HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-02-20 e-packet
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING
CITY COUNCIL
AND
PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, California 94083
Meeting to be held at:
MUNICIPAL SERVICES BUILDING
CITY COUNCIL COMMUNITY ROOM
33 ARROYO DRIVE
VvEDNESDA Y, FEBRUARY 20, 2008
6:30 P.M.
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 54956 of the Government Code ofthe
State of California, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco and the Planning
Commission of the City of South Francisco will hold a Special Joint Meeting on
Wednesday, the 20th day of February 2008, at 6:30 p.m., in the Community Room of the Municipal
Services Building, 33 Arroyo Drive, South San Francisco, California.
Purpose of the meeting:
1. Call to Order.
2. Roll Call.
3. Public Comments - comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting
Agenda.
4. Discussion - Council and the Planning Commission will provide direction
to staff on key issues relevant to a Zoning Ordinance Update.
5. Presentation- Report on the status of The Biotechnology Cluster in South
San Francisco.
6. Adjournment.
-
~
~ - ~\t.\
(~ g
~ ~
v 0
C4lIE#'~ Staff Report
AGENDA ITEM # 4
DATE:
February 20, 2008
TO:
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Planning Commission
FROM:
Marty VanDuyn, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT:
JOINT STUDY SESSION: ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Coundl and the Planning Commission conduct a Joint Study
Session and provide direction on key issues to staff for the Zoning Ordinance Update.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION
South San Francisco is continuing progress on a comprehensive update of its Zoning Ordinance. The result
of this effort is intended to be an up-to-date and understandable code that is an effective tool for
implementing the goals and objectives of the City's General Plan.
The attached "Issues and Options Report" has been prepared by the City's consultant and is based on work
conducted over the past eight months, including interviews with code users conducted in June 2007, a
Joint City Council-Planning Commission study session in July 2007, a technical review of the current
Zoning Ordinance, staff s comments, field reconnaissance, and a comprehensive analysis of General Plan
policies applicable to zoning regulations. The consultant has also worked with staff to review and update
the Geographic Information System (GIS) layers for the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance in order to
inform this effort. The report presents key issues to be addressed in the ordinance update and offers broad
approaches to these issues.
The purpose of this study session is to solicit the City Council and Planning Commission's input on these
global issues. The input received will provide staff and the consultant with direction to proceed with the
next phase of the update.
The key issues identified in the report are as follows:
1. Approaches to preservation of neighborhood character.
2. Methods to ensure compatibility of residential infill development.
3. Ways to encourage new development while addressing concerns about parking shortages.
Staff Report
Subject: Joint Study Session: Zoning Ordinance Update
Date: February 20, 2008
Page 2 of2
4. Processes that ensure design quality through design standards and guidelines.
5. Determining thresholds for review (i.e. City Council, Planning Commission or stafflevel).
6. Techniques for handling nonconforming uses.
7. General Plan policy issues.
Next Steps:
After receiving the Council and Planning Commission's input on the above items, the consultant will
begin preparation of an annotated outline of the revised Zoning Ordinance that indicates where changes are
required. Staff will also organize a tour of new development sites around the Bay Area for the Council
and Planning Commission, to take place in March. Beginning in mid-spring, staff and the City's
consultant will return to the Commission for the first in a series of workshops to address "Module 1: Use
Regulations" as described in the attached report.
CONCLUSION
City staff and the City's consultant will start the Joint Study Session by introducing the project and
presenting the issues and questions for discussion. Following the presentations, Council members and
Planning Commissioners will have an opportunity to ask questions and provide direction.
By:
~
Marty Van Duyn
Assistant City Mana.. r
--
By:
~'~~
arry M. Nagel .J
City Manager
Attachment
1. Zoning Ordinance Update Issues and Options Report
MVD:SK:cs
ZONING ISSUES AND OPTIONS:
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
AND PLANNING COMMISSION
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
FEBRUARY 2008
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE
ZONING ISSUES AND OPTIONS:
REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
AND PLANNING COMMISSION
Prepared by
DYETT & BHATIA
Urba,n and Regional Planners
Table of Contents
I ntrod uction ..... ............. ............... .... ............. ......... ..... ............... .......... .... ...... It ... I
1.1 Purposes of Zoning ......................................................................................................... I
I .2 Types of D istricti ng. ......... ............. .............. ..................... .......... ......... ........... .......... ....... 3
1.3 Components of Zoning................................................................................................. 3
I. 4 Types of Standards ...."................................................................................................,.... 4
Fixed Stan dard s .... ...... "................ ................ ............ ....... ............ ................. .................... 4
Performance Stan dards ...... .......... .............. ............. ..... ........ .......... ...... ...... ..... ......... ..... 4
Discretionary Criteria ... ......... ... ............. ... .... ... ............ ............ ........ ..... ..... ..... ......... ..... 5
1.5 Balancing Flexibility and Certainty.............................................................................. 5
2 Key Issues For Zoning Or'dinance Update ......................................................7
2.1 Neighborhood Character ............................................................................................. 7
2.2 Compatibility of Residentiallnfill Development ...................................................... 7
2.3 Parki ng.... ...... ............ ... .... ......... ......... ......... .... ...... ... ....... ... ......... .......... .... ....... ....... ... ........ 8
2.4 Design Standards and Guidelines ................................................................................ 9
2.5 Thresholds for Revie'N ................................................................................................ 10
2.6 Nonconfo rm i ng Uses......... .............. ...... ......... .......... ......... ....................... ......... ..... ..... I I
2.7 General Plan Issues ...................................................................................................... 13
3 Overview Of Zoning Ordinance Update "Modules" ...................................14
Module I: Use Regulations ......................................................................................... 14
Module 2: Development/Design Standards ............................................................ 14
Module 3: Supplemental Standards, Parking, and Landscaping........................... 1 5
Module 4: Zoning Administration.............................................................................. 15
Draft 0 rd i nan ce ....... ........... .............. .......... ..... .......... ........... .................... ............ ........ I 5
4 Next Steps........ ... ......... ........ .......... ........ ........ ... ... ....... .... ... ............ ...... ............ I 6
I Introduction
The Zoning Ordinance Update is intended to comprehensively revise the South San Francisco
Zoning Ordinance to create a concise and user-friendly set of regulations that will implement
the 1999 General Plan ("Plan") and subsequently adopted area and specific plans. This report
is the culmination of the first phase of the update project, which included interviews with
code users conducted in June 2ooi, field reconnaissance, interviews with and comments
from City staff, a Council-Planning Commission study session, and detailed analysis by Dyett
& Bhatia, the City's consultant.
