Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC Meeting 07-17-08 (Reso 2673-2008) - Tbay 2008 Plan Amendments #21 RESOLUTION NO. 2673-2008 PLANNING COMMISSION, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2006 FINAL TERRABAY SPECIFIC PLAN, AMENDMENTS TO THE PRECISE PLAN, AND A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL CODE, CHAPTER 20.63, “TERRABAY SPECIFIC PLAN DISTRICT” WHEREAS, the Terrabay lands have an extensive planning history dating to the early 1980s; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of South San Francisco approved the Final Terrabay Specific Plan Phase III of the Terrabay Development on November 21, 2000, and have since approved amendments, most recently in 2006, to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan, approved Precise Plan, and Chapter 20.63 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, “Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District”; 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 SEIR and a 2006 Addendum; and, WHEREAS, the applicant now requests an amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, Precise Plan, and a zoning text amendment, to allow as a permitted use, a Product Design Studio (“Studio”) as a support use to the approved office use on the site, and to be located above the approved ground floor retail concourse attached to the site’s North Tower (“2008 Project”); and, WHEREAS, together, the proposed amendments to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan, the Precise Plan, and the zoning text amendments, 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 Addendum fully analyzed all potentially significant impacts and proposed mitigation for said impacts; and, WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts, both of which remain in full force and effect; and, 2 WHEREAS, based on the foregoing and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no further environmental review is required, and the appropriate CEQA document for approval of the 2008 Project is an Addendum, as prepared and adopted by separate resolution; and, WHEREAS, on July 17, 2008, the Planning Commission held a properly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Amendments to the Final Terrabay Specific Plan, the Precise Plan, and the Terrabay Specific Plan District Zoning Ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without limitation, (1) the South San Francisco General Plan, and General Plan Environmental Impact Report; (2) The Final Terrabay Specific Plan, as amended in 2000, 2006 and proposed in 2008; (3) The 2005 Certified Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and 2006 Addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, 1998-99 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, which includes the 1982 Certified Terrabay Environmental Impact Report, the Certified 1996 Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Addendum to the 1998-1999 Certified Terrabay Supplemental Environmental Impact Report and Addendum; (4) All public hearings on the project, including minutes and reports prepared for such hearings, the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco, does hereby RESOLVE as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution. 2. The Amendments are consistent with the South San Francisco General Plan. Amendments proposed relate only to the development of the Product Design Studio. All findings and analysis made in support of compliance of the project with the General Plan are unchanged. The approved 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan would be modified only to allow a product design studio as a support use for the approved office use on the site. Therefore, the distribution, location, and extent of land uses governed by the Terrabay Specific Plan would not be altered. Specific General Plan consistency findings are as follows: Chapter 2.6 Land Use Policies 2-G-1: Preserve the scale and character of established neighborhoods, and protect residents from changes in non-residential areas. Analysis: The proposed Project will be a part the approved 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would compliment the existing land uses on the project site, and the existing approved project compliments the land uses in the area and the City. 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 approved Project has immediate access to Highway 101, San Francisco, the peninsula and the airport which provides local and area-wide clientele for the Project. Previous fiscal studies indicate that the approved 2006 Project will add to the City’s tax base. 3 The 2008 Project proposes a supporting use for the approved office component of the 2006 Project and enhances the Project’s overall marketability. The existing FAR is 0.78 and the 2008 Project would increase that to a 0.84 FAR under the 1.0 FAR maximum for Business Commercial land use designations with structured parking. 2-I-4: Require all new developments seeking an FAR bonus set forth in Table 2.2-2 to achieve a progressively higher alternative mode usage. Analysis: The TDM measures identified in Schedule 20.120.030-B: Summary of Program Requirements (Zoning) of the City’s TDM Ordinance is incorporated into the TDM program for the Project. The TDM Program is approved and the 2008 Project will be a part of the approved TDM Program. 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 2006 Project avoids critical species habitat, wetlands, and the archaeological site. The 2008 Project does not change these conditions. The driving factor in clustering the 2006 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 a buffer zone. 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 2008 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 2006 Project provides office, restaurant and retail land uses and a performing arts center. The 2008 Project does not alter these conditions 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 2006 Project sponsor contributed land and $8.5 million to construct the hook ramps. The traffic improvements are in place and operational. The 2008 Project would not change these conditions and has complied with this policy. 4-3-G-2: Provide safe and direct pedestrian and bikeways between and through 4 residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers. Analysis: The 2006 Project includes pedestrian walkways to Airport and Sister Cities Boulevard and to the bus stop on Airport Boulevard. The 2008 Project includes two direct links to the Product Design Studio; one from the second floor office and the second from the ground floor retail area. The 2008 Project would not impact pedestrian and bikeways and links to transit and complies with this policy. 