does not address and is not required to address whether the  project is consistent with regulatory changes that occurred after certification of the 2011 EIR.   GHG Emissions  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains SU): The current project would not change Impact GHG‐1  (combined with Impact GHG‐2) as the GHG emissions of the project were accounted for in the 2011 EIR  and therefore the conclusion remains significant and unavoidable.   The 2011 EIR concluded that the OPSP would have a significant and unavoidable impact related to GHG  emissions. As a hotel project within the parameters of that analyzed in the OPSP and 2011 EIR, the GHG  emissions of the project were accounted for in the prior analysis and the project would not therefore  result in new or substantially more severe impacts related to GHG emissions than previously identified  in the 2011 EIR.   In addition, the project would be required to comply with updated GHG reduction requirements  implemented since the 2011 EIR. Many of the City’s Climate Action Plan’s reduction measures are  targeted to city‐wide strategies that are not directly applicable to development projects. The project is  located near the ferry terminal and would include pedestrian/bicycle connections and walkways and  participate in a Transportation Demand Management program to promote transit and reduce trips  (contributing to Measures 1.1 through 1.3). The project would include new tree plantings (Measure 3.4)  and would meet current standards of energy and water efficiency (Measures 3.1 and 6.1), and would  participate in recycling for waste reduction (Measure 5.1).  Development projects in the city, including  those in the current project, are required to complete a GHG Compliance Checklist during the plan  review process demonstrating that all applicable requirements are met. The current project will comply  with the Climate Action Plan.   Further, BAAQMD updated its guidelines since the 2011 EIR. Although this Environmental Checklist is  limited to an analysis of the project’s consistency with the 2011 EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section  15168, the project was reviewed against BAAQMD’s updated thresholds and would not result in  wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary electrical usage (see Section P: Utilities and Service Systems and  Energy), would comply with required electric vehicle requirements and VMT targets (see Section O:  Transportation), and would implement applicable measures from the City’s Climate Action Plan. At the  time of preparation of this analysis, the City does not preclude natural gas appliances and plumbing in  hotel projects.    130   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 41 Consistency with GHG Reduction Plans  Same Conclusion (Conclusions remains NI): The Clean Air Plan has been updated and the South San  Francisco Climate Action Plan has been adopted since the 2011 EIR but the current project remains  consistent with relevant plans and the no additional impact conclusion remains unchanged from the  2011 EIR.  For informational purposes, the project’s consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan is discussed  above and the current project would be consistent with that plan. The current project does not conflict  with applicable control measures, is generally consistent with the Clean Air Plan as well as the City’s  Climate Action Plan. The project would therefore not create new or substantially more severe impacts  than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.    131   Page 42 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist H. Hazards and Hazardous Materials and Wildfire Impacts  Related To: OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Routine Hazardous  Materials Use  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ N/A  LTS   b. Risk of Upset  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Haz‐2: Waste Excavation and Re‐ disposition [as it pertains to continued  implementation of the Site  Management Plan]  Haz‐4b: Deep Foundations  Haz‐4c: Minimization of Irrigation  Water  Haz‐4e: Operation and Maintenance  Activities  LTS w/MM  c. Hazardous  Materials within a  ¼‐mile of a School  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  d. Hazardous  Materials Site  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Haz‐6a: Site Management Plan  Haz‐6b: Landfill Gas System  Haz‐6c: Non‐use of Groundwater  LTS w/MM  e. Airport Hazards  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  f. Emergency Access  Routes  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  g. Wildfire 1 NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  1 Note that the current CEQA Guidelines include wildfire in its own section. This topic has been addressed here as it was in  the 2011 EIR. Discussion Hazards and Hazardous Materials Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, Inc. prepared a Final Closure Plan (FCP) and Post‐ Closure Monitoring and Maintenance Plan (PCMMP) for the Phase I and II Development of the OSPS  area, which is available as part of the project application on file with the City of South San Francisco  Economic & Community Development Department. The FCP provides a basis for preparing design and  construction documents for landfill mitigation and monitoring components, such as the final landfill  cover and landfill gas control and monitoring systems. The PCMMP provides a detailed plan for post‐ closure monitoring and maintenance activities during the various stages of development, as well as  establishing the responsible parties for each required activity. As discussed in Section F: Geology and  Soils, Langan excavated the original cap and some of the landfill refuse and regraded the site, re‐using  some of the refuse and transporting the rest off‐site. Replacement fill was imported from off‐site, and a  new clay cap was put in place.   132   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 43 Lists of hazardous materials sites are regularly updated and have been updated since the 2011 EIR,  including the following two additional sites in the general vicinity of the project: Seaboard Paper  Company – 336 Oyster Point Boulevard, and Wildberg Brothers – 349 Oyster Point Boulevard. However,  while nearby sites have been identified as having prior releases of hazardous materials, there is no  reported evidence of active leaks or contamination from these sites affecting soil or groundwater that  could migrate to the project site or represent significant releases in the project area requiring any  additional actions related to the proposed project, so these are not further discussed.  The airport land use plan for the nearby airport has been updated since the 2011 EIR. The City/County  Association of Governments of San Mateo County, Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan  for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport was published in November 2012 including  updated regulations regarding allowable building heights in the project area.  For informational purposes, since the 2011 EIR, the CEQA Guidelines have been updated to include  more detailed threshold questions related to wildfire impacts in its own section. The purpose of this  document, however, is to determine whether the project is within the scope of the 2011 EIR. As had  been standard practice at the time, the 2011 EIR considered wildfire risk as part of the hazards and  hazards materials section, so this topic is discussed here. The expanded wildfire considerations apply to  projects in areas that are very high fire severity zones, which does not apply to the project, so are not  further detailed.  Routine Hazardous Materials Use  Less Significant Conclusion (LTS w/ MM reduced to LTS): Impact Haz‐1 and related mitigation measures  Haz‐1a through Haz‐1e pertain to the use of hazardous materials  by research laboratory uses in the  office/R&D portions of the OSPS, and are not applicable to this hotel project.  Operation of the hotel would use common hazardous materials such as cleaning products. State and  federal laws require businesses that handle hazardous materials to ensure that the hazardous materials  are properly handled, used, stored, and disposed of; and in the event that hazardous materials are  accidentally released, to prevent or reduce injury to health and the environment. The South San  Francisco Fire Prevention division enforces certain fire code regulations pertaining to safe handling and  proper storage of hazardous materials. Occupational safety standards exist in federal and state laws to  minimize worker safety risks from both physical and chemical hazards in the workplace. The California  Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration is responsible for developing and enforcing  workplace safety standards and ensuring worker safety in the handling and use of hazardous materials.  As a hotel use, project operations are not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or  environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials.  This section pertains to recurring transportation, use or disposal of hazardous materials as part of long‐ term operation. One time transportation, use or disposal of hazardous materials related to construction  and development is discussed in the following sections. The project would therefore not create new or  substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Risk of Upset  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impacts Haz‐2  and ‐4, mitigation measures Haz‐2, Haz‐4b, Haz‐4c, and Haz‐4e, or the less‐than‐significant with  mitigation conclusion as the potential for accidental future hazardous materials release of pre‐existing  site materials remains unchanged since the 2011 EIR, with the project site being on top of the former  133   Page 44 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist landfill. Mitigation measure Haz‐4a has already been met with the clay cap upgrade performed by  Langan (see Section F: Geology and Soils) and Haz‐4d is not applicable as none of the groundwater  monitoring wells are on the project site property. 2011 EIR impact Haz‐3 and associated mitigation  measures are related to demolition of existing structures and are not applicable to the current project  because demolition of the existing building has already been completed on the project site. Impact Haz‐5  and related mitigation measures relate to the potential for accidental release of laboratory chemicals by  research laboratory uses in the office/R&D portions of the OSPS, and are not applicable to this hotel  project.  As noted in the 2011 EIR, due to the former use of the project site as a municipal landfill, there is a  potential for development on the site to lead to an increased rate of on‐site waste settlement and off‐ site migration of contaminants in groundwater. Due to the presence of methane in the soil, building on  the project site present the potential for buildup of soil gases in the building; however, the project  would comply with Haz‐2, Haz‐4b, Haz‐4c, and Haz‐4e and would not therefore have any new or  substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.   Hazardous Materials Near Schools  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion related to hazardous materials near schools as the lack of schools in the vicinity has not  changed since the 2011 EIR.   The OPSP area is not located within one‐quarter mile of a school site. The project would therefore not  create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Hazardous Materials Site  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): Impact Haz‐6 and mitigation measures Haz‐6a  through Haz‐6c related to construction on a landfill cap would be applicable to the current project.  Although waste relocation, demolition, and most of the excavation have already been completed on the  site, landscaping and utility placement and maintenance still carry potential impacts due to the site’s  hazardous materials status. Mitigation measure Haz‐6d would not be applicable to this project as there  are no current businesses on the project site.   As mentioned above, Langan has drafted a PCMMP, implementation of which is anticipated to fulfill  mitigation measures Haz‐6a through Haqz‐6c. The PCMMP details measures necessary to mitigate the  potential impacts of landfill gas and that can build up under the soil and potentially leak into the  groundwater. The hotel would be required to include an alarm system that monitors the level of  methane in the building and in the event that methane levels reached a concentration activating the  alarm, the mitigation system would automatically implement active mitigation activities to reduce the  level of methane to acceptable levels. Monitoring activities will be required to ensure the integrity of  the cap and check for groundwater contamination.  Airport Hazards  Same Conclusion(conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change the less‐than‐ significant conclusion, as the proposed heights under the current project remain within height levels  considered safe in relation to the airport.   The airport land use plan for San Francisco International Airport has been updated since the 2011 EIR.  The OPSP area, including the current project site, is mapped in an area where critical aeronautical  134   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 45 surfaces (the height limits for development) are between approximately 425 and 450 feet above mean  sea level. Structures reaching between 250 and 300 feet or more above mean sea level would be  required to incorporate element to address possible obstructions. The proposed building height of 165  feet above sea level is below these heights. As a project within the Airport Land Use Plan, the project  would be subject to applicable coordination with the Airport Land Use Commission and FAA to ensure  compliance with applicable regulations, and would not therefore create any new or substantially more  severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Emergency Access Routes  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion as the general roadway design and requirements for adequate access have not changed since  the 2011 EIR.  Wildfire  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion as the project site is in a developed area and the lack of wildfire risk in the vicinity has not  changed since the 2011 EIR.      135   Page 46 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist I. Hydrology and Water Quality   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a., e. Water Quality  and Water Plans  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Hydro‐1: Best Management Practices  Hydro‐2: Preparation and  Implementation of Project SWPPP  Hydro‐3: Compliance with NPDES  Requirements  Haz‐4e: Operation and Maintenance  Activities  LTS w/MM  b. Groundwater  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  c. Alter Drainage  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  d. Inundation  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  Discussion Hydrology and Water Quality Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   The latest (April 5, 2019) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps  (FIRMs) showed no portion of the project site proposed for development as subject to flood hazards.  The NPDES General Construction Permit Requirements apply to clearing, grading, and disturbances to  the ground such as excavation and has been updated since the 2011 EIR, though these changes are not  substantial as they relate to current project development. All construction and Stormwater Pollution  Prevention Plan (SWPPP) activity would be in compliance with the Construction General Permit Order.  The California Department of Water Resources presented updated sea level rise scenarios in their  California Climate Science and Data for Water Resources Management in 2015. The future sea level rise  scenarios associated with planning and permitting development in potentially susceptible areas in the  San Francisco Bay Area are:   • a sea level rise of 24 inches by 2050; and   • a sea level rise of 66 inches by 2100.   These values represent the upper end of the range of sea level rise estimates and are consistent with  preliminary state recommendations for 100‐year sea level rise. These values are meant to ensure that  projects take these potentially high estimates into account when planning infrastructure and  development projects and have changed slightly from those the 16‐ and 55‐inch assumptions used in the  2011 EIR.  Consistent with Phase 1 development plans in the OPSP and 2011 EIR, the project site has been recently  regraded and recapped such that the ground level at the footprint of the building is approximately 19  feet (228 inches) above sea level.   136   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 47 Water Quality and Water Plans   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impacts  Hydro‐1, Hydro‐2, and Hydro‐3 and mitigation measures Hydro‐1, Hydro‐2, and Hydro‐3, or the less‐ than‐significant with mitigation conclusion as the potential for contamination of bay water due to  stormwater pollutants and erosion or siltation remains substantially unchanged since the 2011 EIR.  Mitigation measure Haz‐4e would also reduce impact Hydro‐1. Mitigation measure Haz‐4a, also listed  under impact Hydro‐1 in the 2011 EIR, has already been completed.  Although the current project would not involve demolition or excavation of landfill materials, as  mentioned in impact Hydro‐3, construction activities at the site would still present a threat of soil  erosion from soil disturbance by subjecting unprotected bare soil areas to the erosional forces of runoff  during construction activities and the potential for increased erosion and/or parking lot pollutants to  impair water quality. These impacts would be mitigated through compliance with applicable permitting  requirements and a project‐specific stormwater pollution prevention plan as detailed in the mitigation  measures for the 2011 EIR. The project would therefore not create new or substantially more severe  impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Groundwater  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion related to groundwater depletion as the project area is nearly fully covered with impervious  area under existing conditions and is located in the former Bay margin and not used for groundwater  supply and therefore development under the current project would not result in the potential for  groundwater depletion, which has not changed since the 2011 EIR.  Alter Drainage  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion as the requirement for control of runoff and lack of potential for changes in stormwater  runoff have not substantially changed since the 2011 EIR.  The project represents redevelopment of a capped landfill. Consistent with the 2011 EIR, control of site  stormwater runoff is addressed by required regulatory compliance and compliance with requirements  would ensure no significant impacts. Siltation and erosion are discussed under water quality above and  flooding is discussed under inundation below. The project would therefore not create new or  substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Inundation  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Hydro‐4 and  Hydro‐5 or the less‐than‐significant conclusions related to inundation as the project will not place new  structures within the 100‐year flood hazard zone and the potential for flooding due to levee or dam  failure or sea level rise have not substantially changed since the 2011 EIR.   As discussed above, while FEMA has reconsidered flood hazards in the area since the 2011 EIR, the  current project will not place new structures within a 100‐year flood hazard zone and the impact  remains unchanged from the 2011 EIR.  Estimates of potential sea level rise scenarios have increased from 55 inches considered in the 2011 EIR  to 66 inches (5.5 feet) by 2100.  The project site has been recently regraded and capped as a part of  Phase 1 landfill refuse relocation such that the ground level at the footprint of the building is  137   Page 48 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist approximately 19 feet (228 inches) above sea level. This is above the updated projected sea level rise of  up to 66 inches by 2100 and consistent with conclusions in the 2011 EIR. The project would therefore  not create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR. 138   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 49 J. Land Use   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Division of an  Existing Community  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  b. Conflict with Land  Uses / Land Use  Plans  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  Discussion Land Use Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   There have been no substantial changes to the land use environmental setting of the OPSP site,  including the hotel site with respect to land use. Development of the area has proceeded according to  area plans and recent development.  Since the 2011 EIR, the City’s Housing Element of the General Plan was updated in 2015 but would not  substantially change impacts or conclusions for the proposed hotel. The entire General Plan is currently  being updated again, but the updated document is not yet in effect and is not anticipated to be  substantially revised in relation to the project site and proposed development. The project would  therefore not create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  The marine support services building that was previously on the project site has been demolished since  the 2011 EIR, and the project site is currently vacant.  Division of an Existing Community  Same Conclusion (NI): The current project would not change the no impact conclusion as there are no  established communities in the area to divide, which has not changed since the 2011 EIR.  Conflict with Land Uses / Land Use Plans  Same Conclusion (NI): The current project would not change the no impact conclusion as there are no  conflicts with land uses/land use plans, which has not changed since the 2011 EIR.  The current project is consistent with the development type and density established by existing zoning  and the General Plan, as previously updated for consistency with adoption of the 2011 EIR. The OPSP  specified a hotel development to a total of 350 rooms. The current project proposes a hotel with up to  350 rooms. The project is consistent with development anticipated under relevant plans and therefore  would not create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.      139   Page 50 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist K. Mineral Resources   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of Significance Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Loss of Mineral  Resources  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  b. Loss of Mineral  Recovery Sites  NI ☒ ☐ -- NI  Discussion Same Conclusion (NI): There have been no changes in circumstance or new information related to  mineral resources, which do not occur in the OPSP area, including the current project site, and there  would be no change to the no impact conclusion related to mineral resources.    140   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 51 L. Noise   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs   Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Noise  SU w/MM  (construction)  LTS (operations)  ☒ ☐ Noise‐5:  Construction Noise SU w/MM  (construction) LTS  (operations)  b. Vibration  LTS ☒ ☐ -- LTS  c. Airport Noise  LTS ☒ ☐ -- LTS  Discussion Noise Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   The noise environment has not changed substantially from that assessed in the 2011 EIR and remains  primarily characterized by ambient noise, local traffic noise generated along arterial streets and U.S.  101, and aircraft over flights associated with San Francisco International Airport. The types and locations  of noise sensitive land uses in the vicinity has not substantially changed since the 2011 EIR, with the  nearest noise sensitive receptors being live‐aboard boats located in the marinas, which could be  located  as close as approximately 325 feet from the edge of the project site.   Noise (Construction)  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains SU w/ MM for construction): The current project would not  change Impact Noise‐5, mitigation measure Noise‐5, and the significant and unavoidable conclusion as  the potential for loud construction activities over long periods has not changed since the 2011 EIR.   As noted in the 2011 EIR, while the project would be required to comply with applicable construction  noise regulations, construction activities, including pile driving, will generate substantial levels of noise  at off‐site receivers over an extended period of time. Construction activities for the current project  would have substantially the same potential for noise under the current project as the 2011 EIR. As  noted above, as a hotel project within the parameters of that analyzed in the OPSP and 2011 EIR, the  construction noise of the project were accounted for in the prior analysis and therefore the project  would not create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Noise (Operations)  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS for operation): The current project would not change Impacts  Noise‐1 through Noise‐3 or the less‐than‐significant conclusion as the potential for operational noise  impacts has not substantially changed since the 2011 EIR.   As noted in the 2011 EIR, noise levels at a hotel and retail/restaurant site would not exceed the City’s  noise level goal for exterior noise (65 dBA CNEL) as a result of transportation noise sources. Consistent  with conclusions of the 2011 EIR, while roadway traffic and related noise would increase with the  project, the ambient noise level is already characterized by traffic noise and increases from  141   Page 52 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist development of the project site would not have the potential to be substantial (would be less than 3  dBA) at noise sensitive uses.   With area development, the 2011 EIR forecast an interior noise level of 35 dBA CNEL at the hotel  assuming standard construction, which is consistent with interior noise standards for hotel uses. The  project would therefore not create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed  in the 2011 EIR.  Vibration  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Noise‐4 and  the less‐than‐significant conclusion as the potential for groundborne vibration has not changed since the  2011 EIR.   As noted in the 2011 EIR, the proposed uses are not the type that will generate substantial groundborne  vibration during operations and construction activities are of the type and distance from existing  structures that there is no potential for significant vibration impacts. The project would therefore not  create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.  Airport Noise  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Noise‐6 or the  less‐than‐significant conclusion as the site is outside the area significantly impacted by aircraft noise,  which has not changed since the 2011 EIR.   While the airport land use plan for San Francisco International Airport has been updated since the 2011  EIR, the OPSP area remains well outside the airport’s noise‐affected 65 dBA CNEL noise contour. The  exterior noise environment at the OPSP area resulting from aircraft would be considered compatible  with proposed uses. The project would therefore not create new or substantially more severe impacts  than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.        142   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 53 M. Population & Housing Impacts  Related To: OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Population Growth LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  b. Displacement of  Housing or People  NI ☒ ☐ ‐‐  NI  Discussion Population and Housing Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Local and regional planning documents are regularly updated, including related to this topic, the City’s  Housing Element of the General Plan in 2015 which incorporates the Association of Bay Area  Governments’ (ABAG) Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Updated RHNA numbers are currently  being incorporated into an updated General Plan. As an approved specific plan, OPSP development is  considered as planned development in these planning documents.   Population Growth  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Pop‐1 or the  less‐than‐significant conclusion as the potential for indirect population growth due to increased  employment has not changed since the 2011 EIR.   While the specifics of employment depend on the exact programming of the various spaces, a hotel of  the proposed size with a restaurant and commercial amenities would be anticipated to support  approximately 200 to 300 employees.  As concluded in the 2011 EIR, the project would increase  employment and contribute to the high jobs to housing ratio in the city and contribute to indirect  population growth, but a hotel use would support nearby employment uses and would be consistent  with local and area planning and would therefore not be considered unplanned growth. The project is  consistent with the program previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR and therefore would not create new or  substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.   Displacement of Housing or People  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains NI): The current project would not change the no impact  conclusion as there have been no changes in existing residents on the site since the 2011 EIR.   The only current residences in the OPSP remain live‐aboard boats in the marinas, which were found to  not be affected by development in the 2011 EIR. The project is consistent with the program previously  analyzed in the 2011 EIR and therefore would not create new or substantially more severe impacts than  previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.        143   Page 54 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist N. Public Services & Recreation   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of Significance Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Public Services  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  b. Recreation  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  Discussion Public Services and Recreation Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Area‐wide development has continued throughout the vicinity and public service and recreation plans  and operations are regularly assessed and updated. The SSFPD operates generally out of one main  station (as opposed to having substations), located at 33 Arroyo Drive. The closest Fire Station to the  project site is #62 at 249 Harbor Way, approximately 1.5 miles away.   Public Services and Recreation  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change the less‐than‐ significant conclusion as the potential to increase demand for services and recreation has not changed  since the 2011 EIR.  As under the 2011 EIR, the current project will be served by existing facilities (or those relocated  through separate projects), will meet emergency vehicle access standards, and will pay appropriate  development fees toward public services. The project therefore would not create new or substantially  more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.   While the current project does not include public open space, it is part of the OPSP development, which  as noted in the 2011 EIR, included more than the standard of 0.5 acres of parks per 1,000 employees,  including approximately 3 acres of park and 3.1 acres of bay front open space and would therefore  create more recreational space then demand for recreational opportunities and have a net benefit on  recreational facilities. The project would contribute in‐lieu fees toward the cost of the public parks and  includes a spa and fitness / game lawn and outdoor open space on site for use by hotel guests. The  conclusion of a less‐than‐significant impact with respect to recreation remains unchanged for the  current project.          144   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 55 O. Transportation   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. Conflict with  Circulation Plans or  Policies  LTS w/MM    ☒ ☐ Traf‐2b: Bay trail Continuity Provisions  in Construction Management Plan    LTS w/MM   b. Conflict with  Transportation  Impact Reduction  Goals1  SU  ☒ ☐ Traf‐1: Transportation Demand  Management Program    LTS w/MM  c. Increase Hazards  LTS ☒ ☐ N/A  LTS   d. Inadequate  Emergency Access  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  1 State CEQA Guidelines have been revised since the 2011 EIR such that intersection and roadway specific service level  analysis will be replaced by an analysis of the amount of vehicle miles traveled per CEQA Section 15064.3.  Discussion Traffic engineers Fehr & Peers prepared a transportation assessment as referenced in this document  and included in full as Attachment B.  Transportation Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Area‐wide development has continued throughout the vicinity as anticipated under the OPSP and other  area plans and included in the cumulative traffic analysis in the 2011 EIR. The City’s Transportation  Improvement Program (TIP) is regularly updated to include needed improvements. Reconfiguration of  the intersection of Oyster Point Boulevard and Marina Boulevard was underway during preparation of  this document per the OPSP as part of Phase 1 development but otherwise, there have not been  substantial changes to the roadway system in the vicinity of the project since the 2011 EIR.   The ferry terminal proposed as a part of OPSP development has been constructed and ferry service is in  operation.  Since the adoption of the 2011 EIR, the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted new  CEQA Guidelines in 2018 to implement the requirements of California Senate Bill (SB) 743. Specifically,  SB 743 and the resulting CEQA Guideline section 15064.3 changed the CEQA transportation impact  analysis significance criteria to eliminate auto delay, level of service (LOS), and similar measures of  vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts under CEQA. The  changes in CEQA Guidelines to implement SB 743 present vehicle miles traveled (VMT) as an appropriate  measure of transportation impacts.   While the 2011 EIR identified level of service‐based impacts and mitigation measures, these are not  applicable to the current project under current CEQA law and are therefore not further discussed in this  analysis. The City of South San Francisco addresses level of service and capacity upgrades through  payment of the city‐wide Transportation Impact Fee and any other applicable fees and the prior impacts  and mitigation measures Traf‐6 through Traf‐36 would no longer be applicable to the project and are  145   Page 56 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist not further discussed in this document.  The assessment under subsection b) instead addresses VMT‐ based analysis.   Conflicts with Circulation Plans or Policies  Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change the less than  significant conclusion with mitigation measures for Impact Traf‐2b, as the site is adjacent to the Bay Trail  and would therefore require mitigation measure Traf‐2b to ensure trail continuity during construction.  Impact and mitigation measures Traf‐2 and Traf‐5 would not be relevant to this project, as they are  specific to Phase III and IV offices.   As under the 2011 EIR, the current project could result in increased use of area pedestrian and bicycle  facilities and includes enhancement and new connections to those facilities. Identified mitigation  measure Traf‐2b requires continuity of the Bay Trail during construction activities and would be  applicable to the project. The project is consistent with the program previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR  and therefore would not create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in  the 2011 EIR.   Conflict with Transportation Impact Reduction Goals  Same Conclusion (SU reduced to LTS w/ MM): While the 2011 EIR had identified impacts and mitigation  related to level of service, current laws require analysis on a VMT basis, which demonstrates the project  would have a less‐than‐significant impact with respect to transportation impacts and would be required  to implement TDM measures per City requirements (Traf‐1). Trip generation and characteristics under  the current project would be consistent with the hotel development specified under the 2011 EIR.     Traffic engineers Fehr & Peers prepared a trip generation comparison between the total OPSP  development as analyzed in the 2011 EIR and the current project, as shown in Table 1 below. Although  the 2011 EIR did not break down trip generation by land use, the project size is consistent with that  assumed in the 2011 EIR and would therefore be expected to generate a comparable number of trips as  the hotel identified in the 2011 EIR. Moreover, the trip generation would be well within the estimated  trip generation envelope of the OPSP and therefore vehicular transportation‐related impacts are  consistent with the 2011 EIR and would not be considered new impacts for the purposes of CEQA  analysis.  Table 1: Trip Generation Comparison  Scenario  Daily  AM Peak Hour  PM Peak Hour  Oyster Point Specific Plan   17,684  1,873  2,127  Oyster Point Hotel Project  2,751  135  204    Source: Fehr & Peers, 2022  The City of South San Francisco provides VMT screening criteria for development projects. The criteria  are based on the type of project, characteristics, and/or location. If a project meets the City’s screening  criteria, the project is determined to result in less‐than‐significant impacts, and a detailed VMT analysis  is not required. The project would not meet the location‐based screening as nearby transit options do  not currently meet high‐quality transit standards. A hotel use is not one of the uses for which screening  criteria are specifically provided. Although the City of South San Francisco does not have a threshold of  significance for VMT associated with hotel uses specifically, consistent with the City’s screening criteria  146   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 57 for local serving land uses, the project would have a less than significant impact with respect to VMT if it  does not result in a net increase in VMT.    The project’s VMT was assessed by Fehr & Peers (Attachment B). Based on a survey of other area uses,  hotels in the vicinity primarily serve nearby office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport,  as opposed to generating new tourism‐oriented or resort‐oriented travel. The average trip length  associated with a hotel in the East of 101 area was calculated to be 3.6 to 3.9 miles, compared to  average trip lengths of 12.9 miles for office/R&D and other land uses in the that area.   Assuming a similar travel pattern for the proposed project as existing hotels in the vicinity, the project  would not materially increase vehicle miles traveled and may help shorten trips for hotel guests that  would otherwise stay at hotels farther away.   Therefore, the project would not result in a net increase in VMT and would have a less‐than‐significant  impact in this regard. Compliance with the City’s TDM requirements, also required by Traf‐1, would  likely further reduce the project’s VMT.   Hazards and Emergency Access   Less Significant Conclusion (LTS w/ MM reduced to LTS): The current project would have a reduced  conclusion to Impacts and mitigation measures Traf‐2 and Traf‐3 would not apply as the site has been  designed to meet safety standards and is not near the Phase III and Phase IV garages.   The proposed project would not reroute or change any of the city streets in its vicinity that would  impact emergency vehicle access to nearby properties. The project would provide access suitable for  truck traffic, which would also include emergency vehicles. Emergency vehicles would have access to all  building entrances and facilities as well as the Bay Trail connection along the east side of the project.  The project is consistent with the program previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR and therefore would not  create new or substantially more severe impacts than previously analyzed in the 2011 EIR.   147   Page 58 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist P. Utilities and Service Systems and Energy   Impacts  Related To:  OPSP EIR  Findings with  Implementation  of MM (If  Required)  PROJECT  Relationship to OPSP  EIR Findings  Applicable MMs  Project Level  of  Significance  Equal or  Less  Severity  Substantial  Increase in  Severity  a. New or Expanded  Facilities  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  b. Water Supplies  LTS ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS  c. Wastewater  Capacity  LTS w/MM ☒ ☐ Util‐2b: Oyster Point Subtrunk  Replacement  LTS w/MM  d‐e. Solid Waste   LTS  ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS   f. Energy 1 LTS  ☒ ☐ ‐‐  LTS   1 Note that the current CEQA Guidelines include energy in its own section. This topic has been addressed here as it was in  the 2011 EIR. Discussion Utilities and Service Systems Setting Changes from the 2011 EIR   Area‐wide development has continued throughout the vicinity and utilities plans and service are  regularly assessed and updated, including Cal Water’s South San Francisco District Water Supply and  Facilities Master Plan, the City’s Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP), and contracts and operations  related to solid waste.    Relocation of wastewater system Pump Station No. 1 as identified in the 2011 EIR is being completed as  part of Phase 1 development activities and will be completed prior to development of the project site.  The upsizing and improvements to Pump Station No. 2 as identified in the 2011 EIR to accommodate  build‐out of the OPSP area as well as other area growth has since been included in the City’s current  Capital Improvement Plan though not constructed; this pump station does not service the project site.   California Assembly Bill (AB) 341 requires businesses that generate 4 or more cubic yards of waste per  week to recycle. AB 1826 requires all businesses to subscribe to organics recycling service. The City of  South San Francisco has implemented these requirements through programs run by the South San  Francisco Scavenger Company.  New or Expanded Facilities   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change the less‐than‐ significant conclusion related to new or expanded facilities as the need for new or expanded facilities has  not changed since the 2011 EIR.  As under the 2011 EIR, the current project will be served by existing facilities (or those relocated  through separate projects) or on‐site and in‐roadway utility improvements that were included in  analysis of OPSP development, and the current project would not change the potential for impacts  related to such improvements. Consistent with assumptions in the OPSP and 2011 EIR, a new sewer  pump station is proposed on or in the vicinity of the project site. The conclusion of a less‐than‐significant  impact with respect to new or expanded utility facilities remains unchanged for the current project.  148   Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist Page 59 Water Supply   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Util‐1 or the  less‐than‐significant conclusion as the current project would not substantially change projected increases  in water demand.   The 2011 EIR included a Water Supply Assessment, which determined that with proposed on‐site  distribution infrastructure and compliance with applicable water conservation measures, proposed  water usage would be within available supply. As part of an approved specific plan, development of the  project site has been included in local and regional water supply planning. The project is also smaller  than the 500‐room hotel size that would have been required to prepare a project‐specific Water Supply  Assessment under Senate Bill 610.The conclusion of a less‐than‐significant impact with respect to water  supply remains unchanged for the current project.   Wastewater   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS w/ MM): The current project would not change Impacts Util‐2  and Util‐3, and mitigation measure Util‐2b, or the less‐than‐significant with mitigation conclusion as the  current project would not substantially change projected wastewater generation or planned capacity.  Mitigation measure Util‐2a would not apply as Pump Station No. 2 does not serve the project area.  As part of an approved specific plan, development of the project site has been included in area‐wide  wastewater planning and was determined in the 2011 EIR not to have a significant effect on system‐ wide wastewater capacity but would require localized improvements, including the off‐site  improvement of a larger sized subtrunk in Oyster Point. Mitigation measure Util‐2b requiring  demonstrated capacity prior to operations remains applicable to the current project to reduce potential  to less than significant. The City may determine that payment of the Sewer Impact Fee satisfies this  measure.  Solid Waste   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would not change Impact Util‐5 or the  less‐than‐significant conclusion as the site would be adequately served by existing facilities and comply  with applicable solid waste regulations.   The 2011 EIR determined that the solid waste generated by development in the OPSP area would be  within availability capacity of applicable facilities and would meet reduction standards and not  otherwise conflict with applicable regulations or goals. While specific requirements for commercial solid  waste service are regularly updated, the current project would meet all current requirements and the  impact would remain less‐than‐significant and consistent with 2011 EIR conclusions.   Energy   Same Conclusion (conclusion remains LTS): The current project would contribute to increased energy  consumption in the OPSP area but would not change Impact Util‐6 or the less‐than‐significant conclusion  as development would comply with applicable energy efficiency regulations.   The OPSP would be considered to have a significant impact related to energy use if it would violate  applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations relating to energy standards and/or if energy  consumption increases resulting from the OPSP would trigger the need or expanded off‐site energy  facilities.  149   Page 60 Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist The current project would be required by the City to comply with all standards of Title 24 of the  California Code of Regulations and the new California Green Building Standards Code (CALGREEN), as  applicable, aimed at the incorporation of energy‐conserving design and construction. PG&E  infrastructure exists in the area, and any improvements and extensions required to accommodate the  OPSP would be determined in consultation with PG&E prior to installation. As a result, although the  OPSP would incrementally increase energy consumption, it would not result in a significant impact  related to the provision of energy services. The project is consistent with the hotel development  assumed in the 2011 EIR and would therefore be within the energy usage assumed for the OPSP and by  the 2011 EIR with the less‐than‐significant energy impact identified in the 2011 EIR.     150         MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM ATTACHMENT A to the Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist    151 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND   REPORTING PROGRAM  INTRODUCTION  This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) fulfills Public Resources Code  Section  21081.6  which  requires  adoption  of  a  mitigation  monitoring  program  when  mitigation  measures  are  required  to  avoid  or  reduce  a  proposed projects  significant  environmental  effects.  The  MMRP  is  only  applicable  if  the  City of  South  San  Francisco  decides to approve the proposed Project.   The MMRP is organized to correspond to environmental issues and  significant  impacts  discussed in the Addendum. The table below is arranged in the following five columns:   Recommended mitigation measures,    Timing for implementation of the mitigation measures,   Party responsible for implementation,   Monitoring action,   Party  or  parties  responsible  for  monitoring  the  implementation of  the  mitigation  measures, and   A blank for entry of completion date as mitigation occurs.   152 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 2 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Vis‐2a:  Lighting Plan. In order to reduce sources of light and glare created by lighting within the OPSP area, the applicant shall specify fixtures and lighting that maintains appropriate levels of light at building entries, walkways, courtyards, parking lots and private roads at night consistent with minimum levels detailed in the City’s building codes. These fixtures shall be designed to eliminate spillover, high intensity, and unshielded lighting, thereby avoiding unnecessary light pollution. Prior to issuance of building permits for each phase of construction within the OPSP, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Design Plan for review and approval by the City of South San Francisco Planning Department. The plan shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the following: ○ The Lighting Design Plan shall disclose all potential light sources with the types of lighting and their locations. ○ Typical lighting shall include low mounted, downward casting and shielded lights that do not cause spillover onto adjacent properties and the utilization of motion detection systems where applicable.  ○ No flood lights shall be utilized. ○ Lighting shall be limited to the areas that would be in operation during nighttime hours. ○ Low intensity, indirect light sources shall be encouraged. ○ On‐demand lighting systems shall be encouraged. ○ Mercury, sodium vapor, and similar intense and bright lights shall not be permitted except where their need is specifically approved and their source of light is restricted. ○ Generally, light fixtures shall not be located at the periphery of Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Planning Division  153 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 3 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed the property and should shut off automatically when the use is not operating. Security lighting visible from the highway shall be motion‐sensor activated. ○ Use “cut‐off” fixtures designed to prevent the upward cast of light and avoid unnecessary light pollution where appropriate. ○ All lighting shall be installed in accordance with the building codes and the approved lighting plan during construction. Vis‐2b:  Glare Reduction. In order to reduce sources of daytime glare created by reflective building materials, the applicant shall specify exterior building materials for all proposed structures constructed for the Phase I Project and each subsequent phase of development under the OPSP that include the use of textured or other non‐reflective exterior surfaces and non‐reflective glass types, including double glazed and non‐reflective vision glass. These materials shall be chosen for their non‐reflective characteristics and their ability to reduce daytime glare. All exterior glass must meet the specifications of all applicable codes for non‐reflective glass and would therefore reduce daytime glare emanating from the OPSP area. Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Planning Division  Air‐4a:  Implement BAAQMD‐Recommended Measures to Control Particulate Matter Emissions during Construction. Measures to reduce diesel particulate matter and PM10 from construction are recommended to ensure that short‐term health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors are avoided. Dust (PM10) Control Measures: ○ Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to residences should be kept damp at all times. Prior to issuance of construction permits ‐and‐ During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division  154 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 4 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed ○ Cover all hauling trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard.  ○ Pave, apply water at least twice daily, or apply (non‐toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas. ○ Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas and sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is deposited onto the adjacent roads. ○ Hydroseed or apply (non‐toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (i.e., previously‐graded areas that are inactive for 10 days or more). ○ Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non‐toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. ○ Limit traffic speeds on any unpaved roads to 15 mph. ○ Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. ○ Suspend construction activities that cause visible dust plumes to extend beyond the construction site.  ○ Post a publically visible sign(s) with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Additional Measures to Reduce Diesel Particulate Matter and PM2.5 and other construction emissions: ○ The developer or contractor shall provide a plan for approval by the City or BAAQMD demonstrating that the heavy‐duty 155 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 5 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed (>50 horsepower) off‐road vehicles to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet‐average 20 percent NOx reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent CARB fleet average for the year 2011 ○ Clear signage at all construction sites will be posted indicating that diesel equipment standing idle for more than five minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate, or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks could keep their engines running continuously as long as they were onsite or adjacent to the construction site. ○ Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from off‐road diesel powered equipment. Each project shall ensure that emissions from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be repaired immediately ○ The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors). ○ Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions.  Bio‐3a:  Incorporate Best Management Practices for Water Quality During Construction. The Plan shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) for water quality to minimize During construction Applicant for the development Verification that requirements are met during SSF Building Division  156 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 6 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed impacts in the surrounding wetland environment, sloughs and channels, and the San Francisco Bay during construction. These BMPs shall include numerous practices that will be outlined within the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), including, but not limited to, the following mitigation measures:  1.   No equipment will be operated in live flow in any of the sloughs or channels or ditches on or adjacent to the site. 2.   No debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, cement, concrete, washings, petroleum products or other organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into aquatic or wetland habitat. 3.   Standard erosion control and slope stabilization measures will be required for work performed in any area where erosion could lead to sedimentation of a waterbody. For example, silt fencing will be installed just outside the limits of grading and construction in any areas where such activities will occur upslope from, and within 50 ft of, any wetland, aquatic, or marsh habitat. This silt fencing will be inspected and maintained regularly throughout the duration of construction. 4.   Machinery will be refueled at least 50 ft from any aquatic habitat, and a spill prevention and response plan will be developed. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur. constructionBio‐3b:  Minimize Soil Disturbance Adjacent to Wetland and Marsh Habitat. To the extent feasible, soil stockpiling, equipment During construction Applicant for the Verification that Environmentally SSF Planning Division  157 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 7 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed staging, construction access roads, and other intensively soil‐disturbing activities shall not occur immediately adjacent to any wetlands that are to be avoided by the OPSP. The limits of the construction area shall be clearly demarcated with Environmentally Sensitive Area fencing to avoid inadvertent disturbance outside the fence during construction activities. development Sensitive Areas are avoided Bio‐4: Ensure Adequate Stormwater Run‐off Capacity. Increases in stormwater run‐off due to increased hardscape shall be mitigated through the construction and maintenance of features designed to handle the expected increases in flows and provide adequate energy dissipation. All such features, including outfalls, shall be regularly maintained to ensure continued function and prevent failure following construction. Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verification that adequate stormwater run‐off capacity is provided SSF Public Works Department  Bio‐6:  Pre‐Construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre‐construction surveys for nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and/or Fish and Game Code of California within 100 feet of a development site in the OPSP area shall be conducted if construction commences during the avian nesting season, between February 1 and August 31. The survey should be undertaken no more than 15 days prior to any site‐disturbing activities, including vegetation removal or grading. If active nests are found, a qualified biologist shall determine an appropriate buffer in consideration of species, stage of nesting, location of the nest, and type of construction activity. The buffers should be maintained until after the nestlings have fledged and left the nest. Prior to construction if during nesting period Applicant for the development Completion of survey and, if birds present, provision of buffer SSF Planning Division  Bio‐10a:  Lighting Measures to Reduce Impacts to Birds. During design of any building greater than 100 feet tall, the OPSP Applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist experienced with During preliminary design of any Applicant for the Incorporation of lighting that minimizes bird SSF Planning Division  158 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 8 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed bird strikes and building/lighting design issues to identify lighting‐related measures to minimize the effects of the building’s lighting on birds. Such measures, which may include the following and/or other measures, shall be incorporated into the building’s design and operation. ○ Use strobe or flashing lights in place of continuously burning lights for obstruction lighting. Use flashing white lights rather than continuous light, red light, or rotating beams. ○ Install shields onto light sources not necessary for air traffic to direct light towards the ground. ○ Extinguish all exterior lighting (i.e., rooftop floods, perimeter spots) not required for public safety. ○ When interior or exterior lights must be left on at night, the operator of the buildings shall examine and adopt alternatives to bright, all‐night, floor‐wide lighting, which may include: ○ Installing motion‐sensitive lighting. ○ Using desk lamps and task lighting. ○ Reprogramming timers. ○ Use of lower‐intensity lighting. ○ Windows or window treatments that reduce transmission of light out of the building shall be implemented to the extent feasible. building greater than 100 feet tall development impactsBio‐10b: Building Design Measures to Minimize Bird Strike Risk. During design of any building greater than 100 feet tall, the OPSP Applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist experienced with bird strikes and building/lighting design issues to identify measures related to the external appearance of the building to minimize the During preliminary design of any building greater than Applicant for the development Incorporation of design features that minimize bird impacts SSF Planning Division  159 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 9 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed risk of bird strikes. Such measures, which may include the following and/or other measures, shall be incorporated into the building’s design. ○ Use non‐reflective tinted glass. ○ Use window films to make windows visible to birds from the outside. ○ Use external surfaces/designs that “break up” reflective surfaces rather than having large, uninterrupted areas of surfaces that reflect, and thus may not appear noticeably different (to a bird) from, the sky. 100 feet tallGeo‐2a: Compliance with California Building Code. OPSP development shall meet requirements of the California Building Code, including the California Building Standards, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, and as modified by the amendments, additions and deletions as adopted by the City of South San Francisco, California. Incorporation of seismic construction standards will reduce the potential for catastrophic effects of ground shaking, such as complete structural failure, but will not completely eliminate the hazard of seismically induced ground shaking. Geo‐2b: Compliance with a design‐level Geotechnical Investigation report prepared by a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and with Structural Design Plans as prepared by a Licensed Professional Engineer. Proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and a Licensed Professional Engineer. The structural engineering design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation, shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with the California Building Code.  Prior to issuance of building permits ‐and‐ Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendations are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division  160 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 10 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Geo‐2c: Obtain a building permit. The OPSP applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of South San Francisco Building Division. Plan Review of planned buildings and structures shall be completed by the Building Division for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned commercial and industrial sites in the East of 101 area of the City of South San Francisco. According to the East of 101 area plan, Geotechnical Safety Element, buildings shall not be subject to catastrophic collapse under foreseeable seismic events, and will allow egress of occupants in the event of damage following a strong earthquake. Geo‐3a: Compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance with Structural Design Plans. A design‐level Geotechnical Investigation shall be prepared for the site under the direction of a California Registered Geotechnical Engineer and shall include analysis for liquefaction potential of the site soils, particularly in the perimeter dikes. Proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation. The Geotechnical Investigation shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Geotechnical Consultant and by the City Engineer. A Registered Structural Engineer shall prepare project structural design plans. Structures shall be designed to reduce the effects of anticipated seismic settlements. The Geotechnical Engineer shall review the Structural Design Plans and provide approval for the Geotechnical elements of the plans. The design plans shall identify specific mitigation measures to reduce liquefaction potential, if the potential for liquefaction is found to exist, or other ground failure modes such as lateral spreading, seismic densification or stability of the perimeter dike slopes. Mitigation measures may include ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or jet Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendations are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division  161 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 11 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed grouting.  