This report is based on a technical review of the City's current zoning regulations, City staff
comments, and the stakeholder interviews. It summarizes the issues that have been identified
and suggests options for approaching them as the work proceeds. The report focuses on
broad approaches to zoning. Its purpose is to distill key choices and present "big ideas" for
consideration by the Planning Commission and City Council.
The next phase of the project will include preparation of an annotated outline that lays out
the basic structure of the revised ordinance with a "plain English" commentary that explains
the proposed changes. Additional analysis and documentation of technical issues and the
basis for recommended standards will be included as each zoning "module" is completed for
City staff and Planning Commission review.
1.1 PURPOSES OF ZONING
American cities use zoning to accomplish a number of purposes. Some of these purposes are
well established, such as the maintenance of stable residential areas and the prevention of
health and safety hazards. Others-such as promoting transit-oriented development,
maintaining aesthetic values, encouraging infIlI development, and creating walkable
communities-are newer. All of the purposes and powers of zoning are rooted in the police
powers that the State grants to local governments.
Zoning, subdivision controls, and other regulations also are intended to implement city plans,
visions, and goals. A zoning ordinance translates the policies of a general plan into parcel-
specific regulations. As such, zoning should be used to implement land use, urban design, and
open space plans, rather than to se:rve in itself as the primary planning tool.
1 See City of South San Francisco, Stakeholder Interviews Summary Report, September 2007. Available at:
http://www.ssf.net/civica/ inc/ displayblobpdf2.asp?BlobID= 10836.
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
Relationship Betw~~en General Plan and Zoning Ordinance
GENERJU PLAN
Establishes policy
(including land
use designations)
CONSISTENT WITH GENERAL PLAN
SPECIFIC/AREA PLANS
.lONING ORDINANCE
DESIGN GUIDELINES
Apply to a specific area
May include
design/development
standards and guidelines
Implements General Plan
policy; including:
design and develop-
ment standards
More detailed land use
district designations
- Complement zoning
Provide basis for
subjective/discretionary
design renew
Note: State law also requires tha:t the subdivision ordinance conform to the general plan.
Zoning regulations traditionally have been used to separate incompatible land uses, minimize
nuisance impacts and environmental harm, and coordinate or time development intensity
with supporting public infrastructure. Zoning is also effective for dealing with the geographic
location of activities and for regulating the three-dimensional aspects of development with
height, bulk, setback, and architectural design standards. Zoning is a way to make explicit a
city's policies for development and urban design, to ensure fairness (so all lots in a given zone
may be developed to similar intensities and are subject to similar restrictions and public
contributions), and to avoid abuses of discretion.
In recent decades, zoning has been called on to address an increasing variety of public policy
goals related to environmental protection, economic development, neighborhood
revitalization, aesthetics, public safety, and transportation mode choice. Zoning is less
effective in realizing these types of public policy goals than it is in addressing physical form
and uses of land. Another limitation of zoning is that it can work only on an incremental
basis, as individual parcels develop or redevelop.
In summary, every zoning ordinance must address two basic concerns: to minimize the
adverse effects that buildings or uses on a property will have on neighboring properties, and
to encourage optimal development patterns and activities within the community.
2
Zoning Issues and Options
February 2008
1.2 TYPES OF DISTRICTING
The most basic concept in zoning is the idea of a district. Within each district, the zoning
ordinance applies a uniform set of regulations. There are three basic types of districting
frameworks:
. Land Use Approach. This approach, sometimes called "Euclidean" zoning, establishes
districts based on how land is used and segregates different types of use. Such
districting schemes have historically separated residential, commercial, and industrial
uses and further divided residential districts into single- and multi-family residential
zones. Euclidean codes are also typically hierarchal, allowing less intense uses in
higher intensity zones, such as single-family homes in districts zoned for multi-family
use. More recently, some of these codes have been amended to include mixed-use
zoning districts.
. Development Type/Community Character Approach. Districts are intended to create
urban or suburban environments meeting specified standards or performance
criteria. This approach emphasizes the characteristic development types over a range
of uses. So-called "form-based" zoning, which focuses on the building envelope and
its relationship to the public realm and surrounding development, is a version of this
approach.
