HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Meeting 12-15-16 (Reso 2797-2016) - Genesis 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2797-2016
PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN PARADISE
VALLEY/TERRABAY SUB-PLANNING AREA, 2015 FINAL TERRABAY SPECIFIC
PLAN PHASES II AND III AND PRECISE PLAN, TERRABAY SPECIFIC PLAN
ZONING DISTRICT ORDINANCE, TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
PROGRAM MODIFICATION AND DESIGN REVIEW TO PERMIT THE
CONSTRUCTION AND USE OF AN AMENITY BUILDING FOR THE GENESIS
CAMPUS PROJECT (TERRABAY PHASE III)
WHEREAS, AP#-SF2 CT South LLC and AP#-SF3 CT North LLC (Genesis South San
Francisco) (“Applicant”) owns property commonly known as Terrabay Phase III of the Final
Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III, located at One and Two Tower Place in South San
Francisco, California, which is a development consisting of Research and Development,
Commercial, Office, Retail and various amenities including open space (“Terrabay Project”);
and
WHEREAS, the Terrabay Project has an extensive planning history, dating back to the early
1980s; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of South San Francisco approved the Final Terrabay Specific Plan
Phases II and III of the Terrabay Development on November 21, 2000, and have since approved
amendments, most recently in 2015, to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III and
approved Precise Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), environmental
impacts of the project and various amendments have been analyzed, resulting in certification of a
1982 Environmental Impact Report (EIR), a 1996 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
(SEIR), a 1998/99 SEIR, a 2005/06 SEIR, 2006, 2008, 2012, and 2015 Addenda, and preparation
of a 2016 Addendum; and
WHEREAS, the Applicant now requests an amendment to the General Plan, 2015 Final Terrabay
Specific Plan Phases II and III and Precise Plan, Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District
Ordinance, and Modification to the Transportation Demand Management Program (TDM) to
permit the construction of an Amenity Building on the Phase III site to add approximately 53,000
net new square feet where the 15,007 square foot Product Design Studio was approved in 2008.
The Amenity Building would consist of various uses including but not limited to a hotel,
conference areas, restaurant, and wellness center (“2016 Project”); and
WHEREAS, together the proposed amendments to the General Plan, 2015 Final Terrabay
Specific Plan Phases II and III and the Precise Plan, Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District
Ordinance, and TDM, and the conditions of approval are referred to as the “Amendments”; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, changes to projects for which an EIR has been certified do not
require subsequent EIRs, unless the lead agency determines that the changes will result in new
significant impacts or mitigation measures, or substantially more severe impacts than those
analyzed in the previous EIR; and
WHEREAS, the prior certified EIR, SEIRs and Addenda, including the 2016 Addendum, fully
analyzed all potentially significant impacts and incorporated proposed mitigation for said
impacts; and
WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for the Terrabay Project and a Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Terrabay
Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts, both of which remain in full force and effect; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and carefully considered the information in the
Addendum prepared for the 2016 Project, and by separate resolution, recommends that the City
Council consider the Addendum as an objective and accurate document that reflects the
independent judgment and analysis of the City in the discussion of the 2016 Project’s
environmental impacts; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing on November 3,
2016, which was continued to November 17, 2016 and to December 15, 2016, to consider the
proposed Amendments to the 1999 General Plan, Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III
and Precise Plan, Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District Ordinance, TDM, and conditions of
approval, to take public comments, and make a recommendation to the City Council on the 2016
Project.
NOW THEREFORE, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without
limitation, the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code §21000, et seq. 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
Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III, as amended in 2000, 2006, 2008, 2012, 2015 and
as proposed in 2016; the 2005/06 Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and
2000, 2006, 2008, 2012, 2015 and 2016 Addenda and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program, 1998-99 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, the Certified
1996 Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, the 1982 Certified Terrabay
Environmental Impact Report,; all site plans, and all reports, minutes, and public testimony
submitted as part of the Planning Commission’s duly noticed November 3, 2016, November 17,
2016 and December 15, 2016 meetings; 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:
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
Approval (Exhibit A), General Plan Amendment (Exhibit B), Zoning Ordinance
Amendment (Exhibit C), Specific Plan Amendment (Exhibit D), Precise Plan Drawings
(Exhibit E), and Modified Transportation Demand Management Plan (Exhibit F) are each
incorporated by reference as part of this Resolution, as if each were 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.