4-3-G-3: In partnership with local employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle operations. Analysis: The Terrabay project implements a shuttle service for Peninsula Mandalay. The shuttle service will be expanded to cover the Phase III Project including the 2008 Project. 4-3-I-4: Require provision of secure and covered bicycle parking. Analysis: The approved TDM Program identifies bicycle facilities. The 2008 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 Phase I and II include a linear park. The park terminates within the Phase III site. The 2006 Project includes a trail to the western portion of the site for an overlook area. The 2008 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: Terrabay has had a long (25 year plus) history that has been controversial. Beginning in 1999 through to the present, much of the controversy has been abated largely as a result of the following actions: • The Planning Commission and City Council designated the Preservation Parcel as permanent open space. • Myers Development, City leaders and City staff worked with community groups to address the restoration and preservation of land and habitat. As a result of this effort, 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 5 Preservation Parcel. The conveyance of the 6.22 acre Recreation Parcel to the City for open space and recreation. • Myers and the City, in particular the City Council and Planning Commission sub committee worked to develop a land plan that in the words of one sub committee member, “makes economic and land use sense”. The 2006 Project includes office and retail land use that will bring tax revenues to the City, provide for police and fire services and pay for its own infrastructure. The 2008 Project will enhance these conditions. The addition of a product design studio will serve to enhance the marketability of the project. 3. 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 and found it complied with the ALUC requirements (letter of October 25, 2000). The proposed Amendments will allow for development of a second story above the retail concourse planned for the North Tower. At a height of 40 feet above mean sea level, this portion of the project, as proposed by the Amendments, will be well below the project site’s height limit of 360 feet. Accordingly, the compliance letter of October 25, 2000 supports approval of the Amendments with the conditions imposed. 4. 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 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. The proposed Amendments would allow development of the Studio on top of previously approved development. The Amendments would not result in any additional grading on the site and would remain well within the previously approved grading limits, therefore, the Amendments are consistent with the HCP. 5. Proper environmental documentation has been prepared for the Amendments in accordance with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: the Planning Commission’s independent review of the proposed Amendments; the SEIR and relevant sections of the 1982 EIR and the 1996 Supplemental EIR and the entire 1999 SEIR, and Addendum thereto, which demonstrate that any significant impacts from the proposed development have either been avoided or mitigated to a level of less than significance or were addressed in the Statement of Overriding Considerations. No further environmental analysis is required when a prior EIR has been prepared for a project unless new or substantially more severe significant impacts are identified. The Amendments do not result in any new or substantially more severe significant impacts or any require changes to existing mitigation measures. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no additional environmental review is required, and an Addendum is the 6 appropriate CEQA document for approval of the Amendments. 6. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and density of development. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not limited to the following: 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 Addendum, 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. 7. The design, improvements and constructions standards included within the Amendments are not likely to 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 Terrabay Specific Plan. 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 SEIR and 2006 Addendum 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, to cause substantial environmental damage, or to cause substantial and avoidable injuries to fish, wildlife or their habitat. 8. 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 following: Planning Commission’s independent review of the proposed Amendments and the reports of the city engineer and other appropriate department heads. 9. 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 opportunities. No changes are proposed in the Amendments that would alter passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities. 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 SEIR and 2006 Addendum, analyze the energy impacts of the project and provide to the extent feasible future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. 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 does hereby: A. Recommend approval of an amendment to the 2006 Final Terrabay Specific Plan to permit development of the Studio as proposed, and authorization for staff to 7 make changes to the plan consistent with the City Council’s approval of same. B. Recommend approval of an amendment to the Precise Plan for the project to permit development of the Studio as proposed. C. Recommend approval of a zoning text amendment to Chapter 20.63, “Terrabay Specific Plan District,” as described in the draft ordinance attached as Exhibit B to this resolution and incorporated herein by reference. * * * * * * I hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco at the regular meeting held on the 17th day of July , 2008, by the following vote: Ayes: Commissioner Zemke, Commissioner Moore, Commissioner Oborne, Commissioner Sim, Commissioner Prouty and Vice Chairperson Teglia Noes: None Abstain: None Absent: Chairperson Giusti Attest: /s/ Susy Kalkin_____________________ Susy Kalkin Secretary to the Planning Commission 1122051.1 8 Exhibit A Conditions of Approval 9 Exhibit B Draft Ordinance Amending Municipal Code Chapter 20.63 (Zoning Text Amendment)