. Geographic/Neighborhood Approach. Districts reflect specific characteristics of the
natural or built environment, such as hillsides, riparian corridors, neighborhood
business districts, transit corridors, or airport approach zones. This approach
emphasizes the needs of specific areas.
These approaches are not mutually exclusive. In fact, most zoning ordinances and districts are
hybrids. As circumstances usually require a blend of approaches, the challenge becomes
striking the right balance while avoiding complex regulation.
1.3 COMPONENTS OF ZONING
There are two basic components to zoning. The first is the zoning text, which defines each
zoning district and applies a uniDDrm set of regulations for each. The second is the zoning
map, which applies the districts created in the text of the zoning code.
Within the zoning text, four basic types of zoning regulations control the use and
development of property:
. Land Use Regulations. These regulations specify the land uses that are permitted,
conditionally permitted or specifically prohibited in each zoning district, and include
special requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses.
. Development Regulatiom;. These regulations control the height, bulk, location and
appearance of structures. Development regulations also include requirements for on-
site parking and loading, signs, landscaping and screening, and other supplemental
development regulations.
3
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Uti date
· Administrative Provisions. These regulations contain detailed procedures for the
administration of the zoning ordinance, and include common procedures for
discretionary entitlement applications and other permits.
. General Terms and Use CJassilications. A list of use classifications and a list of terms
and definitions used in tht:: zoning ordinance.
1.4 TYPES OF STANDARDS
A zoning ordinance typically contains three types of standards: fixed, performance, and
discretionary. Choice of the type of standard used depends upon the purpose of the district
and how district regulations will be administered.
FIXED STANDARDS
A common approach to the regulation of development is through the use of fixed standards
intended to assure a predictable outcome. Fixed standards serve to quantify a particular
physical characteristic of development on a site. These standards may set a minimum
requirement or a maximum limit, such as the maximum building height of 35 feet in
residential neighborhoods. Since fixed standards are easy to measure, they are also easy to
enforce and are very predictable in their application and result. On the other hand, the more
that a zoning ordinance uses fixed standards, the less flexible it is and the more limited it is in
its ability to allow for site-specific design solutions.
PERFORMANCE ST ANDARIDS
An alternative approach is the use of performance standards. Performance standards regulate
the outcome or "performance" to be achieved by development. As with fixed standards,
performance standards result in requirements that can be measured; however, these standards
vary from site to site depending upon the desired outcome.
For instance, to reduce traffic in residential neighborhoods, a performance standard could
require that businesses adjacent to residential zones not generate more than 50 trips per day
per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Another example would be a noise standard that
imposes a more stringent noise threshold on lots that border residential zones.
Performance standards have the advantage of focusing more directly on the development
impacts that a community wants to limit. Using the example of solar access, the performance
standard limiting shadow is likely to be more effective than fixed standards for yard setbacks,
simply because the desired outcome is determined. On the other hand, performance
standards are much more complicated to administer and are generally less successful at
achieving or maintaining a uniform development character within a district, unless they are
used in combination with fixed standards. Performance standards are also more difficult to
enforce, as they require more staff time and expertise in communicating why a specific use or
site condition may violate a performance standard.
4
Zoning Issues and Options
February 2008
DISCRETIONARY CRITERI~~
Discretionary standards, like ftxed and performance standards, establish criteria that a project
must meet. However, unlike measurable standards, these criteria are more subjective and
open to interpretation. For instance, a criterion requiring "front yards consistent with the
character of setbacks within the district" will require a determination by the decision maker as
to what" consistent with the character of the district" means.
Discretionary regulations provide considerable flexibility for both the developer and the City
in meeting General Plan policies. While this discretion requires the developer to convince
staff, the Planning Commission, or the Design Review Board that a proposal meets these
policies, it also provides decision makers the discretion to deny a proposal that clearly does
not meet the criteria. As with performance standards, enforcement is more time consuming
than for ftxed standards.
When making a decision based on conformance with discretionary criteria, the decision
maker needs to make ftndings that set. forth the rationale for the decision. Findings explain
how city officials arrived at their decision "bridging the gap" between the factual information
in the record and the ftnal decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny an
application.
Although some ordinances require compliance with guidelines as a basis for decisions,
guidelines are typically advisory direction-setters that provide examples of desirable
outcomes. A carefully crafted set of guidelines explains the objective to be achieved and
suggests a variety of approaches but does not preclude alternatives that may be more creative
ways to achieve the desired outcome.
1.5 BALANCING FLEXIBILITY AND CERTAINTY
As South San Francisco updates its zoning regulations, one issue will be ftnding the right
balance between flexibility and certainty to best implement the General Plan. As the City
considers the next steps for regulatory reform, discussion of choices could address these basic
philosophical issues:
. Flexibility vs. predictability: Is the zoning ordinance intended as a set of ftxed rules
that apply across the board, or does it allow room to respond to individual cases?
Should the area for negotiation be wide or narrow? To what extent should this be
determined by the ordinance or by practice?
. Flexibility vs. administrative cost: What are the costs to the applicant, to opponents,
and to the City in terms of both the time and resources needed for hearings?
. Development cost vs. quality: Standards should be written with an understanding of
their effect on developers' and consumers' costs and on the quality of the
environment for both user and community at large.
. Preservation vs. development: Will a particular regulation stimulate or dampen
change in uses, users, or appearance? A related issue is whether adopting a new
5
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
standard will result in a proliferation of nonconforming situations, which could also
discourage investment.