B. General Plan Text Amendments
1. The Terrabay Mixed Use General Plan designation for the Genesis Campus
permits a variety of office, employment, hotel, fitness, research and development (“R&D”),
retail, cultural and recreation uses on the Terrabay Phase III site. The proposed Amenity
Building amendment that would permit a wellness center, hotel and restaurant and other amenity
and retail uses would meet the purposes of Chapter 20.540 of the Municipal Code because the
amendment is clarifying the mixed use land use designation approved in 2015, and provides for a
hotel use on the site, a permitted use stipulated in SSFMC Chapter 20.240, and other permitted
uses within an amenity building.
2. The Terrabay Mixed Use General Plan designation for the Genesis Campus,
would permits a variety of office, employment, hotel, fitness, research and development
(“R&D”), retail, cultural and recreational uses on the Terrabay Phase III site. The proposed
Amenity Building amendment that would permit a wellness center, hotel and restaurant and other
amenity and retail uses will be consistent with existing General Plan policies as follows:
Chapter 2.6 Land Use Policies
2-G-2: Maintain a balanced land use program that provides opportunities for continued
economic growth and building intensities that reflect South San Francisco’s prominent
inner bay location and excellent regional access.
Analysis: The Project has immediate access to U.S.101, San Francisco, the peninsula and
the airport which provides local and area-wide clientele for the Project. The Project has
constructed infrastructure improvements and contributed to area-wide circulation
improvements. The addition of an Amenity Building and uses therein would provide a
vitality and focal point to the Genesis Campus, and would be synergistic with the City’s
Downtown Station Area Specific Plan vision to increase Downtown density and vitality,
provide a walkable community and move the Caltrain station closer to the Downtown.
The land use pattern and quality of development would not be compromised. By the 2016
Amenity Building project.
2-I-13: As a part of development review in environmentally sensitive areas require
specific environmental studies and/or review as stipulated in Section 7.1: Habitat and
Biological Resources Conservation.
Analysis: The site plan as approved in 2006, 2008, 2012, 2015 and proposed in 2016
avoids critical species habitat, wetlands, and the archaeological site. The requested
Amenity Building use does not change these conditions. The driving factor in clustering
the Terrabay Project was the protection of 26 acres (the Preservation Parcel) for species
habitat preservation. Terrabay Phase III was approximately 47 acres in area prior to the
designation of the Preservation Parcel as open space and the Buffer Parcel as an area that
would permit surface roads, parking landscaping and a small kiosk. The Preservation
Parcel contains over 1,000 Viola Pendunculata which is the food plant for the endangered
Callippee Silverspot butterfly. The Preservation Parcel also preserves the archaeological
site and wetlands in perpetuity. The 2016 Project would not affect these conditions.
Chapter 3: Planning Sub-Areas Element: Paradise Valley/Terrabay
3-8-G-2: Improve accessibility to neighborhood shopping opportunities.
Analysis: The approved Terrabay Project provides office, restaurant, R&D and retail
land uses and a performing arts center. The 2016 Project would not alter these conditions,
but augment them by providing a hotel, restaurant and wellness center, and complies with
this policy.
Chapter 4: Transportation
4-2-G-7: Provide a fair and equitable means for paying for future street improvements;
and, 4-2-I-6: Incorporate as part of the City’s CIP needed intersection and roadway
improvements including Bayshore (now Airport) Boulevard and U.S. 101 Hook Ramps.
Analysis: The Applicant contributed land and $8.5 million to construct the hook ramps.
The traffic improvements are in place and operational. The 2016 Project would not
change these conditions and is required to pay $143,751.15 in Oyster Point Traffic
Improvement fees.
4-3-G-2: Provide safe and direct pedestrian and bikeways between and through
residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers.
Analysis: The Terrabay Project includes pedestrian walkways to Airport and Sister Cities
Boulevard and to the bus stop on Airport Boulevard. The Terrabay Project includes
underground pedestrian tunnels from the parking structure to the North and South Tower
retail concourse areas. The TDM Program includes bus service to the site and transport of
occupants to transit centers including the Oyster Point Ferry, BART and Caltrain. The
Terrabay Project also includes valet service. The 2016 Project would not impact
pedestrian and bikeways and links to transit and implements this policy.
4-3-G-3: In partnership with local employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle
operations.