Geo‐3b: Obtain a building permit. The OPSP applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of South San Francisco Building Division. Plan Review of planned buildings and structures shall be completed by the Building Division for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned commercial and industrial sites in the East of 101 area of the City of South San Francisco. According to the East of 101 area plan, Geotechnical Safety Element, buildings should not be subject to catastrophic collapse under foreseeable seismic events, and will allow egress of occupants in the event of damage following a strong earthquake. Geo‐4: Compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation. A design‐level Geotechnical Investigation shall include an evaluation of static stability and seismic stability under a design magnitude earthquake event. Seismic analyses shall include pseudo‐static analyses to estimate permanent slope displacements due to earthquake motions. The Geotechnical Engineer shall prepare recommendations to mitigate potential slope instability, if slope stability problems are identified. Mitigation measures may include ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or jet grouting.  Design‐level Geotechnical Investigations shall be completed during preliminary and final design stages and will confirm material types used in the construction of the perimeter dikes to verify that the slopes meet minimum criteria for stability under both static and seismic conditions. Knowledge of the stability of the perimeter dikes will guide the selection of any future measures to mitigate any deficiencies identified in the perimeter dike.  Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendations are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division  Geo‐5a: Deep Foundations. Because of the magnitude of expected settlement of Bay Mud soils and waste fill materials that would Prior to  Applicant for  Verify  SSF Building    162 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 12 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed occur under new building loads, the OPSP applicant must consider the use of deep foundations such as driven piles. Specific recommendations for suitable deep foundation alternatives and required penetrations will be provided during the course of a design‐level geotechnical investigation and will depend on factors such as the depth and hardness of the underlying clays, sands or bedrock, and the corrosivity of the waste materials and Bay Mud soils. Suitable deep foundation types may include driven precast, prestressed concrete piles or driven closed‐end steel pipe piles with the interior of the pile filled with concrete after driving.   Deep foundations shall extend through all waste materials and Bay Mud and be tipped in underlying stiff to hard clays, dense sands or weathered bedrock. Where waste and Bay Mud soils underlie the site, wall and column loads as well as floor slabs shall be founded on deep foundations. Settlement of properly‐designed and constructed deep foundation elements is typically less than about one‐half inch. The majority of settlement typically occurs during construction as the loads are applied.  Where landfill waste and Bay Mud are not present (possibly at extreme western and northwestern edges of the site) and competent soil or bedrock are present near the ground surface (within about 5 feet of finished grade elevation), shallow foundations such as footings or mats may be appropriate foundation types, as determined during the course of a design‐level geotechnical investigation. Where proposed structures straddle a transition zone between these conditions, a combination of shallow and deep foundations may be required. Any transition zones shall be identified during site‐specific geotechnical investigations for preliminary and final designs.  Geo‐5b: Predrilling and/or Pile Configuration. Piles either shall be issuance of building permits the development requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction Division163 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 13 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed predrilled through the fill and landfill materials to protect the piles from damage due to unknown materials, to reduce pushing waste material deeper, and to reduce pile alignment problems or shall have a pointed tip configuration. If a drill is used, it should only loosen and break up in‐place obstructions that may cause pile damage. During recent subsurface investigations reported by Treadwell & Rollo (2009b) obstructions including concrete rubble was encountered throughout the landfill area, particularly in the northern end of the site. Even with predrilling, precast concrete piles could be damaged during installation at a landfill site such as Oyster Point. For preliminary planning purposes, a precast concrete pile breakage rate during installation of 10 to 15 percent may be considered applicable.  Piles usually have to include pointed tip configurations to avoid pushing landfill waste downward. These configurations are typically readily accommodated by pile driving contractors.  Geo‐5c: Indicator Pile Program. Prior to specifying the lengths of the production piles, drive indicator piles at the structure sites in order to observe the driving characteristic of the piles and the ability of the driving equipment when a driven pile is used. The driving criteria and pile length of production piles shall also be estimated from the information obtained from driving of the indicator piles. The contractor shall use the same equipment to drive both the indicator and production piles. Indicator pile lengths and locations shall be selected by the Geotechnical Engineer, in conjunction with the Structural Engineer and Contractor after the foundation plan has been finalized.  The indicator pile program will serve to establish information on the following: ○ Estimates of production pile lengths; 164 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 14 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed ○ Drivability of production piles; ○ Performance of pile driving equipment; and  ○ Variation in driving resistance relative to depth and location of piles. Geo‐6: Account for Drag Load on Deep Foundations. The Geotechnical Engineer shall account for accumulation of drag load in the structural design of the deep foundations elements (piles).  Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendations are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division  Geo‐7:  Incorporate Systems for Landfill Gas Control.  Measures for the control of landfill gas shall be included in building design.  Measures for the control of landfill gas typically include a collection system, floor slab shielding and interior alarms.   For projects on or adjacent to the landfill area, during preliminary project design and prior to issuance of building permit Applies on a building by building basis Verification that measures for the control of landfill gas are included SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  Geo‐8a: Avoid Significant New Loads on Landfill Waste and Bay Mud. A design‐level Geotechnical Investigation shall include exploration to more thoroughly determine the thickness and areal extent of landfill waste and Bay Mud. To avoid inducing additional settlement to the settlement that is already on‐going, grading plans shall include as little additional new fill as possible, and Prior to issuance of building permit Applies to all construction Verification of adequate report SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  165 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 15 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed significant new structure loads or any structures that are settlement‐sensitive shall be founded on deep foundations extended below the Bay Mud, as recommended in the design‐level Geotechnical Investigation report.  All grading shall be planned to avoid penetrating the landfill cap and to reduce the amount of long‐term settlement in response to new fills. Because the Bay Mud and waste across most of the site are still settling under the weight of existing fill and waste decomposition and will settle more under new fills, additional settlement should be expected, with the creation of localized low‐lying surface areas. Existing low areas shall be corrected during site grading to allow for proper drainage. Long‐term maintenance planning for the development shall also include provisions for periodic grading to correct drainage problems and improve site grades, as outlined in the Disposition and Development Agreement.  The Geotechnical Engineer will recommend other site‐specific recommendations based on the results of the design‐level Geotechnical Investigation to mitigate on‐going settlement and any additional settlement to be expected in response to new development.    Geo‐8b: Design Building‐Soil Interface to Allow Free Movement. The Structural Engineer shall provide that structures not supported on deep foundations not be structurally tied into pile‐supported buildings, except as noted below, and shall be designed to allow free vertical movement between structures.   Articulated ramps on walkways and building entrances at the interface between the pile and soil‐supported areas can provide a smooth walkway over moderate differential settlements with some amount of maintenance. As the magnitude of the differential Prior to issuance of building permit Applies to all construction Verification of compliant construction plans SSF Building Division  166 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 16 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed settlement increases, however, these ramps may need to be rebuilt or realigned to account for the larger elevation differential. Similar ramps may also reduce differential settlements between driveways and pile‐supported parking lots. Over time, voids will tend to form beneath pile‐supported buildings due to on‐going settlement of the landfill. Use of wall skirts around the building perimeter will help to reduce the visual impact of these voids. Geo‐9a: Monitoring and Testing.  Special precautions shall be taken to monitor the safety conditions and to provide for the safety of workers in the area. Additionally, if excavations encounter water, this water shall be tested for contaminants and may have to undergo specialized handling, treatment and/or disposal if it is contaminated.  A system to disperse methane during construction shall be installed in or adjacent to the trenches.   For projects on the landfill area, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Adherence to measures if water discovered during excavation SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  Geo‐9b: Locate Underground Utilities in Soil Cap.  To the extent practicable, the utilities shall be constructed in the soil landfill cap to avoid direct contact of the utility lines and construction workers with the waste material. If construction of utilities in the waste material is necessary, proper design and construction precautions shall be taken to protect the system and the workers from the corrosive and hazardous conditions of the waste. Geo‐9c: Seal Trenches and Underground Structures.  Trenches and underground structures shall be sealed to preclude gas intrusion.  Typical types of sealing procedures include providing a low permeability clay cover of 1 foot over the top of the pipe, or the utility trench be lined with a relatively impervious For projects on the landfill area, prior issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of compliant plans and adherence to approved plans during construction SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  167 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 17 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed geomembrane. Underground manholes may be shielded from methane intrusion by placement of a membrane around the outside of the structure. To reduce gas migration off‐site within the utility trenches, all trenches crossing the transition zone between the landfill and non‐landfill portions of the property shall be sealed with a clay plug surrounding the pipe or other approved methods. In addition, plugs shall also be provided at the perimeters of buildings to reduce migration of gas through the utility trenches to beneath the buildings. Geo‐10: Provide For Continuity of Landfill Cap.  Following planned landfill excavation and landfill cap repair, the project Civil Engineer shall require that excavations for building foundations, utility trenches and other underground structures be configured to maintain continuity of the landfill cap.  The specific configuration will depend upon the excavation depth and orientation to underlying wastes. However, a low‐permeability layer of soil or a geomembrane properly tied to surrounding cap areas may be required.   For projects on the landfill area, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of landfill cap installation SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  Geo‐11: Common Trenches and Vaults.  Where underground utilities are to be located in landfill areas, consideration shall be given to reducing the number of utilities trenches by locating utilities in common trenches to the extent practicable.  In addition, vaulted systems shall be designed and maintained at such interfaces that provide flexible and/or expandable connections to the proposed buildings.  In addition, the utility lines beneath buildings shall be suspended from hangers fastened to structural floor slabs.   For projects on the landfill area, during preliminary design and prior to issuance of building permit Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of adherence to measures SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  168 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 18 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Geo‐12: Flexible Materials and Joints.  Utility lines shall be constructed of flexible pipe such as welded polyethylene to accommodate differential settlement within the waste material and landfill cap. At the border of the landfill, where differential settlements are expected to be large, the utility lines shall be designed to allow for rotation. As with buried utilities on a conventional site, proper bedding and backfilling shall be completed, as specified in a design‐level geotechnical investigation report. For projects on the landfill area, during preliminary design, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of adherence to measures SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  Geo‐13: Increase Flow Gradient.  The Civil Engineer shall consider increasing the flow gradient in sewers and storm drains so that differential settlements will not disrupt the flow. An alternative is to provide a pumping system that does not rely on gravity flow. Such measures will reduce the impact of reduced flow gradient due to differential settlement to less than significant.  This applies to the entire OPSP, including the Phase I Project. For projects on the landfill area, during preliminary design, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of adherence to measures SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department  Geo‐14:  Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. In accordance with the Clean Water Act and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Applicant shall file a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to the start of construction. The SWPPP shall include specific best management practices to reduce soil erosion. This is required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit, 99‐08‐DWQ). Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verification that adequate plan prepared SSF Building Division  169 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 19 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Haz‐2: Waste Excavation and Re‐disposition. A plan shall be written for management of excavated wastes/refuse. Non‐hazardous excavated waste shall be re‐deposited in an alternate part of the site and any hazardous waste shall be relocated off‐site for appropriate disposal. The plan can be a section of the Site Management Plan (Mitigation Measure Haz‐4a), or a stand alone document. The plan shall include measures to avoid releases of wastes or waste water into the environment and to protect workers and the public. The details of the plan shall be based, in part, on the amount of material to be removed and the final design of foundation structures, but will generally include the following, as deemed appropriate by the regulatory agencies, particularly DTSC and RWQCB: ○ To the greatest extent possible, use existing boring data to obtain pre‐characterization of refuse for off‐site disposal, and to pre‐plan areas to be removed versus areas to be re‐deposited on‐site. ○ Divide excavation areas into daily sections; plan to complete excavation and backfilling a section during each working day. Minimize the time period that refuse is exposed. ○ Review existing boring data and existing site documentation to evaluate potential subsurface materials to be encountered. ○ Stake out area to be excavated. ○ If excavation is to be conducted at depths where groundwater is to be encountered, conduct dewatering to minimize worker potential direct contact with groundwater. Removed groundwater shall be treated in accordance with the requirements outlined in the Site Management Plan (Mitigation Measure Haz‐4a). Prior to issuance of building permit and during construction on the landfill area Applies to all construction Compliance with Site Management Plan SSF Public Works Department  170 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 20 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed ○ Screen excavation site with a portable photoionization detector and combustible gas monitor for landfill gasses. Continue screening progress of each excavation section as work proceeds. Use foam suppressants or 6 inches minimum of daily soil cover for nuisance odors. ○ Provide carbon dioxide gas source (fire extinguisher or cylinder) to flood excavation as necessary to prevent migration of gases into atmosphere above excavation, minimize explosive or fire potential, and control nuisance and odors. ○ Begin excavation and segregate soil and /or clay cap material above refuse for reuse as foundation layer. ○ Upon reaching refuse, place refuse into dump truck standing by on‐site. ○ Dispose of each truck load of refuse immediately after filling equipment. All loads to be covered when hauling. Refuse shall be either re‐deposited on‐site in a specified area, or hauled to an off‐site disposal facility. ○ Prior to relocation, field verify each load for disposal classification type (landfill classification, Class 3 or Class 2).  If waste for off‐site disposal is characterized as either California or Federal Hazardous Waste as defined in the criteria described in CCR Title 22 Section 66261, then the hazardous waste shall be tracked using the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest System (USEPA Form 8700‐22). ○ Hazardous and if necessary,  non‐hazardous waste shall be transported to the appropriate disposal facility using a permitted, licensed, and insured transportation company.  Transporters of hazardous waste shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR 263 and 22 CCR 66263.  Copies of 171 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 21 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed uniform hazardous waste manifests signed by the designated waste disposal facility shall be retained for at least five years from the date the waste was accepted by the initial transporter.  Copies of records pertaining to the characterization of hazardous or nonhazardous waste shall be retained for a minimum of three years. ○ Upon reaching over‐excavation depth, place a minimum of 6‐inch thick layer of appropriate backfill soil on excavation bottom to seal exposed refuse surface. Place soil by the end of the same day excavation is completed. ○ Upon completion of excavation, begin cap placement procedures. Specific measures shall be targeted to minimize the duration of waste exposure, plan for appropriate final destination of wastes based on the presence of contaminants of concern, allow for adjustment in plan based on unexpected occurrences, and to protect worker safety and the public. Additional work plan measures are discussed in Haz‐4a. In addition, worker protection measures for soil and dewatering are discussed in Haz‐6a. Measures specific to off‐site air quality during construction are included in mitigation measure Air‐4. Haz‐4b: Use Of Deep Foundations To Prevent Load Induced Settlement. Buildings on fill shall be supported using driven steel or concrete piles founded in stiff to hard clays, dense sands or weathered bedrock underlying the fill. Both the structural loads and building floor slabs shall be supported on piles. This will avoid placing additional building loads on fill material.  Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Adherence to specifications provided in measure SSF Building Division  Haz‐4c:  Minimization of Irrigation Water Use. Landscaping of the  During  Applicant for    SSF Building    172 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 22 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed site shall be selected to stabilize the soil, prevent erosion, and reduce the need for extensive irrigation. Excessive water could infiltrate the landfill cap and produce leachate. To prevent this, low‐water vegetation shall be selected to reduce irrigation water. In addition the thickness of the erosion resistant layer in landscaped areas will be increased to minimize intrusion of roots into the lower layers of the cover. Construction the development DivisionHaz‐4e: Operation and Maintenance Activities. Operation and maintenance (O&M) activities are expected to occur indefinitely at the site. Operation and maintenance activities shall include inspections and observations of site features to protect the landfill cap, prevent utility damage, maintain gravity flow of sewer systems, maintain the landfill gas barrier and venting systems, and monitor for leachate and groundwater contaminant concentrations. O&M shall act to prevent releases of hazardous materials by identifying deficits in engineering controls prior to release events.   SSF Building Division   SSF Building Division  Haz‐6a: Development and Implementation of Site Management Plans. A Site Management Plan shall be prepared that addresses the exposure risk to people and the environment resulting from future demolition, construction, occupancy, and maintenance activities on the property. The plans for the landfill portion of the OPSP shall be in accordance with RWQCB order No. 00‐046, the PCMP and recommendations of the Environmental Consultant, and shall be reviewed and approved by the RWQCB, DTSC, the SMCEHD Groundwater Protection Program and the City of South San Francisco Public Works Department. Specific mitigation measures designed to protect human health   SSF Building Division   SSF Building Division  173 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 23 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed and the environment shall be provided in the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following: 1) Requirements for site specific Health and Safety Plans (HASP) shall be prepared in accordance with OSHA regulations by all contractors at the OPSP area. This includes a HASP for all demolition, grading and excavation on the site, as well as for future subsurface maintenance work. The HASP shall include appropriate training, any required personal protective equipment, and monitoring of contaminants to determine exposure. The HASP shall be reviewed and approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The plan shall also designate provisions to limit worker entry and  exposure and shall show locations and type of protective fencing to prevent public exposure to hazards during demolition, site grading, and construction activities. 2) Requirements for site‐specific construction techniques that would minimize exposure to any subsurface contamination shall be developed. This shall include dewatering techniques to minimize direct exposure to groundwater during construction activities, treatment and disposal measures for any contaminated groundwater removed from excavations, trenches, and dewatering systems in accordance with local and Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines. Groundwater encountered in excavations shall not be discharged into the neighboring storm drain, but into a closed containment facility, unless proven to have concentrations of contaminants below established regulatory guidelines. Extracted contaminated groundwater shall be required to be stored in tanks or other sealed container until tested. If testing determines that the water can be discharged into the sanitary sewer system, then the applicant shall acquire a ground water discharge permit from the City of South San Francisco Sanitary Sewer District and meet local discharge limits before 174 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 24 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed being allowed to discharge into the sanitary sewer. Water shall be analyzed for the chemicals of concern at the site, including benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, chlorobenzene, naphthalene and additional compounds as requested by the receiving facility or the City of South San Francisco. 3) Waste relocation. Relocation or removal of existing landfill waste/refuse will be required for landfill cap upgrades and for site construction. Excavated waste can either be re‐deposited on site or disposed of at an active landfill facility. Off‐site disposal will require pre‐characterization of the waste for acceptance at an approved waste disposal facility. Waste manifests will be prepared to document transportation and disposal. On‐site disposal shall require proper placement, compaction, and capping of the refuse material. In either case, segregation of Class 2 and Class 3 from Class 1 material for disposal purposes shall be performed on‐site to the extent possible. No Class 1 material shall be relocated or re‐deposited on‐site. BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 34 section 118 documents a limited exemption for construction activities at landfill sites. This section specifies that when the construction activities are related to “installing, expanding, replacing, or repairing components of the landfill gas, leachate, or gas condensate collection and removal systems.” Excavation for cap upgrades falls under this exemption. Excavation for construction purposes will also likely fall under this exemption. As such it will be necessary to provide BAAQMD with construction plans and other documentation as detailed under this regulation for the purposes of obtaining a letter of exemption from BAAQMD. Excavation procedures are also discussed in Measure Haz‐2. 4) Future subsurface work plan. The plan shall document procedures for future subsurface landscaping work, utility maintenance, etc., with proper notification, where applicable. The 175 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 25 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed plan shall include a general health and safety plan for each expected type of work, with appropriate personal protective equipment, where applicable. This plan may be included in the operations and maintenance plan as appropriate. Haz‐6b: Landfill Gas System. Section 21160 of Title 27 of the CCR requires that closed landfills implement and maintain landfill gas control. A landfill gas (LFG) venting system shall be placed under the bottom slabs of each structure built entirely or partially over landfill material, to collect and vent the build up of gases diffusing through the landfill cap. The LFG system shall include spray‐applied vapor barrier membranes, horizontal collection and passive venting, gas detection and monitoring. The system shall either have backup active collection and venting or shall be designed to facilitate retrofitting with an active system, if measures warrant the retrofit. Potential migration of LFG into the building space shall be mitigated by the collection and venting system, and secondly by the spray‐applied membrane. Subsurface landfill gases shall be vented by a network of perforated piping placed beneath the building slabs. The exhaust gases shall be manifolded to a series of riser piping that is to be vented above structure roofs. Passive landfill gas systems do not require permits, however if an active system is installed, either at the time of construction or as part of a retrofit, a BAAQMD permit will be needed.   Applicant for the development (within building on site) ‐and‐ SSF Building Division (external to building)   SSF Building Division  Haz‐6c: Non‐use of Groundwater. Water supply wells shall not be installed at the site. This will prevent direct contact between the public and site groundwater and leachate. All phases  Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in landscaping plan SSF Building    176 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 26 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Hydro‐1: Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be used during installation of foundation piers to reduce the potential for gaps in the subsurface confining layers around the piers. BMP requirements shall be identified in the SWPPP and shall be developed by the applicant or their authorized representative. The exact BMPs to be implemented shall depend on final pier design and type, but can include pre‐drilling and grouting of concrete piers, use of hollow steel piers, or other methods to reduce the risk of displaced refuse creating a void in the Bay Mud layer. The proposed BMPs shall be benchmarked against the California Department of Transportation Stormwater Quality Handbooks Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual (2003 and associated updates). Prior to issuance of building permits ‐and‐ During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division  Hydro‐2: Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the applicant of a project under the OPSP shall develop a SWPPP to protect water quality during construction. If the SWPP will be developed after September 2, 2011, the SWPPP shall be developed by a California Qualified SWPPP Developer in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit 2009‐009‐DWQ. The project SWPPP shall include, but is not limited, to the following mitigation measures for the construction period: 1) Grading and earthwork shall be allowed with the appropriate SWPPP measures during the wet season (October 1 through April 30) and such work shall be stopped before pending storm events.  2) Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro‐seeding, shall be utilized in accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments “Erosion & Prior to issuance of building permits ‐and‐ Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division  177 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 27 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Sediment Control Measures” manual. Silt fences shall be installed down slope of all graded slopes. Hay bales shall be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets. 3) BMPs to be developed by the applicant shall be used for preventing the discharge or other construction‐related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e. paint, concrete, etc) to downstream waters.  4) After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for accumulated sediment and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and sediment.  In accordance with the handbook C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance, Version 2, permanent mitigation measures for stormwater shall be submitted as part of project application submittals with the Planning Permit Application and the Building Permit Application. Elements that shall be addressed in the submittals include the following: 5) Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the OPSP area. R&D activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used at the proposed OPSP area shall be described. This shall include a thorough assessment of existing and potential pollutant sources.  6) Identification of BMPs to be implemented at the OPSP area based on identified industrial activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control BMPs, with treatment controls used as needed.  7) Development of a monitoring and implementation plan. Maintenance requirements and frequency shall be carefully described including vector control, clearing of clogged or 178 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 28 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed obstructed inlet or outlet structures, vegetation/landscape maintenance, replacement of media filters, etc.  8) The monitoring and maintenance program shall be conducted as described in Haz‐4e.  9) Proposed pervious and impervious surfaces, including site design measures to minimize impervious surfaces and promote infiltration (except where the landfill cover is present). 10) Proposed locations and approximate sizes of stormwater treatment measures. Hydro‐3: Compliance with NPDES Requirements. Applicants for a project under the OPSP shall comply with all Phase I NPDES General Construction Activities permit requirements established by the CWA and the Grading Permit requirements of the City of South San Francisco. Erosion control measures to be implemented during construction shall be included in the project SWPPP. The project SWPPP shall accompany the NOI filing and shall outline erosion control and storm water quality management measures to be implemented during and following construction. The SWPPP shall also provide the schedule for monitoring performance. Refer to Mitigation Measure Hydro‐2 for more information regarding the project SWPPP. Implementation of Phase I NPDES General Construction Activities permit requirements would reduce construction‐related impacts associated with erosion and/or siltation to less‐than‐significant. Prior to issuance of building permits ‐and‐ During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division  Noise‐5: Construction Noise. To reduce noise levels generated by construction, the following standard construction noise control measures shall be included in all construction projects within the During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction SSF Building Division  179 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 29 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed OPSP area. ○ Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment.  ○ Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines should be strictly prohibited. ○ Locate stationary noise generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive receptors. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA.  ○ Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. ○ Route all construction traffic to and from the OPSP area via designated truck routes where possible. Prohibit construction related heavy truck traffic in residential areas where feasible. ○ Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point that they are not audible at existing residences bordering the OPSP area. ○ The contractor shall prepare and submit to the City for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise‐generating construction activities.  ○ Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. contracts and are met during construction 180 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 30 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. ○ For pile driving activities, consider a) pre‐drilling foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile, b) using multiple pile driving rigs to expedite this phase of construction, and/or c) the use of “acoustical blankets” for receivers located within 100 feet of the site. Traf‐1: Transportation Demand Management Program. The OPSP sponsors shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.400 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG. These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of the development. The C/CAG guidelines specify the number of trips that may be credited for each TDM measure. Prior to occupancy Applicant for the development Approval of TDM Program SSF Planning Division  Traf‐2b: Bay Trail Continuity Provisions in Construction Management Plan. Continuity of the Bay Trail shall be included in construction management plans for all phases of development in the OPSP. When feasible, construction shall avoid disrupting the Bay Trail and when not feasible, the construction management plan shall specify plans for clear and safe detours for bicyclists and pedestrians and be ADA accessible. Prior to issuance of building permits ‐and‐ During construction Applicant for the development Verification of inclusion in the construction management plan SSF Planning Division and SSF Building Division  181 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 31 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring ResponsibilityDate Completed Util‐2b:  Oyster Point Subtrunk Replacement. To provide the required sewer capacity, the Oyster Point Subtrunk will need to be replaced with a larger sized trunk line, with sizes ranging from 12, 15, and 18‐inches. The majority of these improvements are included in the Sewer Master Plan and are funded through a flat‐rate sewer connection fee for new development and a monthly impact fee. The amount of the impact fee is based on the quantity (flow) of wastewater generated. The occupants of the proposed OPSP shall pay the sanitary sewer fees imposed by the City of South San Francisco in order to mitigate the cost of the sewer system upgrades necessary to manage the wastewater flows generated by the OPSP.  An additional 700 feet of 8‐inch diameter sewer trunk from Eccles Avenue to Gull Road needs to be upsized to a 12‐inch diameter trunk sewer. This segment of sewer trunk was not included in the recommendations in the Sewer Master Plan. The applicants shall either work with the City to include this improvement in an Sewer Master Plan update or directly fund their fair share of the improvement. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy of Phase IV or building at which warrant criteria levels are approached, if earlier Applicant for the development   Payment of sewer connection fee / fair share contribution SSF Public Works Department   182         FEHR & PEERS TRANSPORTATION ASSESSMENT ATTACHMENT B to the Oyster Point Hotel Project Environmental Checklist 183 345 California Street | Suite 450 | San Francisco, CA 94104 | (415) 348-0300 | Fax (415) 773-1790 www.fehrandpeers.com Memorandum  Date: May 4, 2022 To: Rebecca Auld, Lamphier Gregory From: Daniel Jacobson and Emily Chen, Fehr & Peers Subject: Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment SF22-1215 This memorandum provides a transportation assessment for a proposed hotel located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan area in South San Francisco (“Project”). It includes an analysis of travel demand, site access and circulation, and vehicle miles traveled, as well as a comparison to the analysis provided in the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR. Key Findings   • The Project’s hotel and restaurant uses are unlikely to materially increase vehicle miles traveled due to the Project’s proximity to office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport. • The Project’s size and trip generation is well within the estimated trip generation envelope of the Specific Plan Area and therefore consistent with the transportation analysis in the Specific Plan EIR. • Access and circulation illustrated in the Project’s conceptual site plan is consistent with the Oyster Point Specific Plan and would not create or exacerbate transportation safety impacts. • Based on the above findings, there are no anticipated new impacts to transportation facilities that were not identified in the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR.    184 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 2 of 12 Project Description  The Project is located on Marina Boulevard near the eastern terminus of Oyster Point Boulevard adjacent to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The Project consists of up to 350 hotel rooms, a restaurant and bar, and meeting rooms covering about 261,000 square feet. A ballroom may be added in a future phase. Approximately 250 parking spaces would be provided (78 of which would be valet) along with a loading dock that accommodates two service trucks. The Project includes three driveways along Marina Boulevard and a public access trail along the eastern edge of the site connecting to the Bay Trail. Project Setting  Land Use & Transportation Context The Project is located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan area, an 81 acre redevelopment in South San Francisco approved in 2011. The Specific Plan includes the development of up to 2.3 million square feet of office/R&D space as well as new infrastructure, recreation and open space, and the proposed Project. The Specific Plan’s Phase One buildings (660,000 square feet) were completed in early 2022, while remaining phases are underway. The Project is located along Marina Boulevard near the eastern terminus of Oyster Point Boulevard, which connects to US-101 and major arterials within South San Francisco. Gull Drive, Eccles Avenue, and Gateway Boulevard are the nearest north-south streets intersecting with Oyster Point Boulevard. The South San Francisco Ferry Terminal is located adjacent to the project site, while the South San Francisco Caltrain station and South San Francisco BART Station are accessible via peak period shuttle services provided by the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance (Commute.org). While no SamTrans bus service currently serves the site, an extension of Route 130 along the Oyster Point Boulevard corridor is planned to occur in 2023. New pedestrian and bicycle facilities have been provided along Oyster Point Boulevard and Marina Boulevard adjacent to the Project site, including sidewalks, crosswalks, and Class II bike lanes. The Bay Trail covers the perimeter of the Specific Plan area and has frontage on the southern shoreline of the Project site. Figure 1 illustrates the Project location in relation to nearby land uses and transportation facilities. Figure 2 illustrates the Oyster Point Specific Plan. 185 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 3 of 12 Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: Oyster Point Specific Plan 186 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 4 of 12 Specific Plan Design Guidelines The Oyster Point Specific Plan seeks to promote alternative transportation modes to, from and within the site (Design Goal 3). To accomplish this, it includes the following applicable design guidelines related to the Project’s site access and circulation: General Guidelines • Provide convenient, efficient, and safe access to Oyster Point. • Maintain and enhance access to adjacent parcels, the waterfront, and the Ferry Terminal. • Encourage alternative transportation by emphasizing pedestrian, bicycle and transit in the roadway network design. • Promote safe pedestrian and vehicular circulation by minimizing conflicts at intersections and changes in road width and direction. Service, Delivery and Emergency Access Guidelines • Service vehicles should be accommodated by the roadway network, with clearly delineated lane markings, signals, and wayfinding signage. • Service, delivery and emergency vehicles should have access to both primary as well as secondary entrances to buildings and facilities. • These secondary entrances should be limited specifically to service, delivery, and emergency access. • Service vehicle driveways and loading areas should be screened and separated from public pedestrian walkways where possible. • Secondary access for emergency vehicles will be provided when their access is restricted from using primary entrances. Parking Access Guidelines • Parking access should be clearly delineated by lane markings, signals, and wayfinding signage. • Access to and from the parking garages should be located at intersections or from a dedicated right turn lane. • Adequate queuing space should be provided at parking garage entrances. Bicycle Circulation Guidelines • Bicycle access and parking should be clearly delineated by lane markings and wayfinding signage. 187 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 5 of 12 Streetscapes and Sidewalks Guidelines • Sidewalks should support an interconnected and public development. • Width of sidewalks should be appropriate to • accommodate an active development. • Sidewalks should be inset from roadways with a landscape buffer where possible to promote pedestrian friendly circulation. Guidelines to Support the TDM Program • The site should include dedicated passenger drop- off and shuttle stop areas. • Pedestrian connections should be provided to connect the buildings and site adjacent sidewalks, Bay Trail and shuttle stops. • Bicycle lanes, routes and/or paths should be provided to allow bicycle accessibility to all buildings at the site. • The parking areas should provide preferred parking for carpool, vanpool, low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles, and electric plug-in vehicles. • Parking should be provided for motorcycle and scooters. • Long-term (Class I) and Short-Term (Class II) bicycle parking should be provided at or adjacent to all buildings. • Shower and changing facilities should be provided in or easily accessible from all buildings. • Transportation and Commute Information Kiosks should be provided at all buildings. • In addition to the physical measures described above, the TDM program will include programmatic measures such as informational resources, transit programs, and commuter amenities. Project Travel Demand  Project Trip Generation Vehicle trip estimates for the Project (Table 1) were developed by applying national trip generation rates presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition to the proposed land uses. Due to the continued disruptions in travel behavior associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, ITE rates were used in lieu of conducting new vehicle counts at comparable local sites. ITE Land Use 310 (Hotel) is defined as a place of lodging and supporting facilities such as a full-service restaurant, bar, meeting rooms, ballrooms, and convention facilities, which most closely matches the facilities included in the proposed Project. ITE includes a reasonably large sample size of 28 studies for AM peak hour trip generation data and 31 studies for PM peak hour trip generation data. Daily trip generation data includes a more limited sample size of seven studies and may have a higher margin of error. 188 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 6 of 12 ITE rates are typically derived from suburban settings that lack a mix of land uses within walking distance; consequently, Fehr & Peers used the trip generation methodology known as MXD+ to calibrate the trip generation estimates to local conditions and the proximity to adjacent office/research & development (R&D) uses. The MXD+ method is based on a weighted average of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s MXD Model and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program’s Report 684 methodology. Additional reductions associated with the proposed transportation demand management program were not included due to limited data available for comparable hotel sites As illustrated in Table 1, the project is projected to generate approximately 2,751 vehicle trips on an average weekday with about 135 occurring in the AM peak hour and about 204 in the PM peak hour. These trip generation estimates do not account for the proposed transportation demand management program, which would further reduce the number of private vehicle trips to the project. The Project considers adding a ballroom in a future phase. Since ITE rates are based upon hotels that typically include ballrooms, the trip generation estimates in Table 1 include travel demand associated with the future ballroom. Consequently, Table 1 may present an overestimate of travel demand without the ballroom. Table 1. Oyster Point Hotel Trip Generation Land Use Size Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Hotel1 350 rooms 2,797 90 71 161 106 101 207 Internal Trip Reductions2 - (46) (8) (2) (26) (1) (2) (3) Net New Project trips - 2,751 82 69 135 105 99 204 Notes: 1Based on ITE 11th Edition (Land Use #310 – Hotel, average rate) 2Based on MXD+ trip generation methodology which accounts for Internal trip reductions account for trips made between land uses within the Specific Plan area. Trip Distribution and Assignment About half of Project vehicle travel is expected to occur within South San Francisco, Brisbane, San Bruno, and the San Francisco International Airport. Figure 3 illustrates daily vehicle trip distribution between traffic analysis zones (TAZs) for nearby clusters of hotels in South San Francisco and Brisbane based on StreetLight data, which tracks anonymized movement using cell phone location-based services data. Each site shares similar characteristics as business-oriented hotels that illustrates comparable travel behavior, offering some combination of meeting rooms, ballrooms, and restaurant/bar facilities, although most of these sites are generally older and smaller hotels. Based on this analysis, the Project’s vehicle trip distribution is expected to be most 189 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 7 of 12 heavily concentrated within the East of 101 Area (15 to 20 percent of trips), to/from the San Francisco International Airport (10 to 15 percent), and elsewhere in South San Francisco, Brisbane, or San Bruno (10 to 15 percent). The remaining 50 to 60 percent of trips would mostly be distributed across San Francisco and San Mateo counties. Figure 3: Vehicle Trip Distribution for Nearby Hotels in South San Francisco and Brisbane 190 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 8 of 12 Vehicle trips would be concentrated along Oyster Point Boulevard to access US-101. Upon reaching US-101, about 50 percent of trips are likely to travel to the south, 40 percent to the north, and 10 percent continuing along Sister Cities Boulevard. Trips occurring fully within the East of 101 Area are likely to use Gull Drive, Eccles Avenue, and Gateway Boulevard. Vehicle Miles Traveled The Project is a business-oriented hotel primarily serving nearby office/R&D uses and San Francisco International Airport. Unlike nearby office/R&D land uses in the East of 101 Area that typically generate vehicle miles, the Project would exhibit characteristics of a local-serving land use rather than a regional destination. In its Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, the State of California’s Office of Planning and Research notes that “local- serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT.”1 Hotels in the East of 101 Area appear to exhibit similar travel behavior as local-serving retail: as illustrated in Figure 3, vehicle trip lengths for four nearby hotel clusters in South San Francisco and Brisbane tend to be short and focused around nearby office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport. As shown in Table 2, the average vehicle trip length for nearby hotels is about four miles, compared with an average trip length of about 13 miles for other land uses in the East of 101 Area. Table 2. Trip Length Comparison East of 101 Area Land Use Average Trip Length Hotels 3.6-3.9 Miles Office/R&D and Other Land Uses 12.9 miles Source: StreetLight data and C/CAG Model Hotels in the vicinity primarily serve nearby office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport, as opposed to generating new tourism-oriented or resort-oriented travel. Assuming a similar travel pattern for the proposed Project as those existing in the vicinity, the Project would not materially increase vehicle miles traveled and may help shorten trips for hotel guests that would otherwise stay at hotels farther away. Although the City of South San Francisco does not have a threshold of significance for VMT associated with hotel uses, the Project may be presumed to have a less than significant impact to VMT based on the City’s screening criteria for local serving land uses that do not result in a net increase in VMT. 1 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, State of California Office of Planning & Research, 2018 https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180416-743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf 191 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 9 of 12 Specific Plan & City Policy Consistency   Trip Generation The Specific Plan EIR document published in 2011 estimated that the Specific Plan buildout would result in 17,684 daily trips, of which 1,873 would occur during the AM peak hour and 2,127 would occur during the PM peak hour (a net change of about 12,716 daily vehicle trips, 1,402 AM peak hour trips, and 1,621 PM peak hour trips. As shown in Table 3, the Oyster Point Hotel is expected to generate in total about 2,751 daily trips, including about 135 AM peak hour trips and 204 PM peak hour trips. Although the Specific Plan EIR did not break down trip generation by land use, the Oyster Point Hotel size is consistent with the Specific Plan, is therefore expected to generate a comparable number of trips as the hotel identified in the Specific Plan EIR. Moreover, its trip generation is well within the estimated trip generation envelope of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan and Project trip generation are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Trip Generation Comparison Scenario Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Oyster Point Specific Plan (2011) 17,684 1,873 2,127 Oyster Point Hotel Project 2,751 135 204 Sources: Oyster Point Specific Plan, 2011 and Fehr & Peers, 2022 Figure 4: Annotated Project Site Plan 192 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 10 of 12 Access & Circulation Access and circulation illustrated in the Project’s conceptual site plan is consistent with the Oyster Point Specific Plan. The site plan (Figure 4) includes driveways connecting to Marina Boulevard, pedestrian connections to the street’s sidewalk, and a Bay Trail connection on its eastern edge as identified in the Specific Plan. Service, Delivery and Emergency Access The Project would provide two onsite loading spaces for commercial deliveries and service vehicles. The Project would primarily be served by small- to mid-sized box trucks, laundry trucks, and garbage trucks (all typically 16 to 32 feet). Truck activity is expected to be spread throughout the day depending on particular functions: for example, garbage trucks typically arrive early morning, while laundry trucks typically arrive mid-morning (in coordination with housekeeping services). Service and delivery vehicles would use a screened in loading dock in the middle of the site. Trucks would enter via the easternmost driveway and conduct a three-point turn within the parking lot to back into the loading dock. The site plan remains conceptual at the time of this analysis, but it can be reasonably inferred that the proposed layout can accommodate such trucks provided that truck turning templates are used to inform the design process. Larger tractor-trailer vehicles are expected for restaurant delivery. These deliveries would primarily occur overnight. Tractor-trailer trucks would back in from Marina Boulevard to access the loading dock. Since the site is located on a relatively low volume street and these deliveries would occur outside of peak hours, large truck deliveries would not pose conflicts with other modes. Truck drivers may benefit from approaching the site from the westbound direction (via looping around the Marina turnaround) to avoid reversing into their blind side when approaching the lot. The City of South San Francisco requires five loading spaces for a 261,000 square foot commercial land use. Based on the anticipated loading activity and distribution throughout the day, city requirements likely exceed anticipated demand, and comparable hotels in the East of 101 Area typically include one to two loading spaces. The proposed loading supply is expected to be sufficient provided that hotel management staggers loading activities throughout the day. Emergency vehicles would have access to all building entrances and facilities as well as the Bay Trail connection along the east side of the Project. The Project is therefore consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines for efficient service, delivery, and emergency vehicle access. Parking Access Access for the proposed 250 parking spaces would be provided via three driveways along Marina Boulevard. Each driveway would serve hotel, restaurant, and meeting room uses, with the 193 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 11 of 12 westernmost driveway expected to serve as the primary entrance. Since these driveways are located along the eastern edge of Marina Boulevard, they are likely to account for a majority of vehicle traffic along the street and are unlikely to pose conflicts with the limited through traffic that occurs. Figure 5: Parking Layout The Project’s proposed parking supply includes a 26 percent reduction relative to parking requirements described in Section 20.330.006 of the zoning code. City code would require approximately 340 parking spaces, of which about one-third would be required for hotel guests and the remainder for meeting rooms, hotel employees, and other uses. The applicant has proposed a reduced parking supply due to the hotel’s proximity to nearby office/R&D uses, access to shuttle, ferry, and planned SamTrans service, and market demand at similar hotels. In particular, travel behavior of airport- and business-oriented hotel guests has shifted in recent years from relying on rental cars to Uber and Lyft, resulting in a decrease in parking demand. While occasional surges in parking demand may occur, the applicant anticipates that this may be addressed through additional valet parking, shared parking with neighboring lots, and encouraging visitors to access the hotel via other transportation modes. 194 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment May 4, 2022 Page 12 of 12 Bicycle Access Bicyclists would access the site via the Project’s driveways. Bicycle parking would be provided per City code and delineated with signage. The Project would provide 35 bicycle parking spaces, which is consistent with City code. The Project is consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines to incorporate bicycle travel into projects. Pedestrian Access The Project would align with the new sidewalk and trail infrastructure in the Specific Plan Area. Pedestrians would access the Project via a pathway to the lobby. Pedestrians would access the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal, Commute.org shuttles, and planned SamTrans service by crossing Marina Boulevard and walking approximately 300 feet to the east to reach the ferry terminal entrance and bus/shuttle stop. The Project is consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines to support an interconnected and pedestrian-friendly development. TDM-Supportive Site Plan Features The Project would be subject to the City’s TDM Ordinance requirements and would incorporate site plan elements consistent with these requirements as described above, including a passenger loading area, direct pedestrian connections to sidewalks and transit facilities, access to bike lanes and trails, and bike parking. The Project is consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines to encourage alternative forms of transportation. EIR Transportation Impacts The Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR identifies several significant impacts to transportation facilities, including intersection delay, freeway delay, and offramp queues. Based on the analysis above, the Project’s effects would be consistent with this analysis. Since the certification of the EIR, the State of California has adopted new CEQA guidelines that that vehicle level of service (LOS) and similar measures related to auto delay shall not be used as the sole basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts. The Project would contribute toward Transportation Impact Fees to address multimodal transportation needs around the Specific Plan Area. 195 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 1 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM INTRODUCTION This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) fulfills Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 which requires adoption of a mitigation monitoring program when mitigation measures are required to avoid or reduce a proposed projects significant environmental effects. The MMRP is only applicable if the City of South San Francisco decides to approve the proposed Project. The MMRP is organized to correspond to environmental issues and significant impacts discussed in the Addendum. The table below is arranged in the following five columns: • Recommended mitigation measures, • Timing for implementation of the mitigation measures, • Party responsible for implementation, • Monitoring action, • Party or parties responsible for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures, and • A blank for entry of completion date as mitigation occurs. 196 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 2 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Vis-2a: Lighting Plan. In order to reduce sources of light and glare created by lighting within the OPSP area, the applicant shall specify fixtures and lighting that maintains appropriate levels of light at building entries, walkways, courtyards, parking lots and private roads at night consistent with minimum levels detailed in the City’s building codes. These fixtures shall be designed to eliminate spillover, high intensity, and unshielded lighting, thereby avoiding unnecessary light pollution. Prior to issuance of building permits for each phase of construction within the OPSP, the applicant shall submit a Lighting Design Plan for review and approval by the City of South San Francisco Planning Department. The plan shall include, but not necessarily be limited to the following: ○ The Lighting Design Plan shall disclose all potential light sources with the types of lighting and their locations. ○ Typical lighting shall include low mounted, downward casting and shielded lights that do not cause spillover onto adjacent properties and the utilization of motion detection systems where applicable. ○ No flood lights shall be utilized. ○ Lighting shall be limited to the areas that would be in operation during nighttime hours. ○ Low intensity, indirect light sources shall be encouraged. ○ On-demand lighting systems shall be encouraged. ○ Mercury, sodium vapor, and similar intense and bright lights shall not be permitted except where their need is specifically approved and their source of light is restricted. ○ Generally, light fixtures shall not be located at the periphery of Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Planning Division 197 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 3 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed the property and should shut off automatically when the use is not operating. Security lighting visible from the highway shall be motion-sensor activated. ○ Use “cut-off” fixtures designed to prevent the upward cast of light and avoid unnecessary light pollution where appropriate. ○ All lighting shall be installed in accordance with the building codes and the approved lighting plan during construction. Vis-2b: Glare Reduction. In order to reduce sources of daytime glare created by reflective building materials, the applicant shall specify exterior building materials for all proposed structures constructed for the Phase I Project and each subsequent phase of development under the OPSP that include the use of textured or other non-reflective exterior surfaces and non-reflective glass types, including double glazed and non-reflective vision glass. These materials shall be chosen for their non-reflective characteristics and their ability to reduce daytime glare. All exterior glass must meet the specifications of all applicable codes for non-reflective glass and would therefore reduce daytime glare emanating from the OPSP area. Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Planning Division Air-4a: Implement BAAQMD-Recommended Measures to Control Particulate Matter Emissions during Construction. Measures to reduce diesel particulate matter and PM10 from construction are recommended to ensure that short-term health impacts to nearby sensitive receptors are avoided. Dust (PM10) Control Measures: ○ Water all active construction areas at least twice daily and more often during windy periods. Active areas adjacent to residences should be kept damp at all times. Prior to issuance of construction permits ‐and‐ During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division 198 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 4 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed ○ Cover all hauling trucks or maintain at least two feet of freeboard. ○ Pave, apply water at least twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers on all unpaved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas. ○ Sweep daily (with water sweepers) all paved access roads, parking areas, and staging areas and sweep streets daily (with water sweepers) if visible soil material is deposited onto the adjacent roads. ○ Hydroseed or apply (non-toxic) soil stabilizers to inactive construction areas (i.e., previously-graded areas that are inactive for 10 days or more). ○ Enclose, cover, water twice daily, or apply (non-toxic) soil binders to exposed stockpiles. ○ Limit traffic speeds on any unpaved roads to 15 mph. ○ Replant vegetation in disturbed areas as quickly as possible. ○ Suspend construction activities that cause visible dust plumes to extend beyond the construction site. ○ Post a publically visible sign(s) with the telephone number and person to contact at the Lead Agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s phone number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Additional Measures to Reduce Diesel Particulate Matter and PM2.5 and other construction emissions: ○ The developer or contractor shall provide a plan for approval by the City or BAAQMD demonstrating that the heavy-duty 199 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 5 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed (>50 horsepower) off-road vehicles to be used in the construction project, including owned, leased and subcontractor vehicles, will achieve a project wide fleet- average 20 percent NOx reduction and 45 percent particulate reduction compared to the most recent CARB fleet average for the year 2011 ○ Clear signage at all construction sites will be posted indicating that diesel equipment standing idle for more than five minutes shall be turned off. This would include trucks waiting to deliver or receive soil, aggregate, or other bulk materials. Rotating drum concrete trucks could keep their engines running continuously as long as they were onsite or adjacent to the construction site. ○ Opacity is an indicator of exhaust particulate emissions from off-road diesel powered equipment. Each project shall ensure that emissions from all construction diesel powered equipment used on the project site do not exceed 40 percent opacity for more than three minutes in any one hour. Any equipment found to exceed 40 percent opacity (or Ringelmann 2.0) shall be repaired immediately ○ The contractor shall install temporary electrical service whenever possible to avoid the need for independently powered equipment (e.g. compressors). ○ Properly tune and maintain equipment for low emissions. Bio-3a: Incorporate Best Management Practices for Water Quality During Construction. The Plan shall incorporate Best Management Practices (BMPs) for water quality to minimize During construction Applicant for the development Verification that requirements are met during SSF Building Division 200 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 6 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed impacts in the surrounding wetland environment, sloughs and channels, and the San Francisco Bay during construction. These BMPs shall include numerous practices that will be outlined within the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), including, but not limited to, the following mitigation measures: 1. No equipment will be operated in live flow in any of the sloughs or channels or ditches on or adjacent to the site. 2. No debris, soil, silt, sand, bark, slash, sawdust, cement, concrete, washings, petroleum products or other organic or earthen material shall be allowed to enter into or be placed where it may be washed by rainfall or runoff into aquatic or wetland habitat. 3. Standard erosion control and slope stabilization measures will be required for work performed in any area where erosion could lead to sedimentation of a waterbody. For example, silt fencing will be installed just outside the limits of grading and construction in any areas where such activities will occur upslope from, and within 50 ft of, any wetland, aquatic, or marsh habitat. This silt fencing will be inspected and maintained regularly throughout the duration of construction. 4. Machinery will be refueled at least 50 ft from any aquatic habitat, and a spill prevention and response plan will be developed. All workers will be informed of the importance of preventing spills and of the appropriate measures to take should a spill occur. construction Bio-3b: Minimize Soil Disturbance Adjacent to Wetland and Marsh Habitat. To the extent feasible, soil stockpiling, equipment During construction Applicant for the Verification that Environmentally SSF Planning Division 201 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 7 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed staging, construction access roads, and other intensively soil- disturbing activities shall not occur immediately adjacent to any wetlands that are to be avoided by the OPSP. The limits of the construction area shall be clearly demarcated with Environmentally Sensitive Area fencing to avoid inadvertent disturbance outside the fence during construction activities. development Sensitive Areas are avoided Bio-4: Ensure Adequate Stormwater Run-off Capacity. Increases in stormwater run-off due to increased hardscape shall be mitigated through the construction and maintenance of features designed to handle the expected increases in flows and provide adequate energy dissipation. All such features, including outfalls, shall be regularly maintained to ensure continued function and prevent failure following construction. Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verification that adequate stormwater run- off capacity is provided SSF Public Works Department Bio-6: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey. Pre-construction surveys for nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and/or Fish and Game Code of California within 100 feet of a development site in the OPSP area shall be conducted if construction commences during the avian nesting season, between February 1 and August 31. The survey should be undertaken no more than 15 days prior to any site-disturbing activities, including vegetation removal or grading. If active nests are found, a qualified biologist shall determine an appropriate buffer in consideration of species, stage of nesting, location of the nest, and type of construction activity. The buffers should be maintained until after the nestlings have fledged and left the nest. Prior to construction if during nesting period Applicant for the development Completion of survey and, if birds present, provision of buffer SSF Planning Division Bio-10a: Lighting Measures to Reduce Impacts to Birds. During design of any building greater than 100 feet tall, the OPSP Applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist experienced with During preliminary design of any Applicant for the Incorporation of lighting that minimizes bird SSF Planning Division 202 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 8 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed bird strikes and building/lighting design issues to identify lighting- related measures to minimize the effects of the building’s lighting on birds. Such measures, which may include the following and/or other measures, shall be incorporated into the building’s design and operation. ○ Use strobe or flashing lights in place of continuously burning lights for obstruction lighting. Use flashing white lights rather than continuous light, red light, or rotating beams. ○ Install shields onto light sources not necessary for air traffic to direct light towards the ground. ○ Extinguish all exterior lighting (i.e., rooftop floods, perimeter spots) not required for public safety. ○ When interior or exterior lights must be left on at night, the operator of the buildings shall examine and adopt alternatives to bright, all-night, floor-wide lighting, which may include: ○ Installing motion-sensitive lighting. ○ Using desk lamps and task lighting. ○ Reprogramming timers. ○ Use of lower-intensity lighting. ○ Windows or window treatments that reduce transmission of light out of the building shall be implemented to the extent feasible. building greater than 100 feet tall development impacts Bio-10b: Building Design Measures to Minimize Bird Strike Risk. During design of any building greater than 100 feet tall, the OPSP Applicant shall consult with a qualified biologist experienced with bird strikes and building/lighting design issues to identify measures related to the external appearance of the building to minimize the During preliminary design of any building greater than Applicant for the development Incorporation of design features that minimize bird impacts SSF Planning Division 203 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 9 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed risk of bird strikes. Such measures, which may include the following and/or other measures, shall be incorporated into the building’s design. ○ Use non-reflective tinted glass. ○ Use window films to make windows visible to birds from the outside. ○ Use external surfaces/designs that “break up” reflective surfaces rather than having large, uninterrupted areas of surfaces that reflect, and thus may not appear noticeably different (to a bird) from, the sky. 100 feet tall Geo-2a: Compliance with California Building Code. OPSP development shall meet requirements of the California Building Code, including the California Building Standards, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, and as modified by the amendments, additions and deletions as adopted by the City of South San Francisco, California. Incorporation of seismic construction standards will reduce the potential for catastrophic effects of ground shaking, such as complete structural failure, but will not completely eliminate the hazard of seismically induced ground shaking. Geo-2b: Compliance with a design-level Geotechnical Investigation report prepared by a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and with Structural Design Plans as prepared by a Licensed Professional Engineer. Proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and a Licensed Professional Engineer. The structural engineering design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation, shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with the California Building Code. Prior to issuance of building permits -and- Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendation s are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division 204 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 10 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Geo-2c: Obtain a building permit. The OPSP applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of South San Francisco Building Division. Plan Review of planned buildings and structures shall be completed by the Building Division for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned commercial and industrial sites in the East of 101 area of the City of South San Francisco. According to the East of 101 area plan, Geotechnical Safety Element, buildings shall not be subject to catastrophic collapse under foreseeable seismic events, and will allow egress of occupants in the event of damage following a strong earthquake. Geo-3a: Compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation and in conformance with Structural Design Plans. A design-level Geotechnical Investigation shall be prepared for the site under the direction of a California Registered Geotechnical Engineer and shall include analysis for liquefaction potential of the site soils, particularly in the perimeter dikes. Proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation. The Geotechnical Investigation shall be reviewed and approved by the City’s Geotechnical Consultant and by the City Engineer. A Registered Structural Engineer shall prepare project structural design plans. Structures shall be designed to reduce the effects of anticipated seismic settlements. The Geotechnical Engineer shall review the Structural Design Plans and provide approval for the Geotechnical elements of the plans. The design plans shall identify specific mitigation measures to reduce liquefaction potential, if the potential for liquefaction is found to exist, or other ground failure modes such as lateral spreading, seismic densification or stability of the perimeter dike slopes. Mitigation measures may include ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or jet Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendation s are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division 205 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 11 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed grouting. Geo-3b: Obtain a building permit. The OPSP applicant shall obtain a building permit through the City of South San Francisco Building Division. Plan Review of planned buildings and structures shall be completed by the Building Division for adherence to the seismic design criteria for planned commercial and industrial sites in the East of 101 area of the City of South San Francisco. According to the East of 101 area plan, Geotechnical Safety Element, buildings should not be subject to catastrophic collapse under foreseeable seismic events, and will allow egress of occupants in the event of damage following a strong earthquake. Geo-4: Compliance with recommendations of a Geotechnical Investigation. A design-level Geotechnical Investigation shall include an evaluation of static stability and seismic stability under a design magnitude earthquake event. Seismic analyses shall include pseudo-static analyses to estimate permanent slope displacements due to earthquake motions. The Geotechnical Engineer shall prepare recommendations to mitigate potential slope instability, if slope stability problems are identified. Mitigation measures may include ground improvement by methods such as stone columns or jet grouting. Design-level Geotechnical Investigations shall be completed during preliminary and final design stages and will confirm material types used in the construction of the perimeter dikes to verify that the slopes meet minimum criteria for stability under both static and seismic conditions. Knowledge of the stability of the perimeter dikes will guide the selection of any future measures to mitigate any deficiencies identified in the perimeter dike. Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendation s are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division Geo-5a: Deep Foundations. Because of the magnitude of expected settlement of Bay Mud soils and waste fill materials that would Prior to Applicant for Verify SSF Building 206 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 12 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed occur under new building loads, the OPSP applicant must consider the use of deep foundations such as driven piles. Specific recommendations for suitable deep foundation alternatives and required penetrations will be provided during the course of a design-level geotechnical investigation and will depend on factors such as the depth and hardness of the underlying clays, sands or bedrock, and the corrosivity of the waste materials and Bay Mud soils. Suitable deep foundation types may include driven precast, prestressed concrete piles or driven closed-end steel pipe piles with the interior of the pile filled with concrete after driving. Deep foundations shall extend through all waste materials and Bay Mud and be tipped in underlying stiff to hard clays, dense sands or weathered bedrock. Where waste and Bay Mud soils underlie the site, wall and column loads as well as floor slabs shall be founded on deep foundations. Settlement of properly-designed and constructed deep foundation elements is typically less than about one-half inch. The majority of settlement typically occurs during construction as the loads are applied. Where landfill waste and Bay Mud are not present (possibly at extreme western and northwestern edges of the site) and competent soil or bedrock are present near the ground surface (within about 5 feet of finished grade elevation), shallow foundations such as footings or mats may be appropriate foundation types, as determined during the course of a design- level geotechnical investigation. Where proposed structures straddle a transition zone between these conditions, a combination of shallow and deep foundations may be required. Any transition zones shall be identified during site-specific geotechnical investigations for preliminary and final designs. Geo-5b: Predrilling and/or Pile Configuration. Piles either shall be issuance of building permits the development requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction Division 207 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 13 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed predrilled through the fill and landfill materials to protect the piles from damage due to unknown materials, to reduce pushing waste material deeper, and to reduce pile alignment problems or shall have a pointed tip configuration. If a drill is used, it should only loosen and break up in-place obstructions that may cause pile damage. During recent subsurface investigations reported by Treadwell & Rollo (2009b) obstructions including concrete rubble was encountered throughout the landfill area, particularly in the northern end of the site. Even with predrilling, precast concrete piles could be damaged during installation at a landfill site such as Oyster Point. For preliminary planning purposes, a precast concrete pile breakage rate during installation of 10 to 15 percent may be considered applicable. Piles usually have to include pointed tip configurations to avoid pushing landfill waste downward. These configurations are typically readily accommodated by pile driving contractors. Geo-5c: Indicator Pile Program. Prior to specifying the lengths of the production piles, drive indicator piles at the structure sites in order to observe the driving characteristic of the piles and the ability of the driving equipment when a driven pile is used. The driving criteria and pile length of production piles shall also be estimated from the information obtained from driving of the indicator piles. The contractor shall use the same equipment to drive both the indicator and production piles. Indicator pile lengths and locations shall be selected by the Geotechnical Engineer, in conjunction with the Structural Engineer and Contractor after the foundation plan has been finalized. The indicator pile program will serve to establish information on the following: ○ Estimates of production pile lengths; 208 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 14 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed ○ Drivability of production piles; ○ Performance of pile driving equipment; and ○ Variation in driving resistance relative to depth and location of piles. Geo-6: Account for Drag Load on Deep Foundations. The Geotechnical Engineer shall account for accumulation of drag load in the structural design of the deep foundations elements (piles). Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Verify geotechnical recommendation s are included in plans and construction contracts SSF Building Division Geo-7: Incorporate Systems for Landfill Gas Control. Measures for the control of landfill gas shall be included in building design. Measures for the control of landfill gas typically include a collection system, floor slab shielding and interior alarms. For projects on or adjacent to the landfill area, during preliminary project design and prior to issuance of building permit Applies on a building by building basis Verification that measures for the control of landfill gas are included SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department Geo-8a: Avoid Significant New Loads on Landfill Waste and Bay Mud. A design-level Geotechnical Investigation shall include exploration to more thoroughly determine the thickness and areal extent of landfill waste and Bay Mud. To avoid inducing additional settlement to the settlement that is already on-going, grading plans shall include as little additional new fill as possible, and Prior to issuance of building permit Applies to all construction Verification of adequate report SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department 209 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 15 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed significant new structure loads or any structures that are settlement-sensitive shall be founded on deep foundations extended below the Bay Mud, as recommended in the design-level Geotechnical Investigation report. All grading shall be planned to avoid penetrating the landfill cap and to reduce the amount of long-term settlement in response to new fills. Because the Bay Mud and waste across most of the site are still settling under the weight of existing fill and waste decomposition and will settle more under new fills, additional settlement should be expected, with the creation of localized low- lying surface areas. Existing low areas shall be corrected during site grading to allow for proper drainage. Long-term maintenance planning for the development shall also include provisions for periodic grading to correct drainage problems and improve site grades, as outlined in the Disposition and Development Agreement. The Geotechnical Engineer will recommend other site-specific recommendations based on the results of the design-level Geotechnical Investigation to mitigate on-going settlement and any additional settlement to be expected in response to new development. Geo-8b: Design Building-Soil Interface to Allow Free Movement. The Structural Engineer shall provide that structures not supported on deep foundations not be structurally tied into pile-supported buildings, except as noted below, and shall be designed to allow free vertical movement between structures. Articulated ramps on walkways and building entrances at the interface between the pile and soil-supported areas can provide a smooth walkway over moderate differential settlements with some amount of maintenance. As the magnitude of the differential Prior to issuance of building permit Applies to all construction Verification of compliant construction plans SSF Building Division 210 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 16 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed settlement increases, however, these ramps may need to be rebuilt or realigned to account for the larger elevation differential. Similar ramps may also reduce differential settlements between driveways and pile-supported parking lots. Over time, voids will tend to form beneath pile-supported buildings due to on-going settlement of the landfill. Use of wall skirts around the building perimeter will help to reduce the visual impact of these voids. Geo-9a: Monitoring and Testing. Special precautions shall be taken to monitor the safety conditions and to provide for the safety of workers in the area. Additionally, if excavations encounter water, this water shall be tested for contaminants and may have to undergo specialized handling, treatment and/or disposal if it is contaminated. A system to disperse methane during construction shall be installed in or adjacent to the trenches. For projects on the landfill area, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Adherence to measures if water discovered during excavation SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department Geo-9b: Locate Underground Utilities in Soil Cap. To the extent practicable, the utilities shall be constructed in the soil landfill cap to avoid direct contact of the utility lines and construction workers with the waste material. If construction of utilities in the waste material is necessary, proper design and construction precautions shall be taken to protect the system and the workers from the corrosive and hazardous conditions of the waste. Geo-9c: Seal Trenches and Underground Structures. Trenches and underground structures shall be sealed to preclude gas intrusion. Typical types of sealing procedures include providing a low permeability clay cover of 1 foot over the top of the pipe, or the utility trench be lined with a relatively impervious For projects on the landfill area, prior issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of compliant plans and adherence to approved plans during construction SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department 211 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 17 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed geomembrane. Underground manholes may be shielded from methane intrusion by placement of a membrane around the outside of the structure. To reduce gas migration off-site within the utility trenches, all trenches crossing the transition zone between the landfill and non-landfill portions of the property shall be sealed with a clay plug surrounding the pipe or other approved methods. In addition, plugs shall also be provided at the perimeters of buildings to reduce migration of gas through the utility trenches to beneath the buildings. Geo-10: Provide For Continuity of Landfill Cap. Following planned landfill excavation and landfill cap repair, the project Civil Engineer shall require that excavations for building foundations, utility trenches and other underground structures be configured to maintain continuity of the landfill cap. The specific configuration will depend upon the excavation depth and orientation to underlying wastes. However, a low-permeability layer of soil or a geomembrane properly tied to surrounding cap areas may be required. For projects on the landfill area, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of landfill cap installation SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department Geo-11: Common Trenches and Vaults. Where underground utilities are to be located in landfill areas, consideration shall be given to reducing the number of utilities trenches by locating utilities in common trenches to the extent practicable. In addition, vaulted systems shall be designed and maintained at such interfaces that provide flexible and/or expandable connections to the proposed buildings. In addition, the utility lines beneath buildings shall be suspended from hangers fastened to structural floor slabs. For projects on the landfill area, during preliminary design and prior to issuance of building permit Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of adherence to measures SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department 212 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 18 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Geo-12: Flexible Materials and Joints. Utility lines shall be constructed of flexible pipe such as welded polyethylene to accommodate differential settlement within the waste material and landfill cap. At the border of the landfill, where differential settlements are expected to be large, the utility lines shall be designed to allow for rotation. As with buried utilities on a conventional site, proper bedding and backfilling shall be completed, as specified in a design-level geotechnical investigation report. For projects on the landfill area, during preliminary design, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of adherence to measures SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department Geo-13: Increase Flow Gradient. The Civil Engineer shall consider increasing the flow gradient in sewers and storm drains so that differential settlements will not disrupt the flow. An alternative is to provide a pumping system that does not rely on gravity flow. Such measures will reduce the impact of reduced flow gradient due to differential settlement to less than significant. This applies to the entire OPSP, including the Phase I Project. For projects on the landfill area, during preliminary design, prior to issuance of building permit and during construction Applies to all construction on a landfill Verification of adherence to measures SSF Building Division and SSF Public Works Department Geo-14: Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan. In accordance with the Clean Water Act and the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Applicant shall file a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to the start of construction. The SWPPP shall include specific best management practices to reduce soil erosion. This is required to obtain coverage under the General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Associated with Construction Activity (Construction General Permit, 99-08-DWQ). Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verification that adequate plan prepared SSF Building Division 213 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 19 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Haz-2: Waste Excavation and Re-disposition. A plan shall be written for management of excavated wastes/refuse. Non- hazardous excavated waste shall be re-deposited in an alternate part of the site and any hazardous waste shall be relocated off-site for appropriate disposal. The plan can be a section of the Site Management Plan (Mitigation Measure Haz-4a), or a stand alone document. The plan shall include measures to avoid releases of wastes or waste water into the environment and to protect workers and the public. The details of the plan shall be based, in part, on the amount of material to be removed and the final design of foundation structures, but will generally include the following, as deemed appropriate by the regulatory agencies, particularly DTSC and RWQCB: ○ To the greatest extent possible, use existing boring data to obtain pre-characterization of refuse for off-site disposal, and to pre-plan areas to be removed versus areas to be re-deposited on-site. ○ Divide excavation areas into daily sections; plan to complete excavation and backfilling a section during each working day. Minimize the time period that refuse is exposed. ○ Review existing boring data and existing site documentation to evaluate potential subsurface materials to be encountered. ○ Stake out area to be excavated. ○ If excavation is to be conducted at depths where groundwater is to be encountered, conduct dewatering to minimize worker potential direct contact with groundwater. Removed groundwater shall be treated in accordance with the requirements outlined in the Site Management Plan (Mitigation Measure Haz-4a). Prior to issuance of building permit and during construction on the landfill area Applies to all construction Compliance with Site Management Plan SSF Public Works Department 214 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 20 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed ○ Screen excavation site with a portable photoionization detector and combustible gas monitor for landfill gasses. Continue screening progress of each excavation section as work proceeds. Use foam suppressants or 6 inches minimum of daily soil cover for nuisance odors. ○ Provide carbon dioxide gas source (fire extinguisher or cylinder) to flood excavation as necessary to prevent migration of gases into atmosphere above excavation, minimize explosive or fire potential, and control nuisance and odors. ○ Begin excavation and segregate soil and /or clay cap material above refuse for reuse as foundation layer. ○ Upon reaching refuse, place refuse into dump truck standing by on-site. ○ Dispose of each truck load of refuse immediately after filling equipment. All loads to be covered when hauling. Refuse shall be either re-deposited on-site in a specified area, or hauled to an off-site disposal facility. ○ Prior to relocation, field verify each load for disposal classification type (landfill classification, Class 3 or Class 2). If waste for off-site disposal is characterized as either California or Federal Hazardous Waste as defined in the criteria described in CCR Title 22 Section 66261, then the hazardous waste shall be tracked using the Uniform Hazardous Waste Manifest System (USEPA Form 8700- 22). ○ Hazardous and if necessary, non-hazardous waste shall be transported to the appropriate disposal facility using a permitted, licensed, and insured transportation company. Transporters of hazardous waste shall meet the requirements of 40 CFR 263 and 22 CCR 66263. Copies of 215 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 21 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed uniform hazardous waste manifests signed by the designated waste disposal facility shall be retained for at least five years from the date the waste was accepted by the initial transporter. Copies of records pertaining to the characterization of hazardous or nonhazardous waste shall be retained for a minimum of three years. ○ Upon reaching over-excavation depth, place a minimum of 6-inch thick layer of appropriate backfill soil on excavation bottom to seal exposed refuse surface. Place soil by the end of the same day excavation is completed. ○ Upon completion of excavation, begin cap placement procedures. Specific measures shall be targeted to minimize the duration of waste exposure, plan for appropriate final destination of wastes based on the presence of contaminants of concern, allow for adjustment in plan based on unexpected occurrences, and to protect worker safety and the public. Additional work plan measures are discussed in Haz-4a. In addition, worker protection measures for soil and dewatering are discussed in Haz-6a. Measures specific to off-site air quality during construction are included in mitigation measure Air-4. Haz-4b: Use Of Deep Foundations To Prevent Load Induced Settlement. Buildings on fill shall be supported using driven steel or concrete piles founded in stiff to hard clays, dense sands or weathered bedrock underlying the fill. Both the structural loads and building floor slabs shall be supported on piles. This will avoid placing additional building loads on fill material. Prior to issuance of building permits Applicant for the development Adherence to specifications provided in measure SSF Building Division Haz-4c: Minimization of Irrigation Water Use. Landscaping of the During Applicant for SSF Building 216 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 22 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed site shall be selected to stabilize the soil, prevent erosion, and reduce the need for extensive irrigation. Excessive water could infiltrate the landfill cap and produce leachate. To prevent this, low-water vegetation shall be selected to reduce irrigation water. In addition the thickness of the erosion resistant layer in landscaped areas will be increased to minimize intrusion of roots into the lower layers of the cover. Construction the development Division Haz-4e: Operation and Maintenance Activities. Operation and maintenance (O&M) activities are expected to occur indefinitely at the site. Operation and maintenance activities shall include inspections and observations of site features to protect the landfill cap, prevent utility damage, maintain gravity flow of sewer systems, maintain the landfill gas barrier and venting systems, and monitor for leachate and groundwater contaminant concentrations. O&M shall act to prevent releases of hazardous materials by identifying deficits in engineering controls prior to release events. SSF Building Division SSF Building Division Haz-6a: Development and Implementation of Site Management Plans. A Site Management Plan shall be prepared that addresses the exposure risk to people and the environment resulting from future demolition, construction, occupancy, and maintenance activities on the property. The plans for the landfill portion of the OPSP shall be in accordance with RWQCB order No. 00-046, the PCMP and recommendations of the Environmental Consultant, and shall be reviewed and approved by the RWQCB, DTSC, the SMCEHD Groundwater Protection Program and the City of South San Francisco Public Works Department. Specific mitigation measures designed to protect human health SSF Building Division SSF Building Division 217 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 23 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed and the environment shall be provided in the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall include the following: 1) Requirements for site specific Health and Safety Plans (HASP) shall be prepared in accordance with OSHA regulations by all contractors at the OPSP area. This includes a HASP for all demolition, grading and excavation on the site, as well as for future subsurface maintenance work. The HASP shall include appropriate training, any required personal protective equipment, and monitoring of contaminants to determine exposure. The HASP shall be reviewed and approved by a Certified Industrial Hygienist. The plan shall also designate provisions to limit worker entry and exposure and shall show locations and type of protective fencing to prevent public exposure to hazards during demolition, site grading, and construction activities. 2) Requirements for site-specific construction techniques that would minimize exposure to any subsurface contamination shall be developed. This shall include dewatering techniques to minimize direct exposure to groundwater during construction activities, treatment and disposal measures for any contaminated groundwater removed from excavations, trenches, and dewatering systems in accordance with local and Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines. Groundwater encountered in excavations shall not be discharged into the neighboring storm drain, but into a closed containment facility, unless proven to have concentrations of contaminants below established regulatory guidelines. Extracted contaminated groundwater shall be required to be stored in tanks or other sealed container until tested. If testing determines that the water can be discharged into the sanitary sewer system, then the applicant shall acquire a ground water discharge permit from the City of South San Francisco Sanitary Sewer District and meet local discharge limits before 218 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 24 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed being allowed to discharge into the sanitary sewer. Water shall be analyzed for the chemicals of concern at the site, including benzene, ethylbenzene, xylenes, chlorobenzene, naphthalene and additional compounds as requested by the receiving facility or the City of South San Francisco. 3) Waste relocation. Relocation or removal of existing landfill waste/refuse will be required for landfill cap upgrades and for site construction. Excavated waste can either be re-deposited on site or disposed of at an active landfill facility. Off-site disposal will require pre-characterization of the waste for acceptance at an approved waste disposal facility. Waste manifests will be prepared to document transportation and disposal. On-site disposal shall require proper placement, compaction, and capping of the refuse material. In either case, segregation of Class 2 and Class 3 from Class 1 material for disposal purposes shall be performed on-site to the extent possible. No Class 1 material shall be relocated or re- deposited on-site. BAAQMD Regulation 8 Rule 34 section 118 documents a limited exemption for construction activities at landfill sites. This section specifies that when the construction activities are related to “installing, expanding, replacing, or repairing components of the landfill gas, leachate, or gas condensate collection and removal systems.” Excavation for cap upgrades falls under this exemption. Excavation for construction purposes will also likely fall under this exemption. As such it will be necessary to provide BAAQMD with construction plans and other documentation as detailed under this regulation for the purposes of obtaining a letter of exemption from BAAQMD. Excavation procedures are also discussed in Measure Haz-2. 4) Future subsurface work plan. The plan shall document procedures for future subsurface landscaping work, utility maintenance, etc., with proper notification, where applicable. The 219 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 25 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed plan shall include a general health and safety plan for each expected type of work, with appropriate personal protective equipment, where applicable. This plan may be included in the operations and maintenance plan as appropriate. Haz-6b: Landfill Gas System. Section 21160 of Title 27 of the CCR requires that closed landfills implement and maintain landfill gas control. A landfill gas (LFG) venting system shall be placed under the bottom slabs of each structure built entirely or partially over landfill material, to collect and vent the build up of gases diffusing through the landfill cap. The LFG system shall include spray-applied vapor barrier membranes, horizontal collection and passive venting, gas detection and monitoring. The system shall either have backup active collection and venting or shall be designed to facilitate retrofitting with an active system, if measures warrant the retrofit. Potential migration of LFG into the building space shall be mitigated by the collection and venting system, and secondly by the spray-applied membrane. Subsurface landfill gases shall be vented by a network of perforated piping placed beneath the building slabs. The exhaust gases shall be manifolded to a series of riser piping that is to be vented above structure roofs. Passive landfill gas systems do not require permits, however if an active system is installed, either at the time of construction or as part of a retrofit, a BAAQMD permit will be needed. Applicant for the development (within building on site) -and- SSF Building Division (external to building) SSF Building Division Haz-6c: Non-use of Groundwater. Water supply wells shall not be installed at the site. This will prevent direct contact between the public and site groundwater and leachate. All phases Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in landscaping plan SSF Building 220 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 26 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Hydro-1: Best Management Practices (BMPs) shall be used during installation of foundation piers to reduce the potential for gaps in the subsurface confining layers around the piers. BMP requirements shall be identified in the SWPPP and shall be developed by the applicant or their authorized representative. The exact BMPs to be implemented shall depend on final pier design and type, but can include pre-drilling and grouting of concrete piers, use of hollow steel piers, or other methods to reduce the risk of displaced refuse creating a void in the Bay Mud layer. The proposed BMPs shall be benchmarked against the California Department of Transportation Stormwater Quality Handbooks Construction Site Best Management Practices (BMPs) Manual (2003 and associated updates). Prior to issuance of building permits -and- During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division Hydro-2: Preparation and Implementation of Project SWPPP. Pursuant to NPDES requirements, the applicant of a project under the OPSP shall develop a SWPPP to protect water quality during construction. If the SWPP will be developed after September 2, 2011, the SWPPP shall be developed by a California Qualified SWPPP Developer in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board Construction General Permit 2009-009-DWQ. The project SWPPP shall include, but is not limited, to the following mitigation measures for the construction period: 1) Grading and earthwork shall be allowed with the appropriate SWPPP measures during the wet season (October 1 through April 30) and such work shall be stopped before pending storm events. 2) Erosion control/soil stabilization techniques such as straw mulching, erosion control blankets, erosion control matting, and hydro-seeding, shall be utilized in accordance with the regulations outlined in the Association of Bay Area Governments “Erosion & Prior to issuance of building permits -and- Prior to construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division 221 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 27 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Sediment Control Measures” manual. Silt fences shall be installed down slope of all graded slopes. Hay bales shall be installed in the flow path of graded areas receiving concentrated flows and around storm drain inlets. 3) BMPs to be developed by the applicant shall be used for preventing the discharge or other construction-related NPDES pollutants beside sediment (i.e. paint, concrete, etc) to downstream waters. 4) After construction is completed, all drainage facilities shall be inspected for accumulated sediment and these drainage structures shall be cleared of debris and sediment. In accordance with the handbook C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance, Version 2, permanent mitigation measures for stormwater shall be submitted as part of project application submittals with the Planning Permit Application and the Building Permit Application. Elements that shall be addressed in the submittals include the following: 5) Description of potential sources of erosion and sediment at the OPSP area. R&D activities and significant materials and chemicals that could be used at the proposed OPSP area shall be described. This shall include a thorough assessment of existing and potential pollutant sources. 6) Identification of BMPs to be implemented at the OPSP area based on identified industrial activities and potential pollutant sources. Emphasis shall be placed on source control BMPs, with treatment controls used as needed. 7) Development of a monitoring and implementation plan. Maintenance requirements and frequency shall be carefully described including vector control, clearing of clogged or 222 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 28 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed obstructed inlet or outlet structures, vegetation/landscape maintenance, replacement of media filters, etc. 8) The monitoring and maintenance program shall be conducted as described in Haz-4e. 9) Proposed pervious and impervious surfaces, including site design measures to minimize impervious surfaces and promote infiltration (except where the landfill cover is present). 10) Proposed locations and approximate sizes of stormwater treatment measures. Hydro-3: Compliance with NPDES Requirements. Applicants for a project under the OPSP shall comply with all Phase I NPDES General Construction Activities permit requirements established by the CWA and the Grading Permit requirements of the City of South San Francisco. Erosion control measures to be implemented during construction shall be included in the project SWPPP. The project SWPPP shall accompany the NOI filing and shall outline erosion control and storm water quality management measures to be implemented during and following construction. The SWPPP shall also provide the schedule for monitoring performance. Refer to Mitigation Measure Hydro-2 for more information regarding the project SWPPP. Implementation of Phase I NPDES General Construction Activities permit requirements would reduce construction-related impacts associated with erosion and/or siltation to less-than-significant. Prior to issuance of building permits -and- During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction contracts and are met during construction SSF Building Division Noise-5: Construction Noise. To reduce noise levels generated by construction, the following standard construction noise control measures shall be included in all construction projects within the During construction Applicant for the development Verify requirements are included in construction SSF Building Division 223 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 29 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed OPSP area. ○ Equip all internal combustion engine driven equipment with intake and exhaust mufflers that are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment. ○ Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines should be strictly prohibited. ○ Locate stationary noise generating equipment such as air compressors or portable power generators as far as possible from sensitive receptors. Construct temporary noise barriers to screen stationary noise generating equipment when located near adjoining sensitive receptors. Temporary noise barriers could reduce construction noise levels by 5 dBA. ○ Utilize "quiet" air compressors and other stationary noise sources where technology exists. ○ Route all construction traffic to and from the OPSP area via designated truck routes where possible. Prohibit construction related heavy truck traffic in residential areas where feasible. ○ Control noise from construction workers’ radios to a point that they are not audible at existing residences bordering the OPSP area. ○ The contractor shall prepare and submit to the City for approval a detailed construction plan identifying the schedule for major noise-generating construction activities. ○ Designate a "disturbance coordinator" who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem be implemented. contracts and are met during construction 224 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PAGE 30 OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction schedule. ○ For pile driving activities, consider a) pre-drilling foundation pile holes to minimize the number of impacts required to seat the pile, b) using multiple pile driving rigs to expedite this phase of construction, and/or c) the use of “acoustical blankets” for receivers located within 100 feet of the site. Traf-1: Transportation Demand Management Program. The OPSP sponsors shall implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program consistent with the City of South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Chapter 20.400 Transportation Demand Management, and acceptable to C/CAG. These programs, once implemented, must be ongoing for the occupied life of the development. The C/CAG guidelines specify the number of trips that may be credited for each TDM measure. Prior to occupancy Applicant for the development Approval of TDM Program SSF Planning Division Traf-2b: Bay Trail Continuity Provisions in Construction Management Plan. Continuity of the Bay Trail shall be included in construction management plans for all phases of development in the OPSP. When feasible, construction shall avoid disrupting the Bay Trail and when not feasible, the construction management plan shall specify plans for clear and safe detours for bicyclists and pedestrians and be ADA accessible. Prior to issuance of building permits -and- During construction Applicant for the development Verification of inclusion in the construction management plan SSF Planning Division and SSF Building Division 225 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM OYSTER POINT HOTEL PROJECT PAGE 31 Mitigation Measure Timing/ Schedule Implementation Responsibility Verification Monitoring Action Monitoring Responsibility Date Completed Util-2b: Oyster Point Subtrunk Replacement. To provide the required sewer capacity, the Oyster Point Subtrunk will need to be replaced with a larger sized trunk line, with sizes ranging from 12, 15, and 18-inches. The majority of these improvements are included in the Sewer Master Plan and are funded through a flat-rate sewer connection fee for new development and a monthly impact fee. The amount of the impact fee is based on the quantity (flow) of wastewater generated. The occupants of the proposed OPSP shall pay the sanitary sewer fees imposed by the City of South San Francisco in order to mitigate the cost of the sewer system upgrades necessary to manage the wastewater flows generated by the OPSP. An additional 700 feet of 8-inch diameter sewer trunk from Eccles Avenue to Gull Road needs to be upsized to a 12-inch diameter trunk sewer. This segment of sewer trunk was not included in the recommendations in the Sewer Master Plan. The applicants shall either work with the City to include this improvement in an Sewer Master Plan update or directly fund their fair share of the improvement. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy of Phase IV or building at which warrant criteria levels are approached, if earlier Applicant for the development Payment of sewer connection fee / fair share contribution SSF Public Works Department 226 Exhibit 1C. 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR For online access to the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR please click the link below: https://weblink.ssf.net/WebLink/0/doc/270123/Page1.aspx 227 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve entitlements for the proposed hotel project including Design Review (DR22-0005),Use Permit (UP22-0001),and Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0006)and adopt an ordinance approving Development Agreement (DA22-0001)to construct a new 12-story,165 foot tall,350 room,261,000 square foot hotel building,with 232 surface parking spaces and site improvements, located at 367 Marina Boulevard in the Oyster Point Specific Plan zone district WHEREAS,Oyster Point Holdco,LLC (“Applicant”)has proposed to construct an approximately 261,00 square foot hotel.An additional 14,200 square feet of building space is anticipated as a future expansion phase to include an event ballroom and additional meeting space for a total square footage of 275,200 at 367 Marina Boulevard (“Project Site”); and, WHEREAS, the proposed Project is located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan area; and, WHEREAS,the Applicant seeks approval of the following entitlements for the project:Development Agreement, Use Permit, Design Review, Transportation Demand Management Plan; and, WHEREAS,approval of the applicant’s proposal is considered a “project”for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act, Pub. Resources Code §21000, et seq. (“CEQA”); and, WHEREAS,an environmental checklist was prepared for the project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168,which concluded that per CEQA Guidelines sections 15168 and 15162,the project is within the scope of the certified the Oyster Point Specific Plan Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”)(State Clearinghouse number 2010022070)and no further environmental review is required.The environmental checklist also concluded the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183,as there are no project- specific significant effects which are peculiar to the Project or its site; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed and carefully considered the information in the environmental checklist,and by separate resolution,recommended that the City Council approve the environmental checklist as the appropriate environmental document for the project; and WHEREAS,the Design Review Board reviewed the project at its meeting of May 17,2022,and recommended approval of the project; and, WHEREAS,on November 17,2022 the Planning Commission for the City of South San Francisco held a lawfully noticed public hearing to solicit public comment and consider the proposed entitlements,take public testimony, and make a recommendation to the City Council on the project; and, NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it,which includes City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 1 of 7 powered by Legistar™228 File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it,which includes without limitation,the California Environmental Quality Act,Public Resources Code §21000,et seq. (“CEQA”)and the CEQA Guidelines,14 California Code of Regulations §15000,et seq.;the South San Francisco General Plan and General Plan EIR;the South San Francisco Municipal Code;the Project applications;the Oyster Point Hotel Project Plan set,prepared by SB Architects,dated September 28,2022, the Transportation Demand Management Plan,as prepared by Fehr &Peers,dated October 19,2022,the Oyster Point Specific Plan,the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR,including the Draft and Final EIR and all appendices thereto;the Environmental Checklist;all site plans;and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code §21080(e)and §21082.2),the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows: SECTION 1 FINDINGS A.General Findings 1.The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution. 2.The Exhibits attached to this Resolution,including Conditions of Project Approval (Exhibit A),Oyster Point Hotel Project Plan Set (Exhibit B),and the Transportation Demand Management Plan (Exhibit C ),and Development Agreement (Exhibit F)are each incorporated by reference and made a part of this Resolution, as if set forth fully herein. 3.The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco,315 Maple Avenue,South San Francisco,CA 94080, and in the custody of the Planning Manager, Tony Rozzi. By a separate resolution,the Planning Commission,exercising its independent judgment and analysis made the findings contained in that Resolution and recommended that the City Council make a determination that the environmental effects of the proposed Project were sufficiently analyzed under the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR (EIR)pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15168 and no additional environmental review is required.The Planning Commission also recommended that the City Council make a determination that the environmental checklist also demonstrates that the proposed project qualifies for streamlining under CEQA Guidelines Section 15183,as there are no project-specific significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site. 4.The proposed Project is consistent and compatible with all elements in the City of South San Francisco General Plan,as it will help the City implement several broad General Plan goals,including but not limited to:maintaining a balanced land use program that provides opportunities for continued economic growth,and building intensities that reflect South San Francisco’s prominent inner bay location and excellent regional access. 5.The proposed Project is consistent with the standards and requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance. City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 2 of 7 powered by Legistar™229 File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. 5.The proposed Project is consistent with the standards and requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance. The development of the Project Site would result in the construction of new 350 room hotel as anticipated in the Oyster Point Specific Plan. 6.The site is physically suitable for the type of development and density proposed,as an existing vacant underutilized site will be developed as a 350 room hotel that meets the City’s land use and zoning standards, and the Oyster Point Specific Plan. B.Design Review 1.The project is consistent with the applicable standards and requirements of the Zoning Ordinance because,as conditioned,the project meets all of the development standards of the Oyster Point Specific Plan District in the South San Francisco Municipal Code including but not limited to floor area,height, lot coverage, and land use. 2.The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and the Oyster Point Specific Plan District, including the goals,policies,and implementation measures and will minimize the effects of traffic, parking,storm water run-off,and construction dust and emissions on adjacent land uses and properties in the project vicinity. o Allow parking reductions for projects that have agreed to implement trip reduction methods (4.3 -I-18, Transportation Element); o Require new development pay a fair share of the cost of street and other traffic and transportation improvements (4.2-I-7, Transportation Element); o Adopt the standard construction dust abatement measures included in BAAQMD’s CEQA Guidelines.These measures would reduce particulate emissions from construction and grading activities. (7.3-I-3, Conservation and Open Space Element); and o Encourage land use and transportation strategies that promote use of alternatives to the automobile for transportation,including bicycling,bus transit,and carpooling (7.3-G-4, Conservation and Open Space Element) 3.The Project is consistent with the applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council;because the proposed Hotel building includes adequate design features to create architectural interest and avoid a large- scale,bulky and “box-like”appearance.Long facades are broken up into smaller visual components through variations in form and texture.Wall planes are varied and exterior building walls vary in depth and/or direction.Building walls exhibit offsets,recesses,or projections with significant depth,or a repeated pattern of offsets,recesses,or projections of smaller depth.There is variety in height and roof forms. Building height is varied so that portions of the building have a change in height and are varied over different portions of the building through changes in the roof parapets,elevators and stairway projections. The building façade incorporates details such as window recesses and changes in material.The use of City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 3 of 7 powered by Legistar™230 File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. The building façade incorporates details such as window recesses and changes in material.The use of materials,textures,and colors enhance architectural interest and emphasize details and changes in plane. Some of the architectural features of the main façade are incorporated into the rear and side elevations. 4.The Project is consistent with Findings for Approval for the other entitlements the project requires including use permit and a transportation demand management (TDM)program as detailed in the staff report and findings. In summary: a)The hotel land use is a permitted use in the Oyster Point Specific Plan District and the hotel use supports the Oyster Point Specific Plan vision for a hotel at this site that serves airport clientele and visitor serving uses, as well as, reduced trips and parking. b)The project satisfies the Use Permit Findings for reduced parking for airport oriented hotels. c)The project is consistent with TDM Findings by offering numerous trip reduction measures to employees and guests that will reduce trips. 5.The Project is consistent with the applicable design review criteria in South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.480.006 (“Design Review Criteria”)because the project has been reviewed and recommended for approval by the Design Review Board on May 17,2022 because it was found to be consistent with each of the following eight design review criteria included in the “Design Review Criteria” section of the Ordinance. 1.The site subject to design review shall be graded and developed with due regard for the natural terrain,aesthetic quality,and landscaping so as not to impair the environmental quality,value,or stability of the site or the environmental quality or value of improved or unimproved property in the area. 2. A building, structure, or sign shall: a)Reasonably relate to its site and property in the immediate and adjacent areas; b)Not be of such poor quality of design as to adversely affect the environmental quality or desirability of the immediate areas or neighboring areas; and c)Not unreasonably interfere with the occupancy,environmental quality,or the stability and value of improved or unimproved real property or have an unreasonable detrimental effect on the health, safety, and general welfare of the community. 3.New additions to existing residential dwellings shall be architecturally compatible with the primary residential unit, with respect to style, massing, roof pitch, color and materials. 4.A site shall be developed to achieve a harmonious relationship with the area in which it is located and adjacent areas,allowing a reasonable similarity of style or originality,which does not impair the environmental quality or value of improved or unimproved property or prevent appropriate development City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 4 of 7 powered by Legistar™231 File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. environmental quality or value of improved or unimproved property or prevent appropriate development and use of such areas or produce degeneration of properties in such areas with attendant deterioration of conditions affecting the health, safety, and general welfare of the City. 5.Parking areas shall be designed and developed to buffer surrounding land uses;compliment pedestrian-oriented development;enhance the environmental quality of the site,including minimizing stormwater run-off and the heat-island effect; and achieve a safe, efficient, and harmonious development. 6.Open space,pedestrian walks,signs,illumination,and landscaping (including irrigation)shall be designed and developed to enhance the environmental quality of the site,achieve a safe,efficient,and harmonious development,and accomplish the objectives set forth in the precise plan of design and design criteria. 7.Electrical and mechanical equipment or works and fixtures and trash storage areas shall be designed and constructed so as not to detract from the environmental quality of the site.Electrical and mechanical equipment or works and fixtures and trash storage areas shall be concealed by an appropriate architectural structure which uses colors and materials harmonious with the principal structure,unless a reasonable alternative is identified. 