. Under regulation vs. ov€:r-regulation: How does the community find the least
number of rules that will do the job?
6
2 Key Issues for Zoning Ordinance Update
Based on the stakeholder interviews, discussions with staff, and Dyett & Bhatia's analysis of
the existing Zoning Ordinance, we have identified seven key issues to be addressed in the
course of the Zoning Ordinance Update.
2.1 NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER
Which neighborhoods or areas of South San Francisco have distinctive characteristics that
the Zoning Ordinance should protect? What are the factors that make these neighborhoods
distinctive? Should they be reOectlf:d in additional objective standards?
A number of stakeholders commented that South San Francisco has distinctive
neighborhoods, and that development standards should be tailored to these neighborhoods in
order to reflect and maintain their character. In order to implement this concept, we will need
to determine which neighborhoods or areas are distinctive and what factors contribute to
their character.
Dyett & Bhatia proposes to work with City staff to develop several neighborhood typologies.
Typology in urban design involves the identification and classification of factors that are
common to a neighborhood. Staff will help identify the features that define distinctive South
San Francisco neighborhoods such as Brentwood, the Westborough Townhomes, Downtown
residential areas with lanes and others. The defming features may include architectural style,
typical setbacks and heights, roof styles (pitched, flat, etc.), street widths, presence and type of
landscaping, and where parking is located. Once a typology is developed, it could be
incorporated into the Zoning Ordinance as a basis for residential sub-districts or overlay
districts where special regulations would apply. An alternative to mapping districts would be
citywide standards that tie setbacks, roofs, garage location, or other elements to the prevalent
condition of the surrounding neighborhood. For example, setbacks could be an average of the
setbacks of a certain number of lots on either side of a subject property. To the extent
possible, Dyett & Bhatia will emphasize objective (measurable) standards rather than
discretionary guidelines.
The issue of neighborhood character will be further addressed in the development of the
Annotated Outline, which will establish a set of zoning districts for the City; in Module 2,
Development/Design Standards; and throughout the Zoning Ordinance Update process.
2.2 COMPATIBiliTY OF IRESIDENTIAl INFlll DEVELOPMENT
How should the zoning ordinance be changed to ensure that new development fits into
existing neighborhoods? What a1'e the factors that determine whether new construction or
substantial alterations are compatible with surrounding development? How much change is
acceptable?
7
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
Stakeholders commented that new homes constructed within eXlstmg residential
neighborhoods in South San Francisco are often out of scale with the surrounding
neighborhood. Currently, the CitY' conducts design review for all new single-family, two-
family and three-family dwellings on individual lots that are not in planned developments.
Design review is also required for additions to one-, two-, and three-family residential
structures that change the existing roofline of the structure and increase the floor area by 50
percent or more. Nevertheless, there are still complaints about the height, mass, and scale of
residential infill development.
Dyett & Bhatia recommends addressing building scale as much as possible through objective
standards rather than discretionary review. Standards for residential infill could include
volumetric standards such as maximum FAR, and sliding-scale height provisions depending
on roof slope. Standards such as minimum setback could also be tied to existing
neighborhood conditions. For example, in Oakland, certain development standards apply if at
least 60 percent of the nearest 10 houses on each side have a specified condition (such as
garages located to the side or rear of buildings).
Development standards for the compatibility of residential infill will be addressed in Module
2, Development/Design Standards.
2.3 PARKING
What changes to parking standards and regulations are needed to implement General Plan
policies regarding parking, encourage new and infiU development and facilitate the reuse of
existing development sites while addressing concerns about parking shortages in certain
areas?
Stakeholders identified a number of concerns regarding parking in South San Francisco.
Some believe that there are parking shortages in downtown and older residential areas. Others
commented on the parking regulations for specific land uses, allowances for tandem parking,
and whether transportation demand management (TDM) strategies are being used
appropriately with the parking regulations.
With regard to parking, the 1999 General Plan calls for the following:
. Allowing parking reductions for projects that have agreed to implement trip
reduction methods.
. Reducing minimum parking requirements for all projects proximate to transit
stations and for projects implementing a TDM program.
. Investigating opportunities for shared parking facilities whenever possible to reduce
the number of new parking stalls required.
. Establishing criteria for reduced parking for mixed-use developments, for
developments that meet specified TDM criteria, and medium- and high-density
residential development.
8
Zoning Issues and Options
February 2008
Additionally, discussions on the topic of tandem parking have touched issues of
neighborhood character and residential design and thus have broader implications for those
topic areas as well.
As a matter of course, the Zoning Ordinance Update will involve a thorough review of the
City's parking regulations to identify changes needed to implement the General Plan and to
address concerns that Staff and stakeholders have identified. Assuming that the Zoning
Ordinance Update will implement these General Plan policies listed above, what other
parking issues need to be examined as part of the Zoning Ordinance Update?
Parking standards will be addressed in Module 3, Supplemental Regulations.
2.4 DESIGN ST ANDARDSi AND GUIDELINES
To what extent should building and site design issues be addressed through specific
development standards that prOlride more certainty versus discretionary review based on
design guidelines? Which approli'ch, or combination of approaches, wiD best achievt~ the
City's goals for achieving design quality in development?