Analysis: The Terrabay Project implements two shuttle services. One service is in
concert with the Peninsula Congestion Relief Alliance and the other with Success Factor
the existing South Tower tenant. Notwithstanding existing or future Project occupants the
TDM Program would continue to be required and operational. The 2016 Project would
not alter or affect these conditions.
4-3-I-4: Require provision of secure and covered bicycle parking.
The approved TDM Program includes bicycle facilities. The South Tower is constructed
with showers and lockers and secure bicycle storage as would the North Tower when
constructed. The 2016 Project would not alter or affect these conditions.
Chapter 5: Parks, Public Facilities and Services
5-I-G-5: Develop linear parks in conjunction with major infrastructure improvements
and along existing utility and transportation rights-of-ways.
Analysis: Terrabay Phases I and II includes linear parks. The parks terminate at the
Phase III site. The Phase III Project includes a 1,500 foot trail to the north western
portion of the site terminating at an overlook area with landscaping and seating. The 2016
Project would not alter these conditions.
Chapter 6: Economic Development
6-G-I: In partnership with business and community groups, proactively participate in the
City’s economic development.
Analysis: The Terrabay Project has had a long (34 years) history that has included the
following actions:
• The Planning Commission and City Council designated the Preservation Parcel as
permanent open space.
• Applicant, City leaders and City staff worked with community groups to address the
restoration and preservation of land and habitat. The results of the restoration are
being used as examples of success by U.S. Fish and Wildlife, San Mateo County and
Thomas Reid and Associates. San Bruno Mountain Watch, in a comment letter on the
2005 SEIR also lauded the restoration of the Preservation Parcel.
• Applicant and the City, in particular the City Council and Planning Commission
subcommittee worked to develop a land plan (2006) that in the words of one
subcommittee member, “makes economic and land use sense”. The 2016 Project
would not detract from but add to the economic viability of the Project.
• The 2016 Project adds a hotel, shared conference facilities and a restaurant all
contributing to the City’s economic development.
3. The General Plan, as proposed for amendment, will not be detrimental to the
public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City, because the amendments
would allow a hotel, restaurant and wellness facilities in new seven-story building on the North
Tower parcel within an existing mixed use development. The CEQA analysis demonstrates there
would be no new impacts associated with mixed use. The Amenity Building with the R&D use
would result in less vehicle trips to and from the site than associated with Commercial Office.
The North Access Road and fire truck turn around approved at the north and south elevations of
the North Tower and the roadway completely surrounding the South Tower implement fire
department conditions of approval.
4. The General Plan, as proposed for amendment, will result in a Terrabay Phase III
area that continues to be physically suitable for the type and intensity of the land use being
proposed. The General Plan specifically contemplates the proposed development, and the
suitability of the site for the existing and proposed development was analyzed thoroughly in
previously certified environmental documents and the 2016 Addenda prepared for the Project.
The development parcel +/- 20 acres that contains the North and South Tower parcels
implements mitigation measures identified in the 1998/99 SEIR. Those measures resulted in the
Preservation and Buffer Parcels and wetland, cultural and habitat preservation. The construction
of the hook ramps off of U.S. 101 in front of the Project site were also a mitigation measure from
the 1998/99 SEIR. Applicant contributed land and $8.5 million in circulation improvement fees
to assist in realizing the City sponsored Oyster Point Traffic Improvement Project, and is
required by conditions of approval to pay a traffic circulation fee based upon the hotel use.
C. Specific Plan Amendment
1. The Specific Plan, as proposed for amendment to refine the permitted uses,
triggers the implementation of valet parking, and would implement, be consistent with and
conform to the General Plan as proposed for amendment. The standards and criteria by which the
Terrabay Project development has and will proceed and the standards and conservation,
development, and utilization of natural resources are not altered by the 2016 Plan Amendment.
The proposed text amendment stipulates the parameters of the Amenity Building and the uses
proposed therein which are permitted on the site. The Specific Plan and General Plan
modifications are consistent.
2. The Specific Plan, as proposed for amendment, will not alter the findings of the
environmental documentation that indicate that the specific plan modification would not be
detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience or welfare of the City because the
proposed uses are permitted uses in the Terrabay Zoning District and are designed to serve the
project as a whole, reduce traffic and provide public access and benefit. The Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted by City Council Resolution No. 81-2006 is not
altered or modified by the 2016 Specific Plan Amendment and would remain in full force and
effect. The conditions of approval adopted by Resolution No. 82-2006 would not be altered by
the 2016 Specific Plan Amendment and would be augmented as identified in the attached
proposed conditions of project approval (Attachment 2 Exhibit A).