8.Components considered in design review shall include but not be limited to exterior design, materials,textures,colors,means of illumination,landscaping,irrigation,height,shadow patterns,parking, access,security,safety,and other usual on-site development elements.(Ord.1544 §2,2017;Ord.1432 §2, 2010) C.Transportation Demand Management Plan 1.The proposed trip reduction measures are feasible and appropriate for the project,considering the proposed use or mix of uses and the project’s location,size,and hours of operation based on a detailed review of the Transportation Demand Management plan for the proposed hotel which outlines numerous trip reduction measures applicable to both guests and employees including but not limited to subsidized transit passes for employees encouraging uses of Caltrain,BART,SF Bay Ferry and SamTrans services, bicycle storage showers and lockers and repair,and strategies to reduce employee commutes such as carpool/vanpool ridematching,guaranteed ride home programs,and free parking for carpool/vanpools just to name a few.All of these and more trip reduction measures discussed in the project TDM plan are feasible and relevant to the operation of the proposed hotel land use and it’s guests and employees. 2.The proposed performance guarantees will ensure that the target alternative mode use established for the project by this chapter will be achieved and maintained because the project TDM program demonstrates that trip reduction is feasible with the implementation of the proposed measure outlined in the TDM program for hotel occupants,visitors,guests and employees which will be monitored on a yearly basis as part of the annual reporting requirements. D. Conditional Use Permit for Reduced Parking for Airport-Oriented Hotels and Motels City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 5 of 7 powered by Legistar™232 File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. 1.Distance the hotel or motel is located from the airport. Airport-oriented hotels and motels are usually located no further than three miles from the San Francisco International Airport.The proposed Hotel would be located within three miles of the San Francisco International (SFO) Airport’s border. 2.Availability of airport bus and/or limousine service.The location of this hotel will be served by various airport shuttle, bus and limousine services 3.Proximity of auto rental agencies to the site. Additional parking may be required for rental facilities on the site.Since San Francisco International Airport is located in close proximity to the hotel there are many rental car services nearby. There are approximately 6-8 car rental facilities all within less than 3 miles of the proposed hotel. 4.Availability of parking facilities adjoining the site which have peak use hours different from peak hours of the hotel or motel.In the project vicinity there is a combination of several large scale public and private surface parking lots which would have alternate parking peaks from the hotel. 5.Documentation of actual use of parking spaces at an existing and comparable facility for an extended period of time.Parking demand estimated using standard rates published by ITE in Parking Generation, 5th Edition is expected to be 259 parking spaces, a deficit of 27 spaces. However, with the implementation of the TDM plan measures, discussed further in the following section, the proposed parking supply is expected to be adequate. 6.Availability of on-site meeting rooms and conference facilities.The project as proposed would provide approximately 14,300 square feet of on-site meeting rooms and conference facilities. 7.Designation of additional parking spaces to allow for extended parking for guests using the airport.As proposed, the Hotel would not be providing extended parking (e.g., for long-term airport parking). As proposed, the parking stalls would be solely for overnight guests and employees. 8.In determining the required number of off-street parking spaces needed for an airport-oriented hotel or motel,the Planning Commission shall include provisions for additional off-street parking spaces to serveCity of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 6 of 7 powered by Legistar™233 File #:22-956 Agenda Date:11/17/2022 Version:1 Item #:4b. motel,the Planning Commission shall include provisions for additional off-street parking spaces to serve employee needs at the rate of one-half space per employee and for related uses such as restaurants and conference/meeting rooms.As calculated the provided parking includes parking spaces to serve employee needs and any ancillary uses. E. Development Agreement 1.The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives,policies,general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and the Oyster Point Specific Plan because the Development Agreement will permit the development of a project that furthers the General Plan’s goals,policies,and implementation measures and would facilitate the construction of a hotel at the location that the Specific Plan designates for a hotel; 2.The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in,and the regulations prescribed for the land use district in which the real property is located because Oyster Point Specific Plan designates the project site for a hotel land use; 3.The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience,general welfare and good land use practice because the Development Agreement will permit the development of a hotel that will provide high quality amenities and event space available to the public,support travel and tourism in the City,as well as provide a resource for surrounding businesses to accommodate travelers and hold meetings; 4.The Development Agreement is not detrimental to the health,safety and general welfare because the Development Agreement will permit the development of a high quality hotel on a vacant,underutilized site and will provide for ongoing maintenance and monitoring of conditions on a former landfill site; 5.The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property valued because the Development Agreement will permit the development of a hotel on a site that was identified for such development in the Specific Plan and the hotel will support surrounding uses. SECTION 2 DETERMINATION NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that subject to the Conditions of Approval,attached as Exhibit A to this Resolution,the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution,and recommends that the City Council approves the entitlements request for the Project and adopt an ordinance to enter into a Development Agreement. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. City of South San Francisco Printed on 11/10/2022Page 7 of 7 powered by Legistar™234 Page 1 DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL P22-0014: DR22-0005, DA22-0001, UP22-0001, TDM22-0006 367 Marina Boulevard (APNs 015-011-350) (As recommended by City Staff on November 17, 2022) PLANNING CONDITIONS GENERAL 1. The applicant shall comply with the Planning Division’s standard Conditions and Limitations for Commercial, Industrial, Mixed-Use and Multi-Family Residential Projects (attached to this document). 2. The project shall be constructed and operated substantially as indicated on the plan set prepared by SB Architects on September 28, 2022, and approved by the Planning Commission in association with P22-0014: DR22-0005, DA22-0001, UP22-0001 and TDM22-0006 as amended by the conditions of approval. The final plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City’s Chief Planner. 3. The construction drawings shall comply with the Planning Commission approved plans, as amended by the conditions of approval, including the plans prepared by SB Architects on September 28, 2022. 4. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for the construction of public improvements, the final design for all public improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer and Chief Planner. 5. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for grading improvements, the applicant shall submit final grading plans for review and approval by the City Engineer and Chief Planner. 6. Applicant shall comply with all permitting requirements of the Water Board and Scavenger related to the project, and provide proof of permits and/or approval prior to building permit issuance for these project elements. 7. The applicant shall comply with all terms and conditions specified in the Development Agreement DA22-0001). 8. The applicant shall comply with all terms and conditions specified in the Purchase and Sale Agreement (PSA) between the City and Ensemble Investments, LLC entered into December 10, 2021 for APN 015-010-970 367 Marina Boulevard, including Exhibit F “Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures” which is attached. The applicant is also 235 Page 2 responsible for complying with the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board approved Post-closure Monitoring & Maintenance Plan, Phase I and II Development, dated September 8, 2017 by Langan Engineering and Environmental Services or subsequent updates, hereinafter referred to as the “PCMMP”. https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/esi/uploads/geo_report/1974087655/L1 0009323371.PDF as applicable to 367 Marina Boulevard. CONSTRUCTION 9. The applicant is responsible for maintaining site security prior to, and throughout the construction process. This includes installation of appropriate fencing, lighting, remote monitors, or on-site security personnel as needed. 10. The applicant is responsible for providing site signage during construction, which contains contact information for questions regarding the construction. 11. During construction, the applicant shall provide parking for construction workers. 12. Construction Equipment Standards and Construction Emissions Minimization Plan. All off-road construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower shall have engines that meet or exceed either U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB) Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards. If a particular piece of off-road equipment that meets these standards is technically not feasible; the equipment would not produce desired emissions reduction due to expected operating modes; installation of the equipment would create a safety hazard or impaired visibility for the operator; or, there is a compelling emergency need to use off-road equipment that does not meet these standards, the Contractor shall use the next cleanest piece of off-road equipment (i.e., Tier 3 Engine with Level 3 Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy (VDECS), Tier 3 Engine with Level 2 VDECS, Tier 3 Engine with alternative fuel), and the Contactor shall develop a Construction Emissions Minimization Plan (CEMP) to describe the process used to identify the next cleanest piece of off-road equipment and the steps that will be taken to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants to the greatest extent practicable. The CEMP shall be submitted the City’s Planning Department for review and approval prior to using the equipment. DESIGN REVIEW / SITE PLANNING 1. All equipment (either roof, building, or ground-mounted) shall be screened from view through the use of integral architectural elements, such as enclosures or roof screens, and landscape screening or shall be incorporated inside the exterior building wall. Equipment enclosures and/or roof screens shall be painted to match the building. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit plans showing utility locations, stand-pipes, 236 Page 3 equipment enclosures, landscape screens, and/or roof screens for review and approval by the Chief Planner or designee. 2. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for landscaping improvements, the applicant shall submit final landscaping and irrigation plans for review and approval by the City’s Chief Planner. The plans shall include documentation of compliance with SSFMC Section 20.300.007, Landscaping. 3. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit final landscaping and irrigation plans demonstrating compliance with the State’s Model Water Efficiency Landscaping Ordinance (MWELO), if applicable. a) Projects with a new aggregate landscape of 501 – 2,499 sq. ft. may comply with the prescriptive measures contained in Appendix D of the MWELO. b) Projects with a new aggregate landscape of 2,500 sq. ft. or greater must comply with the performance measures required by the MWELO. c) For all projects subject to the provisions of the MWELO, the applicant shall submit a Certificate of Completion to the City, upon completion of the installation of the landscaping and irrigation system. 4. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits, the applicant shall submit interim and final phasing plans and minor modifications to interim and final phasing plans for review and approval by the Chief Planner, City Engineer and Chief Building Official. 5. The applicant shall contact the South San Francisco Scavenger Company to properly size any required trash enclosures and work with staff to locate and design the trash enclosure in accordance with the SSFMC Section 20.300.014, Trash and Refuse Collection Areas. Applicant shall submit an approval letter from South San Francisco Scavenger to the Chief Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the Design Review Board from their meeting of May 17, 2022: a. Review the landscaping plans, as some species will not survive the SSF elements due to wind and cold issues: • Holly Oak with not work well on this site • Coast Redwood will not survive the harsh wind • Arbutus unedo is more of a shrub, consider using Arbus unedo ‘Marina’, which is a successful evergreen tree in SSF. • Leyland Cypress is often a short lived tree in the area. • Myoporum laetum are attacked by thrips and many of them died or died back severely during the last big frost. • Cistus, Rockrose will need good sandy soil, and is often short lived. 237 Page 4 • Clematus armandii vine will not take wind. Take care the orientation if used. • Liriope suffers from snail infestations and requires additional maintenance. b. Consider planting clusters of trees off-site on the adjacent vacant parcel and coordinate with the City to plant beyond the south edge, if possible for a more organic look and feel rather than a strict line of trees at the perimeter of the site and parking area. c. Consider adding ground floor solar panels. d. Screen service areas on the façade including but not limited to the trash enclosure. e. Maintain the curved corners on future development and building out on site to continue the nautical look and feel. 7. Landscaped areas in the project area may contain trees defined as protected by the South San Francisco Tree Preservation Ordinance, Title 13, Chapter 13.30. Any removal or pruning of protected trees shall comply with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, and applicant shall obtain a permit for any tree removals or alterations of protected trees, and avoid tree roots during trenching for utilities. 8. The applicant shall install three-inch diameter, PVC conduit along the project frontage, in the right-of-way, if any trenching is to take place, for the purpose of future fiber installation. Conduit shall have a pull rope or tape. A #8 stranded trace wire will be installed in the conduit or other trace wire system approved by the City. 9. All landscaping installed within the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property owner. 10. Prior to receiving certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall install street furniture, trash receptacles, and bicycle racks along the project sidewalk frontages. The Planning Division shall review and approve all street furniture, trash receptacles and bicycle rack options during the Building Permit process. 11. Demolition of any existing structures on site will require demolition permits. 12. Prior to proceeding with exterior construction, the applicant shall provide a full-scale mockup of a section of exterior wall that shows the cladding materials and finishes, windows, trim, and any other architectural features of the building to fully illustrate building fenestration, subject to site inspection and approval by Planning Division staff. 13. After the building permits are approved, but before beginning construction, the owner/applicant shall hold a preconstruction conference with City Planning, Building, and Engineering staff and other interested parties. The developer shall arrange for the attendance of the construction manager, contractor, and all relevant subcontractors. TRANSPORTATION / PARKING 238 Page 5 14. A Parking and Traffic Control Plan for the construction of the project shall be submitted with the application for Building Permit, for review and approval by the Chief Planner and City Engineer. 15. The applicant has prepared and submitted a draft Preliminary TDM Plan. In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.400, Transportation Demand Management, prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit a Final TDM Plan for review and approval by the Chief Planner. a) The Final TDM Plan shall include all mandatory elements included in the Ordinance in place at the time of building permit application submittal and shall substantially reflect the Preliminary TDM Plan prepared by Fehr & Peers modified as necessary to reflect the structure of the current Ordinance. The Final TDM Plan shall be designed to ultimately achieve the requirements of a Tier 2 project, which includes all hotels. b) The Final TDM Plan shall outline the required process for on-going monitoring. This project will be required to submit an annual self-certification form, starting one (1) year after the granting of a certificate of occupancy, for the first twenty years after occupancy. c) The applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program costs associated with monitoring and enforcing the TDM Program on an annual basis. The annual monitoring fee is $1,848 and is updated by the City Council on an annual basis. d) The Final TDM plan shall be subject to review and approval by the San Mateo City/County Association of Governments. The property owner shall ensure compliance with the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program Land Use Implementation Policy (C/CAG TDM Policy). Specifically, the property owner shall ensure that the measures identified in the approved C/CAG TDM Checklist are implemented over the life of the project, and that the property owner and tenants acknowledge the requirement to participate in the periodic monitoring and reporting requirements identified in the C/CAG TDM Policy. Accordingly, it is recommended that the property owner and/or developer clearly identify these TDM provisions and responsibilities in any sales and/or lease or sublease transactions. 16. Provide clear signage on site for commercial, and visitor parking areas to help direct vehicle traffic. ENVIRONMENTAL MITIGATION MEASURES / CEQA 1. The applicant shall comply with all applicable mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and Environmental Checklist dated October 2022. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall prepare a 239 Page 6 checklist outlining mitigation measures and status of implementation for review and approval by the Chief Planning or designee. 2. Improvement Measure: Construction Equipment Standards and Construction Emissions Minimization Plan. All off-road construction equipment greater than 25 horsepower shall have engines that meet or exceed either U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) or California Air Resources Board (ARB) Tier 4 Final off-road emission standards. If a particular piece of off-road equipment that meets these standards is technically not feasible; the equipment would not produce desired emissions reduction due to expected operating modes; installation of the equipment would create a safety hazard or impaired visibility for the operator; or, there is a compelling emergency need to use off-road equipment that does not meet these standards, the Contractor shall use the next cleanest piece of off-road equipment (i.e., Tier 3 Engine with Level 3 Verified Diesel Emission Control Strategy (VDECS), Tier 3 Engine with Level 2 VDECS, Tier 3 Engine with alternative fuel), and the Contactor shall develop a Construction Emissions Minimization Plan (CEMP) to describe the process used to identify the next cleanest piece of off-road equipment and the steps that will be taken to reduce emissions of criteria air pollutants to the greatest extent practicable. The CEMP shall be submitted the City’s Planning Department for review and approval prior to using the equipment. 3. [Regulated project and 100% LID treatment on-site] Applicant shall provide 100% Low-Impact Development for C.3 stormwater treatment on-site. All stormwater runoff shall be treated prior to discharge to the City Right-of-Way or City storm drain system. Sizing and design shall conform to the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program design templates and technical guidance and be approved by the Water Quality Control Plant. Exemptions from C.3 requirements must be demonstrated based on the exemptions and exclusions allowed by the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program C.3 Stormwater Technical Guidance. Applicant shall maintain all treatment measures required by the project and enter into a Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement with the City. CLIMATE ACTION PLAN 1. The project will be subject to the requirements for commercial projects of the City’s Climate Action Plan adopted October 12, 2022. IMPACT / DEVELOPMENT FEES **Fees are subject to annual adjustment, and will be calculated based on the fee in effect at the time that the payment of the fee is due. The fees included in these Conditions of Approval are estimates, based on the fees in place at the time of project approval.** 240 Page 7 1. CHILDCARE FEE: Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall pay any applicable childcare fees in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.310. This fee is subject to annual adjustment. Based on the plans recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 the childcare impact fee estimate for the project is: $.30 per square foot 2. PARK FEES: Prior to issuance of the first building permit [non-residential] the applicant shall pay the Parkland Acquisition Fee and Parkland Construction Fee in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.67. The fee is subject to annual adjustment. Based on the plans recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 the park fee estimate for the project is: $1.44 per square foot 3. CITYWIDE TRANSPORTATION FEE: Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall pay applicable transportation impact fees in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.73. The fee is subject to annual adjustment. Based on the plans recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 the citywide transportation fee estimate for the project is: $2,929.29 per room 4. COMMERCIAL LINKAGE FEE: Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall pay the applicable commercial linkage fee in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.69, based on the current fee for each applicable land use category. The fee shall be calculated based on the fee schedule in effect at the time the building permit is issued. Based on the plans recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 the commercial linkage fee estimate for the project is: $5.80 per square foot 5. PUBLIC SAFEY IMPACT FEE: Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the development, the applicant shall pay applicable Public Safety Impact Fees in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.75. Based on the plans recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 the Public Safety Impact Fee for the project is: $.31 per square feet 6. LIBRARY IMPACT FEE: Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the development, whichever is earlier, the applicant shall pay applicable Library Impact Fee in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.74. Based on the plans recommended for approval by the Planning Commission on November 3, 2022 the Library Impact Fee for the project is: $.04 per square foot 7. PUBLIC ART REQUIREMENT: All non-residential development is subject to the Public Art Requirement, per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.76. The public art requirement for this project shall be satisfied by providing qualifying public art, as 241 Page 8 defined in South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.76 and reviewed and approved by the Cultural Arts Commission or designee, with a value equal to not less than 1% of construction costs for acquisition and installation of public art on the project site; or electing to make a public art contribution payment in an amount not less than 0.5% of construction costs into the public art fund. The in-lieu contribution payment shall be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. 8. East of 101 Impact Fees These fees require specialized calculations per project. Contact the Engineering Division for information on calculating East of 101 Impact fees: (650) 829-6652, or see the Engineering Development Review webpage for more information. Oyster Point Interchange Fee East of 101 Sewer Impact Fees 242 Page 9 STANDARD CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, MIXED USE, AND MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS Entitlement and Permit Status 1. Unless the use has commenced or related building permits have been issued within two (2) years of the date this permit is granted, this permit will automatically expire on that date. A one-year permit extension may be granted in accordance with provisions of the SSFMC Chapter 20.450 (Common Procedures). 2. The permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the property owner or a duly authorized representative files an affidavit, prior to the issuance of a building permit, stating that the property owner is aware of, and accepts, all of the conditions of the permit. 3. The permit shall be subject to revocation if the project is not operated in compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. Minor changes or deviations from the conditions of approval of the permit may be approved by the Chief Planner and major changes require approval of the Planning Commission, or final approval body of the City, per SSFMC Chapter 20.450 (Common Procedures). 5. Neither the granting of this permit nor any conditions attached thereto shall authorize, require or permit anything contrary to, or in conflict with any ordinances specifically named therein. 6. Prior to construction, all required building permits shall be obtained from the City’s Building Division. 7. All conditions of the permit shall be completely fulfilled to the satisfaction of the affected City Departments and Planning and Building Divisions prior to occupancy of any building. Any request for temporary power for testing equipment will be issued only upon substantial completion of the development. Lighting, Signs, and Trash Areas 8. All exterior lights shall be installed in such a manner that is consistent with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards), and there shall be no illumination on adjacent properties or streets which might be considered either objectionable by adjacent property owners or hazardous to motorists. 243 Page 10 9. No additional signs, flags, pennants or banners shall be installed or erected on the site without prior approval, as required by SSFMC Chapter 20.360 (Signs). 10. Adequate trash areas shall be provided as required by SSFMC 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 11. Trash handling area must be covered, enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit. If being installed in a food service facility the drain must be connected to a grease interceptor prior to the connection to the sanitary sewer. Landscaping, Construction, & Utilities 12. The construction and permitted use on the property shall be so conducted as to reduce to a minimum any noise vibration or dust resulting from the operation. 13. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted. 14. All sewage and waste disposal shall be only by means of an approved sanitary system. 15. Prior to any on-site grading, a grading permit shall be obtained from the City Engineer. 16. All existing utility lines, underground cable conduits and structures which are not proposed to be removed shall be shown on the improvement plans and their disposition noted. 17. All landscape areas shall be watered via an automatic irrigation system which shall be maintained in fully operable condition at all times, and which complies with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 18. Landscaped areas shall be zoned by WUCOL ratings and have individual valves for specific hydro-zones as well as trees. Irrigation timers shall be set to meet requirements of plants in established hydro-zones. 19. All planting areas shall be maintained by a qualified professional; the landscape shall be kept on a regular fertilization and maintenance program and shall be maintained weed free. 20. Trees shall be selectively pruned by a qualified arborist; no topping or excessive cutting-back shall be permitted. Tree pruning shall allow the natural branching structure to develop. 244 Page 11 21. Trees that are retained within the construction site shall have Tree Protection Zones (TPZ) established extending to the edge of the canopy dripline. 22. Plant materials shall be replaced when necessary with the same species originally specified unless otherwise approved by the Chief Planner. Parking Areas, Screening, & Drainage 23. All ducting for air conditioning, heating, blower systems, accessory mechanisms and all other forms of mechanical or electrical equipment which are placed on or adjacent to the building shall be screened from public view, in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 24. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, turn-around areas and landscaping areas shall be kept free of debris, litter and weeds at all times. Site, structures, paving, landscaping, light standards, pavement markings and all other facilities shall be permanently maintained. 25. All parking spaces, driveways, maneuvering aisles, and turn-around areas must drain and be plumbed to the sanitary sewer. 26. The onsite stormwater catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay). Public Safety 27. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the Municipal Code, “Minimum Building Security Standards” Ordinance revised May 1995. The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 28. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.24 of the Municipal Code, “Fire Code” Ordinance. The Fire Department reserves the right to make additional safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans. 29. All fire sprinkler test and/or drain lines shall be connected to the sanitary sewer. 245 Page 12 POLICE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS All construction must conform to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.050 Minimum security standards for multiple-family dwellings, (Ord. 1477 § 1A, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995) 15.48.085 Additional Security Measures May Be Required Per South San Francisco Municipal Code 15.48.085 -Additional Security Measures, the following conditions will also be required: 1. The applicant shall install and maintain a system allowing first responders to enter the building’s common areas by means of a code to be entered into a keypad or similar input device. The keypad/device should be located at the main entrance and an additional keypad/device located at an additional, but separate entrance, for a total of two different entrances for first responders. A permanent code shall be issued to the police department by email to planningsergeant@ssf.net. Physical keys or electronic access cards will not satisfy this requirement. Please note this is separate from any key control or access requirement the fire department might have. 2. The hardware design of any double doorways shall prevent any doors from being secured in a closed position to either another door or a fixed object within four feet of any door by means of a rope, cable, chain, or similar item. This is to prevent malicious prevention of egress and/or ingress by building occupants or first responders. Pay particular attention to all glass doorways. See possible samples below. Acceptable: Unacceptable: 246 Page 13 3. All exterior doorways shall be illuminated during darkness by a white light source that has full cut-off and is of pedestrian scale. 4. Interior common areas, bicycle storage area, fire escapes, etc., shall be always illuminated with a white light source that is controlled by a tamperproof switch, or a switch located in an inaccessible location to passers-by. 5. The landing at the lowest level of service staircases, such as those in the fire escapes, shall have some mechanism, such as fencing and/or a gate to prevent access and prevent people from loitering or concealing themselves in that area. The fencing shall be at least 72 inches tall, in line with the lowest step, and of a design that makes it difficult to climb. 6. Any exterior bicycle racks installed shall be of an inverted “U” design, or other design that allows two different locking points on each bicycle. 7. The mature height of all shrubbery shall be no higher than three feet, if so, it shall be maintained at a maximum height of three feet, and tree canopies shall be no lower than six feet above grade. 8. The applicant shall install and maintain a camera surveillance system that conforms to the technical specifications of South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.66.050, Minimum technological standards, (Ord. 1515, 2016). The video surveillance cameras will be used as a crime deterrent and assist with the identification and apprehension of criminals if a crime is committed on the property. Enough cameras shall be installed to 247 Page 14 provide adequate coverage for the intended space. Cameras shall be placed minimally in the following locations: • All exterior entrances/exits • Bicycle storage area • Main lobby of building • Lobby of sales/leasing office • Loading docks 9. Any leasing of sales offices within the building shall be alarmed with a central station monitored silent intruder alarm system. 10. Any exterior benches accessible to the public shall have center armrests to prevent persons from lying down on them. The Police Department reserves the right to review and comment upon the submission of revised and updated plans. For questions concerning this project, please contact the Planning Sergeant at (650) 877-8927 or at planningsergeant@ssf.net. WATER QUALITY CONTROL DIVISION CONDITIONS 1. Storm drains must be protected during construction. Discharge of any demolition/construction debris or water to the storm drain system is prohibited. 2. Do not use gravel bags for erosion control in the street or drive aisles. Drains in street must have inlet and throat protection of a material that is not susceptible to breakage from vehicular traffic. 3. No floatable bark shall be used in landscaping. Only fibrous mulch or pea gravel is allowed. 4. As site falls in a Moderate Trash Generation area per South San Francisco’s ATTACHED Trash Generation Map (http://www.flowstobay.org/content/municipal- trash-generation-maps), determined by the Water Quality Control Division: -Regional Water Quality Control Board-approved full trash capture devices must be installed to treat the stormwater drainage from the site. -At a minimum, a device must be installed before the onsite drainage enters the City’s public stormwater system (i.e. trash capture must take place no farther downstream than the last private stormwater drainage structure on the site). -An Operation & Maintenance Agreement will be required to be recorded with San Mateo County, ensuring the device(s) will be properly maintained. -A full trash capture system is any single device or series of devices that traps all particles retained by a 5 mm mesh screen and has a design treatment capacity of not less than the peak flow rate resulting from a one-year, one-hour storm in the sub-drainage area or designed to carry at least the same flow as the storm drain connected to the inlet. 248 Page 15 5. Roof leaders/gutters must NOT be plumbed directly to storm drains; they shall discharge to stormwater treatment devices or landscaping first. 6. Fire sprinkler test drainage must be plumbed to sanitary sewer and be clearly shown on plans. 7. Trash enclosure shall be covered (roof, canopy) and contained (wall/fence). As food prep/service is to be involved, the floor shall slope to a central drain that discharges to a grease trap/interceptor and is connected to the sanitary sewer. Details of trash enclosure shall be clearly provided on plans. 8. Install a condensate drain line connected to the sanitary sewer for rooftop equipment and clearly show on plans. 9. As a food service kitchen/ prep area is to be included, it shall connect to a gravity grease interceptor at least 1500 gallons (liquid capacity) in size. Sizing of the grease removal device must be in accordance with the uniform plumbing code. 10. Grease interceptor shall be connected to all non-domestic wastewater sources in the kitchen (wash sinks, mop sinks, floor drains) and shown on plans. 11. A cut sheet of the Grease Interceptor/Trap must be shown on plans. 12. Garbage Disposals in Industrial/Commercial facilities are prohibited by City of South San Francisco Municipal Code. Garbage Disposal(s) shall not be included/installed. 13. Applicant will be required to pay a Sewer Capacity Fee (connection fee) based on SSF City Council-approved EDU calculation (involving anticipated flow, BOD and TSS calculations and including credits for previous site use). Based on the information received, the estimated Sewer Capacity Fee will be $1,009,064.17, payable with the Building Permit. 14. Elevator sump drainage (if applicable) shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to connection to the sanitary sewer. 15. Wherever feasible, install landscaping that minimizes irrigation runoff, promotes surface infiltration, minimizes use of pesticides and fertilizers and incorporates appropriate sustainable landscaping programs (such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping). 16. Site is subject to C.3 requirements of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (please see SMCWPPP C.3 Regulated Projects Guide at https://www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment for guidance). WC-3, the City’s consultant, will review and determine C.3 compliance and the following items will be required; 17. Applicant shall provide 100% Low-Impact Development for C.3 stormwater treatment for all of the project’s impervious areas. In-lieu of on-site treatment, applicants seeking Special Project Status exemption to Low Impact Development for C.3 treatment may install LID treatment within the Right-of-Way. If Applicant chooses to treat any of their Project’s impervious areas within the ROW, Applicant shall size the treatment measures to treat both the Project’s impervious areas and the ROW. The ROW area to be treated shall be from the property line to the street centerline or crown whichever is a greater distance along the entire project frontage. Sizing and design shall conform to the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program design templates and technical guidance and be approved by the Water Quality Control Plant and the Engineering Division. Applicant shall maintain all treatment measures required by the project and enter into a Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement with the City. 18. Completed attached forms for Low Impact Development (C3-C6 Project Checklist). 249 Page 16 Forms must be on 8.5in X 11in paper and signed and wet stamped by a professional engineer. Calculations must be submitted with this package. Use attached forms for completing documents, as old forms are no longer sufficient Forms can also be found at http://www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment A completed copy must also be emailed to andrew.wemmer @ssf.net 19. Sign and have engineer wet stamp forms for Low Impact Development. 20. Submit flow calculations and related math for LID. 21. Complete attached Operation and Maintenance (O&M) agreements. Use attached forms for completing documents, as old forms are no longer sufficient Do not sign agreement, as the city will need to review prior to signature. Prepare packet and submit including a preferred return address for owner signature. Packet should also be mailed or emailed to: Andrew Wemmer City of SSF WQCP 195 Belle Air Road South San Francisco, CA 94080 Andrew.wemmer@ssf.net Exhibit Templates can also be found within Chapter 6 the C.3 Technical Guidance at http://www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment. 22. The onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay). 23. Landscaping shall meet the following conditions related to reduction of pesticide use on the project site: a. Where feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat stormwater runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain, and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolonged exposure to water shall be specified. b. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. c. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent practicable. d. Proper maintenance of landscaping, with minimal pesticide use, shall be the responsibility of the property owner. e. Integrated pest management (IPM) principles and techniques shall be encouraged as part of the landscaping design to the maximum extent practicable. Examples of IPM principles and techniques include: i. Select plants that are well adapted to soil conditions at the site. 250 Page 17 ii. Select plants that are well adapted to sun and shade conditions at the site. In making these selections, consider future conditions when plants reach maturity, as well as seasonal changes. iii. Provide irrigation appropriate to the water requirements of the selected plants. iv. Select pest-resistant and disease-resistant plants. v. Plant a diversity of species to prevent a potential pest infestation from affecting the entire landscaping plan. vi. Use “insectary” plants in the landscaping to attract and keep beneficial insects. 24. A SWPPP must be submitted (if > 1 acre). Drawings must note that erosion control shall be in effect all year long. 25. A copy of the state approved NOI must be submitted (if > 1 acre). Please have applicant contact Andrew Wemmer at Water Quality Control with any questions at (650) 829-3840 or Andrew.wemmer@ssf.net. PARKS DEPARTMENT The following Parks Department comments shall be addressed on the plans submitted for building permit: 1.Page 21/22: L7.00 & L7.01 - Cercis occidentalis will not survive at this location. Both species of redbuds have been tried all through out SSF and the wind and climate do not allow for them to grow well if they even survive. - Myoporum laetum are significantly impacted by thrips in this area. These trees were previously growing at this site and were all declining due to repeated thrip attacks. - Parking areas should not have Podocarpus gracilior due to their tendency to damage hardscaped areas with root intrusion. The high winds will cause roots to seek hold further away into the windward side and will damage the paving significantly. - Laurus nobilis can vector Sudden Oak Death and verified clean stock must be used when planting. - Site is incredibly windy and redwoods should only be planted between the hotel and the bay to have the building block wind. If not these trees will be repeatedly topped by the wind and will never reach potential and look terrible. 2.Page 24: L8.01 – There are notice low water use plants mixed with moderate water use plants in the shrub schedule. Plants should be hydrozoned based off water needs across species and have valves dedicated to each water requirement for those species. This conflicts with irrigation legend where low water use shrubs are shown in highlighting the bioswales on page L9.00 and yet moderate water use plants are called for in the bioswale areas on page L8.01. Please fix this or explain how this is being thought about and justified. 251 Page 18 3.Page 30: A1.00 - This plan shows an old version of the recreation parcel to the west of the hotel. This parcel plan has significantly changed and should be reflected in these plans and contemplated in designing of building. This should be coordinated with the City. Please have applicant contact Joshua Richardson at Parks Department with any questions at Joshua.Richardson@ssf.net. FIRE DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS After review of application and plans provided for this project, the Fire Department has the following comments. This plan is being returned APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOTED BELOW. 1. Projects shall be designed in compliance with established regulations adopted by the City of South San Francisco affecting or related to structures, processes, premises, and safeguards regarding the following: a. The hazard of fire and explosion arising from the storage, handling or use of structures, materials, or devices. b. Conditions hazardous to life, property, or public welfare in the occupancy of structures or premises. c. Fire hazards in the structure(s) or on the premises from occupancy or operation. d. Matters related to the construction, extension, repair, alteration or removal of the fire suppression or alarm systems. e. Conditions affecting the safety of fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. 2. Fire service features for buildings, structures and premises shall comply with all City adopted building standards, California Code of Regulations Title 24 Building Standards and South San Francisco City Code. 3. Permit(s) shall be required as set forth in adopted California Building Code (CBC) Section 105, California Residential Code (CRC) Section R105 and California Fire Code (CFC) Sections 105.6 and 105.7. Submittal documents consisting of construction documents, statement of special inspections, geotechnical report and other data shall be submitted in two or more sets with each permit application. The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design professional. Where special conditions exist, the code official is authorized to require additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional. a. Construction documents shall be dimensioned and drawn on suitable material. Electronic media documents shall be submitted. Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of adopted codes and relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, as determined by the code official. b. Shop drawings for the fire protection system(s) shall be submitted directly to the Fire Department to indicate conformance with adopted codes and the construction documents and shall be approved prior to the start of system installation. Shop 252 Page 19 drawings shall contain all information as required by the referenced installation standards in Chapter 9. c. The construction documents shall show in sufficient detail the location, construction, size, and character of all portions of the means of egress including the path of the exit discharge to the public way in compliance with the provisions of adopted codes. In other than occupancies in Groups R-2, R-3, and R-2.1, the construction documents shall designate the number of occupants to be accommodated on every floor, and in all rooms and spaces. d. The construction documents submitted with the application for permit shall be accompanied by a site plan showing to scale the size and location of new construction and existing structures on the site, distances from lot lines, the established street grades and the proposed finished grades and it shall be drawn in accordance with an accurate boundary line survey. In the case of demolition, the site plan shall show construction to be demolished and the location and size of existing structures and construction that are to remain on the site or plot. The code official is authorized to waive or modify the requirement for a site plan where the application for permit is for alteration or repair or where otherwise warranted. e. Construction documents for proposed fire apparatus access, location of fire lanes, security gates across fire apparatus access roads and construction documents, hydraulic calculations and material specifications for fire hydrant, fire protection or detection systems shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to construction. 4. Where fire apparatus access roads or a water supply for fire protection are required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except where approved alternative methods of protection are provided. 5. For the purposes of prescribing minimum safeguards for construction, alteration, and demolition operations to provide reasonable safety to life and property from fire during such operations. building, facilities, and premises during construction, alteration, or demolition, including those in underground locations shall be in compliance with CFC Chapter 33 and NFPA 241. 6. New and existing buildings shall be provided with approved illuminated or other approved means of address identification. The address identification shall be legible and placed in a position that is visible from the street or road fronting the property. Address identification characters shall contrast with their background. Address numbers shall be Arabic numerals or alphabetic letters. Numbers shall not be spelled out. Character size and stroke shall be in accordance with CFC Section 505.1.1 through 505.1.2. Where required by the fire code official, address identification shall be provided in additional approved locations to facilitate emergency response in accordance with this code and CFC Section 505.1.3. Where access is by means of a private road and the building cannot be viewed from the public way or when determined by the fire code official, a monument, pole, or other approved illuminated sign or other approved means shall be used to identify the structure(s). Address identification shall be maintained. 7. An approved water supply capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to premises on which facilities, buildings or portions of buildings are 253 Page 20 hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction, in accordance with CFC Section 507, Appendices B & C. a. Fire-flow requirements for buildings or portions of buildings and facilities shall be determined by adopted CFC Appendix B. b. Fire hydrant systems shall comply with adopted CFC Section 507.5.1 through 507.5.8 and Appendix C. 8. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with CFC Section 503 and Appendix D. a. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction. The fire apparatus access road shall extend to within 200 feet of all portions of the facility and all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of the building as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. i. Traffic calming measures (bollards, speed bumps, humps, undulations, etc.) are not approved as a part of this review and require specific approval from the Fire Department. ii. Should a security gate be planned to serve the facility, the gate shall be equipped with a Knox Company key operated electric gate release switch. During a power failure, gate shall release for manual operation OR be equipped with standby power or connected to the building emergency panel. In addition to sending the request to exit signal to the gate operator, the magnetic detection loop (when activated) shall prohibit the gate from closing upon fire apparatus. b. Commercial and industrial developments with buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet or three stories in height or 62,000 square feet shall have not fewer than two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. a. The Fire Department has worked with the project to improve onsite access and has taken into consideration the possible use of the Bay Trail as a possible limited secondary point of emergency access. Due to the Bay Trail being privately owned by multiple owners it is unreasonable to require an emergency vehicle access easement to overlay the Bay Trail, however, due to the existing public access allowed across the Bay Trail the recent improvements to the trail to withstand the imposed loads of fire apparatus, the Bay Trail is being considered in mitigation of the required remote secondary access. b. Along with improved site access the project is required to improve existing public access along Marina Blvd. to reduce emergency response delays. i. Existing speed humps between Oyster Point Blvd. and the entire project site shall be removed. c. Due to significantly reduced site access the base fire flow for this project shall not be reduced by more than 25% for the installation of required automatic fire sprinklers. c. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided in accordance with CFC D105. For purposes of this requirement, the highest roof 254 Page 21 surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. One or more of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located not less than 15 feet and not greater than 30 feet from the building and shall be positioned parallel to one entire long side of the building or as approved by the fire code official. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located over the aerial fire apparatus access road or between the aerial fire apparatus road and the building. There shall be no architectural features, projections or obstructions that would limit the articulation of the aerial apparatus. d. Required Fire Department access roads shall be signed “No Parking – Fire Lane” per current Fire Department standards and California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 22500. e. A Fire Department key box shall be provided on the front of each structure for access to fire protection equipment within the building. 9. The provisions of the adopted CFC shall specify where fire protection and life safety systems are required and shall apply to the design, installation, inspection, operation, testing, and maintenance of all fire protection systems. a. Approved automatic fire sprinkler systems in new buildings and structures shall be provided in the locations described in adopted CFC Sections 903.2.1 through 903.2.20. Approved automatic fire sprinkler systems in existing buildings and structures shall be provided in locations described in adopted CFC Section 903.6. i. Structure will be required to be protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system. 1. If required Fire Department Connection (FDC) for the sprinkler and/or standpipe systems shall be located on the street side of the structure or facing approved fire apparatus access roadway fully visible and recognizable from the street, and within 100 feet an approved fire hydrant. b. Structure will be required to install a standpipe system in the building. i. Not less than one standpipe shall be provided for use during construction. Such standpipes shall be installed prior to construction exceeding 40 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access. Such standpipes shall be provided with fire department hose connections at floor-level locations adjacent to stairways as construction progresses, such standpipes shall be extended to within one floor of the highest point of construction having secured decking or flooring. 10. The following are a list, but not limited to, of deferred plan submittal items that are required by the Fire Department - additional items may be called out based on subsequent permit reviews: a. Private underground fire main & hydrants b. Standpipe system c. Fire sprinkler system d. Fire pump e. Fire alarm/ Emergency voice alarm communication system f. Emergency responder radio system (to be determined) 255 Page 22 g. Smoke control system h. Fire command center i. Energy storage system (to be determined) j. Solar photovoltaic power system (to be determined) k. Compressed gasses (to be determined) l. Gates and barricades across fire apparatus access roads For any questions, please contact Ian Hardage, Battalion Chief Fire Marshal South San Francisco Fire Department (650) 829-6645. ENGINEERING DIVISION Permits 1. At the time of each permit submittal, the Applicant shall submit a deposit for each of the following permit reviews and processing: a. Building Permit plan check and civil review. Provide an engineer’s estimate or opinion of probable cost of on-site improvements for deposit amount calculation. b. Hauling/Grading plan check and permit processing. Provide Cubic Yards for deposit amount calculation. c. Public Improvement plan check and permit processing. Provide an engineer’s estimate or opinion of probable cost of ROW improvements for deposit amount calculation. 2. A Grading Permit is required for grading over 50 cubic yards and if 50 cubic yards or more of soil is exported and/or imported. The Applicant shall pay all permit and inspection fees, as well as any deposits and/or bonds required to obtain said permits. The Grading Permit requires several documents to be submitted for the City’s review and approval. The Grading Permit Application, Checklist and Requirements may be found on the City website at http://www.ssf.net/departments/public-works/engineering-division. 3. A Hauling Permit shall be required for excavations and off-haul or on-haul, per Engineering requirements; should hauling of earth occur prior to grading. Otherwise, hauling conditions would be included with the grading permit. Hauling Permit may be found on the City website at: http://www.ssf.net/departments/public-works/engineering-division. 4. The Applicant shall submit a copy of their General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit Notice of Intent and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), where required by State or Federal regulations, to the Engineering Division for our information. These documents shall be submitted prior to receiving a grading or building permit for the subject project. 5. The City of South San Francisco is mandated by the State of California to divert sixty-five percent (65%) of all solid waste from landfills either by reusing or recycling. To help meet this goal, a city ordinance requires completion of a Waste Management Plan (“WMP”) for covered building projects identifying how at least sixty-five percent (65%) of non-inert project waste materials and one hundred percent (100%) of inert materials (“65/100”) will be diverted from the landfill through recycling and salvage. The Contractor shall submit a WMP application and fee payment prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. 256 Page 23 6. A Public Improvement Permit is required for any work proposed within the public right-of- way. The Applicant shall pay all permit, plan check, and inspection fees, as well as, any deposits and/or bonds required to obtain said permits. 7. Prior to the issuance of any permits for construction, the Applicant shall submit written evidence from the County and/or State Regulators with jurisdiction over environmental matters at the project site, indicating that the improvement plans for the development comply with all Regulatory requirements for a hotel development on a closed municipal landfill. In addition, all improvement plans shall comply with the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (“Water Board”) approved Postclosure Monitoring and Maintenance Plan, Former Oyster Point Landfill, Oyster Point Properties – Phase I and II Development, 379 Oyster Point Boulevard, South San Francisco, California, dated September 8, 2017, by Langan Engineering and Environmental Services, including all updates and revisions, collectively referred to hereinafter as the “PCMMP”, as applicable to 367 Marina Boulevard. The PCCMP is available for review on the Water Board’s Geotracker website at: https://documents.geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/esi/uploads/geo_report/1974087655/L1000 9323371.PDF. To the extent that the project requires the abandonment or relocation of any existing groundwater monitoring wells on the project site, the Applicant shall confirm that such wells have been properly abandoned and/or relocated with the approval of the lead regulatory agency with jurisdiction over environmental matters at the project site (“Lead Agency”). Plan Submittal 8. The Applicant shall submit detailed plans printed to PDF and combined into a single electronic file, with each being stamped and digitally signed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of California, along with three printed copies. Incorporated within the construction plans shall be applicable franchise utility installation plans, stamped and signed and prepared by the proper authority. Plans shall include the following sheets; Cover, Separate Note Sheet, Existing Conditions, Demolition Plan, Grading Plan, Horizontal Plan, Striping and Signage Plan, Utility Plan(s), Detail Sheet(s), Erosion Control Plan, and Landscape Plans, (grading, storm drain, erosion control, and landscape plans are for reference only and shall not be reviewed during this submittal). 9. Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall obtain a grading permit with the Engineering Division and shall submit an application, all documentation, fees, deposits, bonds and all necessary paperwork needed for the grading permit. The Applicant shall submit a grading plan that clearly states the amount of cut and fill required to grade the project. The Grading Plans shall include the following plans: Cover, Notes, Existing Conditions, Grading Plans, Storm Drain Plans, Stormwater Control Plan, and Erosion Control Plan. 10. Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall obtain a Public Improvement Permit for all proposed work within the City ROW and shall submit an application, all documentation, fees, deposits, bonds and all necessary paperwork needed for the Public Improvement Permit. The Public Improvement Plans shall include only the scope of work within the City ROW (with reference to the on-site plans) consisting of the following plans: 257 Page 24 Civil Plans, Landscape Plans, and Joint Trench Plans. 11. Along with the building permit and grading permit submittals, Applicant shall submit separate Right-of-Way (ROW) improvement plans for the Public Improvement Permit Application. An engineer’s cost estimate for the scope of work shown on the approved ROW improvement plans is required to determine the performance and payment bond amount. The submittal of the bonds is required prior to the execution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. 12. The Applicant shall submit a copy of their General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit Notice of Intent and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), where required by State or Federal regulations, to the Engineering Division for our information. These documents shall be submitted prior to receiving a grading or building permit for the subject project. 13. All improvements shall be designed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the Engineering Division. 14. The Engineering Division reserves the right to include additional conditions during review of the building permit, grading permit, or public improvement permit. Mapping and Agreements 15. The Applicant shall make an Irrevocable offer of Dedication to the City for a 20-foot wide Emergency Vehicle Access Easement west of the project site to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall. 16. The Applicant shall dedicate to the City an 18-foot wide Public Access Easement for the sidewalk and landscape areas that are not located within the public right-of-way on the Marina Boulevard frontage of the project site. 17. The Applicant shall dedicate to the City, an Emergency Vehicle Access Easement through the project site to the widths as approved by the City Engineer and Fire Marshall. 18. The Applicant shall dedicate to the City, a Sanitary Sewer and Utilities Easement as needed to accommodate underground utilities for the relocation of the existing Sanitary Sewer Pump Station and Marina Harbor electrical switch gear cabinet. The exact alignment and limits of said Easement shall be determined by the City as part of its design effort for the relocation of said facilities. Said Easement shall be dedicated to the City in advance of the City constructing the sewer utilities on the Hotel property 19. Unless otherwise noted, all applicable easements shall be recorded with the San Mateo County Clerk Recorder’s Office prior to approval of a TCO for the Hotel. 20. Applicant shall pay for all Engineering Division deposits and fees required for any mapping application prior to review. 