Many of the stakeholders that Dyett & Bhatia interviewed expressed a desire to see better
design quality in South San Francisco. Several of them commented that the City needs more
design guidelines, particularly to ensure that buildings are not overly bulky and that new
development fits with existing devlelopment. South San Francisco does not currently maintain
a comprehensive set of design guidelines, though the East of 101 Area Plan contains
guidelines that are used to evaluate projects in that area. It is important to emphasize that
design review based on design guidelines is only one among a range of regulatory approaches
to addressing building and site design. Possible approaches are described below:
. Development Standards. Design can be regulated through objective development
standards that are specifi~~d in the Zoning Ordinance. Examples of standards that
relate to design are height stepbacks, requirements for fas:ade projections and recesses
at specified intervals, and minimum dimensions for window trim or recessing. To
provide more options/flexibility, a "menu" approach-in which an applicant selects
from a list of alternative strategies-could be used for some standards. Objective
development standards are very useful for dealing with certain design issues because
they provide clarity for applicants and cut down on the amount of interpretation and
negotiation that is needed. Increasing the number and scope of specific design
standards in the Ordinance could reduce the number of projects that require
discretionary review.
. Design Guidelines. Design guidelines state the design principles that development
should follow, and typically provide illustrated examples. In contrast to standards,
guidelines are generally only advisory, although they can provide a statutory basis for
approval or denial. They are used in conjunction with design review or other
discretionary processes. Design guidelines are typically within a freestanding
document that is separate from the Zoning Ordinance, but referenced within it.
. Checklist Design Review Approval. Checklist design review is a ministerial process,
typically used for smaller projects (e.g. single-family homes in compliance with all
9
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
applicable zoning standards, residential alterations, etc.). Projects must comply with
all or a specified minimum number of quantified design standards that contribute to
design compatibility (e.g. roof pitch, setbacks, materials, garage placement, etc.).
Following a determination that a project complies with the checklist requirements and
all applicable zoning and building standards, the applicant would be entitled to a
building permit.
. Criteria for Design Review Approval. Qualitative statements about what site and
building design should achieve, used as a basis for decisions on design review. Projects
must meet these criteria in order to be approved. Criteria are used as the basis for
findings to support a decision to approve, approve with conditions, or deny.
Successful design review usually combines objective standards with guidelines that give
examples of acceptable solutions. Guidelines can provide an important link between General
Plan policies and more precise and exact zoning standards by describing and suggesting
approaches that would be appropriate in different situations. In contrast to zoning standards
that might, for example, specify build-to lines to support pedestrian activity, a guideline
intended to create pedestrian-oriented streets may suggest that new retail buildings should
include entrances, outdoor seating areas, porches, and arcades that promote pedestrian use of
the street edge. A design review process that is based on clear standards and guidelines
provides direction, avoids abuse of discretion, and offers certainty to both applicants and
members of the general public.
To maintain clarity, make it easier to revise guidelines, and make the ordinance easy to
administer and maintain, Dyett & Bhatia recommends that design guidelines not be codified
as part of the Zoning Ordinance. However, the Zoning Ordinance could include design
criteria and standards, and could potentially also include supplemental urban form
regulations for specific geographic areas that warrant an additional level of design control.
Wherever possible, Dyett & Bhatia will address design issues through standards and
performance criteria, rather than discretionary criteria or design guidelines requiring case-by-
case interpretation. This approach makes it easier for applicants and the public to understand
the City's expectations for development and for staff and City officials to administer the
regulations. The current scope of work for the Zoning Ordinance Update includes
preparation of design standards. It does not include preparation of illustrated design
guidelines; however, the City could undertake preparation of design guidelines as a separate
project. Such guidelines could apply citywide or might be for specific areas or specific use
types.
Design standards will be addressed ill greater detail ill Module 2, Development/Design
Standards.
2.5 THRESHOLDS FOR REVIEW
Should there be changes to any- of the thresholds that trigger different types of project
review? If the ordinance included more specific objective standards developed with dialogue
with the Planning Commission/City Council, could some projects that currently- require
Planning Commission review be handled at the staff level with appeals to the Commission?
10
Zoning Issues and Options
February 2008
Are there some uses that could be'? aDowed by right subject to specific limitations (e.g., size,
location, hours of operation, etc.)l
There may be opportunities to refine thresholds for project review and reduce the number of
minor cases that come before the Planning Commission and City Council. Review processes
could be shifted so that the Commission and Council concentrate on bigger projects and
broader policy questions, while design details are addressed more by the Design Review Board
or by staff.
Thresholds triggering design review could be clarified, and, in some cases, a more minor
review process established for proj1ects that meet specified criteria.
As a general approach, Dyett & Bhatia recommends including more specific standards in the
Zoning Ordinance in order to limit the need for discretionary review. Regardless of whether
the ordinance requires discretionary review to make a decision, the use of objective standards
will increase certainty for developers, landowners, staff, and public officials.
Thresholds for review will be addnessed in greater depth in Module 4, Zoning Administration,
of the Zoning Ordinance Update. Specific zoning standards that could facilitate a reduction in
discretionary decisions will be prepared as part of Modules 1,2, and 3.
2.6 NONCONFORMING USES
How does the City want to ha.ndle nonconforming uses? There is a range of possible
approaches, from very restrictive to very permissive, depending on the degree to which the
City wants to eliminate nonco.uforming uses, or support and accommodate existing
industries and re-use of existing buildings and sites. Should provisions vary for different
areas in the city depending on specific situations and General Plan policy direction and types
of nonconforming uses?