3. The Specific Plan area is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the land
use being proposed. The approved 2006, 2008, 2012 and 2016 Final Terrabay Specific Plan
Phases II and III would be modified only to allow the construction of a seven-story amenity
building where a two-story design studio was approved in 2008. The distribution, location, and
extent of land uses governed by the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III would not be
altered from that of previous approvals, except for the addition of a wellness center. The
distribution, location, extent and intensity of major components of the public and private
improvements including transportation, water, wastewater, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy
and other essential facilities would not be altered by the 2016 Specific Plan Amendment. The site
is suited for the type, density and location of commercial development in that all the mitigation
measures applicable to the Phase III site identified in the 1982 EIR, 1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR,
and 2005 SEIR and 2006, 2008, 2015 and 2016 Addenda are incorporated into the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program. No changes to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program are required as a result of the Amendments. The Terrabay Project location provides
immediate access to the City’s East of 101 biotech center, U.S. 101 and a short commute to San
Francisco’s Mission Bay biotech industry as well as San Francisco International Airport.
4. The Amendments to the Specific Plan will be superior to development otherwise
allowed under conventional zoning classifications because they are in conformance with the
parameters of the Specific Plan and allow for preservation of habitat and open space, traffic
improvements and shared uses not otherwise recognized through conventional zoning.
5. The Amendments are consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. Dave Carbone,
Staff Administrator of the C/CAG San Mateo County Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC),
previously reviewed the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III and found it complied
with the ALUC requirements (letter of October 25, 2000). The proposed Amendments will allow
for the construction of a 75 foot amenity building adjacent to the 21-story North Tower and will
not alter the ALUC findings.
6. The Amendments are consistent with the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP).
Victoria Harris, biologist with Thomas Reid Associates (The Plan Administrator) reviewed the
previously approved Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III and found the Specific Plan
complied with the HCP boundary and grading limits (letter of October 25, 2000) certified by the
City of South San Francisco on May 12, 1999. The limits certified by the City on May 12, 1999,
were used to verify HCP Compliance for Terrabay Phase II and Phase III. In 2016 Victoria
Harris reviewed the proposed Amenity Building placement and found no impacts. A biological
assessment was performed in 2016 (Patrick Kobrnus, biologist and consultant to San Mateo
County Department of Parks and Recreation). No special species or habitat was found on the
Phase III Terrabay site. The Amendments are consistent with the HCP.
D. Zoning Ordinance Amendment
1. The proposed zoning text amendments are consistent with the adopted General
Plan in that the zoning amendments define wellness center, stipulate the initiation of valet
parking and clarify permitted uses. The amendments comply with the General and Specific Plan
land use designations for the reasons stated in Findings B.2 and C.1 above.
2. The subject property is suitable for the uses permitted in the proposed zone in
terms of access, size of parcel, relationship to similar or related uses, and other considerations
deemed relevant by the Planning Commission and City Council in that the approved 2008 site
plan would not be altered in the proposed area of placement of the Amenity Building where the
Product Design Studio was approved. The North Access Road and fire truck turn around
approved at the north and south elevations of the North Tower and the roadway completely
surrounding the South Tower implement fire department conditions of approval.
3. The proposed zoning text amendments are not detrimental to the use of land in
any adjacent zone in that the CEQA analysis demonstrates there would be no new impacts
associated with the Amenity Building. The R&D, office, retail and Amenity Building uses would
result in less vehicle trips to and from the site than associated with Commercial Office; the
CEQA documentation found no new impacts associated with the Amenity Building and uses
contained therein; and implementation of the 2006 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program and the Conditions of Approval identified in Exhibit A would protect the public health,
safety and welfare and protect the environment. The Development Parcel +/- 20 acres that
contains the North and South Tower parcels, including the Amenity Building, implements
mitigation measures identified in the 1998/99 SEIR. Those measures resulted in the Preservation
and Buffer Parcels and wetland, cultural and habitat preservation. The construction of the hook
ramps off of U.S. 101 in front of the Project site were also a mitigation measure from the
1998/99 SEIR. Applicant contributed land and $8.5 million in circulation improvement fees to
assist in realizing the City sponsored Oyster Point Traffic Improvement Project. The 2016
Project is required to pay additional improvement fees.