21. Prior to the approval of any Permits, the Applicant shall enter into an Improvement Agreement and Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement with the City. These agreements shall be approved by City Council prior to execution. a. The Improvement Agreement shall require the Applicant to ensure the faithful performance of the design, construction, installation and inspection of all public improvements as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division at no cost to the City and shall be secured by good and sufficient payment, performance, and one (1) year warranty bonds or cash deposit adequate to cover all of the costs, 258 Page 25 inspections and administrative expenses of completing such improvements in the event of a default. The value of the bonds or cash deposit shall include 110% of the cost of construction based on prevailing wage rates. The value of the warranty bond or cash deposit shall be equivalent to 10% of the value of the performance security. b. The Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement shall require the Applicant to maintain any street furniture that serves the property, and all stormwater treatment measures and the landscaping/street trees in the Public right-of-way within the project frontage at no cost to the City. The Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement shall be recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder and may be transferred to the property owner. 22. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall provide the City with (a) an Operation and Maintenance Plan approved by the Lead Agency (the “O&M Plan”) that among other things, defines Applicant’s obligations with respect to the implementation, operation, maintenance and reporting of all existing environmental land use and engineering controls associated with the project, including inspections, maintenance and reporting for the (i) landfill cap, (ii) methane and VOC collection, monitoring and alarm systems, and (iii) groundwater, surface water and leachate monitoring systems at the project site; and (b) and a fully executed Operation and Maintenance Agreement (“O&M Agreement”) between the Applicant and City to assure full and continuous implementation of the O&M Plan. Right-of-Way 23. Prior to building permit issuance and prior to any work within the City Right-of-Way, the Applicant shall obtain a Public Improvement Permit from the Engineering Division. All new public improvements required to accommodate the development shall be installed at no cost to the City and shall be approved by the City Engineer and constructed to City Standards. All new public improvements shall be completed prior to Final Occupancy of the project or prior any Temporary Occupancy as approved by the City Engineer. 24. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall enter into an Improvement Agreement and Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement with the City. These agreements shall be approved by City Council prior to execution. The Improvement Agreement shall require the Applicant to install all proposed public improvements as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division at no cost to the City. The Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement shall require the Applicant to maintain any street furniture that serves the property and all landscape within the project frontage at no cost to the City. The Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement shall be recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder and may be transferred to the property owner. 25. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit a video survey of the adjacent streets (perimeter of proposed property location) to determine the pre-construction condition of the streets at no cost to the City. The Applicant will be responsible to ensure that the condition of the streets and striping is in at least existing condition or better after construction is completed. 259 Page 26 26. At the existing street bulb on Marina Boulevard, the Applicant shall remove the existing retaining wall and guardrail, perform grading, and widen the street to match the typical street width along the project frontage. 27. The Applicant shall install curb and gutter along the widened segment of Marina Boulevard. 28. The Applicant shall install a sidewalk, and landscaping along the project frontage on Marina Boulevard and easterly of the project frontage to the existing curb ramp at the exiting north/south Bay Trail. The sidewalk width shall match the existing sidewalk on Marina Boulevard. 29. The Applicant shall reconstruct the existing curb ramp on the west side of the proposed main Hotel entry to integrate it into the new driveway entrance to meet ADA standards. 30. The Applicant shall construct three new City Standard driveway entrances with sidewalks to the project parking area. 31. The Applicant shall install a Rapid Rectangular Flashing Beacon at the three existing uncontrolled crosswalks on Marina Boulevard. 32. Per BCDC Permit No. 2017.007.00 and any amendments thereafter, the Applicant shall be responsible for constructing any improvements and satisfying any obligations imposed by BCDC on the Project and coordinating with BCDC to amend the Permit to reflect those improvements. 33. Internal driveways shall be a minimum of 15’ wide for one-way travel and 25’ wide of for areas subject to two-way travel. One-way travel lanes within the site shall be clearly posted and marked appropriately. 34. Applicant shall ensure that any pavement markings impacted during construction are restored and upgraded to meet current City standards current to the time of Encroachment Permit approval. 35. The Applicant shall install one streetlight on the project frontage on Marina Boulevard in the vicinity of the widened segment of the street. The new streetlight shall connect to the existing City street light system. The light pole and fixture shall match the existing streetlights on Marina Boulevard. 36. Upon completion of construction and landscape work at the site, the Applicant shall clean, repair or reconstruct, at their expense, as required to conform to City Standards, all public improvements including driveways, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street pavements along the street frontages of the subdivision to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Damage to adjacent property caused by the Applicant, or their contractors or subcontractors, shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the affected property owner and the City Engineer, at no cost to the City or to the property owner. 37. The Applicant shall ensure the proposed tree planters and planting locations do not interfere with underground utilities or the joint trench. The Applicant will be required to install root barrier measures at the back of sidewalk to prevent the sidewalk from uplift. 38. The Applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all street trees landscaped irrigation systems installed within the Public right-of-way. 260 Page 27 39. Prior to Public Improvement Permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide an engineer’s estimate for all work performed with in the public right-of-way and submit a bond equal to 110% of the estimate. 40. Prior to the issuance of the Encroachment Permit, the Applicant shall submit Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plans for proposed work that will obstruct the existing pedestrian walkways. 41. No foundation or retaining wall support shall extend into the City Right-of-Way without express approval from the Engineering Department. Applicant shall design any bioretention area or flow-through planters adjacent to the property line such that the facility and all foundations do not encroach within the City Right-of-Way or into an adjacent parcel. 42. The project shall not include any permanent structural supports (retaining walls, tiebacks, etc.) within the ROW. City Engineer approval is required for any temporary structural supports within the ROW. Any temporary structural supports shall be removed after construction. 43. Any work within the public sidewalk and/or obstructing pedestrian routes shall require pedestrian routing plans along with traffic control plans. Temporary lane or sidewalk closures shall be approved by the City Engineer and by the Construction Coordination Committee (if within the CCC influence area). For any work affecting the sidewalks or pedestrian routes greater than 2 days in duration, the adjacent parking lane or adjacent travel lane shall be closed and temporary vehicle barriers placed to provide a protected pedestrian corridor. Temporary ramps shall be constructed to connect the pedestrian route from the sidewalk to the street if no ramp or driveway is available to serve that purpose. 44. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall coordinate with Scavenger and submit all garbage related plans. Stormwater 45. Landfill settlement may have impacted the capacity of the existing City public storm drain system on Marina Boulevard in the vicinity of the Hotel site. The Applicant shall perform a topographic survey of the existing public storm drain system in the vicinity of the Hotel Site to the outfall at the Bay, to verify if the grades of the stormdrain system have settled compared to the designed grades. If settlement has occurred, the Applicant shall prepare a storm drain hydraulic study to verify the loss of capacity of the City stormdrain system. The study shall incorporate all existing flows including flows from the developed site and any flows from City infrastructure that currently discharge to the existing public storm drain. The study shall evaluate the capacity the storm drain during a 25-year design storm. Initial time of concentration shall be 10 minutes. Precipitation shall be based on NOAA data for the site. The study shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 46. The Applicant shall design and construct, all on-site storm drainage improvements connecting to the City storm drain system including on-site stormwater storage if necessary to account for any loss in capacity of the existing City storm drain system, as recommended by the Applicant’s approved storm drainage and hydraulic study at no cost to the city. 47. On-site and off-site storm drainage conveyance systems shall be designed to accommodate the 10-year, 10-minute design storm. Precipitation used for the hydraulic analysis shall be based on NOAA Atlas 14 data for the project site. Storm duration shall be equal to the time of concentration with an initial minimum of 10 minutes. 261 Page 28 48. Hydraulic Grade lines shall not be less than 1 foot from the ground surface. 49. Runoff Coefficients used for hydraulic calculations shall be as follows: a. Pervious/landscape surfaces—0.35 b. Impervious surfaces —0.95 50. Drainage runoff shall not be allowed to flow across lot lines or across hotel property boundaries onto adjacent private property without an appropriate recorded easement being provided for this purpose. 51. All on-site drainage facilities required by the City Engineer to accommodate the runoff from the hotel property shall be provided by the Applicant at no cost to the City. 52. All building downspouts shall be connected to rigid pipe roof leaders which shall discharge into an approved drainage device or facility that meets the C3 stormwater treatment requirements of Municipal Regional Permit. 53. All storm drainage runoff shall be discharged into a pipe system or concrete gutter. Runoff shall not be surface drained into surrounding private property or public streets. 54. Existing on-site drains that are not adequately sized to accommodate run-off from the fully developed property and upstream drainage basin shall be improved as required by the Applicant’s civil engineering consultant’s plans and specifications as approved by the City Engineer. These on-site improvements shall be installed at no cost to the City. 55. The on-site storm drainage system shall not be dedicated to the City for ownership or maintenance. The storm drainage system and any storm water pollutions control devices within the hotel property shall be owned, repaired, and maintained by the property owner. Sanitary Sewer 56. The Applicant shall cooperate with the City for the design and construction of the City’s Capital Improvement Program project to relocate the existing sanitary sewer lift station from the Hotel project site to a nearby location off-site on City property. The relocation of the lift station may require underground utilities and access onto the Hotel project site and if necessary, the Applicant shall be responsible to grant an easement to the City for said purpose. 57. The Applicant shall install the new sewer lateral to City Standards including a cleanout within the project site and a new wye connection at the main. Lateral sizes of 8-inch or larger require a manhole connection at the City sewer main. The new sewer lateral shall connect to a new sewer manhole to be incorporated into the new lift station design by the City. 58. The Applicant shall install a limit of one building sanitary sewer lateral per lot unless specifically waived by an Improvement per the requirements of the City’s Municipal Code section 14.14.040 (b). 59. Sanitary Sewer plan shall show all existing and proposed utilities. Be sure to provide minimum horizontal and vertical clearances for all existing and proposed utilities. Also include all existing and proposed manhole, catch basin and pipe invert elevations. 60. All utility crossings shall be potholed, verified and shown on the plans prior to the building permit submittal. 61. The on-site sanitary sewer system/plumbing shall be designed and installed in accordance with 262 Page 29 the Uniform Plumbing Code, as amended and adopted by the City, and in accordance with the requirements of the South San Francisco Building Division. 62. Each on-site sanitary sewer manhole and cleanout shall be accessible to maintenance personnel and equipment via pathway or driveways as appropriate. Each maintenance structure shall be surrounded by a level pad of sufficient size to provide a safe work area. 63. The on-site sanitary sewer system shall not be dedicated to the City for maintenance. The sanitary sewer facilities within the hotel property shall be repaired and maintained by the property owner. Utilities 64. All electrical and communication lines serving the property, shall be placed underground within the property being developed and to the nearest underground utility vault. Pull boxes, junction structures, vaults, valves, and similar devices shall not be installed within pedestrian walkway areas. 65. The Applicant shall install fire hydrants at the locations specified by the Fire Marshal. Installation shall be in accordance with City Standards as administered by the Fire Marshall. 66. The Applicant shall coordinate with the California Water Service for all water-related issues. All water mains and private water services shall be installed to the standards of the California Water Service and the City. On-site Improvements 67. Internal driveways shall be a minimum of 15’ wide for one-way travel and 25’ wide of for areas subject to two-way travel. One-way travel lanes within the site shall be clearly posted and marked appropriately. 68. The Applicant shall install detectable warnings at driveways and pedestrian pathways per the ADA and City Standards where there is vehicular crossing along a pedestrian path of travel. 69. The Applicant shall install pedestrian pathways per ADA standards for pedestrians to access the San Francisco Bay Trail east of the project site. 70. Staging or storing of trash bins shall not be permitted on Public right-of-way or on-site within the Emergency Vehicle Access Easement. 71. The Applicant shall submit a construction access plan that clearly identifies all areas of proposed access during the proposed development. 72. Prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division, the Applicant shall require their Civil Engineer to inspect the finished grading surrounding the building and to provide the City a memo that confirms the site conditions conform to the approved site plan and that there is positive drainage away from the exterior of the building. The Applicant shall make any modifications to the grading, drainage, or other improvements required by the project engineer to conform to intent of his plans. 73. All areas are to be landscaped and irrigated and shall meet the requirements of the City’s Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). Submit landscape, drainage and grading plans for review and approval by the Engineering Division. 263 Page 30 74. Any monument signs to be installed for the project shall be located completely on private property and shall not encroach into the City’s right-of-way. The Developer shall ensure that placement of the monument signs do not obstruct clear lines of sight for vehicles entering or exiting the site. Grading 75. The recommendations contained within the geotechnical report shall be included in the Site Grading and Drainage Plan. The Site Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared by the developer’s civil engineer and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. 76. During grading operations, the entire project site shall be adequately sprinkled with water to prevent dust or sprayed with an effect dust palliative to prevent dust from being blown into the air and carried onto adjacent private and public property. Dust control shall be for seven days a week and 24 hours a day. Should any problems arise from dust, the developer shall hire an environmental inspector at his/her expense to ensure compliance with the grading permit. 77. Haul roads within the City of South San Francisco shall be cleaned daily, or more often, as required by the City Engineer, of all dirt and debris spilled or tracked onto City streets or private driveways. 78. The Applicant shall submit a winterization plan for all undeveloped areas within the site to control silt and stormwater runoff from entering adjacent public or private property. This plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to September 1 of each year. The approved plan shall be implemented prior to November 1 of each year. 79. Prior to placing any foundation concrete, the Applicant shall hire a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer authorized to practice land surveying to certify that the new foundation forms conform with all setbacks from confirmed property lines as shown on the Plans. A letter certifying the foundation forms shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for approval. 80. The applicant is required by ordinance to provide for public safety and the protection of public and private property in the vicinity of the land to be graded from the impacts of the proposed grading work. 81. All hauling and grading operations are restricted to between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. for residential areas and 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. for industrial/commercial areas, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. 82. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no grading in excess of 200 cubic yards shall be accomplished between November 1 and May 1 of each year. Additional Site Mitigations 83. A methane mitigation and monitoring system (MMS) shall be designed, installed and operated in building structures in general accordance with methane mitigation standards used by Los Angeles County Public Works' Gas Hazard Mitigation Policy and Standards (https://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/swims/onlineservices/methane-mitigation-standards.aspx) and/or an equivalent standard. The MMS design should be shown on the improvement plans for the project and be signed by a California Professional Engineer. 264 Page 31 84. Trench dams shall be designed and installed in all utility trenches to prevent migration of methane and/or VOCs into buildings. The trench dam design should be shown on the improvement plans for the project and be signed by a California Professional Engineer. 85. Utilities should be designed to accommodate potential future ground settlement. 86. Methane/VOC monitoring wells shall be installed outside and separate from buildings and shown on project improvement plans. 87. A geotextile fabric (as a marker) should be installed on top of the erosion resistant layer so the top of the landfill cap can be identified during future construction activities. 88. Landscaping and irrigation systems should be installed at elevations above the landfill cap (i.e., the erosion resistant layer) to protect integrity of the landfill cap. 89. Site grades shall be designed (and maintained) to prevent surface water accumulation and infiltration through the landfill cap. 90. Developer shall implement an automatic dig alert notification to City Public Works for the property. 91. Developer shall prepare and implement a Soil Management Plan for construction activities that potentially disturb the landfill cap. 92. Developer shall record a land use covenant prohibiting construction/subsurface work unless City is notified in advance. If the work potentially disturbs the landfill cap, the work shall be performed pursuant to a City and regulatory agency-approved Soil Management Plan. 93. Developer shall require hotel personnel to notify City if geotextile “marker” fabric is encountered or visible. 94. Developer shall prepare and implement an Emergency Response Plan (ERP), which outlines procedures to be followed in the event of an emergency (such as fires, explosions, earthquakes, floods, vandalism, surface drainage problems, waste releases, etc.), The plan shall be prepared with input and approval from Fire, police, public works, Water Board and any other regulatory agency requesting review. The ERP shall be reviewed and updated annually. The annual updates shall be submitted to the City for review and approval. Engineering Impact Fees 95. The Applicant shall pay the following Fees prior to receiving a Building Permit for the subject project: a) The Oyster Point Interchange Impact Fee per the formula established by Resolution 71-84. 265 Page 32 b) The East of 101 Sewer Impact Fee per the formula established by Resolution 97- 2002. 5230164.1 266 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 COVER SHEET Owner AREA MAP OYSTER POINT HOTEL PRECISE PLAN REVISIONS - 28 SEPTEMBER 2022 AREA MAP VICINITY MAP PROJECT SITE PROJECT SITE PROJECT ADDRESS: APN LOT SIZE: PROJECT FAR: PROJECT HEIGHT OCCUPANCY: TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: ZONING: PRESENT AND / OR PREVIOUS USE: ADJACENT USES: APPLICABLE CODES: Oyster Point, South San Francisco 015-011-350 (Revised 6/22/2022) 204,742 SF (4.70 ACRES) 1.3 165 ft ASL Top of Parapet , 146 ft Top of Parapet from grade, 119 ft to last floor served R-1, S-1, A-2, A-3, B 1A (PODIUM), 1B (LIGHT GAUGE FRAMING FOR TOWER) OYSTER POINT SPECIFIC PLAN EMPTY LAND PARCEL OYSTER POINT MARINA, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO FERRY TERMINAL, NEW COMMERCIAL OFFICE, DEDICATED OPEN SPACE, EXISTING COMMERCIAL & EXISTING PARKING 2019 EDITION OF TITLE 24, THE CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING: 2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) 2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE - TITLE 24 2019 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL AND PLUMBING CODE 2019 CALIFORNIA GREEN BUILDING STANDARDS CODES PROJECT DESCRIPTION FFiirrmm AAddddrreessss CCoonnttaacctt EEmmaaiill OOwwnneerr Ensemble 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Randy McPherson rmcpherson@ensemble.net AArrcchhiitteecctt SB Architects 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 Keith Houchin khouchin@sb-architects.com CCooddee ((EEggrreessss//AADDAA)) Jensen Hughes 376 E Warm Springs Rd #210 Las Vegas, Nevada 89119 Hossein Davoodi hossein.davoodi@jensenhughes.com LLiigghhttiinngg DDeessiiggnn First Circle 3187 Airway Avenue, BLDG C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Matt Levesque matt@firstcircledesign.com SSttrruuccttuurraall CKC Structural Engineers 10500 NE 8th St #800 Bellevue, WA 98004 Joe Ferzli joef@ckcps.com CCiivviill//UUttiilliittiieess BKF Engineers 150 California Street, Suite 650 San Francisco, CA 94111 Eric Girod egirod@bkf.com GGeeootteecchh Langan Engineering 135 Main Street, 15th floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Justin Ray jray@langan.com IInntteerriioorr DDeessiiggnn HBA 334 Brannan St., 3rd Floor San Francisco, CA 94107 Miguel Baeza Miguel.Baeza@HBA.com LLaannddssccaappee IMA 5281 California Ave, Ste 350 Irvine, CA 92617 Robert Moffat rmoffat@imadesign.com MMEEPP PAE 48 Golden Gate Ave San Francisco, CA 94102 Alan Shepherd alan.shepherd@pae-engineers.com PROJECT DIRECTORY 00.00 SITE COVERAGE BUILDING FOOTPRINT = 42, 617 SQFT (21%) FUTURE EXPANSION = 12, 278 SQFT (6%) OTHERS = 149, 847 SQFT (73%) TOTAL SITE AREA = 204, 742 SQFT (100%) 267 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 PROJECT SHEET INDEX SHEET NO.SHEET NAME 00.00 COVER SHEET 00.01 PROJECT SHEET INDEX 00.02 PROJECT DESCRIPTION SHEET NO.SHEET NAME C0.00 COVER SHEET - CIVIL DRAWINGS C1.00 RECORD BOUNDARY C2.00 PROPOSED SITE PLAN C3.00 CONCEPTUAL GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C4.00 CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN C5.00 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN SHEET NO.SHEET NAME L0.00 COVER SHEET - LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS L1.00 OVERALL SITE PLAN L2.00 PROGRAM ZONES L3.01 ENTRY DRIVE, ARRIVAL COURTYARD & VALET PARKING L3.02 PRE-FUNCTION & SPA TERRACES L3.03 BAY GARDEN, FITNESS / GAME LAWN, FIRE PIT & BAR TERRACE L3.04 MULTIPURPOSE EVENT COURT & RESTAURANT TERRACE L4.01 SECTIONS A & B L4.02 SECTIONS C & D L5.00 HARDSCAPE PLAN L6.00 WALL, FENCE & GATE PLAN L7.00 TREE PLAN & SCHEDULE L7.01 TREE PLANTING PALETTE L8.00 SHRUB PLAN L8.01 SHRUB SCHEDULE L8.02 SHRUB PLANTING PALETTE L9.00 IRRIGATION PLAN & CALCULATIONS L10.00 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER INTRODUCTION ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS LIGHTING DRAWINGS CIVIL DRAWINGS LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS 00.01 SHEET NO.SHEET NAME A0.00 COVER SHEET - ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS A0.01 DEVELOPMENT AREA SUMMARY A0.02 AIRPORT PROXIMITY DIAGRAM A1.00 SITE PLAN A1.01 SITE PLAN - ENLARGED PLAN A1.02 SITE PLAN - CIRCULATION PLAN A1.03 SITE PLAN - BCDC CONNECTION A1.04 SITE PLAN - FIRE LANE DIAGRAM A1.05 SITE PLAN - PARKING STUDY A1.06 SITE PLAN - SITE COVERAGE PLAN A1.07 SITE PLAN - SHADOW STUDY A2.00 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 01 A2.01 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 02 A2.02 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 03 A2.03 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 04 A2.04 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 05 A2.05 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 06 A2.06 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 07 A2.07 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 08 A2.08 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 09 A2.09 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 10 A2.10 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 11 A2.11 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 12 A2.12 BUILDING PLAN - ROOF PLAN A3.00 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 1 A3.01 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 2 A3.02 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 3 A3.03 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 4 A4.00 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 1 A4.01 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 2 A4.02 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 3 A4.03 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 4 A4.04 MATERIAL BOARD & REFERENCE IMAGERY A5.00 RENDERING - AERIAL VIEW A5.01 RENDERING - BAY TRAIL VIEW A5.02 RENDERING - ARRIVAL VIEW A5.03 RENDERING - BAY TRAIL (RESTAURANT) VIEW A5.04 RENDERING - ROOFTOP BAR VIEW SHEET NO.SHEET NAME LT0.00 COVER SHEET - LIGHTING DRAWINGS LT1.01 SITE LIGHTING MASSING STUDY LT1.02 SITE LIGHTING LAYOUT LT1.03 SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLAN LT2.01 BUILDING ELEVATIONS LT2.02 BUILDING ELEVATIONS LT3.01 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS LT3.02 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS LT3.03 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS LT4.01 LIGHTING RENDERING LT4.02 LIGHTING RENDERING 268 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Owner 1. INTRODUCTION: Ensemble Real Estate Investments (“Applicant”) proposes to develop a full-service hotel on the peninsula of Oyster Point designated within South San Francisco specific plan (formal address yet to be assigned). The applicant seeks approval of the Precise Plan (“Entitlements”) by the end of 2022 with the intent of submitting to the building department for permit approval by the end of 2023. The project intends to service the Oyster Point developments currently under construction or planned to be built by Kilroy Reality while also providing public amenities to the broader community East of the 101 area. 2. SETTING: The property is approximately 204,742 square foot parcel (4.70 acres; APN: 015-011-350) that sits on the peninsula of the Oyster Point specific plan and is dedicated for a future hotel development. The site is flanked by the existing marina to the north and the San Francisco bay to the south. The Bay Trail extends along the southern edge of the site and connects around the end of the peninsula. To the west of the site a dedicated public open space is planned while to the east are existing commercial buildings and parking lots with access to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The site is a “Brownfield site” that has been regraded and capped by Kilroy Reality, the master developer of the specific plan, and is currently sitting vacant, ready for development. 3. PROPOSED PROJECT a. Project Features The proposed project would consist of a maximum 350 hotel rooms, restaurant, lobby lounge, event ballroom, meeting rooms, fitness facilities, roof top bar and the associated back of house facilities to service the amenities. Hotel amenities, specifically the restaurant, lounge, and roof top bar, are intended to be available to the public and provide views both north and south across the San Francisco Bay. Access to the existing north-south bay trail path is considered across the site landscape as well as connections back to the primary pedestrian paths along Marina Blvd. In total the gross building area is approximately 261,000 square feet in habitable area, with the potential to expand in a future phase with an additional 14,200 square feet of function and meeting space and will provide a total of 249 parking spaces of which all of them are intended to be fully valet operated. A screened loading dock and yard with space allocated for two dedicated service trucks is provided adjacent to the back of house facilities with access through the central parking lot. The building will be classified high-rise at 12 habitable floors with the last floor served sitting at 119ft above grade. Additional height is considered at the top of the building for mechanical equipment screening and elevator overruns that will put the overall height of the building at approximately 165 feet ASL and 146 ft above finish grade. b. Requested Approvals The applicant plans to submit the Precise Plan application by April 29, 2022 and is seeking approval of the project’s Precise Plan by the end of calendar year 2022. Pending approval of the precise plan, the Applicant intends to submit the project plans for construction permit by the end of 2023. Additional review will be submitted to the FAA for confirmation of building height with respect to the airport approach corridors. c. Public Benefits The Project aims to fill the market need, providing a 4-star hotel to service the growing business developments within the Oyster Point specific plan and surrounding areas. The project will provide additional function and meeting space while being positioned at an International Audience for business travelers. The project amenities will provide an anchor for the community with its food and beverage offerings as well as gathering opportunities within the lounge and bar spaces. The hotel can further support the potential for a future ferry terminal proposed by the South San Francisco City within the marina to the north of the hotel while providing employment and career opportunities for the South San Francisco workforce. PROJECT DESCRIPTION SITE PHOTOS 00.02 269 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 OYSTER POINT PRECISE PLAN SUBMITTAL CIVIL DRAWINGS SHEET NO.SHEET NAME C0.00 COVER SHEET - CIVIL DRAWINGS C1.00 RECORD BOUNDARY C2.00 PROPOSED SITE PLAN C3.00 CONCEPTUAL GRADING & DRAINAGE PLAN C4.00 CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN C5.00 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN INDEX OF DRAWINGS C0.00 COVER SHEET - CIVIL DRAWINGS 270 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 LEGEND: NOTES: AERIAL BENCHMARK: BASIS OF BEARINGS: BOUNDARY: ABBREVIATIONS: 1730 N. FIRST STREETSUITE 600SAN JOSE, CA 95112(408) 467-9100www.bkf.com C1.0 0 RECORD BOUNDARY 04/29/2022 271 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 1730 N. FIRST STREETSUITE 600SAN JOSE, CA 95112(408) 467-9100www.bkf.com PROPOSED SITE PLAN C2.0 0 04/29/2022 272 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 1730 N. FIRST STREETSUITE 600SAN JOSE, CA 95112(408) 467-9100www.bkf.com CONCEPTUAL GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN C3.0 0 04/29/2022 Civil Package 273 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 1730 N. FIRST STREETSUITE 600SAN JOSE, CA 95112(408) 467-9100www.bkf.com CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN C4.0 0 04/29/2022 274 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 T7 T1 T5 T3 T6 T8 T9 T10 T2 T4 1730 N. FIRST STREETSUITE 600SAN JOSE, CA 95112(408) 467-9100www.bkf.com C 5.0 0 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN STORMWATER CONTROL MEASURE SUMMARY AREASDRAINAGE DRAINAGE AREASIZE (SF)PERVIOUSSURFACE (SF) TOTALIMPERVIOUSSURFACE (SF) PROPOSED TREATMENTCONTROLS TREATMENT AREA (4% RULE)REQUIRED (SF) SURFACEAREA (SF)PONDINGDEPTH (FT) STORMWATERCONTROLMEASURE A-1 11,912 2,200 9712 BIORETENTION 388 390 0.5 T1 A-2 5,815 2,815 3000 BIORETENTION 120 120 0.5 T2 A-2.1 8,367 907 7460 BIORETENTION 298 300 0.5 T2 A-2.2 5,140 695 4445 BIORETENTION 178 179 0.5 T2 A-3 28,400 6,275 22125 BIORETENTION 885 885 0.5 T3 A-4 22,840 9,015 13825 BIORETENTION 553 555 0.5 T4 A-4.1 11,925 1,670 10255 BIORETENTION 410 410 0.5 T4 A-5 18,490 6,390 12100 BIORETENTION 484 485 0.5 T5 A-5.1 17,453 1,053 16400 BIORETENTION 656 656 0.5 T5 A-6 4,707 957 3750 BIORETENTION 150 150 0.5 T6 A-7 27,250 0 27250 BIORETENTION 1090 1090 0.5 T7 A-8 7,626 2,751 4875 BIORETENTION 195 195 0.5 T8 A-9 16,695 3,945 12750 BIORETENTION 510 510 0.5 T9 A-10 7,630 3,630 4000 BIORETENTION 160 160 0.5 T10 R-1 10,492 2,937 7,555 DEDICATION (EXISTINGOFFSITE TREATMENT)---- TOTAL 204,742 45,240 159,502 04/29/2022 275 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 INDEX OF DRAWINGS COVER SHEET - OYSTER POINT PRECISE PLAN SUBMITTAL LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS L0.00 LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS SHEET NO.SHEET NAME L0.00 COVER SHEET - LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS L1.00 OVERALL SITE PLAN L2.00 PROGRAM ZONES L3.01 ENTRY DRIVE, ARRIVAL COURTYARD & VALET PARKING L3.02 PRE-FUNCTION & SPA TERRACES L3.03 BAY GARDEN, FITNESS / GAME LAWN, FIRE PIT & BAR TERRACE L3.04 MULTIPURPOSE EVENT COURT & RESTAURANT TERRACE L4.01 SECTIONS A & B L4.02 SECTIONS C & D L5.00 HARDSCAPE PLAN L6.00 WALL, FENCE & GATE PLAN L7.00 TREE PLAN & SCHEDULE L7.01 TREE PLANTING PALETTE L8.00 SHRUB PLAN L8.01 SHRUB SCHEDULE L8.02 SHRUB PLANTING PALETTE L9.00 IRRIGATION PLAN & CALCULATIONS L10.00 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER 276 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 277 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 278 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 279 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 280 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 281 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 282 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 283 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 284 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 285 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 286 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 287 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 288 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 289 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 290 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 291 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 292 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 293 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 OYSTER POINT PRECISE PLAN SUBMITTAL ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS INDEX OF DRAWINGS A0.00 COVER SHEET - ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS SHEET NO.SHEET NAME A0.00 COVER SHEET - ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS A0.01 DEVELOPMENT AREA SUMMARY A0.02 AIRPORT PROXIMITY DIAGRAM A1.00 SITE PLAN A1.01 SITE PLAN - ENLARGED PLAN A1.02 SITE PLAN - CIRCULATION PLAN A1.03 SITE PLAN - BCDC CONNECTION A1.04 SITE PLAN - FIRE LANE DIAGRAM A1.05 SITE PLAN - PARKING STUDY A1.06 SITE PLAN - SITE COVERAGE PLAN A1.07 SITE PLAN - SHADOW STUDY A2.00 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 01 A2.01 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 02 A2.02 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 03 A2.03 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 04 A2.04 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 05 A2.05 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 06 A2.06 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 07 A2.07 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 08 A2.08 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 09 A2.09 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 10 A2.10 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 11 A2.11 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 12 A2.12 BUILDING PLAN - ROOF PLAN A3.00 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 1 A3.01 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 2 A3.02 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 3 A3.03 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 4 A4.00 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 1 A4.01 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 2 A4.02 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 3 A4.03 BUILDING ELEVATION - ELEVATION 4 A4.04 MATERIAL BOARD & REFERENCE IMAGERY A5.00 RENDERING - AERIAL VIEW A5.01 RENDERING - BAY TRAIL VIEW A5.02 RENDERING - ARRIVAL VIEW A5.03 RENDERING - BAY TRAIL (RESTAURANT) VIEW A5.04 RENDERING - ROOFTOP BAR VIEW 294 As Designed # Keys MODS Total MODS Gross Area (SQFT) Total Gross Area (SQFT) Typical King 108 1 108 391 42,192 King Plus, Double Queen 194 1 194 415 80,441 Suites 44 1.5 66 635 27,927 Presidential 1 2.5 2.5 1155 1,155 347 371 151,715 Suite Mix*12.97% # Category # Units Mods/Unit Total Mods Unit Size (ft²) INT Areas (ft²) EXT Areas (ft²) OYSTER POINT HOTEL South San Francisco, California SB ARCHITECTS PROGRAM 1.00 HOTEL ROOMS Areas based on Module Areas based on Module 1.10 Guest Rooms 1.11 Standard Room 302 1.0 302 0 0 1.15 Suites 44 1.5 66 0 0 1.16 Presidential Suite 1 2.5 3 0 0 Sub-Total 347 371 151,715 0 1.40 Circulation & Support ( plus Shafts ) 1.41 Circulation & Support 28,580 0 1.42 Shafts Area 530 0 Sub-Total 29,110 0 TOTAL COMBINED TOTAL TOTAL Total Accomodation Area 151,715 0 Total Circulation & Support BOH 29,110 0 Total Guestroom Tower Area 347 371 180,825 0 3.00 HOTEL FRONT OF HOUSE 3.10 Function & Meeting Space Seats 3.11 Ballroom 398 5,138 0 3.12 Ballroom Prefunction 2,002 0 3.13 Meeting Rooms 280 4,519 0 3.14 Meeting Room Prefunction 1,591 0 3.15 Function WC 715 0 3.16 Misc. FOH Space (Valet, Securitty)308 0 Sub-Total 678 14,273 0 3.30 Hotel Food & Beverage # Seats Seat Factor (m2) 3.31 All Day Dining (3-Meal)250 2.4 5,572 3,582 3.32 Rooftop Bar 50 2.2 2,703 3,421 3.34 Lobby Lounge 30 2.2 2,024 1,255 Sub-Total 10,299 8,258 3.40 Spa, Health Club & Fitness 3.41 Fitness 1,702 0 3.42 Support Space 446 0 Sub-Total 2,148 0 3.50 Hotel Lobby & Reception 3.50 Main Lobby 3,922 0 3.51 Reception 308 0 3.52 Front Office 277 0 3.53 Valet 375 0 3.54 Bag Storage 258 0 3.55 Public WC 1,162 0 Sub-Total 6,302 0 3.70 Circulation & Support ( plus Shafts ) 3.71 Circulation & Support 4,954 0 3.72 Shafts (FOH & BOH)130 0 Sub-Total 5,084 0 TOTAL COMBINED TOTAL TOTAL Total Front of House Area 33,022 8,258 Total Front of House Circulation 5,084 0 Total Front of House Area 38,106 8,258 # Category # Units Mods/Unit Total Mods Unit Size (ft²) INT Areas (ft²) EXT Areas (ft²) OYSTER POINT HOTEL South San Francisco, California SB ARCHITECTS PROGRAM 4.00 HOTEL BACK OF HOUSE 4.10 Administrive Area 4.11 Admin Offices 1903 0 4.12 Human Resources 573 0 4.13 Sales & Marketing 0 0 4.14 Accounting & IT 0 0 4.15 B&B Staff 0 0 Sub-Total 2,476 0 4.20 Hotel Services 4.21 Security 157 0 4.22 Room Division 0 0 4.23 Purchasing & Receiving 243 0 4.24 Engineering 805 0 4.25 Kitchen Staff 0 0 4.26 General Storage 5439 0 4.27 A/V Room 238 0 4.28 Employee Facilies 1956 0 4.29 House Keeping 1638 0 4.30 Laundry 0 0 4.40 Trash 309 0 4.50 Loading Dock 0 2770 Sub-Total 10,785 2,770 4.40 Hotel F&B Support # Seats Seat Factor (m2) 4.41 Main Kitchen 250 1 3,355 0 4.42 Rooftop Bar Pantry 50 0.6 917 0 4.43 Lobby Lounge Pantry 30 0.6 0 0 4.44 Food Prep 1,776 0 Sub-Total 6,048 0 4.50 Circulation & Support 4.51 Circulation & Support 17,850 0 Sub-Total 17,850 0 TOTAL COMBINED Total Back of House Area 19,309 2,770 Total Back of House Circulation 17,850 0 Total Back of House Area 37,159 2,770 5.00 MEP Plant 5.10 Hotel MEP Plant 4864 0 5.10 Exterior MEP 0 2862 Sub-Total 4,864 2,862 Total Back of House Area 4,864 2,862 # Category # Units Mods/Unit Total Mods Unit Size (ft²) INT Areas (ft²) EXT Areas (ft²) OYSTER POINT HOTEL South San Francisco, California SB ARCHITECTS PROGRAM Area Brief Total Summary INT Areas (ft²) EXT Areas (ft²) #Keys # Mods Total Area Total Area Hotel Guestroom Areas 347 371 151,715 0 Circulation & Support 28,580 0 Shafts 530 0 1.00 TOTAL ROOM AREA 347 371 180,825 0 Seats Total Area Total Area Ballroom & Conference Facilities 678 14,273 0 Hotel Front of House 18,749 8,258 Circulation & Support 4,954 0 Shafts 130 0 3.00 TOTAL FRONT OF HOUSE AREA 38,106 8,258 Total Area Total Area Hotel Back of House 19309 2770 Circulation & Support 17850 0 4.00 TOTAL BACK OF HOUSE AREA 37,159 2,770 Total Area Total Area MEP Services 4864 2862 5.00 TOTAL MEP PLANT 4,864 2,862 GRAND TOTAL 260,954 13,890 GRAND TOTAL EXCLUDING SHAFTS 260,294 13,890 # Category # Units Mods/Unit Total    Mods Unit Size (ft²) INT Areas (ft²) EXT Areas (ft²) OYSTER POINT HOTEL South San Francisco, California SB ARCHITECTS PROGRAM FUTURE EXPANSION PHASE INT Areas (ft²) EXT Areas (ft²) Ballroom 8,000 0 Prefunction 2,600 0 BOH Support 2,400 0 TOTAL ROOM AREA 13,000 0 GRAND TOTAL (INCLUDING FUTURE EXPANSION) 273,954 13,890 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 DEVELOPMENT AREA SUMMARY A0.01 DESIGN PROGRAM SUMMARY SUITE MIX TOTAL NO. OF PARKING SPACES STANDARD SPACES = 170 VALET SPACES = 33 TANDEM SPACES = 29 TOTAL = 232 SPACES 295 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Follow Up Exhibit 06/27/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 AIRPORT PROXIMITY DIAGRAM A0.023 MILE RADIUSPROJECT SITE SFO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT 296 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A1.00 SITE PLAN 0 30 60 120 FT 1”=60’ FUTURE EXPANSION HOTEL LOBBY EVENT GARDEN SERVICE YARD PARKING PRIMARY EVA ACCESS SECONDARY EVA ACCESS PROPOSED FUTURE FERRY TERMINAL RESTAURANT TERRACE LEGEND FIRE ACCESS LANE 297 18’-0”18’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0”SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A1.01 77’-5” 284’-0” 163’-10” 364’-6” 100’-7” 62’-2” 18’-0”41’-0”115’-1”29’-6”41’-10”47’-2”118’-6”156’-1”19’-11” 402’-6” 41’-1” FUTURE EXPANSION SITE PLAN - ENLARGED PLAN HOTEL LOBBY EVENT GARDEN SERVICE YARD PARKING RESTAURANT TERRACE 298 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A1.02 LEGEND PEDESTRIAN - CIRCULATION VEHICLE - PUBLIC CIRCULATION VEHICLE - SERVICE CIRCULATION ADA PA T H O F T R A V E L SERVICE C I R C U L A T I O N PUBLIC C I R C U L A T I O N VALET CI R C U L A T I O N VALET ACCESS VALET RETURN VALET PARKING SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SITE PLAN - CIRCULATION PLAN 299 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A1.03 SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD SITE PLAN - BCDC CONNECTION BCDC TRAIL (To be rebuilt in place by Kilroy) PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION (Ped. link within hotel site connects 1. Marina Blvd 2. Hotel Entrance 3. BCDC Trail) MARINA BLVD HOTEL ENTRANCE BCDC TRAIL No.Description Date 01 Follow Up Exhibit 09/20/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 300 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A1.04 LEGEND FIRE ACCESS LANE SITE PLAN - FIRE LANE DIAGRAM No.Description Date 01 Follow Up Exhibit 09/28/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 FIRE TRU C K S T A N D D O W N Z O N E AERIAL A C C E S S Z O N E VALET PARKING SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D 20’-0” 26’-0”26’-0”20’-0” 20’-0”20’-0”20’-0”20’-0”175’-0” 175’-0” 301 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ LEGEND STANDARD PARKING SPACES VALET PARKING SPACES TANDEM PARKING SPACES BICYCLE PARKING A1.05 15 10 13 13 12 14 11 6 6 13 7 7 7 9 4 6 5 5 14 14 10 10 6 15 37 TOTAL S P A C E S 33 TOT A L S P A C E S 32 TOTAL SPACES 26 TOTAL S P A C E S 11 TOTAL S P A C E S 6 TOTAL SPACES 23 EMPLO Y E E S P A C E S 64 TOTAL S P A C E S NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES STANDARD SPACES = 170 VALET SPACES = 33 TANDEM SPACES = 29 TOTAL = 232 SPACES 10 BICYC L E PARKING S P A C E S (EMPLOY E E S ) 25 BICYC L E PARKING S P A C E S (PUBLIC)SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SITE PLAN - PARKING STUDY 302 18’-0”18’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0”SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A1.06 18’-0” SITE PLAN - SITE COVERAGE PLAN BUILDING FOOTPRINT PORTE COCHERE HOTEL PARKING SERVICE YARD SERVICE ENTRY HOTEL ENTRY GARDEN LEGEND BUILDING FOOTPRINT FUTURE EXPANSION FOOTPRINT OTHERS SITE COVERAGE BUILDING FOOTPRINT = 42, 617 SQFT (21%) FUTURE EXPANSION = 12, 278 SQFT (6%) OTHERS = 149, 847 SQFT (73%) TOTAL SITE AREA = 204, 742 SQFT (100%) FUTURE EXPANSION 303 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A1.07 8 AM 12 PM 4 PM MAR / SEP EQUINOX(SPRING / FALL)JUN SOLSTICE(SUMMER)DEC SOLSTICE(WINTER)SITE PLAN - SHADOW STUDY 304 18’-0”18’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0” OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.00 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 01 BALLROOM 5,135 SQFT ENGR. RM 805 SQFT ELEC. RM 1,070 SQFT STORE MTG RM 920 SQFTMTG RM 980 SQFT MTG RM 1,615 SQFT BOARD RM 1,000 SQFT SPA WC & SHOWERS 445 SQFT HSKP 1,635 SQFT MEP 560 SQFT FIRE WATER TANK 700 SQFT FIRE PUMP RM 610 SQFT HR 575 SQFT WC 325 SQFT WC 385 SQFT STOR. 755 SQFT STAFF FACILITIES 1,955 SQFT BOH BOH MEP ELEC. COAT CHK SEC. P&R AV FOOD PREP LOADING DOCK EMPLOYEE PARKING BIKE PARKING MEP MEP MEP +19.2 FT +19 FT +19.2 FT +19.2 FT +21 FT +21 FT +22 FT +23 FT +21 FT +21 FT TRASH STOR. & STAGING 1,005 SQFT LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL305 18’-0”18’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0”10’-0” OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.01 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 02 MAIN LOBBY 3,920 SQFT EVENT LAWN 2,000 SQFT FIRE CMD VALET BIKE PARKING OFFICE 280 SQFT BOH 720 SQFT ADMIN OFFICES 1,900 SQFT STOR. ELEC. WC WC RECEP. PORTE COCHE VALET PARKING MAIN KITCHEN 3,355 SQFT PDR 645 SQFT RESTAURANT 4,930 SQFT BAR & LOUNGE 2,025 SQFT RESTAURANT TERRACE EXTERIOR TERRACE LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public LOADING DOCKBELOW EMPLOYEE PARKINGBELOW SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL306 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.02 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 03 FITNESS 1,700 SQFT JR SUITE TYPE D LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 307 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.03 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 04 JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 308 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.04 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 05 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 309 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.05 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 06 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 310 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.06 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 07 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 311 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.07 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 08 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 312 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.08 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 09 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 313 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.09 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 10 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAILJR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C 314 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.10 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 11 LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE E JR SUITE TYPE A JR SUITE TYPE B JR SUITE TYPE C JR SUITE TYPE D BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL315 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.11 BUILDING PLAN - LEVEL 12 PRESIDENTIAL SUITE 1,155 SQFT ROOF TERRACE WC 580 SQFT PANTRY 915 SQFT ROOFTOP BAR 2,700 SQFT LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public JR SUITE TYPE A BOH BOH ELEC. SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL316 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 0 15 30 60 FT 1”=30’ A2.12 BUILDING PLAN - ROOF PLAN ROOFTOP MEP 8,910 SQFT ROOFTOP MEP 5,285 SQFT LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public SF BAY T R AI L MARINA BLVD MARINA B L V D SF BAY TRAIL SF BAY TRAILSF BAY TRAIL317 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A3.00 KEY PLAN BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 1 PRESIDENTIALSUITE BALLROOMPREFUNC. FOODPREP RESTAURANT ELECRM MAIN KITCHEN 1 1OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET BALLROOM LEVEL LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0”PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINESETBACK LINESETBACK LINEEXIT STAIR LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public MEP 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ SITE FILL LAND FILL CLAY CAP 7’-0”5’-3”318 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A3.01 KEY PLAN BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 2 2 2 JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE JR SUITE RESTAURANTBAR & LOUNGE WINEROOMWC LIFT CORE LIFT CORE BALLROOMMEETING RMMEETING RMMEETING RMHR JR SUITE ROOFTOP BAR JR SUITE PORTE COCHERE OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET BALLROOM LEVEL LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0” MEP PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINELEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ SITE FILL LAND FILL CLAY CAP 5’-3”6’-0”1’-0”7’-0”319 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A3.02 KEY PLAN 3 3 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 3OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET BALLROOM LEVEL LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0”PROPERTY LINESETBACK LINEMAIN LOBBY WC BOARD RMHRBOHSITE FILL LAND FILL CLAY CAP LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’7’-0”6’-6”4’-6” 320 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 A3.03 KEY PLAN 4 4 BUILDING SECTION - SECTION 4OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET BALLROOM LEVEL LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0”PROPERTY LINELOBBY BOH BOHBOH SITE FILL LAND FILL CLAY CAP LEGEND Front of House Function Food & Beverage Spa & Fitness Restrooms Back of House Guestroom - Typical Room Guestroom - Suite Room Circulation - Public Circulation - Service Vertical Circulation - Public Vertical Circulation - Public 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ KITCHEN BOH SERVICE DOCK STAIR PUBLICLIFT SERVICELIFT No.Description Date 01 Follow Up Exhibit 06/27/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/20227’-6”5’-0”4’-0”6’-0”8’-0”2’-0” 2’-0” 321 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A4.00 KEY PLAN BUILDING ELEVATION - NORTH ELEVATION LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET LEVEL 01 - BALLROOM LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0” MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 GL-2 ST-1 ST-2 GL-1 Potential Project Signage (Final location TBC) RESTAURANT / BALLROOM KITCHEN / BOH ADMIN / STAFF FACILITIES PORTE COCHE LEGEND CP-1 Cement Plaster - Grey, Smooth Finish GL-1 Vision Glass, Light Blue Tinted GL-2 Vision Glass, Dark Blue Tinted GL-3 Curtain Wall, Light Blue Tinted MT-1 Metal - Light Beige Rainscreen Panel MT-2 Metal - Champagne Tone Metal Trim MT-3 Metal - Steel Blue Rainscreen Panel ST-1 Stone Cladding - Split Face Limestone ST-2 Gabion Wall 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ N 322 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A4.01 KEY PLAN BUILDING ELEVATION - MT-1 MT-2 MT-3 GL-2 ST-1 GL-3 MT-2ST-2 GL-1 Potential Project Signage (Final location TBC) Potential Project Signage (Final location TBC) Rooftop MEP Screening SOUTH ELEVATION OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET BALLROOM LEVEL LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0” RESTAURANT / BALLROOMBAR & LOUNGE / MEETING RMSLOBBYEVENT LAWN LEGEND CP-1 Cement Plaster - Grey, Smooth Finish GL-1 Vision Glass, Light Blue Tinted GL-2 Vision Glass, Dark Blue Tinted GL-3 Curtain Wall, Light Blue Tinted MT-1 Metal - Light Beige Rainscreen Panel MT-2 Metal - Champagne Tone Metal Trim MT-3 Metal - Steel Blue Rainscreen Panel ST-1 Stone Cladding - Split Face Limestone ST-2 Gabion Wall 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ S TOP OF PHASE 2 +56’-6” PHASE 2 EXPANSION FUNCTION & EVENT VOLUME PH2 HT = 22’-6”PHASE 2 EXPANSION FUNCTION & EVENT VOLUME LEVEL 2 +34’-0” TOP OF PHASE 2 +56’-6” LEVEL 1 +21’-0”PH2 HT = 22’-6”PHASE 2 EXPANSION APPROX. MASSING VOLUME 323 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A4.02 KEY PLAN BUILDING SECTION - EAST ELEVATION LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”PODIUM HEIGHT = 30’-6”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET LEVEL 01 - BALLROOM LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0” E MT-1 MT-2MT-3 GL-2 ST-1 GL-3MT-2 ST-2 GL-1 Rooftop MEP Screening RESTAURANT / BALLROOM PARKINGGARDEN LEGEND CP-1 Cement Plaster - Grey, Smooth Finish GL-1 Vision Glass, Light Blue Tinted GL-2 Vision Glass, Dark Blue Tinted GL-3 Curtain Wall, Light Blue Tinted MT-1 Metal - Light Beige Rainscreen Panel MT-2 Metal - Champagne Tone Metal Trim MT-3 Metal - Steel Blue Rainscreen Panel ST-1 Stone Cladding - Split Face Limestone ST-2 Gabion Wall A4.00 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ 324 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A4.03 KEY PLAN BUILDING SECTION - WEST ELEVATION LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5 LEVEL 6 OVERALL HEIGHT = 146’-0”119’-0”27’-0”TOP OF PARAPET LAST FLOOR SERVED LEVEL 9 LEVEL 7 LEVEL 10 LEVEL 8 LEVEL 11 LEVEL 12 ROOF LEVEL TOP OF MEP PARAPET LEVEL 01 - BALLROOM LEVEL 01 +34’-0” +49’-6” +59’-2” +68’-10” +78’-6” +107-6” +88’-2” +117’-2” +97’-10” +126’-10” +138’-0” +150’-0” +165’-0” +19’-3” +21’-0” W MT-1 MT-1MT-2 GL-1 MT-3CP-1 GL-2 ST-1MT-2ST-2 GL-3 Potential Project Signage (Final location TBC) Rooftop MEP Screening LOBBY RESTAURANT / BALLROOMPORTE COCHE LEGEND CP-1 Cement Plaster - Grey, Smooth Finish GL-1 Vision Glass, Light Blue Tinted GL-2 Vision Glass, Dark Blue Tinted GL-3 Curtain Wall, Light Blue Tinted MT-1 Metal - Light Beige Rainscreen Panel MT-2 Metal - Champagne Tone Metal Trim MT-3 Metal - Steel Blue Rainscreen Panel ST-1 Stone Cladding - Split Face Limestone ST-2 Gabion Wall 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ 325 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A4.04 MT-3: METAL - STEEL BLUE RAINSCREEN PANEL GL-2: VISION GLASS, DARK BLUE TINTED MT-1: METAL - LIGHT BEIGE RAINSCREEN PANEL GL-1: VISION GLASS, LIGHT BLUE TINTED GL-3: CURTAIN WALL, LIGHT BLUE TINTED MT-2: METAL - CHAMPAGNE TONE METAL TRIM ST-1: STONE CLADDING - SPLITFACE LIMESTONE CP-1: CEMENT PLASTER - GREY, SMOOTH FINISH ST-2: GABION WALL MATERIAL BOARD & REFERENCE IMAGERY MATERIAL BOARD REFERENCE IMAGERY MT-2 MT-1 GL-1 GL-2 GL-3 ST-1 ST-2 MT-3 BUILDING ELEVATION SOUTH 326 KEY PLAN OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A5.00 RENDERING - AERIAL VIEW 327 KEY PLAN OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 RENDERING - BAY TRAIL VIEW A5.01 V 328 KEY PLAN OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A5.02 RENDERING - ARRIVAL VIEW V 329 KEY PLAN OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A5.03 RENDERING - BAY TRAIL (RESTAURANT) VIEW V 330 KEY PLAN V OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 A5.04 RENDERING - ROOFTOP BAR VIEW LATE AFTERNOON EVENING 331 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 OYSTER POINT PRECISE PLAN SUBMITTAL LIGHTING DRAWINGS INDEX OF DRAWINGS LT0.00 COVER SHEET - LIGHTING DRAWINGS SHEET NO.SHEET NAME LT0.00 COVER SHEET - LIGHTING DRAWINGS LT1.01 SITE LIGHTING MASSING STUDY LT1.02 SITE LIGHTING LAYOUT LT1.03 SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLAN LT2.01 BUILDING ELEVATIONS LT2.02 BUILDING ELEVATIONS LT3.01 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS LT3.02 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS LT3.03 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS LT4.01 LIGHTING RENDERING LT4.02 LIGHTING RENDERING 332 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Primary Entry and Pedestrian Walkway - 15' Overall Height Pole2 Event Lawn - Festoon Lighting5 Event Terrace (Event Power Only)4 Arrival and Gateway Landscape Lighting3 Garden and Event Lawn Landscape Lighting6 Art Garden & Lounge Areas8 Yoga Lawn & Fire Pit9 Spa Terrace10 Walking Trails - Tree Mounted Lighting71Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Pole OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and cB. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projectinC. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible.D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environE. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, nonF. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be loc THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQU 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics3. Fully Shielded Fixtures 4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - Roadway - 18' O Building - VertiBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear Lobby/Prefunction Terrace11 Stairs & Ramp - Steplights12 Bay Garden Lounge Areas Fitness Lawn and Fire Pit Bay Garden and Event Court Landscape Lighting Event Court - Festoon Lighting Entry Drive & Arrival Landscape Lighting Entries & Pedestrian Link Walkway Restaurant & Bar Terrace 107 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Guest Arrival Lounge Lobby / Prefunction Terrace 2 3 4 14 13 1 8 7 569 10 11 12 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property.B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible. C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible.D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment. E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow.F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height. G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics 2. Full Cut-off Optics3. Fully Shielded Fixtures 4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT1.01 SITE LIGHTING MASSING STUDY No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 333 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 XP1 XP2 XP2 XP2 (2)XN1 (2)XN1(2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (6)XN2 (2)XN2 XZ2 (11)XS1 (5)XN3 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (4)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (4)XL1 (4)XL1 (4)XL1 (8)XN1 (4)XN1 (4)XL1 (2)XN1 (4)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XN1 (30)XS1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XL1 (2)XL1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XP2 (3)XN1 (3)XN1 (3)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (4)XN1 (2)XZ2 (15)XB1 (16)XS1 XP2 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 (2)XZ2 XZ2 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (4)XL1 (4)XL1 (2)XL1 (2)XL1 (4)XL1 (3)XL1 (17)XB1 XZ4 XZ4 (2)XN1 (2)XN1(2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 XZ4 XZ3 (15)XZ4 XZ4 XZ4 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 (2)XN1 XP3 XP3 XZ4 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (4)XL1 (2)XL1 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 Tree Accent / Pathway Floodlight: Luminaire Description: In Grade Mounted Uplight | Tree Mounted Floodlight Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2700K LED/809 Lumens | 2700K LED/819 Lumens Mounting Height: Walkway Floodlight at 10'-0" XL1XN1 Parking Areas Light Pole: Luminaire Description: 18'-0" Overall Height Parking Area Pole Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2700K LED/6000 Lumens Overall Height: 18'-0" XP1 Entry and Pedestrian Walkway Light Pole: Luminaire Description: 15'-0" Overall Height Entry and Pedestrian Pole Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2700K LED/4000 Lumens Overall Height: 15'-0" XP2 Linear Accent Ilummination: Luminaire Description: Linear Accent with Optics Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2700K LED/450 Lumens per Foot XZ2 Festoon System / Integral Shade Light: Luminaire Description: Festoon System | Canopy Shade Indirect Light Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2200K LED/173 Lumens per Foot | 2700K / 500 Lumens XZ4 Downlight Illumination: Luminaire Description: Surface Mounted Downlight Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2700K LED/2403 Lumens XB1 (2)XN1 CANOPYLIGHTSTYP. ATTABLES CANOPYLIGHTS (2)XL1 (2)XN1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 Step Light - Stair and Rampway Illumination: Luminaire Description: Recess Mounted Step Light Kelvin Temp: 2700K LED/171 Lumens Backyard Path Illumination:XP3 Luminaire Description: Low Profile Pathway Light - Overall Height: 1'-10" Kelvin Temp/Lumens: 2700K LED/1361 Lumens XZ3 XZ3 (6)XN2XZ3 (8)XN2 XZ2 XS1 XP2 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1(2)XN1 XP2 XP2 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XP2 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 (8)XN1 (2)XZ2 XZ2 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 XZ2 (3)XN1 (3)XL1 (15)XB1 (15)XB1 (3)XN1 (3)XN1 (3)XN1 (3)XL1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XL1 CANOPYLIGHTS (5)XN3 XP3 (4)XL1 (4)XL1 XZ3 XZ3 (2)XN1 (4)XL1 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 XP3 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XZ3 (6)XN2 (3)XL1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XP3 (2)XL1 (2)XL1 (4)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 XZ2 (2)XN2 XZ4 XZ4 XZ4 XZ4 (15)XZ4 CANOPYLIGHTSTYP. ATTABLES (11)XS1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 XZ3 (6)XN2 XZ2 (2)XZ2 XP1 XP1 XP1 (4)XN1(8)XN2 (2)XN1 (3)XL1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 XP1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 (2)XN1 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XP2 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 XWM1 (3)XL1 (3)XL1 (16)XS1(30)XS1 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property. B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible.C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible. D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment.E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow. F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics 3. Fully Shielded Fixtures4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines 5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT1.02 SITE LIGHTING LAYOUT No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 334 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property. B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible.C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible. D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment.E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow. F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics 3. Fully Shielded Fixtures4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines 5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT1.03 SITE LIGHTING PHOTOMETRIC PLAN No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 No.Description Date 01 Follow Up Exhibit 06/21/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 335 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property. B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible.C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible. D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment.E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow. F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics 3. Fully Shielded Fixtures4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines 5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum NORTH ELEVATION2 WEST ELEVATION1 XZ1TYP. XK1TYP. XZ1 XS1TYP. XB1TYP. XK1TYP. XZ1 XK1TYP. XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XK1TYP. XZ1TYP. XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XB1TYP. Elevation Illumination Niche Lighting:XK1 Horizontal Linear Lighting:XZ1 Vertical Linear Lighting:XZ1 Downlighting:XB1 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT2.01 BUILDING ELEVATIONS No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 336 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property. B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible.C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible. D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment.E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow. F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics 3. Fully Shielded Fixtures4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines 5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum SOUTH ELEVATION2 EAST ELEVATION1 XZ1 XK1TYP. XB1TYP. XK1TYP. XS1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XS1TYP. XK1TYP. XB1TYP. XZ1 XK1TYP. XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1TYP. XK1TYP. XK1TYP. XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 XZ1 Elevation Illumination Niche Lighting:XK1 Horizontal Linear Lighting:XZ1 Vertical Linear Lighting:XZ1 Downlighting:XB1 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT2.02 BUILDING ELEVATIONS No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 337 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 XP1 (CONT.)XP1 XB1 XK1 XL1 XN1 XN2 XN3 18'-0" 18'-0"18'-0"18'-0" OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT3.01 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 338 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 XZ2 (CONT.) XP3 XS1 XWM1 XZ1 (CONT.)XZ2XZ1 XP2 ROUND TAPERED POLE (15'-0" OVERALL HEIGHT) OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT3.02 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 339 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 XZ4 XZ4 (CONT.)XZ3 OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT3.03 LIGHTING FIXTURE CUTSHEETS No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 340 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property. B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible.C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible. D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment.E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow. F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics 3. Fully Shielded Fixtures4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines 5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT4.01 LIGHTING RENDERING No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 341 first circle design inc. 3187 Airway Avenue, Bldg C Costa Mesa, CA 92626 OYSTER POINT HOTEL EXTERIOR LIGHTING GUIDELINES A. Lighting fixture lamp sources used for illuminating Outdoor gathering areas and circulation associated with the property shall be shielded, directed downward, and not visible from off the property. B. Upward aimed facade lighting shall be fully shielded, fully confined from projecting into the sky by eaves, roofs, or overhangs, and mounted as flush to a wall as possible.C. Light Pollution shall be reduced to the greatest extent possible. D. Lighting shall be provided for safety, security, and an attractive nighttime environment.E. Wherever possible, the applicant shall use cover material composed of dark, non-reflective material demonstrated to minimize the contribution to sky glow. F. Light fixtures along pedestrian walkways are to be 2'-4' in height.G. Weatherproof 120V power receptacles for Temporary Stage Lighting shall be located at the Event Lawn to support Hotel Operations requirements. THE DESIGN ADHERES TO GUIDELINES USING THE FOLLOWING TECHNIQUES: 1. Spill Control Optics2. Full Cut-off Optics 3. Fully Shielded Fixtures4. Fixtures located at a sufficient distance from Property Lines 5. Fixtures capable of Control via Time Clock, Photocell and Motion Sensor Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Hotel Parking - 18' Overall Height Single & Double Head Poles Roadway - 18' Overall Height Single Head Poles Building - Vertical Direct View LinearBuilding - Horizontal Direct View Linear LIGHT LEVEL CRITERIA Porte Cochere (drop off area): Pool Deck: Pedestrian Walkways: Egress Walkways: Interior Roadways: Interior Roadways (Fire Lane): Property Lines: 15' Beyond Property Lines: 10FC Average (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Average (3:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 0.25FC Minimum (2:1 ratio of Average to Minimum) 1FC Minimum 0.5FC Minimum (15:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 1FC Minimum (40:1 ratio of Maximum to Minimum) 0.2 FC Maximum 0.01 FC Maximum OYSTER POINT HOTEL | SB ARCHITECTS 0 8 16 32 FT 1/16”=1’ Owners Sheet Title Project No. 21950 ARCHITECTS 415 Jackson St, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 T 415/673-8990 F 415/274-2003 A California Corporation Oyster Point Hold Co LLC 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Ensemble Real Estate Investments 444 W. Ocean Blvd, Ste 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 No.Description Date 01 Entitlement Package 04/28/2022 02 Entitlement Package Update 06/21/2022 03 Entitlement Package Update 09/29/2022 LT4.02 LIGHTING RENDERING No.Description Date 01 Precise Plan Submittal 04/29/2022 02 Precise Plan Revisions 09/28/2022 04/29/2022 342 345 California Street | Suite 450 | San Francisco, CA 94104 | (415) 348-0300 | Fax (415) 773-1790 www.fehrandpeers.com Memorandum Date: October 19, 2022 To: Randy McPherson, Ensemble and Christy Usher, City of South San Francisco From: Daniel Jacobson, Fehr & Peers Subject: Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Demand Management Checklist SF22-1215 This memorandum provides a transportation demand management (TDM) checklist for the Oyster Point Hotel project (“Project”) consistent with Chapter 20.400 of the City’s Draft Zoning Amendment Ordinance. As a Tier 2 project, the Project is required to submit a TDM checklist of required and optional trip reduction measures that achieve a minimum threshold of 30 points. An annual self-certification form is required for the first 20 years after occupancy confirming the implementation of these measures. Summary of TDM Checklist The project would implement all required measures. Programmatic measures would include transit pass subsidies, participation in Commute.org programs, carpool/vanpool programs, and a dedicated TDM coordinator. Bicycle and pedestrian-oriented site access would focus on new connections to the Bay Trail and direct paths of access to Marina Boulevard and nearby transit facilities, as illustrated in the Project’s site plan. Bicycle storage, showers, and lockers would also be provided. As a hotel, employee work shifts would typically not revolve around a ‘9 to 5’ schedule, so Project commute behavior would be consistent with the City’s goals to reduce peak period travel. The project would implement two optional TDM measures. First, the project would fully subsidize transit passes for its employees, encouraging use of Caltrain, BART, SF Bay Ferry, and SamTrans services. Second, the project would utilize a shared parking approach to right-size parking supply for the hotel, restaurant, and special event uses. As described in the project’s Parking Management Plan, the shared parking approach would include strategies to manage vehicle trips associated with special events through offering trip planning assistance via the site’s TDM coordinator. 343 Oyster Point Hotel TDM Checlist October 3, 2022 Page 2 of 2 Completed TDM Checklist Tier 2 TDM Certification Checklist Type TDM Measure Eligible Points Project Points Required Measures (20 Points) 50% Transit Pass Subsidies and Pre-Tax Transit Benefits 7 7 Participation in Commute.org Programs 5 5 Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Parking 3 3 Bicycle Storage, Showers, and Lockers 2 2 Designated TDM Coordinator 1 1 Bicycle and Pedestrian-Oriented Site Access 1 1 Encourage Telecommuting & Flexible Work Schedules 1 1 Optional Measures Paid Parking or Parking Cash-Out 10 Enhanced Shuttle Commitment 10 Fully Subsidized Transit Passes 8 8 Affordable Housing Up to 6 Active Transportation Gap Closure Up to 5 Transit Capital Improvements Up to 5 On-Site Pedestrian-Oriented Amenities 3 Bikeshare Program Participation 3 Shared Parking Approach 2 2 Cash Incentives 2 On-Site Carshare 2 Active Transportation Subsidies 1 Bicycle Repair Station 1 Requirements Tier 2 Projects 30 30 1Participation in Kilroy’s commuter shuttle services as well as Commute.org’s shuttle services 344 018708.0001 4856-5538-2574.1 Oyster Point Hotel Parking Study Prepared for: Ensemble City of South San Francisco October 17, 2022 345 018708.0001 4856-5538-2574.1 2 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Description ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Parking Demand Analysis ............................................................................................................. 5 Shared Parking Method ............................................................................................................................................................. 5 Peak Parking Demand Method .............................................................................................................................................. 6 ITE Data .................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Local Data ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Parking Management Practices ................................................................................................... 9 Appendix ...................................................................................................................................... 10 Appendix A. Sample of Previous Parking Studies - Parking Count Results by Hotel .....................................10 Appendix B. Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Analysis ......................................................................................12 346 3 1. Introduction This report presents a Parking Management Plan as required per the City of South San Francisco Zoning Code for a proposed hotel at 367 Marina Boulevard, herein referred to as the “Project.” The City requires that hotels provide justification documenting expected demand based on project features as well as the project’s approach to management and monitoring of parking. This study analyzes potential parking demand based and proposes several practices to manage supply and demand should any imbalances occur. Based on the analysis presented in this report, the Project’s proposed parking supply is expected to adequately serve typical demand. Parking management strategies are presented to handle occasional surges in special event demand. Project Description The Project is located at 367 Marina Boulevard adjacent to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The Project consists of approximately 350 hotel rooms, 10,300 square feet of dining space, and 14,300 square feet of meeting rooms. An 8,000 square foot ballroom may be added in a future phase. The Project would provide 232 parking spaces, of which 33 would be valet spaces. The Project includes three driveways along Marina Boulevard and a public access trail along the eastern edge of the site connecting to the Bay Trail. Figure 1 depicts the proposed parking layout, while Figure 2 illustrates the site plan program. Figure 1: Parking Layout 347 4 Figure 2: Site Plan Program The Project’s parking supply takes into consideration several factors that influence market demand. The hotel would primarily be oriented toward airport- and business-travelers who are more likely to rely on Uber and Lyft than rental cars. Additionally, the hotel is located within walking distance of a number of office/R&D campuses and is served by Commute.org shuttles, planned SamTrans service, and WETA ferry service. The availability of these services coupled with the Project’s transportation demand management (TDM) program suggests lower parking demand than typical suburban hotel sites. While occasional surges in parking demand may occur during special events, the applicant anticipates that this may be addressed through management strategies tailored to each event. A parking management plan is provided in the final section of this report. 348 5 2. Parking Demand Analysis This report analyzes parking demand via two methods: the first method uses a shared parking method to analyze the Project’s proposed uses based on national data, which the second reviews national and local data focused on peak demand. Combined, these methods offer insights into how the Project’s parking demand may be affected by its mix of uses and location in South San Francisco. Shared Parking Method The ULI Shared Parking Manual provides estimates hotel parking demand based on the mix of uses specific to the Project. It estimates that hotel visitors generate a weekday demand of about 0.58 parking spaces per room, and hotel employees generate a demand of 0.15 parking spaces per room. Other features of the proposed Project can be reflected in the ULI calculations as well, including its restaurant and meeting room space. The ULI Shared Parking Manual also calculates how parking demand varies by time of day. For employees, parking demand would be at its peak between 8 AM and 3 PM; for guests, parking demand would peak at 11 PM. At other times of day, parking demand for each group would be below its respective peaks. The ULI Shared Parking method estimates the Project’s typical peak parking demand to be 234 spaces, which would fluctuate by time of day and day of the week (Figure 3). These calculations are provided in Appendix A. ULI does not take into account a project’s proximity to other land uses, use of transit or ride- hailing, or presence of a TDM program, so this estimate may be interpreted as slightly higher than what may be expected of the Project. Based on the ULI method, the Project’s proposed parking supply of 232 spaces appears roughly consistent with typical demand, although peak demand during the morning may reach 234 spaces. While the Project’s location and likelihood of higher rates of walking, biking, transit, carpooling, and ride-hailing should help reduce demand, the ULI method suggests that demand may occasionally meet or exceed the Project’s supply. If such periods occur, supply should be actively managed using practices noted in Section 3. 349 6 Figure 3. Estimated Peak Month Daily Parking Demand by Hour (Weekday) Source: ULI Shared Parking Manual 2020; Fehr & Peers, 2022. Peak Parking Demand Method National and local data sources are also available to estimate peak parking demand. While these sources lack specificity on how a mix of uses affects hotel parking demand, they provide further insights on how hotel parking demand may vary – which is especially true of recent local data that reflects changing transportation conditions in the Bay Area. ITE Data Data from the ITE Parking Generation Manual (5th Edition) provides industry-accepted standards for estimating parking demand for different land uses based on nationwide research and data collection. The ITE Parking Generation Manual projects that standard hotels with meeting rooms and restaurant spaces would generate a typical peak parking demand of 0.74 spaces per hotel room, which translates to about 259 spaces for the proposed Project. The peak parking demand rate represents the maximum number of parking spaces used at a single point in time. However, there could be several (or many) hours throughout the day in which parking demand would be lower than the maximum rate. 0 50 100 150 200 250 Parking StallsHour Peak Month Daily Parking Demand by Hour (Weekday) Hotel Parking Supply 350 7 ITE’s data has several limitations: it lacks specificity in documenting the location, timeframe, and mix of uses in which its data was sampled, and many of its datapoints are from suburban locations out of state that predated Uber and Lyft, with different mixes of amenities present. For these reasons, ITE tends to be a less reliable source for estimating hotel parking demand, and is presented in this report for informational purposes. Local Data Recent data collected in the Bay Area demonstrates how hotel parking demand is changing over time. Data was available from 47 days of observation across 19 different hotels. These studies were conducted between 2014 and 2019 in the cities of South San Francisco, Burlingame, San Mateo, Belmont, San Carlos, Redwood City, Palo Alto, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, and Cupertino. Hotels within the sample ranged in size from 56 to 187 guest rooms. See Appendix B for a complete list of hotels studied. In each study, parking counts were conducted across multiple hours in the day. In some cases, parking counts were available for the full day of data collection; for others, only the peak observed parking count was reported. For each hotel, the peak observed parking demand and the number of hotel rooms were then used to calculate the peak parking demand rate. Like the ITE data, these local studies share the limitations of insufficient documentation of the mix of hotel uses, and are typically smaller in scale than the proposed Project. On average, the peak observed parking demand rate was 0.50 spaces per hotel room. The highest observed peak demand rate was 0.84 spaces per hotel room, and the lowest was 0.28 spaces per room. Figure 4 below displays the relationship between hotel size (by number of rooms) and peak parking demand rate - there was no correlation between hotel size and parking demand rate. Figure 4. Peak Parking Demand Rate by Hotel Size Avg = 0.50 351 8 Of the 47 observations, 29 included information about how many hotel rooms were occupied during the period of data collection; 22 of those 29 hotels were more than 90 percent occupied. At hotels that were more than 90 percent occupied, the average peak parking demand was 0.52 spaces per hotel room (approximately equivalent to the average for all hotels in the sample). These results suggest that even when a hotel is fully occupied, a large proportion of guests do not travel by car or require a parking space. The rise of ride-hailing over the past decade has changed how people travel when visiting hotels. Figure 5 illustrates peak parking demand rates observed by year, illustrating an overall downtrend in hotel parking demand. Among the sites sampled, in 2015, the peak parking demand rate observed was 0.74 spaces per hotel room (similar to ITE’s estimate); in 2019, the peak parking demand rate at that hotel was 0.40 spaces per room. While these results do not reflect a true before/after study of parking demand at the same sites, they suggest that hotel parking demand declined over time as travelers replaced rental cars with ride- hailing trips. Based on the local data presented above, peak parking demand for the proposed Project is estimated to be roughly 140 to 182 spaces. To some extent, the proposed Project’s proximity to transit and other land uses within walking distance may further reduce parking demand compared to some other sites surveyed. However, this range may be an underestimate as it may not fully take into account the effects of larger events that are more typical of a larger hotel compared to the smaller hotels sampled. For these reasons, the Project’s 232 parking spaces appears adequate to meet demand, but there is some uncertainty in how this could vary with larger events. Figure 5. Peak Parking Demand Rate by Year 0.00 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020Occupied Parking SpacesPer Hotel Room352 9 3. Parking Management Practices This parking demand analysis illustrates that the Project’s parking supply of 232 spaces should generally be sufficient to accommodate demand under typical peak conditions. Local data suggests typical peak parking demand may be as low as 140 to 182 spaces, while the ULI Shared Parking model suggests parking demand may reach 234 spaces. There is uncertainty in both estimation methods associated with special events and the Project’s unique location, which may result in larger fluctuations in demand and a lower overall auto mode share than national and local data points. For these reasons, the Project should actively monitor parking conditions to prepare for typical surges in demand (occurring on a daily/weekly basis) and atypical surges demand (occurring due to large special events held at the hotel. When parking demand nears or exceeds supply, the hotel operator shall implement the following parking management practices: ▪ TDM Program: The hotel operator shall implement a TDM program as required by the City’s ordinance and documented in the Project’s TDM Checklist. ▪ Event Planning: Event sponsors shall work with the hotel operator to develop a parking management approach tailored to the scale and market of each event. ▪ Valet Parking: During typical daily/weekly peak periods and for special events, the hotel operator should expand valet parking areas or shift to an all-valet system while scaling up valet staffing as necessary. As a first step, employee parking should be fully valet at all times. ▪ Offsite Parking: For larger events, the hotel operator should establish partnerships with offsite parking facilities for valet and self-park use. Offsite parking is particularly useful for evening events and on days when adjacent lots are not full. ▪ Shuttle Charters or Ride-Hailing Promotions: If valet and offsite parking not able to fully accomodate larger events due to scheduling conflicts, the hotel operator should work with event sponsors to establish shuttle charters or ride-hailing credit promotions for event attendees. Shuttle charters may be more suitable to events oriented toward specific employers in the East of 101 Area, while ride-hailing credit promotions may be more suited toward events targeting a wider audience. ▪ Trip Planning Assistance: For all events, the hotel operator and event sponsor should provide trip planning assistance that prominently features wayfinding instructions for transit, active transportation, and ride-hailing access as well as instructions for valet or offsite parking. Non-auto modes of access should be promoted to reduce overall vehicle trips to the site, especially for events targeted to employers within the East of 101 Area. ▪ Event Monitoring: The hotel operator shall be responsible for monitoring parking demand for special events and adjust its management practices as needed. By implementing these parking management practices, the hotel operator should be able to minimize instances of parking shortages associated with special events and other typical surges in demand. 353 10 Appendix Appendix A. Sample of Previous Parking Studies - Parking Count Results by Hotel Hotel City Date Day of the Week Rooms Percent of Rooms Occupied Parking Stalls Stalls per Hotel Room Peak Parking Demand per Room Peak Parking Demand Per Occupied Room Peak Parking Occupancy AC Hotel South San Francisco 4/17/2019 Wednesday 187 99% 100 0.53 0.42 0.42 78% Hilton Garden Inn Burlingame 5/16/2017 Tuesday 132 94% 0.35 0.37 Hilton Garden Inn Burlingame 5/17/2017 Wednesday 132 96% 0.33 0.35 Hilton Garden Inn Burlingame 5/18/2017 Thursday 132 79% 0.37 0.47 Bay Landing San Mateo 5/16/2017 Tuesday 157 99% 0.41 0.41 Bay Landing San Mateo 5/17/2017 Wednesday 157 98% 0.43 0.44 Bay Landing San Mateo 5/18/2017 Thursday 157 99% 0.43 0.43 Hilton Garden Inn San Mateo 5/16/2017 Tuesday 157 99% 0.29 0.29 Hilton Garden Inn San Mateo 5/17/2017 Wednesday 157 98% 0.28 0.29 Hilton Garden Inn San Mateo 5/18/2017 Thursday 157 99% 0.31 0.32 Los Prados Hotel San Mateo 3/7/2017 Tuesday 116 92% 0.47 0.51 Los Prados Hotel San Mateo 3/8/2017 Wednesday 116 95% 0.45 0.47 Los Prados Hotel San Mateo 3/9/2017 Thursday 116 91% 0.50 0.55 Holiday Inn Belmont 3/30/2016 Wednesday 82 79% 77 0.94 0.48 0.60 51% Holiday Inn Belmont 4/2/2016 Saturday 82 83% 77 0.94 0.67 0.81 71% Fairfield Inn & Suites San Carlos 4/7/2016 Thursday 120 68% 112 0.93 0.55 0.80 59% Fairfield Inn & Suites San Carlos 4/9/2016 Saturday 120 58% 112 0.93 0.73 1.28 79% TownPlace Suites Redwood City 11/6/2019 Wednesday 94 100% 0.67 0.67 TownPlace Suites Redwood City 11/17/2019 Sunday 94 97% 0.60 0.62 Hilton Garden Inn Palo Alto 5/24/2016 Tuesday 174 92% 178 1.02 0.52 0.57 51% Hilton Garden Inn Palo Alto 7/27/2016 Wednesday 174 100% 178 1.02 0.70 0.70 68% 354 11 Hotel City Date Day of the Week Rooms Percent of Rooms Occupied Parking Stalls Stalls per Hotel Room Peak Parking Demand per Room Peak Parking Demand Per Occupied Room Peak Parking Occupancy Hilton Garden Inn Mountain View 4/30/2015 Thursday 160 97% 153 0.96 0.72 0.74 75% Hilton Garden Inn Mountain View 5/2/2015 Saturday 160 98% 153 0.96 0.78 0.80 82% Hilton Garden Inn Mountain View 10/26/2016 Wednesday 160 153 0.96 0.69 72% Hilton Garden Inn Mountain View 10/28/2016 Friday 160 153 0.96 0.39 41% Hilton Garden Inn Mountain View 10/29/2016 Saturday 160 153 0.96 0.33 35% Hilton Garden Inn Mountain View 10/30/2016 Sunday 160 153 0.96 0.33 35% Crestview Hotel Mountain View 7/2/2017 Sunday 64 0.42 Crestview Hotel Mountain View 7/3/2017 Monday 64 0.36 Crestview Hotel Mountain View 7/5/2017 Wednesday 64 0.34 Hotel Strata Mountain View 7/2/2017 Sunday 58 0.66 Hotel Strata Mountain View 7/3/2017 Monday 58 0.60 Hotel Strata Mountain View 7/5/2017 Wednesday 58 0.41 Residence Inn Mountain View 7/2/2017 Sunday 140 0.64 Residence Inn Mountain View 7/3/2017 Monday 140 0.50 Residence Inn Mountain View 7/5/2017 Wednesday 140 0.56 Hotel Vue Mountain View 1/9/2019 Wednesday 56 86% 56 1.00 0.36 0.42 36% Courtyard by Marriott Sunnyvale 4/30/2015 Thursday 145 99% 127 0.88 0.74 0.74 84% Sheraton Inn Sunnyvale 4/30/2015 Thursday 173 72% 283 1.64 0.51 0.70 31% Sheraton Inn Sunnyvale 5/2/2015 Saturday 173 95% 283 1.64 0.84 0.89 52% Courtyard by Marriott Sunnyvale 3/26/2019 Tuesday 145 127 0.88 0.53 61% Courtyard by Marriott Sunnyvale 3/30/2019 Saturday 145 127 0.88 0.28 32% Aloft Hotel Cupertino 6/11/2014 Wednesday 123 100% 0.62 0.62 Aloft Hotel Cupertino 6/14/2014 Saturday 123 98% 0.54 0.55 Source: Compiled by Fehr & Peers, 2020. 355 12 Appendix B. Urban Land Institute Shared Parking Analysis 356 345 California Street | Suite 450 | San Francisco, CA 94104 | (415) 348-0300 | Fax (415) 773-1790 www.fehrandpeers.com Memorandum Date: October 21, 2022 To: Rebecca Auld, Lamphier Gregory and Christy Usher, City of South San Francisco From: Daniel Jacobson and Emily Chen, Fehr & Peers Subject: Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment SF22-1215 This memorandum provides a transportation assessment for a proposed hotel located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan area in South San Francisco (“Project”). It includes an analysis of travel demand, site access and circulation, and vehicle miles traveled, as well as a comparison to the analysis provided in the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR. Key Findings • The Project’s hotel and restaurant uses are unlikely to materially increase vehicle miles traveled due to the Project’s proximity to office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport. • The Project’s size and trip generation is well within the estimated trip generation envelope of the Specific Plan Area and therefore consistent with the transportation analysis in the Specific Plan EIR. • Access and circulation illustrated in the Project’s conceptual site plan is consistent with the Oyster Point Specific Plan and would not create or exacerbate transportation safety impacts. • Based on the above findings, there are no anticipated new impacts to transportation facilities that were not identified in the Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR. 357 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 2 of 12 Project Description The Project is located on Marina Boulevard near the eastern terminus of Oyster Point Boulevard adjacent to the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal. The Project consists of up to 350 hotel rooms, a restaurant and bar, and meeting rooms covering about 261,000 square feet. A ballroom may be added in a future phase. Approximately 232 parking spaces would be provided (33 of which would be valet) along with a loading dock that accommodates two service trucks. The Project includes three driveways along Marina Boulevard and a public access trail along the eastern edge of the site connecting to the Bay Trail. Project Setting Land Use & Transportation Context The Project is located within the Oyster Point Specific Plan area, an 81 acre redevelopment in South San Francisco approved in 2011. The Specific Plan includes the development of up to 2.3 million square feet of office/R&D space as well as new infrastructure, recreation and open space, and the proposed Project. The Specific Plan’s Phase One buildings (660,000 square feet) were completed in early 2022, while remaining phases are underway. The Project is located along Marina Boulevard near the eastern terminus of Oyster Point Boulevard, which connects to US-101 and major arterials within South San Francisco. Gull Drive, Eccles Avenue, and Gateway Boulevard are the nearest north-south streets intersecting with Oyster Point Boulevard. The South San Francisco Ferry Terminal is located adjacent to the project site, while the South San Francisco Caltrain station and South San Francisco BART Station are accessible via peak period shuttle services provided by the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance (Commute.org). While no SamTrans bus service currently serves the site, an extension of Route 130 along the Oyster Point Boulevard corridor is planned to occur in 2023. New pedestrian and bicycle facilities have been provided along Oyster Point Boulevard and Marina Boulevard adjacent to the Project site, including sidewalks, crosswalks, and Class II bike lanes. The Bay Trail covers the perimeter of the Specific Plan area and has frontage on the southern shoreline of the Project site. Figure 1 illustrates the Project location in relation to nearby land uses and transportation facilities. Figure 2 illustrates the Oyster Point Specific Plan. 358 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 3 of 12 Figure 1: Project Location Figure 2: Oyster Point Specific Plan 359 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 4 of 12 Specific Plan Design Guidelines The Oyster Point Specific Plan seeks to promote alternative transportation modes to, from and within the site (Design Goal 3). To accomplish this, it includes the following applicable design guidelines related to the Project’s site access and circulation: General Guidelines • Provide convenient, efficient, and safe access to Oyster Point. • Maintain and enhance access to adjacent parcels, the waterfront, and the Ferry Terminal. • Encourage alternative transportation by emphasizing pedestrian, bicycle and transit in the roadway network design. • Promote safe pedestrian and vehicular circulation by minimizing conflicts at intersections and changes in road width and direction. Service, Delivery and Emergency Access Guidelines • Service vehicles should be accommodated by the roadway network, with clearly delineated lane markings, signals, and wayfinding signage. • Service, delivery and emergency vehicles should have access to both primary as well as secondary entrances to buildings and facilities. • These secondary entrances should be limited specifically to service, delivery, and emergency access. • Service vehicle driveways and loading areas should be screened and separated from public pedestrian walkways where possible. • Secondary access for emergency vehicles will be provided when their access is restricted from using primary entrances. Parking Access Guidelines • Parking access should be clearly delineated by lane markings, signals, and wayfinding signage. • Access to and from the parking garages should be located at intersections or from a dedicated right turn lane. • Adequate queuing space should be provided at parking garage entrances. Bicycle Circulation Guidelines • Bicycle access and parking should be clearly delineated by lane markings and wayfinding signage. 360 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 5 of 12 Streetscapes and Sidewalks Guidelines • Sidewalks should support an interconnected and public development. • Width of sidewalks should be appropriate to • accommodate an active development. • Sidewalks should be inset from roadways with a landscape buffer where possible to promote pedestrian friendly circulation. Guidelines to Support the TDM Program • The site should include dedicated passenger drop- off and shuttle stop areas. • Pedestrian connections should be provided to connect the buildings and site adjacent sidewalks, Bay Trail and shuttle stops. • Bicycle lanes, routes and/or paths should be provided to allow bicycle accessibility to all buildings at the site. • The parking areas should provide preferred parking for carpool, vanpool, low-emitting and fuel-efficient vehicles, and electric plug-in vehicles. • Parking should be provided for motorcycle and scooters. • Long-term (Class I) and Short-Term (Class II) bicycle parking should be provided at or adjacent to all buildings. • Shower and changing facilities should be provided in or easily accessible from all buildings. • Transportation and Commute Information Kiosks should be provided at all buildings. • In addition to the physical measures described above, the TDM program will include programmatic measures such as informational resources, transit programs, and commuter amenities. Project Travel Demand Project Trip Generation Vehicle trip estimates for the Project (Table 1) were developed by applying national trip generation rates presented in the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 11th Edition to the proposed land uses. Due to the continued disruptions in travel behavior associated with the COVID-19 pandemic, ITE rates were used in lieu of conducting new vehicle counts at comparable local sites. ITE Land Use 310 (Hotel) is defined as a place of lodging and supporting facilities such as a full-service restaurant, bar, meeting rooms, ballrooms, and convention facilities, which most closely matches the facilities included in the proposed Project. ITE includes a reasonably large sample size of 28 studies for AM peak hour trip generation data and 31 studies for PM peak hour trip generation data. Daily trip generation data includes a more limited sample size of seven studies and may have a higher margin of error. 361 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 6 of 12 ITE rates are typically derived from suburban settings that lack a mix of land uses within walking distance; consequently, Fehr & Peers used the trip generation methodology known as MXD+ to calibrate the trip generation estimates to local conditions and the proximity to adjacent office/research & development (R&D) uses. The MXD+ method is based on a weighted average of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s MXD Model and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program’s Report 684 methodology. Additional reductions associated with the proposed transportation demand management program were not included due to limited data available for comparable hotel sites As illustrated in Table 1, the project is projected to generate approximately 2,751 vehicle trips on an average weekday with about 135 occurring in the AM peak hour and about 204 in the PM peak hour. These trip generation estimates do not account for the proposed transportation demand management program, which would further reduce the number of private vehicle trips to the project. The Project considers adding a ballroom in a future phase. Since ITE rates are based upon hotels that typically include ballrooms, the trip generation estimates in Table 1 include travel demand associated with the future ballroom. Consequently, Table 1 may present an overestimate of travel demand without the ballroom. Table 1. Oyster Point Hotel Trip Generation Land Use Size Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour In Out Total In Out Total Hotel1 350 rooms 2,797 90 71 161 106 101 207 Internal Trip Reductions2 - (46) (8) (2) (26) (1) (2) (3) Net New Project trips - 2,751 82 69 135 105 99 204 Notes: 1Based on ITE 11th Edition (Land Use #310 – Hotel, average rate) 2Based on MXD+ trip generation methodology which accounts for Internal trip reductions account for trips made between land uses within the Specific Plan area. Trip Distribution and Assignment About half of Project vehicle travel is expected to occur within South San Francisco, Brisbane, San Bruno, and the San Francisco International Airport. Figure 3 illustrates daily vehicle trip distribution between traffic analysis zones (TAZs) for nearby clusters of hotels in South San Francisco and Brisbane based on StreetLight data, which tracks anonymized movement using cell phone location-based services data. Each site shares similar characteristics as business-oriented hotels that illustrates comparable travel behavior, offering some combination of meeting rooms, ballrooms, and restaurant/bar facilities, although most of these sites are generally older and smaller hotels. Based on this analysis, the Project’s vehicle trip distribution is expected to be most 362 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 7 of 12 heavily concentrated within the East of 101 Area (15 to 20 percent of trips), to/from the San Francisco International Airport (10 to 15 percent), and elsewhere in South San Francisco, Brisbane, or San Bruno (10 to 15 percent). The remaining 50 to 60 percent of trips would mostly be distributed across San Francisco and San Mateo counties. Figure 3: Vehicle Trip Distribution for Nearby Hotels in South San Francisco and Brisbane 363 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 8 of 12 Vehicle trips would be concentrated along Oyster Point Boulevard to access US-101. Upon reaching US-101, about 50 percent of trips are likely to travel to the south, 40 percent to the north, and 10 percent continuing along Sister Cities Boulevard. Trips occurring fully within the East of 101 Area are likely to use Gull Drive, Eccles Avenue, and Gateway Boulevard. Vehicle Miles Traveled The Project is a business-oriented hotel primarily serving nearby office/R&D uses and San Francisco International Airport. Unlike nearby office/R&D land uses in the East of 101 Area that typically generate vehicle miles, the Project would exhibit characteristics of a local-serving land use rather than a regional destination. In its Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, the State of California’s Office of Planning and Research notes that “local- serving retail development tends to shorten trips and reduce VMT.”1 Hotels in the East of 101 Area appear to exhibit similar travel behavior as local-serving retail: as illustrated in Figure 3, vehicle trip lengths for four nearby hotel clusters in South San Francisco and Brisbane tend to be short and focused around nearby office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport. As shown in Table 2, the average vehicle trip length for nearby hotels is about four miles, compared with an average trip length of about 13 miles for other land uses in the East of 101 Area. Table 2. Trip Length Comparison East of 101 Area Land Use Average Trip Length Hotels 3.6-3.9 Miles Office/R&D and Other Land Uses 12.9 miles Source: StreetLight data and C/CAG Model Hotels in the vicinity primarily serve nearby office/R&D uses and the San Francisco International Airport, as opposed to generating new tourism-oriented or resort-oriented travel. Assuming a similar travel pattern for the proposed Project as those existing in the vicinity, the Project would not materially increase vehicle miles traveled and may help shorten trips for hotel guests that would otherwise stay at hotels farther away. Although the City of South San Francisco does not have a threshold of significance for VMT associated with hotel uses, the Project may be presumed to have a less than significant impact to VMT based on the City’s screening criteria for local serving land uses that do not result in a net increase in VMT. 1 Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA, State of California Office of Planning & Research, 2018 https://opr.ca.gov/docs/20180416-743_Technical_Advisory_4.16.18.pdf 364 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 9 of 12 Specific Plan & City Policy Consistency Trip Generation The Specific Plan EIR document published in 2011 estimated that the Specific Plan buildout would result in 17,684 daily trips, of which 1,873 would occur during the AM peak hour and 2,127 would occur during the PM peak hour (a net change of about 12,716 daily vehicle trips, 1,402 AM peak hour trips, and 1,621 PM peak hour trips. As shown in Table 3, the Oyster Point Hotel is expected to generate in total about 2,751 daily trips, including about 135 AM peak hour trips and 204 PM peak hour trips. Although the Specific Plan EIR did not break down trip generation by land use, the Oyster Point Hotel size is consistent with the Specific Plan, is therefore expected to generate a comparable number of trips as the hotel identified in the Specific Plan EIR. Moreover, its trip generation is well within the estimated trip generation envelope of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan and Project trip generation are summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Trip Generation Comparison Scenario Daily AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour Oyster Point Specific Plan (2011) 17,684 1,873 2,127 Oyster Point Hotel Project 2,751 135 204 Sources: Oyster Point Specific Plan, 2011 and Fehr & Peers, 2022 Figure 4: Annotated Project Site Plan 365 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 10 of 12 Access & Circulation Access and circulation illustrated in the Project’s conceptual site plan is consistent with the Oyster Point Specific Plan. The site plan (Figure 4) includes driveways connecting to Marina Boulevard, pedestrian connections to the street’s sidewalk, and a Bay Trail connection on its eastern edge as identified in the Specific Plan. Service, Delivery and Emergency Access The Project would provide two onsite loading spaces for commercial deliveries and service vehicles. The Project would primarily be served by small- to mid-sized box trucks, laundry trucks, and garbage trucks (all typically 16 to 32 feet). Truck activity is expected to be spread throughout the day depending on particular functions: for example, garbage trucks typically arrive early morning, while laundry trucks typically arrive mid-morning (in coordination with housekeeping services). Service and delivery vehicles would use a screened in loading dock in the middle of the site. Trucks would enter via the easternmost driveway and conduct a three-point turn within the parking lot to back into the loading dock. The site plan remains conceptual at the time of this analysis, but it can be reasonably inferred that the proposed layout can accommodate such trucks provided that truck turning templates are used to inform the design process. Larger tractor-trailer vehicles are expected for restaurant delivery. These deliveries would primarily occur overnight. Tractor-trailer trucks would back in from Marina Boulevard to access the loading dock. Since the site is located on a relatively low volume street and these deliveries would occur outside of peak hours, large truck deliveries would not pose conflicts with other modes. Truck drivers may benefit from approaching the site from the westbound direction (via looping around the Marina turnaround) to avoid reversing into their blind side when approaching the lot. The City of South San Francisco requires five loading spaces for a 261,000 square foot commercial land use. Based on the anticipated loading activity and distribution throughout the day, city requirements likely exceed anticipated demand, and comparable hotels in the East of 101 Area typically include one to two loading spaces. The proposed loading supply is expected to be sufficient provided that hotel management staggers loading activities throughout the day. Emergency vehicles would have access to all building entrances and facilities as well as the Bay Trail connection along the east side of the Project. The Project is therefore consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines for efficient service, delivery, and emergency vehicle access. Parking Access Access for the proposed 232 parking spaces would be provided via three driveways along Marina Boulevard. Each driveway would serve hotel, restaurant, and meeting room uses, with the 366 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 11 of 12 westernmost driveway expected to serve as the primary entrance. Since these driveways are located along the eastern edge of Marina Boulevard, they are likely to account for a majority of vehicle traffic along the street and are unlikely to pose conflicts with the limited through traffic that occurs. An analysis of the project’s parking supply is provided in the accompanying Parking Management Plan. Figure 5: Parking Layout Bicycle Access Bicyclists would access the site via the Project’s driveways. Bicycle parking would be provided per City code and delineated with signage. The Project would provide 35 bicycle parking spaces, which is consistent with City code. The Project is consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines to incorporate bicycle travel into projects. Pedestrian Access The Project would align with the new sidewalk and trail infrastructure in the Specific Plan Area. Pedestrians would access the Project via a pathway to the lobby. Pedestrians would access the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal, Commute.org shuttles, and planned SamTrans service by crossing Marina Boulevard and walking approximately 300 feet to the east to reach the ferry terminal entrance and bus/shuttle stop. The Project is consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines to support an interconnected and pedestrian-friendly development. 367 Oyster Point Hotel Transportation Assessment October 21, 2022 Page 12 of 12 TDM-Supportive Site Plan Features The Project would be subject to the City’s TDM Ordinance requirements and would incorporate site plan elements consistent with these requirements as described above, including a passenger loading area, direct pedestrian connections to sidewalks and transit facilities, access to bike lanes and trails, and bike parking. The Project is consistent with the Specific Plan’s guidelines to encourage alternative forms of transportation. A TDM Checklist is provided as an attachement. EIR Transportation Impacts The Oyster Point Specific Plan EIR identifies several significant impacts to transportation facilities, including intersection delay, freeway delay, and offramp queues. Based on the analysis above, the Project’s effects would be consistent with this analysis. Since the certification of the EIR, the State of California has adopted new CEQA guidelines that that vehicle level of service (LOS) and similar measures related to auto delay shall not be used as the sole basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts. The Project would contribute toward Transportation Impact Fees to address multimodal transportation needs around the Specific Plan Area. 368 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94083 ______________________________________________________________________________ (Space Above This Line Reserved For Recorder’s Use) This instrument is exempt from recording fees pursuant to Government Code section 27383. Documentary Transfer Tax is $0.00 (exempt per Revenue & Taxation Code section 11922, Transfer to Municipality). DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC. 367 Marina Boulevard SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. _______ OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CITY COUNCIL Effective Date: ___________ 369 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into by and between Oyster Point Holdco, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Developer”), and the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation (“City”), pursuant to California Government Code (“Government Code”) sections 65864 et seq. Developer and the City are sometimes collectively referred to herein as “Parties.” RECITALS A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted California Government Code sections 65864 et seq. (the “Development Agreements Statute”), which authorizes the City to enter into an agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property. B. Pursuant to Government Code section 65865, City has adopted procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements (South San Francisco Municipal Code (“SSFMC”) Chapter 19.60). This Agreement has been processed, considered, and executed in accordance with such procedures and requirements. C. Developer has a legal and/or equitable interest in certain real property located in the City at 367 Marina Boulevard, also known as San Mateo County Assessor’s Parcel Number 015-011-350, as more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit A (the “Property”). D. On March 23, 2011, the City, the South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency, and Oyster Point Ventures, LLC, executed a Disposition and Development Agreement (“DDA”) for the master development named Oyster Point through a multi-phased project, which included development of a hotel on the Property, and required Oyster Point Ventures, LLC, to perform certain site work, grading, and installation of infrastructure to prepare the Property for development. E. On December 10, 2021, Developer and City entered into a Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions (the “PSA”) for Developer’s purchase of the Property from the City, which PSA is included with this Agreement as Exhibit B. The PSA set forth Developer’s and City’s intentions to enter into this Agreement to address the details for development of the Project (as defined below). F. Developer has requested City to enter into a development agreement and proceedings have been taken in accordance with the rules and regulations of the City with regard to Developer’s proposed Project (as defined below). G. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by Developer, City, and the City of South San Francisco City Council (“City Council”) members and have been found to be fair, just, and reasonable. 370 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 2 H. The City Council believes that the best interests of the citizens of the City of South San Francisco and the public health, safety, and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement. I. This Agreement and the Project will be consistent with the City of South San Francisco General Plan (“General Plan”), the City’s East of 101 Area Plan, and the Specific Plan (as defined in Recital M). J. Development of the Property with the Project in accordance with this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to City and will further important policies and goals of the City and San Mateo County. This Agreement will, among other things, secure the right to develop an up to 350-room full-service hotel facility which is the quality of a “AAA” (or similar rating) four diamond or higher hotel Project that will benefit the City by (1) advancing the City economic development goals of enhancing the competitiveness of the local economy and maintaining a strong and diverse revenue and job base, (2) providing much needed additional hotel rooms to visitors to the City and its preeminent biotechnology center at Oyster Point, (3) generating construction-related benefits, including employment, economic and fiscal benefits related to new construction, (4) generating fiscal benefits to the City and San Mateo County due to taxes and other revenue, (5) improving access for residents and visitors to the San Francisco Bay, the City’s marina, and to the San Francisco Bay Trail, and (6) redevelopment and implementation of monitoring protocols for the successful reuse of a former landfill site. K. In exchange of the benefits to City described in the preceding Recital, together with the other public benefits that will result from the Development of the Project, Developer will receive by this Agreement assurance that it may proceed with the Project in accordance with the “Applicable Law” (as defined in Section 1.6 of this Agreement), and therefore desires to enter into this Agreement. L. This agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and provide for the orderly Development of the Project on the Property, facilitate progressive installation of necessary improvements, provide for public services appropriate to the Development of the Project on the Property, and generally serve the purposes for which development agreements under section 65864, et seq. of the California Government are intended. M. The General Plan’s Land Use Element designates the Property as Business Commercial. The Property is also located in the East of 101 Area Plan (and therein designated as Commercial) and in the Oyster Point Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) (depicted therein as a future hotel site) and the Oyster Point Specific Plan Zoning District (Chapter 20.230 of the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code). On March 23, 2011, after duly noticed public hearing and review by the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”), by Resolution No. 46-2011, the City Council certified the Oyster Point Specific Plan and Phase 1 Project Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 20100022070) (“EIR”) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 2100 et seq. (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §§ 15000 et seq.). The EIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts of developing a new full-service hotel with up to 350 rooms and approximately 40,000 square feet of retail uses on the Property. Concurrent with its 371 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 3 certification of the EIR, and by the same resolution, the City Council duly adopted CEQA findings of fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (“MMRP”) for the Project. The Statement of Overriding Considerations carefully considered each of the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the EIR and determined that each such impact is acceptable in light of the Project’s economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits. The MMRP identifies all mitigation measures identified in the EIR that are applicable to the Project and sets forth a program for monitoring or reporting on the implementation of such mitigation measures. Also on March 23, 2011, after a duly noticed public hearing and review by the Planning Commission, by Resolution No. 47-2011, the City Council duly approved a General Plan Amendment for the Oyster Point Specific Plan (“General Plan Amendment”). Also, after a duly noticed by public hearing and review by the Planning Commission, on March 16, 2011, the City Council introduced, and on March 23, 2011 adopted, Ordinance No. 1437-2011 adopting Chapter 20.230 of the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code to establish the Oyster Point Specific Plan District (“Zoning Amendment”). On _______, 2022, after a duly noticed public hearing and review, by Resolution No. _____, the Planning Commission approved a Precise Plan for the Project to allow for development of a hotel with up to 350 rooms and approximately 246 parking spaces, consistent with the Specific Plan, which Precise Plan is attached to this Agreement as Exhibit H. The entitlements described in this Recital M and listed on Exhibit C, as well as this Agreement, are collectively referred to herein as the “Project Approvals.” The Project has been designed to fulfill the Development vision of the Project Approvals consistent with the City’s land use policies and regulations, and to secure Developer’s ability to achieve the Development potential of the Property at a responsible level of growth. N. On ___________, 2022, following a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement. And, on _____________, 2022, the City Council, after conducting a duly noticed public hearing, found that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan and Title 20 of the SSFMC and has conducted all necessary proceedings in accordance with the City’s rules and regulations for the approval of this Agreement and introduced Ordinance No. _______ to approve this Agreement. In accordance with SSFMC section 19.60.120, the City Council, on _________, 2022, at a duly noticed public hearing, conducted a second reading of and adopted Ordinance No. __________ approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, pursuant to the authority contained in Government Code sections 65864 through 65869.5 and Chapter 19.60 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code in effect on the Effective Date and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS TERMS UNDER SECTIONS 1.1 – 1.57 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION 372 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 4 1.1 “Administrative Agreement Amendment” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 7.2 of this Agreement. 1.2 “Administrative Project Amendment” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 7.1 of this Agreement. 1.3 “Affiliate” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. 1.4 “Agreement” shall mean this Development Agreement. 1.5 “Applicable City Law” means the City regulations and provisions applicable to the Property as of the Effective Date as set forth in Exhibit D and any other City ordinances, resolutions, orders, rules, policies, standards, specifications, plans, guidelines or other regulations that are applicable to the Property and the Project and in effect on the Effective Date. 1.6 “Applicable Law” means (i) City Law and (ii) all applicable laws, statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, permits, certificates, judgments, decisions, decrees or orders of any governmental authority as such may be enacted, adopted, and amended from time to time, including regional, State and Federal laws and regulations applicable to the Property and the Project as such 1.7 “Assessments” shall have that meaning set forth in Exhibit D. 1.8 “CEQA” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.9 “City” shall mean the City of South San Francisco. 1.10 “City Council” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital G of this Agreement. 1.11 “City Indemnitees” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.12 of this Agreement. 1.12 “City Law” shall mean City regulations and provisions applicable to the Property as of the Effective Date as set forth in Exhibit D and any other City ordinances, resolutions, orders, rules, policies, standards, specifications, plans, guidelines or other City regulations that are applicable to the Property and the Project and in effect on the Effective Date.. 1.13 “Claims” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.12 of this Agreement. 1.14 “Control” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. 1.15 “Controlled” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. 1.16 “Controlling” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. 1.17 “Deficiencies” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 9.2 of this Agreement. 373 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 5 1.18 “Developer” shall mean Oyster Point Holdco, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and any assignees pursuant to Article 8 of this Agreement. 1.19 “Developer Indemnitees” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 4.9 of this Agreement. 1.20 “Development” or “Develop” shall mean the division or subdivision of land into one or more parcels; the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, improvement, maintenance, or enlargement of any structure; any excavation, fill, grading, landfill, or land disturbance; the construction of specified road, path, trail, transportation, water, sewer, electric, communications, and wastewater infrastructure directly related to the Project whether located within or outside the Property; the installation of landscaping and other facilities and improvements necessary or appropriate for the Project; and any use or extension of the use of land. 1.21 “Development Agreements Statute” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital A of this Agreement. 1.22 “Development Fees” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.2 of this Agreement. 1.23 “District” shall mean any assessment or financing district(s) established by the City pursuant to the Community Facilities District Act of 1982 (Mello-Roos), Government Code Sections 53311 et seq., the Streets and Highways Code, Division 10 and 12, the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, or other similar law to finance all or part of the public improvements through the issuance of bonds and the imposition of assessments, fees, or taxes on the benefiting land, including, but not limited to, the Property. 1.24 “E101 CFD” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.7 of this Agreement. 1.25 “Effective Date” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 2.1 of this Agreement. 1.26 “EIR” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.27 “Force Majeure Delay” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. 1.28 “GDP” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. 1.29 “General Plan” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital I of this Agreement. 1.30 “General Plan Amendment” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.31 “Judgment” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 9.2 of this Agreement. 374 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 6 1.32 “Maximum TOT Rebate Amount” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 4.9 of this Agreement. 1.33 "Mortgage" shall mean any lien of mortgage, deed of trust, or other security interest (e.g., lease-leaseback agreement) in the Project or the Property given in exchange for financing of any kind. 1.34 "Mortgagee" shall mean the beneficiary of any Mortgage. 1.35 “MMRP” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.36 “Parties” shall mean the Developer and City, collectively. 1.37 “Periodic Review” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.5 of this Agreement. 1.38 “Prevailing Wage Laws” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 6.12 of this Agreement. 1.39 “Planning Commission” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.40 “Pre-Existing Property Conditions” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 4.2 of Exhibit B to this Agreement. 1.41 “Project” shall mean the Development on the Property as contemplated by the Project Approvals and, as and when they are issued, the Subsequent Approvals, including, without limitation, the permitted uses, density and intensity of uses, the parking requirements, and maximum size and height of buildings specified in the Specific Plan and in Chapter 20.230 of Title 20 of the SSFMC, and as such Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals may be further defined or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. 1.42 “Project Approvals” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.43 “Property” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital C of this Agreement. 1.44 “PSA” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital E to this Agreement. 1.45 “Severe Economic Recession” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. 1.46 “Specific Plan” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. 1.47 “SSFMC” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital B of this Agreement. 375 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 7 1.48 “Subsequent Approvals” shall mean those certain other land use approvals, entitlements, and permits other than the Project Approvals that are necessary or desirable for the Project. In particular, for example and without limitation, the parties contemplate that Developer may, at its election, seek approvals for the following: amendments of the Project Approvals; design review approvals, unless determined not required pursuant to the further provisions of this Agreement; improvement agreements; grading permits; demolition permits; building permits; lot line adjustments; sewer, water, and utility connection permits; certificates of occupancy; subdivision map approvals; parcel map approvals; resubdivisions; zoning and rezoning approvals; preliminary and final development plans; development agreements; conditional use permits; minor use permits; sign permits; any subsequent approvals required by other state or federal entities for Development and implementation of the Project that are sought or agreed to in writing by Developer; and any amendments to, or repealing of, any of the foregoing. 