One of the challenges for any zoning update is to minimize the creation of nonconforming
uses that could increase the time and cost of zoning administration or create obstacles to
maintaining and upgrading properties.
The stakeholders whom the consultant interviewed commented extensively on
nonconforming industrial uses, emphasizing the need for flexibility in order to allow existing
companies to continue to operate. Some interviewees felt that the City is trying to drive out
viable existing industrial uses, which has led to some sites being vacant or underutilized. At
the same time, the 1999 General Plan Land Use Element called for change in certain areas,
and the City has an imperative to implement the General Plan.
South San Francisco's current provisions for dealing with nonconforming situations do not
provide the tools the City may need to deal effectively with nonconforming situations that
result from the Zoning Ordinance Update. The existing code doesn't include any explicit
objectives or statements of purpose related to nonconforming uses. It also lacks a means for
distinguishing among different types of nonconformities.
II
South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Utldate
There is a range of possible regulatory approaches that could be adopted, from very restrictive
to very permissive, depending on the degree to which the City wants to eliminate
nonconforming uses, or support and accommodate existing industries and re-use of buildings
and sites. The range of approaches includes: amortization (most restrictive); allowing
continuation but no expansion; allowing some substitutions/changes of nonconforming uses;
and allowing continuation with expansion (most permissive). The above approaches can
potentially be mixed and matched depending on the City's needs and General Plan direction.
NoncCl1nforming Use Regulations
. Coftthluation but
no expansion
Substitutionsl
changes in use
Continuation with
limited expansion
PERMISSIVE
An effective strategy for dealing with nonconforming situations recognizes that
nonconforming uses and structures are not all the same. Some are the type of usually
undesirable but necessary activities, such as auto repair shops, that generate noise, odors,
dust, and traffic or require the use of potentially hazardous materials or procedures. Other
nonconforming situations, such as billboards and adult businesses, may have little or no value
to the community, but may be shielded by statutes and case law. Another category is made up
of buildings and uses that help to define the distinctive character of a neighborhood or
district-a long-time commercial use in a residential neighborhood or older homes that have
substandard yards or inadequate parking. Therefore, Dyett & Bhatia recommends creating a
classification system for nonconforming uses according to their character and impact on
surrounding areas.
In addition to distinguishing benign from problematic nonconforming uses, Dyett & Bhatia
also recommends tailoring the nonconforming use regulations according to zoning district
and General Plan classification.
Nonconforming use and development regulations will be addressed in greater detail in
Module 1 along with other use regulations.
/2
Zoning Issues and Options
February 2008
2.7 GENERAL PLAN ISSUES
A major objective of the Zoning Ordinance Update is to make South San Francisco s zoning
consistent with the General Plan" as required by State law. Stakeholders have raised some
issues that indicate concerns about some General Plan policies that were decided as part of
the 1999 General Plan update process. How does the City want to address these concerns?
The following issues raised by stakeholders are actually policy issues rather than issues that
can be handled at the level of the zoning update. Decisions on each of these items were
reached in the 1999 General Plan update process:
. Industrial areas that have been rezoned to office uses have not experienced the type of
office development that was envisioned. For example, South Linden is all zoned
office, but no office development has happened.
. Allow more retail and mixed uses East of 10 1.
. Revisit whether housing could be allowed in the East of 101 area.
Since these are policy issues, it is up to the Council to decide whether it wants to revisit any of
them. If so, these will have to be studied and General Plan amendments initiated. In regards
to housing in the East of 101 area" the City is required by law to update its Housing Element
and adopt the revised Element by June 30, 2009. The element needs to be sent to the State
Department of Housing and Community Development by March 31, 2009. As part of this
process, the City will examine housing development capacity, mix of different housing types,
affordability, and ability to meet projected needs. At that time, and if considered necessary,
issues relating to new housing sites (including in the East of 101 Area) could be examined.
13
3 Overview of Zoning Ordinance Update
"Modules"
Dyett & Bhatia has broken down the work of updating the Zoning Ordinance into "modules"
that cover each major type of zoning regulations (land use regulations, development
standards, etc.). While this issues and options report deals with broad approaches to zoning,
the modules will include further analysis and discussion of technical issues. Each module will
include a set of draft regulations and a workshop with the Planning Commission. Below is a
brief overview of the content of each module.
Prior to developing the modules, the consultant will also prepare a detailed annotated outline,
which will indicate the proposed districting scheme and the organizational structure for the
updated Zoning Ordinance.
MODULE I: USE REGULATIONS
Module 1 will address land use regulations for the zoning districts, standards for specific land
uses, and nonconforming uses. Dyett & Bhatia will evaluate South San Francisco's current use
regulations and identify any changes that are needed in permitted uses and conditional uses
in order to implement the General Plan, respond to staff and stakeholder concerns, and
maintain consistency with State law. The consultant will then prepare a set of draft use
regulations for the base zoning districts in tabular format. The module will also include
standards for specific land uses, including any identified "problem" or "nuisance" uses that
may require regulations that apply across all zones, as well as regulations for nonconforming
uses.
MODULE 2: DEVELOPMENT/DESIGN STANDARDS
Module 2 will focus on essential development standards for the base zoning districts,
including:
. Maximum densities and FARs;
. Height limits, including hdght and bulk of residential additions;
. Height and stepback requirements for non-residential development; build-to lines
and envelopes, where appropriate;
. Setback, streetscape and design standards;
. Outdoor open space for multi-family development; and
. Transitional requirements adjacent to residential districts and public uses.