The mixed use approach to land use and development is reflected in the City’s recent adoption of
the Downtown Station Area Specific Plan (2015) and the South El Camino Corridor General
Plan Amendment (2010). Terrabay Phase III mixed use would be consistent with the approach to
have commercial, employment and residential areas within close proximity to encourage
alternate modes of travel such as transit, bicycle, and walking as well as close proximity to larger
commercial districts such as the Downtown. The 2016 Project brings a synergy of use to the site
as well as local and regional connections via air, train, shuttle and transit bus, bicycle, pedestrian,
and vehicular travel.
E. Precise Plan Amendments
1. The Precise Plan is compatible with the intent and purpose of the General Plan
and the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and III for the reasons stated in Findings B.2 and
C.1 above, and because the Precise Plan, including the site plan roadways, building placement
and landscaping would not change from the approved 2008 and 2015 Precise Plan.
2. The Amendments will not cause environmental damage or substantially and
unavoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat and are designed to achieve compliance with
the development and/or construction standards of the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phases II and
III. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to
the following: the 1982 EIR, 1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, and 2005/06 SEIR and 2000, 2006,
2008, 2012, 2015 and 2016 Addenda that analyze the anticipated environmental effects of the
proposed Phase III development and together with the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program demonstrate that the project will either avoid or mitigate impacts of the
project that are likely to cause serious public health problems, or to cause substantial
environmental damage, or to cause substantial and avoidable injuries to fish, wildlife or their
habitat.
3. The design and type of improvements proposed in the Amendments do not
conflict with public easements for access through or use of the property within the Phase III
areas of the Terrabay development and conform to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act
and Chapter 19.48.080 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code as to design, drainage,
utilities, road improvements and offers of dedication or deed. This finding is based upon all
evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the Planning Commission’s
independent review of the proposed Amendments and the reports of the City Engineer and other
appropriate department heads.
4. As previously determined by the City Council, Phase III of the Terrabay
development provides, to the extent feasible, future passive or natural heating or cooling and car
charging station opportunities. No changes are proposed in the Amendments that would alter
passive or natural heating and cooling and car charging station opportunities. This finding is
based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the 1982 EIR,
1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, and 2005/06 SEIR and 2006, 2006, 2008, 2102, 2015 and 2016
Addenda.
F. Design Review
1. The Project, including Design Review, is consistent with Title 20 of the South
San Francisco Municipal Code because the Project has been designed as a high quality, energy
efficient, contemporary, office/R&D/hotel campus which will provide open spaces and a
pedestrian-friendly environment with extensive landscaping and sustainability elements
incorporated.
2. The Project, including Design Review, is consistent with the General Plan and the
Terrabay Specific Plan because the proposed office/R&D buildings and hotel are consistent with
the policies and design direction provided in the South San Francisco General Plan and the
Terrabay Specific Plan for the Terrabay Mixed Use land use designation.
3. The Project, including Design Review, is consistent with the applicable design
guidelines adopted by the City Council in that the proposed Project is consistent with the
Terrabay Specific Plan District Standards included in Chapter 20.240.
4. The Project is consistent with the Precise Plan, as proposed for modification, for
the reasons stated in Section E, above.
5. The Project is consistent with the applicable design review criteria in Section
20.480.006 (“Design Review Criteria”) because the project has been evaluated against, and
found to be consistent with, each of the eight design review criteria included in the “Design
Review Criteria” section of the Ordinance.
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 adopt a resolution approving the General Plan Amendment (attached as
Exhibit B), the Zoning Ordinance Amendments (Exhibit C) the Specific Plan Amendment
(attached as Exhibit D) and authorize staff to make changes to the Specific Plan consistent with
the City Council’s approval of same, the Precise Plan Amendment (attached as Exhibit E) and
Modification of the Transportation Demand Management Program (attached as Exhibit F).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City
Council adopt an ordinance amending the Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District Ordinance
(attached as Exhibit C).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its
passage and adoption.
* * * * * * *
I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of
the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 15th day of December, 2016 by
the following vote:
AYES: Vice Chairperson Faria, Commissioner Ruiz, Commissioner Wong, Commissioner
Nagales, Commissioner Martin
NOES: _________________________
ABSTENTIONS:_______________________________________________________________
ABSENT: Commissioner Yip, Chairperson Khalfin_________________________________
Attest_/s/Sailesh Mehra__________
Secretary to the Planning Commission