1.49 “Successor Agency” shall mean the Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency for the City of South San Francisco. 1.50 “Tax” and “Taxes” shall not include any generally applicable City Business License Tax or locally imposed Sales Tax. 1.51 “TDM Plan” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.7(a) of this Agreement. 1.52 “Term” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 2.2 of this Agreement. 1.53 “TOT Rebate” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 4.9 of this Agreement. 1.54 “Transfer” shall mean the sale, assignment, conveyance, hypothecation, in whole or in part by Developer of its right, title, obligations, and interest in and to all or any part of the Property to any person or entity at any time during the term of this Agreement. 1.55 “Transfer Agreement” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 9.2 of this Agreement. 1.56 “Transient Occupancy Tax” or “TOT” shall mean the tax imposed on the Project pursuant to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 4.20. 1.57 “Zoning Amendment” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. To the extent that any defined terms contained in this Agreement are not defined above, then such terms shall have that meaning otherwise ascribed to them elsewhere in this Agreement, or if not in this Agreement, then by controlling law, including the SSFMC. ARTICLE 2 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM 2.1 Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon the date the ordinance approving this Agreement becomes effective (“Effective Date”). 376 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 8 2.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the Effective Date and continue (unless this Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended as provided in this Agreement) until ten (10) years plus one (1) day after the Effective Date (“Term”). ARTICLE 3 OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPER 3.1 Obligations of Developer Generally. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the City’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and obligations of City set forth in this Agreement is a material consideration for Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by its long term covenants and obligations, as set forth herein. The Parties acknowledge that many of Developer’s long term obligations set forth in this Agreement are in addition to Developer’s agreement to perform all the applicable mitigation measures identified in the MMRP. 3.2 City Fees. (a) Developer shall pay those processing, building permit, inspection and plan checking fees and charges required by the City for processing applications and requests for Subsequent Approvals under the applicable non-discriminatory regulations in effect at the time such applications and requests are submitted to the City. (b) Consistent with the terms of the Agreement, and subject to Section 5.6, City shall have the right to impose only such development fees (“Development Fees”) as have been adopted by City as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, as set forth on Exhibit D, and only at those rates of such Development Fees in effect at the time of payment of the Development Fees, provided that any increases to Development Fees after the Effective Date are imposed on a citywide (or East of 101 Area Plan-wide) basis, reserving to City the discretion to increase Development Fees for different land use zoning designations in varying amounts. The Development Fees shall be paid at the time set forth on Exhibit D except as otherwise provided in Article 3 of this Agreement. This Section 3.2(b) shall not prohibit City from imposing on Developer any fee or obligation that is imposed by a regional agency or the State of California in accordance with state or federal obligations and required to be implemented by City. 3.3 Post-Closing Mitigation Measures. TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.3 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION (a) Developer shall perform, at Developer’s sole expense, each of the “Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures” identified in Exhibit F to Exhibit B and in the manner set forth therein. (b) Prior to issuance of a building permit, Developer shall execute an Operations and Maintenance Agreement with the City in substantially the form attached to this Agreement as Exhibit E as described in Section F.3 of Exhibit F to Exhibit B. Such Operations and Maintenance Agreement shall be recorded and shall include financial assurances for the ongoing maintenance and operations elements of the “Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures,” including routine inspections, maintenance and reporting for (i) the landfill cap, (ii) 377 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 9 methane and volatile organic compound collection, monitoring and alarm systems, (iii) groundwater, surface water and leachate monitoring systems, as required, (iv) elevation monitoring, and (v) maintenance of hardscape and softscapes. Developer shall separately enter into any Operation and Maintenance Agreement that may be required by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (“Water Board”) or by any other regulatory agency pursuant to Applicable Laws. (c) Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Project, Developer shall prepare a methane and volatile organic compound monitoring plan approved in writing by the Water Board and as described in Section D.4 of Exhibit F to Exhibit B and proceed to implement such plan as part of the Project. (d) Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Project, Developer shall prepare an elevation monitoring plan for the Property as described in Section D.5 of Exhibit F to Exhibit B and proceed to implement such plan as part of the Project. (e) Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Project, Developer shall prepare a post-closure Emergency Response Plan as described in Section E.1 of Exhibit F to Exhibit B and proceed to implement such plan as part of the Project. (f) Developer’s failure to act in accordance with the requirements of Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures identified in Exhibit F to Exhibit B shall constitute a Default under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, to the extent that any modifications to Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures, which the Parties acknowledge were developed without input from or formal approval by the Water Board, are required in order to comply with the Water Board’s regulations or other requirements, or to the extent that there are conflicts between the Water Board’s requirements and Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures, the Parties agree that Developer’s compliance with the Water Board’s requirements shall not constitute an event of default under this Agreement provided that such compliance and any modifications to Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures are reviewed and approved in writing by the City’s Public Works Department and to the reasonable satisfaction of the City Attorney. 3.4 Pre-Construction and Construction Site Maintenance and Security. TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.4 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION (a) From the Effective Date through construction of the Project, Developer shall ensure that the Property is maintained and kept in good repair and condition through implementation of the following measures: (b) Within sixty days after the Effective Date, install a security fence around the perimeter of the Property, landscaping at the Property, and signage with a short description of the Project, approximate construction milestones, and contact information for Developer; (c) Maintain the fence, landscaping, and signage in a neat, clean and orderly condition; 378 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 10 (d) Ensure that the fence and signage is kept free and clear of graffiti or other evidence of vandalism; (e) Ensure the reasonably prompt removal and replacement of dead, damaged or diseased landscaping, conduct quarterly weed abatement and removal, and conduct quarterly cutting of existing grass or other landscape to prevent overgrowth; (f) Ensure the reasonably prompt removal of any solid waste, trash, or other debris deposited on the Property by third-parties; (g) Undertake any other commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that site is kept in a neat, clean and orderly condition prior to the commencement of construction; (h) In the event that Developer fails to maintain the fencing, signage, and landscaping and/or fails to remove solid waste, trash, or debris and fails to remedy such deficiency within seven (7) days of written notice from the City, then City may perform such maintenance and/or cleanup on Developer’s behalf and charge the Developer the cost associated therewith. In the event that a condition on the Property poses an immediate threat to health and safety and/or includes profanity or obscenity, then the City may abate the condition immediately and charge the cost of abatement to Developer; and (i) Implement erosion control measures. Such erosion control measures shall include grading Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented during construction to prevent substantial erosion from occurring during site development. The BMPs shall be included in all construction documents and may include, but not be limited to: (i) restricting grading to the dry season or meet City requirements for grading during the rainy season; (ii) using effective, site-specific erosion and sediment control methods approved by the City Engineer during the construction periods. Provide temporary cover of all disturbed surfaces to help control erosion during construction. Provide permanent cover as soon as is practical to stabilize the disturbed surfaces after construction has been completed; (iii) covering soil, equipment, and supplies that could contribute non-visible pollution prior to rainfall events or perform monitoring of runoff with secure plastic sheeting or tarps; (iv) implementing regular maintenance activities such as sweeping driveways between the construction area and public streets. Cleaning 379 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 11 sediments from streets, driveways, and paved areas on-site using dry sweeping methods. Designating a concrete truck washdown area; (v) disposing of all wastes properly and keep site clear of trash and litter. Cleaning up leaks, drips, and other spills immediately so that they do not contact stormwater; and (vi) placing straw wattles, fiber rolls, or silt fences around the perimeter of the site. Protecting existing storm and sewer inlets in the Project area from sedimentation with filter fabric and sand or gravel bags. 3.5 New Sewer Pump Station Funding. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.5 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- Prior to issuance of the first building permit for the Project, Developer shall pay City $250,000.00 as a contribution for funding a new pump station as detailed in the DDA. Developer agrees to provide any necessary easements or licenses necessary to facilitate continued operation of the existing pump station (i.e., to the extent that City requires access to the Property in order to maintain the current sewer infrastructure on the Property), in addition to any necessary easements or licenses for construction and maintenance of the new Pump Station, subject to Developer’s approval which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed. 3.6 Access for Methane Monitoring. Developer shall provide access to the closed landfill on the Property to third-party consultants and/or representatives of the City and the Successor Agency for the purpose of methane monitoring, subject to applicable regulatory monitoring procedures. Developer shall ensure that the Project design and site conditions do not prevent, impede, or otherwise obstruct such methane monitoring activity. 3.7 Transportation Benefits. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.7 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) Transportation Demand Management Plan. The Developer shall implement a Transportation Demand Management Plan (“TDM Plan”) in compliance with the requirements of the SSFMC in effect on the Effective Date . Failure by Developer to implement the TDM Plan shall constitute a default by Developer subject to the provisions of Article 10 of this Agreement. (b) Community Facilities Districts Support. (i) Developer will support City’s formation of a communities facilities district serving land within the East of 101 Area Plan boundary, provided that (i) the CFD is established within one hundred twenty (120) months of the Effective Date, and (ii) the Project’s combined maximum CFD assessment rate between the CFD contemplated in this subsection (i) and the CFD contemplated in subsection (ii) shall not exceed one dollar ($1.00) per square foot of assessable real property. (ii) Developer will support and pay for the City’s formation of a communities facilities district serving the Property and land within the vicinity of the Property to 380 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 12 fund the services authorized for CFD 2021-01, including without limitation the following services: police protection services; maintenance and lighting of parks, parkways, streets, roads, and open space including roadway maintenance, streetlight maintenance and operations, traffic signal maintenance and operations, parks, waterfront and Bay Trail maintenance, landscaping, parkway, median and open space maintenance, including erosion prevention, public surface parking maintenance, and operation and maintenance of public restroom buildings; operation and maintenance of storm drainage systems. The Project’s CFD tax rate for the CFD contemplated in this subsection (ii) shall be a maximum of $.035 per square foot of non-residential floor area increased annually by two (2.00%) per Fiscal Year. No special tax shall be levied on undeveloped property. The first assessment will be made during the year in which the Project receives its certificate of occupancy. 3.8 BCDC Permit and Public Access. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.8 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) The Parties acknowledge that the Bay Conservation and Development Commission ("BCDC") Permit No. 2017.007.00, originally issued on April 27, 2018 and as subsequently amended (the "BCDC Permit") requires the construction of (i) a temporary north- south Bay Trail connection no later than six (6) months following the completion of Phase IC as described therein, and (ii) a permanent north-south Bay Trail connection. As to the temporary trail, Developer shall [TO BE DETERMINED BASED ON BCDC DIRECTION]. The Parties further acknowledge that Developer has evaluated various ways to implement the permanent north-south connector trail in various locations, including on the Property and in the vicinity of the Property, and that construction of a permanent north-south connector trail meeting BCDC Permit specifications is not feasible. As a consequence, Developer and City agree that as Developer cannot construct the permanent north-south connector trail as shown in the BCDC Permit on behalf of the City; Developer shall instead coordinate with BCDC to identify an alternative project to satisfy the BCDC Permit condition and complete such project, subject to the City’s review and approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. Developer shall also be responsible for coordinating with BCDC to facilitate amending the BCDC Permit to omit the requirement for the permanent north-south connector trail, including but not limited demonstrating that the location of the trail as depicted in the BCDC Permit is not physically feasible given the topography of the site and the significant difference in grade elevations between the existing Bay Trail near the existing pedestrian bridge at the southern shoreline of the peninsula and the Property, and instead providing alternative on-site public access enhancements desired by BCDC as a condition of amending the BCDC Permit. 3.9 Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.9 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- In exchange for the TOT Rebate described in Section 4.8, in the event that Developer Transfers a Majority Interest in the Project to a person or entity who is not an Affiliate, Developer shall pay to the City a one-time only “Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds” as provided in this Section 3.9. (a) For purposes of this Section 3.9, the following definitions apply: 381 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 13 (i) "Cash Consideration" means (A) cash, (B) cash equivalents, and (C) securities that are listed and traded on one or more recognized securities exchanges in or outside the United States and that are not restricted securities within the meaning of the Securities Act of 1933 or Rule 144 adopted thereunder. (ii) "Cash Flow" means (A) Gross Receipts, less (B) unreimbursed operating expenses, less (C) debt service payments pursuant to a Mortgage (limited to interest if debt service is interest only, or interest and straight line amortization of principal on the Mortgage, with an amortization period of not less than twenty years). Cash Flow shall be calculated on a monthly basis including and through the close of escrow under the Transfer. (iii) “Costs of Transfer” means only the following costs incurred by the Developer in connection with a Transfer: (A) verifiable, reasonable, customary brokerage commissions paid as a result of the Transfer; (B) reasonable and customary closing fees and costs including title insurance premiums, documentary stamp taxes, survey fees, escrow fees, recording charges, and transfer taxes; (C) attorneys’ fees and costs incurred, and (D) other verifiable, reasonable, and customary expenses actually incurred by Developer in connection with closing the Transfer. Costs of Transfer shall exclude adjustments to reflect prorations of rents, taxes, or other items of income or expense customarily prorated in connection with sales of real property. (iv) "Developer's Return" shall mean an amount earned through Cash Flow and Net Transfer proceeds sufficient to cause Developer to have achieved an unlevered Internal Rate of Return (IRR) equal to a rate of ____________ (___%) per annum, through and including the date of calculation. “Internal Rate of Return” shall mean, with respect to Developer and as of any date, the discount rate, at which the net present value of all Development Costs as of (and including) such date, all Cash Flow received by Developer as of (and including) such date, and all Net Transfer Proceeds received by Developer as of (and including) such date equals zero. For purposes of calculating Internal Rate of Return, Development Costs shall be an “outflow,” deemed to have occurred on the last day of the month during which such Development Costs were incurred by or provided to Developer, and Cash Flow and Net Transfer Proceeds shall be an “inflow,” deemed to have occurred on the last day of the month during which such Cash Flow and Net Transfer Proceeds were received by Developer. The Internal Rate of Return shall be calculated using the latest version of Microsoft Excel electronic spreadsheet XIRR Financial Function (or, if such electronic spreadsheet is no longer available, a similar spreadsheet used by Developer in its real estate investments to calculate internal rates of return). (v) “Development Costs" means costs incurred and paid by Developer in connection with the development and construction of the Project, or costs that are invoiced to Developer in connection with the development and construction of the Project, as reasonably documented by Developer and as set forth by Developer in a written statement or affidavit to the City. (vi) "Gross Receipts" means the following determined on a cash basis: all payments, revenues, fees, or amounts actually received by Developer or by any other party for the account of Developer from any person for the person’s use or occupancy of any portion of the Property, or from any other advertising, concessions, licensing, or programming generated from 382 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 14 the Project, including, without limitation, all minimum rent, percentage rent, license fees, advertising revenues, event or promotional fees or charges, and permit fees. Notwithstanding the foregoing, City and Developer agree that for purposes of this Section 3.9, with respect to any revenue generated from parking or concessions operated at the Project, Gross Receipts shall only be deemed to include the net amounts received by Developer after paying all expenses incurred in connection with the operation of such parking or concessions services, but in no event shall such net amounts be less than zero. (vii) "Gross Transfer Proceeds" means all consideration directly or indirectly received by or for the account of the Developer in connection with a Transfer of a Majority Interest, of whatever form or nature, including, without limitation, (A) Cash Consideration, (B) the principal amount of any loan made by the Developer to a purchaser as part of the purchase price, and (C) the fair market value of any other non-cash consideration representing a portion of the purchase price. (viii) “Majority Interest” means an interest that is fifty and one-tenth percent (50.1%) or higher in the Project or in the entity that owns the Project. (ix) "Net Transfer Proceeds” means Gross Transfer Proceeds less Costs of Transfer. (b) Calculation of City's Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds. The City's Participation in the Net Transfer Proceeds shall be calculated as follows: Net Transfer Proceeds multiplied by ________ percent (___%); provided, however, that City’s Participation in the Net Transfer Proceeds shall be reduced by the amount required to ensure that Developer achieves a return equal to no less than Developer’s Return (at time of sale) after factoring in the City’s Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds. (c) Reporting of Proceeds from Transfer. No less than fifteen business days prior to a Transfer of a Majority Interest, Developer will deliver to City a written statement that includes the amount of Developer’s Development Costs, and an estimated closing statement that includes the best estimate of the following items: (i) Estimated Gross Transfer Proceeds, identifying all Cash Consideration and non-cash consideration; (ii) Estimated Costs of Transfer; (iii) Estimated Net Transfer Proceeds; and (iv) The calculation of the City's Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds in accordance with Section 3.9(b) hereof. (d) Manner of Payment. Developer shall pay City's Participation in the Net Transfer Proceeds at close of escrow of the first Transfer of a Majority Interest. The estimated closing statement shall be updated as of the date of close of escrow under the Transfer to show the 383 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 15 actual Net Transfer Proceeds and City's share thereof. City may reference in any Notice of Compliance or other representation requested from City that payment of City's Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds is a material obligation under this Agreement, due and owing at close of escrow on the first Transfer of a Majority Interest hereunder. Within forty-five days after any such Transfer, the Developer shall submit to City a report prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles consistently applied, and certified, under penalty of perjury, by Developer's Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent position) as complete and correct in all material respects, confirming the actual amount of Net Transfer Proceeds received, and the amount of Net Transfer Proceeds due to the City. At City's option, any overpayments may be either refunded to Developer or applied to any other amount then due and unpaid. Developer shall accompany the statement of Net Transfer Proceeds with the amount of any underpayments. The closing statement delivered to City under this subsection (d) may be subject to audit or review by City for determination of the accuracy of Developer's reporting of the City's Participation in Net Transfer Proceeds. Failure by Developer to make the payments in the manner and at the times described in this Section 3.9 constitutes default by Developer subject to the provisions of Article 10 of this Agreement. 3.10 Compliance with Master Development Schedule; Extension Rights. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.10 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) Subject to any extensions provided as a result of a Force Majeure Delay as set forth in Section 10.3, and so long as City complies with its obligations to cooperate and to timely process any applications submitted by Developer as set forth in Sections 4.6, 5.1, and 5.3, Developer shall comply with the Master Development Schedule attached as Exhibit G to this Agreement. (b) Notwithstanding the above, Developer shall have the right to for (4) six- month extensions to extend the milestones identified in Exhibit G, at a charge of $100,000.00 per extension, for documented good cause, and by providing thirty (30) days’ advance written notice to the City of Developer’s desire to exercise an extension. Upon receipt of such written notice, documentation supporting good cause, and payment of the applicable fee, each remaining milestone on Exhibit G shall automatically be by six-months. For purposes of this Section 3.10, “good cause” means the following: (1) construction or pre-construction delays arise that are outside of Developer’s reasonable control arising from the unavailability of construction materials for projects similar to the Project that cause significant construction delays, significant construction delays resulting from such materials being unusually difficult or impossible to obtain, or from defects, tariffs, embargoes, or trade disputes, where, in each case, Developer is unable to obtain alternative or replacement materials, within the same or substantially similar time period at substantially the same cost (and without having to forfeit any significant deposits or advance payments), and (2) changes in economic and market conditions that affect the availability of commercially reasonable financing for comparable hotel projects within the San Francisco Bay Area. In the event that Developer fails to provide documentation of good cause as defined above, City may deny Developer’s requested extension. 384 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 16 3.11 Other Developer Obligations. (a) Mitigation Measures. Developer shall comply with the applicable Mitigation Measures identified and approved in the EIR for the Specific Plan, in accordance with CEQA as identified and as set forth in the MMRP. 3.12 Indemnification By Developer. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.12 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) Except for the Claims released by City pursuant to Section 11.2 of Exhibit B, Developer agrees to the fullest extent allowed by law, to indemnify, protect, defend (with counsel satisfactory to City), and hold City (and its elected and appointed officers, officials, directors, legislative body members, managers, employees, consultants, contractors, subcontractors, attorneys, agents, invitees, and/or licensees acting on behalf of City; collectively "City Indemnitees") harmless from and against any and all actions, causes of action, charges, claims, compensation, costs, damages, fees (including attorneys’ fees and experts’ fees), fines, demands, judgments, losses, orders, penalties, rights, and expenses of any kind or type, and compensation whatsoever, direct or indirect, known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen (collectively, “Claims”) suffered by City Indemnitees to the extent caused by: (i) Any material misrepresentation or breach of warranty or covenant made by Developer in this Agreement, provided that Developer’s obligations under this Section 3.12 shall not apply to any misrepresentation or breach of warranty or covenant actually known to and waived by City prior to the Effective Date; (ii) The acts or negligent omissions of Developer or any Developer Indemnitee, including without limitation: (i) Developer’s design, construction, operation, use, and/or maintenance of the Project; (ii) Developer’s performance or failure to perform Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures; (iii) Developer’s design, construction, operation, use, monitoring, and/or maintenance of any of Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures set forth in Exhibit F to Exhibit B; and (iv) Developer’s failure to install, operate, maintain or upgrade the improvements described in the Post-Closing Mitigation Measures, including the Vapor Intrusion Mitigation (“VIMS”)/Methane Mitigation System (“MMS”), in accordance with Best Management Practices or required by Applicable Law, including in response to changed, unexpected, or unanticipated conditions at the Property; and/or (b) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, Developer's obligations under this Section 3.12 shall not apply to any Claims for any alleged lost profits, lost opportunity, or alleged consequential, speculative, contingent or punitive damages. 3.13 Construction Bonds. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 3.13 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- 385 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 17 ARTICLE 4 OBLIGATIONS OF CITY 4.1 Obligations of City Generally. The Parties acknowledge and agree that Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by its covenants and obligations set forth in this Agreement, including Developer’s decision to site the Project in the City, is a material consideration for City’s agreement to perform and abide by the long term covenants and obligations of City, as set forth herein. 4.2 Post-Closing Mitigation Measures. (a) City shall perform, at City’s sole expense, each of the “City’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures” identified in Exhibit G to Exhibit B and in the manner set forth therein. (i) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project, City shall prepare and implement an Operations and Maintenance Plan approved in writing by the Water Board and as described in Section B.9 of City’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures as described in Exhibit G to Exhibit B. (ii) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project, City shall prepare and implement a methane and volatile organic compound monitoring plan approved in writing by the Water Board and as described in Section B.11 of City’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures as described in Exhibit G to Exhibit B. (iii) Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project, City shall prepare and implement a post-closure Emergency Response Plan as described in Section D.1 of City’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures as described in Exhibit G to Exhibit B. 4.3 Protection of Vested Rights. City acknowledges that the vested rights provided to Developer by this Agreement might prevent some City Law from applying to the Property or prevailing over all or any part of this Agreement. City further acknowledges that Developer’s vested rights to Develop the Property include the rights provided by the Project Approvals or the Subsequent Approvals, which may not be diminished by the enactment or adoption of City Law. City shall cooperate with Developer and shall consider undertaking actions mutually agreed by the Parties as necessary to ensure that this Agreement remains in full force and effect. To the maximum extent feasible in accordance with Applicable Law, City shall not require Developer to include a secondary fire apparatus access road from a second public right of way to the Property. 4.4 Availability of Public Services. To the maximum extent permitted by law and consistent with its authority, City shall assist Developer in reserving such capacity for sewer and water services as may be necessary to serve the Project. 4.5 Developer’s Right to Rebuild. City agrees that Developer may renovate or rebuild all or any part of the Project within the Term should it become necessary due to damage or destruction. Any such renovation or rebuilding shall be subject to the square footage and height 386 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 18 limitations vested by this Agreement, and shall comply with the Project Approvals, the building codes existing at the time of such rebuilding or reconstruction, and the requirements of CEQA. 4.6 Expedited Plan Check Process. The City agrees to provide an expedited plan check process for the approval of Project drawings consistent with its existing practices for expedited plan checks. Developer agrees to pay the City’s established fees for expedited plan check services. The City shall use reasonable efforts to provide such plan checks within 3 weeks of a submittal that meets the requirements of Section 5.2. The City acknowledges that the City’s timely processing of Subsequent Approvals and plan checks is essential to the successful and complete Development of the Project. 4.7 Project Coordination. The City shall perform those obligations of the City set forth in this Agreement, which the City acknowledges are essential for the Developer to perform its obligations in Article 3. The City and Developer shall use good faith and diligent efforts to communicate, cooperate and coordinate with each other during Development of the Project. 4.8 Transient Occupancy Tax Rebate. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 4.8 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- To help ensure the economic feasibility of the Project in light of site constraints and added costs associated with development on the Property, City and Developer shall enter into a separate Transient Occupancy Tax Rebate Agreement recorded in the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project granting to Developer a Transient Occupancy Tax Rebate (“TOT Rebate”) of TOT collected by City from Developer in connection with its operation of the Project as a hotel in the form attached as Exhibit F hereto. Such Agreement shall include the following terms: (a) The City’s obligation to provide the TOT Rebate amount to Developer is contingent upon Developer’s continuous operation of a 350-room full-service hotel facility which is the quality of a “AAA” (or similar rating) four diamond or higher hotel Project at the Property. City shall confirm such continued operation annually. (b) The TOT Rebate amount provided by City to Developer shall be equal to fifty (50) percent of the TOT collected from transient rentals of hotel rooms within the Project for a period not to exceed fifteen (15) years beginning from the commencement of operations of the Project as a hotel; provided, however, that the total TOT Rebate provided pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed forty-four million five hundred thirty thousand dollars ($44,530,000) (the “Maximum TOT Rebate Amount”). For purposes of this Section 4.8, “commencement of operations of the Project as a hotel” means the first day upon which the Project provides accommodations to members of the general public via paid bookings. Upon request by City, Developer shall provide documentation to verify the “commencement of operations of the Project as a hotel.” (c) Beginning from the commencement of operations of the Project as a hotel, City shall pay the TOT Rebate to Developer every six (6) months in June and December, for the preceding six (6) months based upon the actual TOT collected for that period from the Project only. 387 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 19 (d) Upon the earlier of City’s payment to Developer of the Maximum TOT Rebate Amount or 15 years since the commencement of operations of the Project as a hotel, the City shall thereafter be entitled to receive one hundred (100) percent of all TOT revenue owed by the Project to the City pursuant to SSFMC Chapter 4.20. (e) City’s obligations under this Section 4.8 shall immediately cease if the Project ceases to operate as a hotel for more than thirty (30) days. For purposes of this subsection, the Project shall not be deemed to have ceased operations in the event of temporary closures due to a Force Majeure event as described in Section 10.3. In addition, the City’s obligations shall immediately cease under this Section 4.8 if Developer fails to pay City's Participation in the Net Transfer Proceeds at close of escrow of the first Transfer of a Majority Interest as contemplated in Section 3.9. 4.9 Indemnification by City. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 4.9 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) Except for the Claims released by Developer pursuant to Section 11.1 of Exhibit B, City agrees to the fullest extent allowed by law to indemnify, protect, defend (with counsel satisfactory to Developer), and hold Developer and its officers, directors, managers, members, employees, agents, contractors, subcontractors, consultants, invitees, or licensees acting on behalf of Developer (collectively, “Developer Indemnitees”) harmless from and against any and all Claims suffered by Developer Indemnitees, to the extent caused by: (i) Any material misrepresentation or breach of warranty or covenant made by City in this Agreement, provided that City's obligations under this Section 4.9 shall not apply to any misrepresentation or breach of warranty or covenant actually known to and waived by Developer prior to the Effective Date; (ii) Claims brought by any third party to the extent caused by the Pre- Existing Property Conditions; provided, however, City's obligations hereunder shall not apply to the extent that such third party claims are caused by the acts or negligent omissions of Developer or any Developer lndemnitee, including without limitation: (i) Developer’s design, construction, operation, use, and/or maintenance of the Project; (ii) Developer’s performance of or failure to perform Developer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures set forth in Exhibit F to Exhibit B; (iii) Developer’s design, construction, operation, use, and/or maintenance of any of Developer's Post- Closing Mitigation Measures; (iv) Developer’s failure to install, operate, maintain or upgrade the improvements described in the Post-Closing Mitigation Measures, including the VIMS/MMS, in accordance with Best Management Practices or required by Applicable Law, including in response to changed, unexpected, or unanticipated conditions at the Property; (v) Developer’s breach of this Agreement; and (vi) failure by Developer to provide any notice, disclosure or other information required by Applicable Laws in connection with the presence or potential presence of Pre-Existing Property Conditions at or otherwise relating to the Project, provided, however, that City’s obligations to Developer Indemnitees under this Section 4.9 shall not be excused by the mere discovery by a Developer Indemnitee of a Pre-Existing Property Condition; 388 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 20 (iii) Claims to the extent caused by City’s: (a) violation of Applicable Laws pertaining to the Pre-Existing Property Conditions from and after the Effective Date; and (b) performance of or failure to perform City’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures described in Exhibit G to Exhibit B from and after the Closing Date (as defined in the PSA). Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, City’s obligations under this Section 4.9 shall not apply to any Claims for any alleged lost profits, lost opportunity, or alleged consequential, speculative, contingent or punitive damages. ARTICLE 5 COOPERATION - IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 Processing Application for Subsequent Approvals. By approving the Project Approvals, City has made a final policy decision that the Project is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare. Accordingly, City shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law, not use its discretionary authority in considering any application for a Subsequent Approval to revisit, frustrate, or change the policy decisions or material terms reflected by the Project Approvals or otherwise to prevent or delay Development of the Project. Instead, the Subsequent Approvals shall be deemed to be tools to implement those final policy decisions. 5.2 Timely Submittals By Developer. Developer acknowledges that City cannot expedite processing Subsequent Approvals until Developer submits complete applications on a timely basis. Developer shall use its best efforts to (i) provide to City in a timely manner any and all documents, applications, plans, and other information necessary for City to carry out its obligations hereunder; and (ii) cause Developer’s planners, engineers, and all other consultants to provide to City in a timely manner all such documents, applications, plans and other necessary required materials as set forth in the Applicable Law. It is the express intent of Developer and City to cooperate and diligently work to obtain any and all Subsequent Approvals. 5.3 Timely Processing By City. Upon submission by Developer of all appropriate applications and processing fees for any Subsequent Approval, City shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law, promptly and diligently commence and complete all steps necessary to act on the Subsequent Approval application including, without limitation: (i) providing at Developer’s expense and subject to Developer’s request and prior approval, reasonable overtime staff assistance and/or staff consultants for planning and processing of each Subsequent Approval application; (ii) if legally required, providing notice and holding public hearings; and (iii) acting on any such Subsequent Approval application. City shall ensure that adequate staff is available, and shall authorize overtime staff assistance as may be necessary, to timely process any such Subsequent Approval application. 5.4 Denial of Subsequent Approval Application. The City may deny an application for a Subsequent Approval only if such application does not comply with this Agreement or Applicable Law. 5.5 Other Government Permits. At Developer’s sole discretion and in accordance with Developer’s construction schedule, Developer shall apply for such other permits and 389 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 21 approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasi-governmental entities in connection with the Development of, or the provision of services to, the Project. City, at Developer’s expense, shall cooperate with Developer in its efforts to obtain such permits and approvals and shall, from time to time, at the request of Developer, use its reasonable efforts to assist Developer to ensure the timely availability of such permits and approvals. 5.6 Assessment Districts or Other Funding Mechanisms. (a) Existing Fees. As set forth in Section 3.2, above, the Parties understand and agree that as of the Effective Date the fees, exactions, and payments listed in Exhibit D are the only City fees and exactions that apply to the Project, subject to the credits and exemptions that may be set forth in Article 3 of this Agreement or identified on Exhibit D and subject to Section 5.6(b) below. Except for those fees and exactions listed in Exhibit D, City is unaware of any pending efforts to initiate, or consider applications for new or increased fees, exactions, or assessments covering the Property, or any portion thereof that would apply to the Project prior to the Effective Date. (b) Application of Fees Imposed by Outside Agencies. The City agrees to exempt Developer from any and all fees, including but not limited to, development impact fees, which other public agencies request the City to impose at City’s discretion on the Project or Property after the Effective Date through the expiration of the Term. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, in the event that another public agency requests that the City impose a fee, including a development impact fee on all new development and land use projects on a citywide (or East of 101 Area Plan-wide) basis, then any such fee duly adopted by the City shall apply to the Project. This Section 5.6(b) shall not prohibit the City from imposing on Developer any fee or obligation that is imposed by a regional agency in accordance with state or federal obligations implemented by the City in cooperation with such regional agency, or that is imposed by the State of California. ARTICLE 6 STANDARDS, LAWS AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE PROJECT 6.1 Vested Right to Develop. Developer shall have a vested right to Develop the Project on the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals, the Subsequent Approvals (as and when they are issued), and Applicable Law, provided, however, that this Agreement shall not supersede, diminish, or impinge upon vested rights secured pursuant to other Applicable Laws, including without limitation, vested rights secured in connection with a vesting tentative subdivision map pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act (Gov’t. Code §§ 66410 et seq.). Nothing in this section shall be deemed to eliminate or diminish the requirement of Developer to obtain any required Subsequent Approvals, or to eliminate or diminish Developer’s right to have its applications for any Subsequent Approval timely processed by City in accordance with this Agreement and Applicable Law. 6.2 Permitted Uses Vested by This Agreement. The vested permitted uses of the Property; the vested density and intensity of use of the Property; the vested maximum height, bulk, and size of proposed buildings; vested provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the location of public improvements; the general location of public utilities; and other 390 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 22 vested terms and conditions of Development applicable to the Project, shall be as set forth in the vested Project Approvals and, as and when they are issued (but not in limitation of any right to Development as set forth in the Project Approvals) the vested Subsequent Approvals. The vested permitted uses for the Project shall include those uses listed as “permitted” in the Project Approvals, as they may be amended from time to time in accordance with this Agreement. 6.3 [Intentionally Omitted] 6.4 Adoption of Reach Code. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 6.4 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- City acknowledges and understands that Developer is planning for and relying upon the ability of restaurants within the Project to be permitted to utilize natural gas for all food cooking and preparation functions. Developer is further relying on its ability to utilize natural gas for commercial laundry facilities within the hotel and for the hotel boiler system and spa heating system. Any amendments to SSFMC Title 15 or to any other provision of the City’s Code, adopted after the Effective Date of this Agreement, that would preclude Developer’s use of natural gas for the hotel operations in the manner described in this Section 6.4 shall not apply to the Project. 6.5 Uniform Codes. Subject to Section 6.4, City may apply to the Property, at any time during the Term, then current Uniform Building Code and other uniform construction codes, and City’s then current design and construction standards for road and storm drain facilities, provided any such uniform code or standard has been adopted and uniformly applied by City on a citywide basis and provided that no such code or standard is adopted for the purpose of preventing or otherwise limiting Development of all or any part of the Project. 6.6 No Conflicting Enactments. Developer’s vested right to Develop the Project shall not be diminished by City approval (whether by action of the City Council or by initiative, referendum or other means) of any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, standard, directive, condition or other measure (each individually, a “City Law”) that is in conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or that reduces the rights or assurances provided by this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any City Law shall be deemed to conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or reduce the Development rights provided hereby if it would accomplish any of the following results, either by specific reference to the Project or as part of a general enactment which applies to or affects the Project: (a) Change any land use designation or permitted use of the Property; (b) Limit or control the availability of public utilities, services, or facilities, or any privileges or rights to public utilities, services, or facilities (for example, water rights, water connections or sewage capacity rights, sewer connections, etc.) for the Project, provided that Developer has complied with all applicable requirements for receiving or using or receiving public utilities, services, or facilities; (c) Limit or control the location of buildings, structures, grading, or other improvements of the Project in a manner that is inconsistent with or more restrictive than the 391 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 23 limitations included in the Project Approvals or the Subsequent Approvals (as and when they are issued); (d) Limit or control the rate, timing, phasing, or sequencing of the Development of all or any part of the Project in any manner; (e) Result in Developer having to substantially delay Development of the Project or require the issuance of additional permits or approvals by the City other than those required by Applicable Law; (f) Establish, enact, increase, or impose against the Project or Property any fees, taxes (including without limitation general, special and excise taxes but excluding any increased local (city or county) sales tax or increases city business license tax), assessments, liens or other monetary obligations (including generating demolition permit fees, encroachment permit and grading permit fees) other than those specifically permitted by this Agreement or other connection fees imposed by third party utilities; (g) Impose against the Project any condition, dedication or other exaction not specifically authorized by Applicable Law; or (h) Limit the processing or procuring of applications and approvals of Subsequent Approvals. 6.7 Initiatives and Referenda; Other City Actions Related to Project. (a) If any City Law is enacted or imposed by initiative or referendum, or by the City Council directly or indirectly in connection with any proposed initiative or referendum, which City Law would conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or reduce the Development rights provided by this Agreement, such Law shall only apply to the Project to the extent it would not diminish Developer’s vested rights to Develop the Project. (b) Except as authorized in Section 6.10, without limiting the generality of any of the foregoing, no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of Development) affecting subdivision maps, building permits or other entitlements to use that are approved or to be approved, issued or granted within the City, or portions of the City, shall diminish Developer’s vested rights to Develop the Project. (c) To the maximum extent permitted by law, City shall cooperate with Developer and shall undertake such actions as may be necessary to ensure this Agreement remains in full force and effect. (d) Developer reserves the right to challenge in court any City Law that would reduce the Development rights provided by this Agreement. 6.8 Environmental Mitigation. The Parties understand that the EIR and MMRP were intended to be used in connection with each of the Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals needed for the Project. Consistent with the CEQA policies and requirements applicable to the EIR, 392 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 24 City agrees to use the EIR and MMRP in connection with the processing of any Subsequent Approval to the maximum extent allowed by law and not to impose on the Project any mitigation measures other than those specifically imposed by the Project Approvals, EIR, and MMRP, or specifically required by CEQA or other Applicable Law, except as provided for in this Section 6.8. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not limit or expand the operation or scope of CEQA, including Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162, with respect to City’s consideration of any Subsequent Approval. Consistent with CEQA, a future, additional CEQA document may be prepared for any Subsequent Approval only to the extent required by Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162, unless otherwise requested in writing by Developer. Developer specifically acknowledges and agrees that, under Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162, City as lead agency is responsible and retains sole discretion to determine whether an additional CEQA document must be prepared, which discretion City agrees it shall not exercise unreasonably or delay. 6.9 Future Legislative Actions. (a) In the event that, following the Effective Date, City revises, modifies, updates, or amends the land use designation(s) of the General Plan in effect on the Effective Date, the Specific Plan in effect on the Effective Date, or of the East of 101 Area Plan in effect on the Effective Date, that are applicable to the Property, or the zoning designation(s) applicable to the Property and in effect on the Effective Date, such updates or amendments shall not diminish Developer’s vested rights to Develop the Project or the Property, but no provision of this Agreement shall limit Developer’s right to apply for any land use entitlement(s) for the Property that are consistent with, or authorized by, such update(s) or amendment(s). Developer acknowledges, however, that the amended or updated policies identified in the immediately preceding sentence might include requirements for permitted development that would be in addition to any obligations of Developer under this Agreement, and that those additional requirements would apply to Developer if Developer applies for any land use entitlement(s) for the Property that are consistent with, or authorized by, any revision, modification, update, or amendment contemplated by this subsection (a) of Section 6.9 of this Agreement. No provision of this Agreement shall limit or restrain in any way Developer’s full participation in any and all public processes undertaken by the City that are in any way related to revisions, modifications, amendments, or updates to the General Plan, the Specific Plan, the East of 101 Area Plan, or the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code. (b) Developer acknowledges that, if it applies for any land use entitlement(s) for the Property that are consistent with, or authorized by, any revision, modification, update, or amendment contemplated by subsection (a) of this Section 6.9 of this Agreement, and that would allow development of the subject parcel(s) in a manner that is inconsistent with, or not authorized by, the Project Approvals, then City may be required to conduct additional CEQA review with respect to such application in accordance with Section 6.8 of this Agreement, and, if such application is finally approved by the City and becomes effective, such approval shall automatically be vested under this Agreement only to the extent such approval is consistent with, or authorized by, the Project Approvals. By way of example, if (following any required CEQA 393 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 25 compliance) such effective approval were to authorize Development of a structure with a floor area ratio of 2.0, but the Project Approvals would only authorize Development of a structure with a floor area ratio of 1.0, then Developer would automatically have the vested right to Develop said structure with a floor area ratio of 1.0, and would automatically have the non-vested right to Develop that same structure with a floor area ratio of 2.0 (unless, following such approval, this Agreement is amended to vest Developer’s right to Develop such structure with a floor area ratio of 2.0). (c) City agrees that, if Developer applies for any land use entitlement(s) for the Property that are inconsistent with, or not authorized by, the Project Approvals, then: (i) such event shall not be a basis for amending or revisiting the terms of the Agreement, unless Developer also applies for an amendment of this Agreement pursuant to subsection (b) of Section 7.2 of this Agreement (i.e., a non-Administrative Agreement Amendment), and shall not be a basis for imposing new exactions, mitigation requirements, conditions of approval, or any other requirement of, or precondition to, Developer’s exercise of its Development rights vested under this Agreement; and (ii) the only exactions, mitigation requirements, or conditions of approval City may impose on such land use entitlement shall be limited to those exactions, mitigation requirements, or conditions of approval authorized under federal, state, or local laws in effect at the time such application is deemed complete, and shall only be imposed with respect to those uses, densities, intensities, and other Development standards applicable to the subject parcel(s) that are inconsistent with, or not authorized by, the Project Approvals. 6.10 Life of Development Approvals, and Permits. The term of any permit or other land use entitlement approved as a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval shall automatically be extended for the longer of the Term (including any extensions) or the term otherwise applicable to such Project Approval or Subsequent Approval if this Agreement is no longer in effect. The Term of this Agreement and the term of Project Approval or Subsequent Approval shall not include any period of time during which a Development moratorium (including, but not limited to, a water or sewer moratorium or water and sewer moratorium) or the actions of other public agencies that regulate land use, Development or the provision of services to the land, prevents, prohibits or delays the construction of the Project or a lawsuit involving any such Development approvals or permits is pending. 6.11 State and Federal Law. As provided in Government Code section 65869.5, this Agreement shall not preclude the application to the Project of changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies, to the extent that such changes are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations. Not in limitation of the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude City from imposing on Developer any fee specifically mandated and required by state or federal laws and regulations. In the event of any changes required by state or federal laws or regulations, the Developer and City shall meet and confer in good faith to determine what, if any, modifications to this Agreement and/or the Project Approvals would allow the Project and City to comply with such state or federal law or regulation while preserving to the maximum extent feasible the spirit and intent of the Parties in this Agreement and the Project Approvals. 394 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 26 6.12 Prevailing Wage. Developer and its contractors and agents shall comply with California Labor Code section 1720 et seq., and regulations adopted pursuant thereto, to the extent applicable to the Project (“Prevailing Wage Laws”), and shall be responsible for carrying out the applicable requirements of such law and regulations. Developer shall submit to City a plan for monitoring payment of prevailing wages and shall implement such plan at Developer’s expense. (a) To the fullest extent permitted by law, Developer shall indemnify, defend (with counsel approved by City, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld) and hold the City, and its elected and appointed officers, officials, employees, agents, consultants, and contractors (for purposes of this Section 6.12 collectively, the “Indemnitees”) harmless from and against all liability, loss, cost, expense (including without limitation attorneys’ fees and costs of litigation), claim, demand, action, suit, judicial or administrative proceeding, penalty, deficiency, fine, order, and damage (for purposes of this Section 6.12, all of the foregoing collectively “Claims”) which directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, are caused by, arise in connection with, result from, relate to, or are alleged to be caused by, arise in connection with, or relate to, the payment or requirement of payment of prevailing wages in connection with this Agreement (including without limitation, all claims that may be made by contractors, subcontractors or other third party claimants pursuant to Labor Code sections 1726 and 1781), the failure to comply with any state or federal labor laws, regulations or standards in connection with this Agreement, including but not limited to the Prevailing Wage Laws, or any act or omission of Developer related to this Agreement with respect to the payment or requirement of payment of prevailing wages, whether or not any insurance policies shall have been determined to be applicable to any such Claims. It is further agreed that the City does not and shall not waive any rights against Developer which it may have by reason of this indemnity and hold harmless agreement because of the acceptance by the City, or Developer’s deposit with the City, of any of the insurance policies described in this Agreement. The provisions of this Section 6.12 shall survive the expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement and the issuance of a Certificate of Completion for the Project. Developer’s indemnification obligations set forth in this Section 6.12 shall not apply to Claims arising solely from the gross negligence or willful misconduct of the Indemnitees. 6.13 Timing and Review of Project Construction and Completion. Except as expressly provided in the Project Approvals and this Agreement, Developer shall have the vested right to Develop the Project in such order, at such rate and at such times as the Developer deems appropriate in the exercise of its sole business judgment. In particular, and not in any limitation of any of the foregoing, since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to consider, and expressly provide for, the timing of Development resulted in a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of Development to prevail over such Parties' agreement, it is the desire of the Parties hereto to avoid that result. 395 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 27 ARTICLE 7 AMENDMENT 7.1 Project Amendments. To the extent permitted by state and federal law, any Project Approval or Subsequent Approval may, from time to time, be amended or modified in the following manner: (a) Administrative Project Amendments. Upon the written request of Developer for an amendment or modification to a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval, the City's Chief Planner or his/her designee shall determine: (i) whether the requested amendment or modification is minor when considered in light of the Project as a whole; and (ii) whether the requested amendment or modification is consistent with this Agreement and Applicable Law. If the Chief Planner or his/her designee finds that the proposed amendment or modification is minor, consistent with this Agreement and Applicable Law, and will result in no new significant impacts not addressed and mitigated in the EIR, the amendment shall be determined to be an “Administrative Project Amendment” and the Chief Planner or his/her designee may, except to the extent otherwise required by law, approve the Administrative Project Amendment without notice and public hearing. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, lot line adjustments, minor alterations in vehicle circulation patterns or vehicle access points, location of parking stalls on the site, number of required parking stalls if City development standards allow, substitutions of comparable landscaping for any landscaping shown on any final development plan or landscape plan, substitutions of comparable building design/façade materials for any building design/façade material shown on any final development plan or Precise Plan, variations in the location of structures that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, location or installation of utilities and other infrastructure connections or facilities that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, and minor adjustments to the Property diagram or Property legal description shall be treated as Administrative Project Amendments. Any requested amendment seeking modification of or deviation from the performance or development standards contained in the Municipal Code and which would otherwise require a discretionary approval by the City Council, Planning Commission, or other formal approval body shall not be treated as an Administrative Project Amendment. (b) Non-Administrative Project Amendments. Any request by Developer for an amendment or modification to a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval which is determined not to be an Administrative Project Amendment as set forth above shall be subject to review, consideration and action pursuant to the Applicable Law and this Agreement. 