/4
Zoning Issues and Options
February 2008
MODULE 3: SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS, PARKING, AND
LANDSCAPING
Module 3 will encompass a broad range of supplemental development standards that are
applicable across multiple zoning districts, including regulations for off-street parking and
loading, landscaping and screening, signs, lighting, general performance standards (for noise,
glare, etc.), accessory structures, fences and walls, outdoor storage, and other general site
development standards.
MODULE 4: ZONING ADMINISTRATION
For Module 4, the consultant will evaluate existing administrative provisions for all zoning
decisions and identify opportunities for streamlining. Processes evaluated will include use
permits, variances and modifications, design review; planned development; interpretations;
zoning text and map amendments; general plan amendments; appeals and revocations of
discretionary permits; as well as historic preservation, which is in Title 2 of the Municipal
Code and not part of the existing Zoning Ordinance. Procedures for citizen participation in
the development review process also will be evaluated.
DRAFT ORDINANCE
After reviewing staff and Planning Commission comments on the draft regulations presented
in each of the "modules," the consultant will prepare a complete draft zoning ordinance. In
addition to the draft regulations from the modules, the ordinance will include introductory
provisions, rules of measurement, and definitions of terms used in the ordinance. First, an
Administrative Draft for City stalf review will be prepared, and then a Public Review Draft
will be made available to the public and then brought before the Planning Commission and
City Council for consideration and adoption.
15
4 Next Steps
After the Planning Commission and City Council have commented on the key issues this
report identifies, an annotated outline of the zoning regulations with a "plain English"
commentary will be prepared. The outline will layout the basic structure of the revised
Zoning Ordinance and indicate what changes will need to be made to current regulations
including:
. The proposed number, types, and purposes of base zoning districts;
. The proposed overlay and special districts, and provisions for planned development;
. The general purpose sections of the new ordinance, including definitions, provisions
for "use classifications," supplemental standards applying in some or all districts,
administration, and enforcement;
. The overall organization and numbering system, and procedures for amendments;
and
. Sample graphic illustrations.
Once approved by City staff and the City Attorney, the outline will become the basis for
drafting preliminary regulations-the modules to be reviewed in summary form by the
Planning Commission.
The following illustration shows the schedule for completing the annotated outline, the
zoning modules, and the complete revised Zoning Ordinance.
Schedule for South San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
-.
-
AnnobII" ...... ,
0utt6n40 tho RC'J'lloJIlQI1l>
......
Dtllvl.Hwm..ml
:5t"'l'Idbr~h
-.
S\,pp~m..t1Utl
Stal'ldatt1!1
~4:
A.dfllimil'_,~'t'
PI'}VI~j<)ri~
ZoNnv()r~
Admk'Itf.l.n PuIlIic
Dr'" ~ Dr'"
.........
t
.
~
..
.
.
.
>8
"
2008
2009
Coosult.mt Effort
\ H(!';)Iln\J
. Planning ComIT'lISSI0n,'
City CoutICtl MeellOg
PfoouCI
~.", NtlW1!lI,..ttet
16
4 Next Steps
After the Planning Commission and City Council have commented on the key issues this
report identifies, an annotated outline of the zoning regulations with a "plain English"
commentary will be prepared. The outline will layout the basic structure of the revised
Zoning Ordinance and indicate what changes will need to be made to current regulations
including:
. The proposed number, types, and purposes of base zoning districts;
. The proposed overlay and special districts, and provisions for planned development;
. The general purpose sections of the new ordinance, including definitions, provisions
for "use classifications," supplemental standards applying in some or all districts,
administration, and enforcement;
. The overall organization and numbering system, and procedures for amendments;
and
. Sample graphic illustrations.
Once approved by City staff and the City Attorney, the outline will become the basis for
drafting preliminary regulations--the modules to be reviewed in summary form by the
Planning Commission.
The following illustration shows the schedule for completing the annotated outline, the
zoning modules, and the complet1e revised Zoning Ordinance.
Schedule for SoutUl San Francisco Zoning Ordinance Update
-.
-..
Annotat.... ModutIt 1
0uttiM ll't'" R..gll!/It.on:s
M_'
OWWtf!'l'Pl'IHlf11
$lMldllof<b
........,:
SUPP"m~nl.1
Slltl'lcUub
~..;
Admil'l~I!;l,h'fff
p".wl~km!l
z_o..on-
~...... PuWk
Or.... ,..... 0.....
--
t ~ ·
~
..
.
.
[;] .
~~
'\'\
2008
2009
Consuttant Effort
\ H.,arl"'j
. Planning CommissIon.'
C,tv CouncIl Meetmg
Produt.1
.:;!!~ Newsletter
16
III Bring Zoning Ordinance into conformance
with the 1999 General Plan, and implement
General Plan policies.
III Legal adequacy--ensure that Zoning
Ordinance is consistent with State and
federal law.
III Create a user-friendly document.
II! Craft a permitting process that balances
discretion and certainty, and streamlines
administrative procedures.
III Provide overview of zoning purposes
and practices.
III Review key issues for zoning update.
flI Obtain Council and Commission input
on issues.
Ii Identify next steps.
III Code-user interviews;
II Field reconnaissance;
III Council -Commission study session
II Technical review of existing code by
Staff and Consultant;
II Identification of issues and options.