7.2 Amendment of this Agreement. This Agreement may be amended from time to time, in whole or in part, by mutual written consent of the Parties hereto or their successors in interest, as follows: (a) Administrative Agreement Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement which does not substantially affect (i) the Term, (ii) permitted uses of the Property, (iii) conditions, terms, restrictions, or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, (iv) the density or intensity of use of the Property or the maximum height or size of proposed buildings, or (v) monetary contributions by Developer, shall be considered an “Administrative Agreement 396 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 28 Amendment” and shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. Administrative Agreement Amendments may be approved by the City Manager or, in the sole discretion of the City Manager, the City Manager may refer any proposed Administrative Agreement Amendment to the City Council for consideration and approval or denial. (b) Other Agreement Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement other than an Administrative Agreement Amendment shall be subject to recommendation by the Planning Commission (by advisory resolution) and approval by the City Council (by ordinance) following a duly noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council, consistent with Government Code sections 65867 and 65867.5. (c) Amendment Exemptions. No amendment of a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval, or a Subsequent Approval shall require an amendment to this Agreement. Instead, any such matter automatically shall be deemed to be incorporated into the Project and vested under this Agreement. ARTICLE 8 ASSIGNMENT, TRANSFER AND NOTICE 8.1 Assignment. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 8.1 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) Absent an express signed written agreement between the Parties to the contrary, neither Developer nor City may assign its rights or delegate its duties under this Agreement without the express written consent of the other Party. No permitted assignment of any of the rights or obligations under this Agreement shall result in a novation or in any other way release the assignor from its obligations under this Agreement. Notwithstanding any provision hereof, Developer may assign this Agreement without the consent of City to one or more entities controlled by, or under common control with, or owned in whole or in part by Developer (an “Affiliate”), provided, Developer shall not be released from its obligations under this Agreement. As used in this Section 8.1, “controlled” shall mean the possession, directly or indirectly, of the power to direct or cause the direction of management or policies, whether through the ownership of voting securities, partnership interest, contracts (other than those that purport to transfer Developer’s interest to a third party not specifically identified in this subsection) or otherwise. 8.2 Transfer Agreements. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 8.2 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) In connection with the Transfer or assignment by Developer of all or any portion of the Project (other than a transfer or assignment by Developer to an Affiliate), Developer and the transferee shall enter into a written agreement regarding the respective interests, rights, and obligations of Developer and the transferee in and under the Agreement and the Project Approvals (a “Transfer Agreement”). Such Transfer Agreement shall include an executed Assignment and Assumption of Rights and Obligations, as set forth in Exhibit I, and may (i) release Developer from obligations under the Agreement or the Project Approvals that pertain to that 397 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 29 portion of the Project being transferred, as described in the Transfer Agreement, provided that the transferee expressly assumes such obligations; (ii) transfer to the transferee vested rights to improve that portion of the Project being transferred; and (iii) address any other matter deemed by Developer to be necessary or appropriate in connection with the transfer or assignment. (b) Prior to any such Transfer or assignment, Developer will seek City’s prior written consent thereof, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. At the time Developer requests City’s written consent, Developer shall submit to the City information describing transferee’s development experience and financial resources. City may refuse to give consent only if, in light of the proposed transferee’s reputation and financial resources, such transferee would not, in City’s reasonable opinion, be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such transferee, including Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures (contained in Exhibit F to Exhibit B of this Agreement). To assist the City Manager in determining whether to provide consent to a transfer or assignment, the City Manager may request from the transferee (directly or through Developer) additional reasonable documentation of transferee’s understanding of and ability and plan to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by transferee, including without limitation obligations specifically identified in this Agreement, the Order No. 00-46 issued by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board to the City on June 21, 2000, the Final Closure Plan and Postclosure Maintenance and Monitoring Plan each dated September 8, 2017, Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures (contained in Exhibit F to Exhibit B of this Agreement), Project Approvals, the EIR and MMRP, the General Plan, the TDM Plan, the Specific Plan, and the East of 101 Area Plan. To assist the City Manager in determining whether to consent to a transfer or assignment, the City Manager may also require one or more representatives of the transferee to meet in person to demonstrate to the City Manager’s reasonable satisfaction that the transferee understands and intends and has the ability to perform the obligations intended to be assumed, including without limitation the obligations identified in the immediately preceding sentence. City shall have sixty(60) days to request any of the information and meetings identified above, as well as request any additional information required in order to review any request for consent to a Transfer, and shall provide a determination as to whether to provide its consent within ninety (90) days of the date the request is received. Such determination will be made by the City Manager and will be appealable by Developer to the City Council. For any Transfer of all of the Property, the Developer and assignee shall enter into an assignment and assumption agreement in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit I. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, each of following Transfers are permitted and shall not require City consent under this Section 8.2: (i) Any Transfer for financing purposes to secure the funds necessary for construction and/or permanent financing of the Project, including any financing transactions, such as sale-leaseback or grant of a mortgage or deed of trust, for purposes of financing development of the Project; or any foreclosure thereof or deed-in-lieu with respect thereto; (ii) An assignment of this Agreement to an Affiliate; (iii) Dedications and grants of easements and rights of way required in accordance with the Project Approvals; 398 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 30 (iv) any change, directly or indirectly, of the equity or ownership interests of Developer or any transferee which individually or cumulatively with prior changes does not result in a change in control of Developer or transferee; or (v) Any leases, subleases, licenses, easements, or other occupancy agreements. (c) Any Transfer Agreement shall be binding on Developer, City, and the transferee. Once approved by the Developer, the transferee, and City, and then upon recordation of any Transfer Agreement in the Official Records of San Mateo County, Developer shall automatically be released from those obligations assumed by the transferee therein. (d) Developer shall be free from any and all liabilities accruing on or after the date of any assignment or transfer with respect to those obligations assumed by a transferee pursuant to a Transfer Agreement. No breach or default hereunder occurring after the assignment or Transfer by any person succeeding to any portion of Developer’s obligations under this Agreement shall be attributed to Developer. 8.3 Notice of Compliance Generally. Within thirty (30) days following any written request which Developer may make from time to time, City shall execute and deliver to Developer (or to any party requested by Developer) a written “Notice of Compliance,” in recordable form, duly executed and acknowledged by City, that certifies: (a) This Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such modifications; (b) There are no current uncured defaults under this Agreement or specifying the dates and nature of any such default; and (c) Any other information reasonably requested by Developer. The failure to deliver such a statement within such time shall constitute a conclusive presumption against City that this Agreement is in full force and effect without modification except as may be represented by the Developer and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the Developer, except as may be represented by the Developer. Developer shall have the right at Developer’s sole discretion, to record the Notice of Compliance. ARTICLE 9 COOPERATION IN THE EVENT OF LEGAL CHALLENGE 9.1 Cooperation. In the event of any administrative, legal, or equitable action or other proceeding instituted by any person not a party to the Agreement challenging the validity of any provision of the Agreement, or any Project Approval or Subsequent Approval, the Parties will cooperate in defending such action or proceeding. City shall promptly (within five business days) notify Developer of any such action against City. If City fails promptly to notify Developer of any 399 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 31 legal action against City or if City fails to cooperate in the defense, Developer will not thereafter be responsible for City’s defense. The Parties will use best efforts to select mutually agreeable legal counsel to defend such action, and Developer will pay compensation for such legal counsel (including City Attorney time and overhead for the defense of such action), but will exclude other City staff overhead costs and normal day-to-day business expenses incurred by City. Developer’s obligation to pay for legal counsel will extend to attorneys’ fees incurred on appeal. In the event City and Developer are unable to select mutually agreeable legal counsel to defend such action or proceeding, each party may select its own legal counsel and Developer will pay its and the City’s attorneys’ fees and costs. Developer shall reimburse the City for all reasonable court costs and attorneys’ fees expended by the City in defense of any such action or other proceeding or payable to any prevailing plaintiff/petitioner. 9.2 Reapproval. (a) If, as a result of any administrative, legal, or equitable action or other proceeding, all or any portion of the Agreement or the Project approvals are set aside or otherwise made ineffective by any judgment in such action or proceeding (“Judgment”), based on procedural, substantive or other deficiencies (“Deficiencies”), the Parties will use their respective best efforts to sustain and reenact or readopt the Agreement, and/or the Project approvals, that the Deficiencies related to, as follows, unless the Parties mutually agree in writing to act otherwise: (i) If any Judgment requires reconsideration or consideration by City of the Agreement or any Project approval, then the City will consider or reconsider that matter in a manner consistent with the intent of the Agreement and with Applicable Law. If any such Judgment invalidates or otherwise makes ineffective all or any portion of the Agreement or Project approval, then the Parties will cooperate and will cure any Deficiencies identified in the Judgment or upon which the Judgment is based in a manner consistent with the intent of the Agreement and with Applicable Law. City will then consider readopting or reenacting the Agreement, or the Project approval, or any portion thereof, to which the Deficiencies related. (ii) Acting in a manner consistent with the intent of the Agreement includes, but is not limited to, recognizing that the Parties intend that Developer may undertake and complete Development of the Project as described in the Agreement, and adopting such ordinances, resolutions, and other enactments as are necessary to readopt or reenact all or any portion of the Agreement or Project approvals without contravening the Judgment. (b) The Parties agree that this Section 9.2 shall constitute a separate agreement entered into concurrently, and that if any other provision of this Agreement, or the Agreement as a whole, is invalidated, rendered null, or set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Parties agree to be bound by the terms of this Section 9.2, which shall survive invalidation, nullification, or setting aside. 400 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 32 ARTICLE 10 DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION 10.1 Defaults. Any failure by either Party to perform any term or provision of the Agreement, which failure continues uncured for a period of thirty (30) days following written notice of such failure from the other Party (unless such period is extended by mutual written consent), will constitute a default under the Agreement. Any notice given will specify the nature of the alleged failure and, where appropriate, the manner in which said failure satisfactorily may be cured. If the nature of the alleged failure is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such 30-day period, then the commencement of the cure within such time period, and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure thereafter, will be deemed to be a cure within such 30-day period. Upon the occurrence of a default under the Agreement, the non-defaulting party may institute legal proceedings to enforce the terms of the Agreement or, in the event of a material default, terminate the Agreement. If the default is cured, then no default will exist and the noticing party shall take no further action. 10.2 Termination. If City elects to consider terminating the Agreement due to a material default of Developer, then City will give a notice of intent to terminate the Agreement and the matter will be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council at a duly noticed and conducted public hearing. Developer will have the right to offer written and oral evidence prior to or at the time of said public hearings. If the City Council determines that a material default has occurred and is continuing, and elects to terminate the Agreement, City will give written notice of termination of the Agreement to Developer by certified mail and the Agreement will thereby be terminated sixty (60) days thereafter. 10.3 Enforced Delay; Extension of Time of Performance. Subject to the limitations set forth below, performance by either party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default, and all performance and other dates specified in this Agreement shall be extended, where delays are due to: war; insurrection; strikes and labor disputes; lockouts; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties; acts of God; acts of the public enemy; terrorism; epidemics; pandemics; quarantine restrictions; governmental restrictions or priority; litigation and arbitration, including court delays; legal challenges to this Agreement, the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, or any other approval required for the Project or any initiatives or referenda regarding the same; environmental conditions that have not been previously disclosed or discovered or that could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence that delays the construction or Development of the Property or any portion thereof; unusually severe weather but only to the extent that such weather or its effects (including, without limitation, dry out time) result in delays that cumulatively exceed thirty (30) days for every winter season occurring after commencement of construction of the Project; acts or omissions of the other party; or acts or failures to act of any public or governmental agency or entity (except that acts or failures to act of City shall not excuse performance by City); moratorium; or a Severe Economic Recession (each a “Force Majeure Delay”). An extension of time for any such cause shall be for the period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause, if Notice by the party claiming such extension is sent to the other party within sixty (60) days of the commencement of the cause. If Notice is sent after such sixty (60) day period, then the extension shall commence to run no sooner than 401 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 33 sixty (60) days prior to the giving of such Notice. Times of performance under this Agreement may also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of City and Developer. Developer’s inability or failure to obtain financing or otherwise timely satisfy shall not be deemed to be a cause outside the reasonable control of the Developer and shall not be the basis for an excused delay, unless such inability, failure or delay is a direct result of a Force Majeure Delay or a Severe Economic Recession. “Severe Economic Recession” means a decline in the monetary value of all finished goods and services produced in the United States, as measured by initial quarterly estimates of United States Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) published by the United States Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis (and not subsequent monthly revisions), lasting more than four (4) consecutive calendar quarters. Any quarter of flat or positive GDP growth shall end the period of such Severe Economic Recession. 10.4 Legal Action. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 10.4 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- (a) Either Party may institute legal action to cure, correct, or remedy any default, enforce any covenant or agreement in the Agreement, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation thereof, and enforce by specific performance or declaratory relief the obligations and rights of the Parties thereto. Except as provided in Section 10.1 and Section 10.4(b) below, the sole and exclusive remedies for any default or violation of the Agreement will be specific performance or declaratory relief. In any proceeding brought to enforce the Agreement, the prevailing Party will be entitled to recover from the unsuccessful Party all costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the prevailing party in the enforcement proceeding. (b) In the event that, following Close of Escrow (as defined in the PSA) for the Property, this Agreement is terminated pursuant to Section 10.2, and such termination occurs prior to commencement of construction for the Project, then the City shall have the right to reenter and take possession of the Property, and to revest in the City the estate of the Developer in the Property or portion thereof. Upon revesting in the City of title to the Property, or portion thereof, the City shall promptly use its best efforts to resell it. For purposes of this subsection, “commencement of construction” means [INSERT DEFINITION] Upon any sale or contract for development, the proceeds shall be applied as follows: (i) First, to reimburse the City for any reasonable costs it incurs in revesting the estate managing or selling the Property or portion thereof, including but not limited to amounts to discharge or prevent liens or encumbrances arising from any acts or omissions of the Developer; (ii) Second, to reimburse the City for damages to which it is entitled under this Agreement by reason of the Developer's default; (iii) Third, to the Developer up to the sum of the amount of the purchase price paid to the City by the Developer pursuant to the PSA for the Property which has reverted to the City and the reasonable cost (incurred after close of escrow) of the improvements the Developer has placed on the Property and such other reasonable costs Developer has incurred after 402 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 34 close of escrow directly in connection with development of the Project which has reverted to the City (for purposes of this subsection “reasonable costs” means [INSERT]); and (iv) Fourth, any balance to the City. 10.5 Periodic Review. (a) Conducting the Periodic Review. Throughout the Term, at least once every twelve (12) months following the Effective Date of this Agreement, City shall review the extent of good-faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Agreement. This review (“Periodic Review”) shall be conducted by the Chief Planner or his/her designee and shall be limited in scope to compliance with the terms of this Agreement pursuant to Government Code section 65865.1. At least ten (10) days prior to the Periodic Review, and in the manner prescribed in Section 11.9 of this Agreement, City shall deposit in the mail or transmit electronically to Developer a copy of any staff report and documents to be relied upon in conducting the Periodic Review and, to the extent practical, related exhibits concerning Developer’s performance hereunder. (b) Developer Submission of Periodic Review Report. Annually commencing one year from the Effective Date and continuing through termination of this Agreement, Developer shall submit a report to the Chief Planner stating the Developer’s good faith compliance with terms of the Agreement. (c) Good Faith Compliance Review. During the Periodic Review, the Chief Planner shall set a meeting to consider the Developer’s good-faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Developer shall be permitted an opportunity to respond to City’s evaluation of Developer’s performance, either orally at the meeting or in a supplemental written statement, at Developer’s election. Such response shall be made to the Chief Planner. At the conclusion of the Periodic Review, the Chief Planner shall make written findings and determinations, on the basis of substantial evidence, as to whether or not Developer has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The decision of the Chief Planner shall be appealable to the City Council. If the Chief Planner finds and determines that Developer has not complied with such terms and conditions, the Chief Planner may recommend to the City Council that it terminate or modify this Agreement by giving notice of its intention to do so, in the manner set forth in Government Code sections 65867 and 65868. The costs incurred by City in connection with the Periodic Review process described herein shall be borne by Developer. (d) Failure to Properly Conduct Periodic Review. If City fails, during any calendar year, to either: (i) conduct the Periodic Review or (ii) notify Developer in writing of City’s determination, pursuant to a Periodic Review, as to Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement and such failure remains uncured as of December 31 of any year during the Term, such failure shall be conclusively deemed an approval by City of Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement for the period of time since the last Periodic Review. 10.6 California Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement shall be filed and heard in the Superior Court of San Mateo County, California. 403 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 35 10.7 Resolution of Disputes. With regard to any dispute involving Development of the Project, the resolution of which is not provided for by this Agreement or Applicable Law, Developer shall, at City’s request, meet with City. The parties to any such meetings shall attempt in good faith to resolve any such disputes. Nothing in this Section 10.7 shall in any way be interpreted as requiring that Developer and City and/or City’s designee reach agreement with regard to those matters being addressed, nor shall the outcome of these meetings be binding in any way on City or Developer unless expressly agreed to by the parties to such meetings. 10.8 Attorneys’ Fees. In any legal action or other proceeding brought by either Party to enforce or interpret a provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and any other costs incurred in that proceeding in addition to any other relief to which it is entitled. 10.9 Hold Harmless. Developer shall hold City and its elected and appointed officers, agents, employees, and representatives harmless from claims, costs, and liabilities for any personal injury, death, or property damage which is a result of, or alleged to be the result of, the construction of the Project, or of operations performed under this Agreement by Developer or by Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees, whether such operations were performed by Developer or any of Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees. Nothing in this Section 10.9 shall be construed to mean that Developer shall hold City harmless from any claims of personal injury, death or property damage arising from, or alleged to arise from, any gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of City, its elected and appointed representatives, offices, agents and employees. ARTICLE 11 MISCELLANEOUS 11.1 Incorporation of Recitals and Introductory Paragraph. The Recitals contained in this Agreement, and the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. 11.2 No Agency. It is specifically understood and agreed to by and between the Parties hereto that: (i) the subject Project is a private development; (ii) City has no interest or responsibilities for, or duty to, third parties concerning any improvements until such time, and only until such time, that City accepts the same pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement or in connection with the various Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals; (iii) Developer shall have full power over and exclusive control of the Project herein described, subject only to the limitations and obligations of Developer under this Agreement, the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, and Applicable Law; and (iv) City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of agency relationship, joint venture or partnership between City and Developer and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as creating any such relationship between City and Developer. 11.3 Enforceability. City and Developer agree that unless this Agreement is amended or terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be enforceable by any party hereto notwithstanding any change hereafter enacted or adopted (whether by 404 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 36 ordinance, resolution, initiative, or any other means) in any applicable general plan, specific plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, or any other land use ordinance or building ordinance, resolution or other rule, regulation or policy adopted by City that changes, alters or amends the rules, regulations, and policies applicable to the Development of the Property at the time of the approval of this Agreement as provided by Government Code section 65866. 11.4 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement, or the application of this Agreement to other situations, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any material provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to a particular situation, is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable, either City or Developer may (in their sole and absolute discretion) terminate this Agreement by providing written notice of such termination to the other party. 11.5 Other Necessary Acts and City Approvals. Each party shall execute and deliver to the other all such other further instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals and this Agreement and to provide and secure to the other party the full and complete enjoyment of its rights and privileges hereunder. Whenever a reference is made herein to an action or approval to be undertaken by City, the City Manager or his or her designee is authorized to act on behalf of City, unless specifically provided otherwise by this Agreement or applicable law. 11.6 Construction. Each reference in this Agreement or any of the Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals shall be deemed to refer to the Agreement, Project Approval, or Subsequent Approval as it may be amended from time to time, whether or not the particular reference refers to such possible amendment. This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for both City and Developer, and no presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against the drafting party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. 11.7 Other Miscellaneous Terms. The singular shall include the plural; the masculine gender shall include the feminine; “shall” is mandatory; “may” is permissive. If there is more than one signer of this Agreement, the signer obligations are joint and several. 11.8 Covenants Running with the Land. All of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring all or a portion of the Project, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to California law including, without limitation, Civil Code section 1468. Each covenant herein to act or refrain from acting is for the benefit of or a burden upon the Project, as appropriate, runs with the Property, and is binding upon the owner of all or a portion of the Property and each successive owner during its ownership of such property. 405 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 37 11.9 Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between City or Developer must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by email or telefacsimile (with original forwarded by regular U.S. Mail), by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by Federal Express or other similar courier promising overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the party to whom it is addressed. If given by facsimile transmission, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received upon actual physical receipt of the entire document by the receiving party’s facsimile machine. Notices transmitted by facsimile after 5:00 p.m. on a normal business day or on a Saturday, Sunday, or holiday shall be deemed to have been given and received on the next normal business day. If given by registered or certified mail, such notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of: (i) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the party to whom notices are to be sent, or (ii) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Any party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Notice by email transmission shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt if received before 5:00 p.m. on a regular business day, or else on the next business day. Such notices or communications shall be given to the parties at their addresses set forth below: If to City, to: City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Attn: City Manager Phone: (650) 877-8500 Fax: (650) 829-6609 With a Copy to: Meyers Nave 1999 Harrison Street, 9th Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Attn: Sky Woodruff Phone: (510) 808-2000 Fax: (510) 444-1108 Email:swoodruff@meyersnave.com If to Developer, to: Oyster Point Holdco, LLC 444 West Ocean Boulevard, Suite 650 Long Beach, CA 90802 Attn: Conrad Garner, Senior Vice President Phone: (562) 435-4857 Email: cgarner@ensemble.net 406 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 38 With Copies to: Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass LLP One Montgomery Street, Suite 3000 San Francisco, CA 94104 Attn: Frank Petrilli Phone: (415) 268-0503 Email: fpetrilli@coblentzlaw.com 11.10 Mortgagee Protection. -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION 11.10 STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, at Developer’s sole discretion, from encumbering the Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any Mortgage. City acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with Developer and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage on the Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Developer under this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to Developer. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Developer to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the event of default claimed or the areas of noncompliance set forth in City’s Notice of Breach, plus additional time not to exceed 90 days, as reasonably determined by the City Manager, to allow Mortgagee sufficient time to make the election to cure and thereafter prosecute such cure to completion. If a Mortgagee shall be required to obtain title or possession in order to cure any default or breach, then the time to cure shall be tolled so long as the Mortgagee is diligently attempting to obtain possession, including by appointment of a receiver or foreclosure, and provides City upon written request from time to time reasonable evidence of such diligent efforts; provided the tolling shall not exceed 90 days or such longer period as City may agree in its sole discretion. A delay or failure by the City to provide such notice required by this Section shall extend, for the number of days until notice is given, the time allowed to the Mortgagee for cure, but shall not extend Developer’s time to cure. (c) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any portion thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the Mortgage or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or portion thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of Developer’s obligations or other affirmative covenants of Developer hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; provided, however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Developer is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be condition precedent to City’s performance 407 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 39 hereunder, and further provided that any sales, transfer, or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 8.1 of this Agreement. 11.11 Entire Agreement, Counterparts And Exhibits. This Agreement is executed in two (2) duplicate counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement consists of 35 pages, exclusive of signature pages, and six (6) exhibits which constitute in full, the final and exclusive understanding and agreement of the parties and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements of the parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of City and the Developer. The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein for all purposes: Exhibit A: Description and Diagram of Property Exhibit B: Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions Exhibit C: List of Project Approvals Exhibit D: Applicable Laws & City Fees, Exactions, and Payments Exhibit E: Operations and Maintenance Agreement Exhibit F: TOT Rebate Agreement Exhibit G: Master Development Schedule Exhibit H: Precise Plan Exhibit I: Form of Assignment and Assumption Agreement Exhibit J: Form of Easement for Existing and Future Sewer Pump Station Access and Infrastructure 11.12 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is intended for the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective permitted successors and assigns, and is not for the benefit of, nor may any express or implied provision hereof be enforced by, any other person, except as otherwise set forth in Section 11.10. 11.13 Recordation Of Development Agreement. Pursuant to Government Code section 65868.5, no later than ten (10) days after City enters into this Agreement, the City Clerk shall record an executed copy of this Agreement in the official records of the County of San Mateo. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and between Developer and City as of the day and year first above written. [Signatures to follow on subsequent pages.] 408 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 40 409 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 41 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC CITY: CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a California municipal corporation By:________________________________ Date: ______________________________ Name: Mike Futrell Its: City Manager ATTEST: By:________________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By:_________________________________ City Attorney 410 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 42 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC DEVELOPER: OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By:________________________________ Date: ______________________________ Name: ________ Its: ____________ 411 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit A Description and Diagram of Property (Starts on Next Page) 412 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit B Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions [Need to Insert Fully Executed Version] (Starts on Next Page) (Exhibit F to Exhibit B – For Reference) BUYER’S POST-CLOSING MITIGATION MEASURES Buyer shall perform, at Buyer’s sole expense, each of Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures identified in this Exhibit F. The measures identified herein are not intended as Buyer’s sole post- closing obligations with respect to the Pre-Existing Property Conditions and shall not reduce or otherwise diminish Buyer’s other obligations under the Agreement with respect to such conditions or otherwise. Capitalized terms not specifically defined herein shall have the meaning prescribed in the Agreement. A. Site Security 1. Provide site security for the Property and all building(s) at the Property. Security features should be designed to prevent unauthorized access by the general public. Building security features may include barriers and/or restricted access signage and alarm systems. B. Engineering Measures - Fill /Capping/Construction Activities 1. Install a minimum of nine (9) feet of clean fill or as otherwise engineered by a qualified civil engineer and subject to City Public Works approval and building plan check within the building footprint area above the landfill cap. Outside of the building footprint, utility trenches shall be located at least twelve (12) inches above the top of the landfill cap within clean fill, except to the extent necessary to connect to existing utility connections. Any utility connections within the cap or below the cap shall occur in trenches with a protective clay layer and clean backfill as engineered by a qualified civil engineer subject to City Public Works approval and building plan check. 2. Install a geotextile fabric (as a marker) on top of the erosion resistant layer (i.e. the landfill cap) so the top of the cap can be identified during future construction activities. 3. Install all landscaping and irrigation systems at elevations within the newly-installed fill layer above the cap to protect cap integrity. 413 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 4. Grade/maintain the Property to prevent surface water accumulation. Install and maintain survey monuments on the Property to monitor landfill settlement. Quarterly inspections are required to ensure monuments are intact and usable and any repairs or replacement are performed as necessary. Installation of at least two permanent survey monuments are required so that the location and elevation of refuse, final cover, and landfill gas system components can be determined throughout the post-closure period. Additionally, monuments will be surveyed every five years and settlement maps will be produced throughout the post-closure period or until settlement has stopped. C. Engineering Measures - MMS/Building 1. Design, install and operate a methane mitigation and monitoring system (MMS) approved in advance by the Water Board and City in building structures. The MMS shall meet the requirements of Title 27 CCR Sections 20931 and 21190, for structures on landfilled areas, and of those listed in the PCMMP. The MMS shall also be designed in general accordance with methane mitigation standards used by Los Angeles County Public Works' Gas Hazard Mitigation Policy and Standards (https://dpw.lacounty.gov/epd/swims/onlineservices/methane-mitigation-standards.aspx). At a minimum, the MMS shall include a vapor barrier membrane (VBM) combined with a horizontal collection and venting system below the VBM. The venting system vents vapors through vertical riser piping that extends from beneath the building to above the roof level. Mechanical blowers will be on standby for use as an active venting system in the event elevated methane levels are detected by electronic sensors installed at various locations within the buildings. The MMS shall also be designed to mitigate potential vapors of other contaminants, including VOCs. 2. Design and install trench dams in utility trenches to prevent migration of methane and/or volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into buildings. 3. All building utilities, methane membrane and collection pipes should be connected/adhered to underside of building foundation slab or installed in a manner that prevents damage from potential future ground settlement. 4. Utilities should be designed to accommodate potential future ground settlement in areas outside of building footprint. 5. Perform all required inspections, maintenance, monitoring and reporting in connection with the approved MMS meeting the requirements of Title 27 CCR Sections 20931 and 21190, for structures on landfilled areas, the requirements listed in the PCMMP and other applicable requirements and regulations. Provide copies of all reports to the City. D. Site Maintenance, Monitoring and Reporting 1. Maintain all hardscapes and softscapes at the Property. Hardscapes are building slabs, slab on grade, roadways, sidewalks and any other hard surfaces over the final landfill cover 414 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 (“cap”); softscapes are landscaped areas over the cap. Maintain all irrigation systems associated with softscape. Inspect all final cover at the Property, including buildings, hardscape and softscape at the Property monthly during the wet season and quarterly during the dry season. In the event corrective action is warranted, promptly implement any necessary corrective action. 2. Prepare and implement an Operation and Maintenance (“O&M”) Plan for the Property, approved in writing by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board (“Water Board”) to address routine inspections, maintenance and reporting for the: a) landfill cap; b) methane and VOC collection, monitoring and alarm systems; and c) groundwater, surface water and leachate monitoring systems, as required. 3. Prepare annual maintenance and monitoring reports relating to implementation of the O&M Plan for the Property, methane and VOC monitoring plan, surface water sampling monitoring plan, and elevation monitoring plan, as required. Submit maintenance and monitoring reports to stakeholders. 4. Prepare and implement a methane and volatile organic compound (“VOC”) monitoring plan for the Property, including the installation of any necessary monitoring wells, approved in writing by the Water Board that describes the frequency and procedures for monitoring in structures and perimeter areas of the site and required corrective actions if monitoring results exceed established thresholds. Perform required reporting and provide copies of all reports to the City. Quarterly monitoring is required within subsurface vaults, utilities and any other subsurface structures where gas may potentially build up. At a minimum, a portable landfill gas meter will be used for subsurface structure monitoring. 5. Prepare and implement an elevation monitoring plan for the Property. 6. Review and properly update all maintenance and monitoring plans and ensure that corrective actions are implemented in a timely manner. E. Emergency Response Measures 1. Prepare and implement a post-closure Emergency Response Plan (ERP) for the Property outlining the procedures to be followed in the event of an emergency (such as fires, explosions, earthquakes, floods, vandalism, surface drainage problems, waste releases, etc.). Procedures for dealing with each type of emergency should be included in the ERP. Multiple agencies (fire, police, City, etc.) should be involved with preparation of the plan. 2. Require annual (at a minimum) updates and training for the ERP. 3. For planned or emergency subsurface activities, implement the ERP, assess damage and perform corrective action as necessary. F. Administrative/Legal Measures – Site Maintenance/Cap/Construction Activities 415 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 1. Have entered into a binding voluntary oversight agreement with the Water Board (i) pursuant to which the Water Board will oversee Buyer’s compliance with the requirements of Order No. 00-46, the Closure Plans, and related Applicable Laws, relating to Buyer’s acquisition, development, operation and use of the Property, and (ii) confirming that with respect to such requirements, the Buyer is the party primarily responsible for such compliance. 2. Comply with the requirements of Order No. 00-46, the Closure Plans, and related Applicable Laws, relating to Buyer’s acquisition, development, operation and use of the Property. 3. Execute and implement an O&M Agreement with the City providing the City and/or the Water Board with financial assurance for completion of the Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures. 4. Establish and assure an automatic dig alert notification to City Public Works in advance of any soil disturbance at the Property. 5. All construction activities that potentially disturb landfill cap shall be performed only pursuant to a Soil Management Plan (SMP) approved in advance by the Water Board. 6. Record a land use covenant prohibiting construction/subsurface work unless City is notified in advance and the work is performed pursuant to the Water Board-approved SMP. 7. Require hotel personnel to notify City if geotextile “marker” fabric is encountered or visible. 416 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit C: List of Project Approvals • Resolution to Adopt the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Reports, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Statement of Overriding Considerations and associated CEQA Findings certified and approved by the City Council on March 23, 2011 by Resolution No. 46-2011; • Resolution to Adopt the Oyster Point Specific Plan approved by the City Council on March 23, 2011 by Resolution No. 47-2011; • Ordinance No. 1437-2011 to amend Chapter 20.230 ("Oyster Point Specific Plan Zoning District") of the South San Francisco Municipal Code introduced by the City Council on March 16, 2011 and adopted by the City Council on March 23, 2011; • Development Agreement by and between the City of South San Francisco and Developer approved by Ordinance No. ______ introduced by the City Council on __________, 2022 and adopted by the City Council on _____________. • Resolution to Approve a Precise Plan for the Project approved by the City Council on __________ by Resolution No. __________. 417 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit D Applicable City Laws & City Fees, Exactions, and Payments CURRENT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO LAWS Developer shall comply with the following City regulations and provisions applicable to the Property as of the Effective Date (except as modified by this Agreement and the Project Approvals). 1.1. South San Francisco General Plan. The Developer will develop the Project in a manner consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the South San Francisco General Plan, as adopted on October 13, 1999 and as amended from time to time prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.2 East of 101 Area Plan. The Developer will develop the Project in a manner consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the East of 101 Area Plan, as adopted and as amended from time to time prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.3 Oyster Point Specific Plan. The Developer will develop the Project in a manner consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the 2011 Oyster Point Specific Plan, as adopted and as amended from time to time prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.3 Oyster Point Specific Plan Zoning District. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner consistent with the Oyster Point Specific Plan Zoning District, City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.230, applicable to the Property as of the Effective Date and as amended from time to time prior to the Effective Date of this Agreement. 1.4 South San Francisco Municipal Code. The Developer shall construct the Project in a manner consistent with the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code provisions, as applicable to the Project as of the Effective Date (except as modified by this Agreement, and as may be amended from time to time consistent with this Agreement). FEES, EXACTIONS, & PAYMENTS Subject to the terms of Sections 3.2 and 5.6 of this Agreement, Developer agrees that Developer shall be responsible for the payment of the following fees, charges, exactions, taxes, and assessments (collectively, “Assessments”). From time to time, the City may update, revise, or 418 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 change its Assessments. Further, nothing herein shall be construed to relieve the Property from common benefit assessments or district taxes levied against it and similarly situated properties by the City pursuant to and in accordance with any statutory procedure for the assessment of property to pay for infrastructure and/or services that benefit the Property. As authorized by the applicable Development Fee enabling ordinance or resolution as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the amount paid for a particular Assessment, shall be the amount owed, based on the calculation or formula in place at the time payment is due, as specified below. 2.1 Administrative/Processing Fees. The Developer shall pay the applicable application, processing, administrative, legal and inspection fees and charges, as then currently adopted pursuant to City’s Master Fee Schedule and required by the City for processing of land use entitlements, including without limitation, General Plan amendments, zoning changes, precise plans, development agreements, conditional use permits, variances, transportation demand management plans, tentative subdivision maps, parcel maps, lot line adjustments, general plan maintenance fee, demolition permits, and building permits. 2.2. Impact Fees (Existing Fees). Except as modified below and as set forth in Section 5.6(a) of this Agreement, only the following existing impact fees shall be paid for net new square footage at the earlier of (i) issuance of certificate of occupancy, or (ii) the times prescribed in the resolution(s) or ordinance(s) adopting and implementing the fees. • Park and Recreation Impact Fee (SSFMC Chapter 8.67). • Childcare Impact Fee (SSFMC Chapter 20.310). • Public Safety Impact Fee (SSFMC Chapter 8.75). • Commercial Linkage Fee (SSFMC Chapter 8.69). • Sewer Capacity Fee (Resolution 39-2010). • Transportation Impact Fee (SSFMC Chapter 8.73). • East of 101 Sewer Impact Fee. • Oyster Point Interchange Impact Fee. • Library Impact Fee (SSFMC Chapter 8.74). • Public Art In-Lieu Fee (SSFMC Chapter 8.76). 419 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit E Operations and Maintenance Agreement (Starts on Next Page) 420 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit F TOT Rebate Agreement (Starts on Next Page) 421 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit G Master Development Schedule Activity Milestones Closing of Escrow No later than December 31, 2022 Submit application for Building Permit No later than December 31, 2023. Delivery of Proof of an Approved Construction Loan from a Reputable Lender Within 18 months of submitting for Building Permit, but no later than June 30, 2025. Delivery of a Final Construction Contract Within 18 months of submitting for Building Permit, but no later than June 30, 2025. Construction Commences Within 18 months of submitting for building permit, but no later than July 31, 2025. Substantial Completion of Construction Within 36 months of construction commencement; targeted for September 2027 (26-month schedule), but no later than June 2028 (35-month schedule). Estimated Opening of hotel Targeted November 2027, but no later than August 2028. 422 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit H Precise Plan (Starts on Next Page) 423 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC Exhibit I Form of Assignment and Assumption Agreement WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of South San Francisco Attn: City Clerk 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 ______________________________________________________________________________ Space Above for Recorder’s Use Exempt from Recording Fees per Cal. Gov. Code § 6103 ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT This Assignment and Assumption Agreement (“Assignment Agreement”) is entered into to be effective on ______,202_, by and between Oyster Point Holdco, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Assignor”), and ___________________, a _______________ (“Assignee”), and the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation (“City”). Assignor and Assignee are sometimes referred to herein as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS -TERMS UNDER THIS SECTION STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION- A. Assignor and City have previously entered into that certain Development Agreement between City and Assignor dated _________, 2022, approved by the City of South San Francisco City Council by Ordinance No. ________ on _________, 2022, to be effective on ________________, 2022, and recorded on ______________, 2022 as Document No. _____________, San Mateo County Official Records (“Development Agreement”) to facilitate the development and redevelopment of that certain real property consisting of approximately ____ acres with the City of South San Francisco, California, which is legally described in Exhibit A of the Development Agreement (“Property”). A true and complete copy of the Development Agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 424 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 B. Assignor is the fee owner of the Property, and Assignor desires to convey its interest in the developable, approximately ___ acre portion of the Property and more particularly described on Exhibit 2 attached hereto (“Assigned Property”) to Assignee concurrently with execution of this Assignment Agreement and Assignee desires to so acquire such interest in the Assigned Property from the Assignor. C. Sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the Development Agreement (“Agreement” therein) refer to Oyster Point Holdco, LLC as “Developer” and provide in part that: In connection with the transfer or assignment by Developer of all or any portion of the Project (other than a transfer or assignment by Developer to an Affiliate), Developer and the transferee shall enter into a written agreement regarding the respective interests, rights, and obligations of Developer and the transferee in and under the Agreement and the Project Approvals (a “Transfer Agreement”). Such Transfer Agreement shall include an executed Assignment and Assumption of Rights and Obligations, as set forth in Exhibit I. . . . Prior to any such Transfer or assignment, Developer will seek City’s prior written consent thereof, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. At the time Developer requests City’s written consent, Developer shall submit to the City information describing transferee’ s development experience and financial resources. City may refuse to give consent only if, in light of the proposed transferee’s reputation and financial resources, such transferee would not, in City’s reasonable opinion, be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such transferee, including Buyer’s Post-Closing Mitigation Measures (contained in Exhibit F to Exhibit B of this Agreement). To assist the City Manager in determining whether to provide consent to a transfer or assignment, the City Manager may request from the transferee (directly or through Developer) additional reasonable documentation of transferee’s understanding of and ability and plan to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by transferee, including without limitation obligations specifically identified in this Agreement, the Order No. 00-46 issued by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board to the City on June 21, 2000, the Final Closure Plan and Postclosure Maintenance and Monitoring Plan each dated September 8, 2017, Buyer’s Post- Closing Mitigation Measures (contained in Exhibit F to Exhibit B of this Agreement), Project Approvals, the EIR and MMRP, the General Plan, the TDM Plan, the Specific Plan, and the East of 101 Area Plan. To assist the City Manager in determining whether to consent to a transfer or assignment, the City Manager may also require one or more representatives of the transferee to meet in person to demonstrate to the City Manager’s reasonable satisfaction that the transferee understands and intends and has the ability to perform the obligations intended to be assumed, including without limitation the obligations identified in the immediately preceding sentence. City shall have sixty (60) days to request any of the information and meetings identified above, as well as request any additional 425 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 information required in order to review any request for consent to a Transfer, and shall provide a determination as to whether to provide its consent within ninety (90) days of the date the request is received. Such determination will be made by the City Manager and will be appealable by Developer to the City Council. For any Transfer of all of the Property, the Developer and assignee shall enter into an assignment and assumption agreement in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit I. D. The Parties desire to enter into this Assignment Agreement in order to satisfy and fulfill their respective obligations under Sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the Development Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Assignment by Assignor. Assignor hereby assigns, transfers and grants to Assignee, and its successors and assigns, all of Assignor’s rights, title and interest and obligations, duties, responsibilities, conditions and restrictions under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property and only to the extent accruing or arising on and after the Effective Date, defined below (collectively, the “Assigned Rights and Obligations”). 2. Acknowledgement and Assumption of Obligations by Assignee. Assignee, for itself and its successor and assigns, hereby acknowledges that it has reviewed, is aware of and intends to honor its Assigned Rights and Obligations with respect to its Development of the Assigned Property pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement, and additionally expressly and unconditionally assumes all of the Assigned Rights and Obligations. Assignee agrees, expressly for the benefit of Assignor and City, to comply with, perform, and execute all of the Assigned Rights and Obligations. 3. Release of Assignor. Assignee and City hereby fully release Assignor from all Assigned Rights and Obligations. Both Assignor and Assignee acknowledge that this Assignment Agreement is intended to fully assign all of the Assigned Rights and Obligations to Assignee, and it is expressly understood that Assignor shall continue to be obligated under the Development Agreement only with respect to those portions of the Property retained by Assignor. 4. Substitution of Assignor. Assignee hereinafter shall be substituted for and replace Assignor in the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property. Whenever the term “Developer” appears in the Development Agreement, it shall hereinafter include Assignee with respect to the Assigned Property. 5. Development Agreement in Full Force and Effect. Except as specifically provided herein with respect to the assignment and assumption, all the terms, covenants, 426 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 conditions and provisions of the Development Agreement are hereby ratified and shall remain in full force and effect. 6. Recording. Assignor shall cause this Assignment Agreement to be recorded in the Official Records of San Mateo County, California, and shall promptly provide conformed copies of the recorded Assignment Agreement to Assignee and City. 7. Successors and Assigns. All of the terms, covenants, conditions and provisions of this Assignment Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 8. Applicable Law/Venue. This Assignment Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to choice of law provisions. Any legal actions under this Assignment Agreement shall be brought only in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo, State of California. 9. Applicable Law/Venue. This Assignment Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to choice of law provisions. Any legal actions under this Assignment Agreement shall be brought only in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo, State of California. 10. Interpretation. All parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation and negotiation of this Assignment Agreement, and this Assignment Agreement shall be construed according to the fair meaning of its language. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Assignment Agreement. Unless the context clearly requires otherwise: (a) the plural and singular numbers shall each be deemed to include the other; (b) the masculine, feminine, and neuter genders shall each be deemed to include the others; (c) “shall,” “will,” or “agrees” are mandatory, and “may” is permissive; (d) “or” is not exclusive; and (e) “includes” and “including” are not limiting. 11. Severability. Except as otherwise provided herein, if any provision(s) of this Assignment Agreement is (are) held invalid, the remainder of this Assignment Agreement shall not be affected, except as necessarily required by the invalid provisions, and shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the parties. 12. Counterparts. This Assignment Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to constitute an original, but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument, with the same effect as if all of the parties to this Assignment Agreement had executed the same counterpart. 13. City Consent. City is executing this Assignment Agreement for the limited purpose of consenting to the assignment and assumption and clarifying that there is privity of contract between City and Assignee with respect to the Development Agreement. 427 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 14. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Assignment Agreement shall be the date upon which Assignee obtains fee title to the Assigned Property by duly recorded deed (“Effective Date”). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor, Assignee and City have entered into this Assignment Agreement as of the date first written above. ASSIGNOR: OYSTER POINT HOLDCO, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of Assignor Name: Title: ASSIGNEE: [INSERT NAME OF ASSIGNEE] By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of Assignee Name: Title: CITY: CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a Municipal Corporation By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of City Name: Title: Approved as to form by: 428 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 By: Signature of Person approving form of the Agreement on behalf of City Name: Title: 429 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 Exhibit J Form of Easement for Existing and Future Pump Station and Infrastructure 430 11/3/2022 DRAFT – TERMS STILL UNDER NEGOTIATION This draft does not include language related to some additional terms still under negotiation. Those additional terms do not impact nature of development. 018708.0001 4885-1412-4080.3 #82388640_v1 5214327.1 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444