GENEnAL PLAN
.AN
.....................\
SPECIFIC/MEA PLANS
DESIGN GUIDELINES
. MOll:- <k.taikd l.~fld IIS1;'
III The Text
y Defines districts consistent with
General Plan land use designations.
}- Establishes a uniform set of
regulations for each district
III The Map
y Applies the districts created in the
text of the code.
III Land use designations describe intended
development character and land uses and
and are mapped on the General Plan Diagram.
III Density ranges for residential land use
designations.
III Intensity limits (e.g. floor-area ratio or FAR)
for non-residential classifications.
III Citywide policies.
III Policies for specific geographic subareas.
· Land use-based "Euclidean" zoning
of Segregation of uses
of Hierarchal regulations
· Character-based zoning
of Environments defined by development
form and how uses perform
of Relationship to public realm and
surrounding development
· Place-based zoning
of ~~E?~r~ro~L1ftei~~fr~~I~~~~eristics of
neighborhood (e.g. hillsides, riparian
corridors, transit corridors
· Hybrid zoning
of A blend of approaches to best meet
community needs
EXAMPLE OF USE REGULA TIONS TABLE
· Use Regulations, Define which land uses are permitted,
conditionally permitted, and prohibited in each district,
and may include special limitations for specific uses.
Regulations, Control the size, design, and
structures and specify how they perform.
· ;~~i~!~~~~~;~v;d~;~i~~i~;~;d ff:d~rxn~o:h~h~~k~~naecisions
and types of zoning actions.
· Land Use Clas:;ifications. Describe groups of similar
residential, business, and public use types that are
similarly regulated and reflect contemporary commerce
and industry.
G'0nera! and Definitions. Explain what terms mean
and how to perform necessary calculations.
· Flexibility 'IS. Predictability: A rule of law or a rule of
individuals? Should the area for negotiation be wide or
narrow? To what extent should this be determined by the
Code or by practice?
.. Fiexihilit.v
applicant,' to opponents,
hearings.
· Development Cost 'Is. Quality: Standards should be
written with an understanding of their effect on
developers' and consumers' costs and on the quality of the
environment for both user and community at large.
· Preserv'oUol1 '15. Will a particular
regulation stimulate or change in uses, users, or
appearance?
Cost: Cost to the
to the City's tolerance for
Establish El Camino Real
promote development as a
boulevard that incorporates
cent.ers as well as
requirements including:
>- Consistent maximum height;
,. No minimum front setback when active uses are
adjacent to streets;
>- Performance-oriented standards;
>- Awning, shade and building transparency
requirements for pedestrian areas.
1. Preservation of neighborhood character;
2. Compatibility of infill development;
3. Rethinking parking standards and
regulations;
4. Approaches for addressing design issues;
5. Changes to review thresholds;
6. Regulation of non-conforming situations;
l. Issues that may require rethinking some
general plan policies.
· Prepare annotated outline.
,; Number, types, and purposes of base districts;
,; Types and purposes of overlay and specific plan
districts;
,; Overall organization and numbering system;
,; Format of individual chapters;
,; Use of graphic illustrations.
· Develop zoning modules.
· Phase I-Diagnosis and Technical Analysis
· Phase II-Choices for New Zoning
· Phase III-Products
· Phase IV-Hearings and Adopted Ordinance:
Hearings for adoption of the ordinance.
II ft10dufe Use regulations for zoning districts,
standards for specific uses.
II Module Development standards for base zoning
districts including development density and
intensity, building envelopes, open space
requirements, and buffering.
II tY!odufe Supplemental standards applicable across
districts including parking, landscaping, signs, and
general site development requirements.
II Module Zoning administration includin~ common
procedures, procedures for specific permlt types,
enforcement, and historic preservation.
II How should the
ordinance be
changed to ensure
new development fits?
.. What factors
determine whether
new development is
compatible?
.. How much change is
acceptable?
II What changes to
parking regulations
are needed to
implement the
Plan's policies to
encourage new and
infill development
and promote reuse
of underdeveloped
sites?
II Which areas need
special parking
requirements or
programs?
II Scale and massing.
II Site conditions (e.g. slope)
II Location and design of garages and parking areas.
II Regulating second story additions, basement
conversions, and decks.
II Development intensity and density.
What approach or
combination of approaches
will best achieve the City's
design quality goals?
./ Development
standards;
./ Design guidelines;
./ Checklist design
review;
./ Criteria for
discretionary design
review.
II Could more specific objective standards allow
changes to current review thresholds (e.g. Zoning
Administrator approval with appeal to Planning
Commission instead of Commission hearings)?
II Which uses could be allowed by right subject to
specific limitations on size, location, hours of
operation, etc.?
.. Minimize creation of
nonconforming uses
.. Providing tools to deal
effectively with
nonconforming situations
. Classify nonconforming
usesubenign uses; uses
that should be replaced
but are unlikely to
redevelop in near term;
uses that are
detrimental)
.. Allow substitutions
.. Should provisions vary for different areas?
II Should the code distinguish among different
types of nonconforming uses?
II Industrial areas designated for office uses;
II Allowing more retail and mixed uses east of
101 ;
II Considering whether housing should be allowed
east of 101.
~'t\\ s4N
S
(~ c
~ ~
v 0
~l~~~ Staff Renort
AGENDA ITEM # 5
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
February 20, 2008
Honorable Mayor, City Council Members & Planning Commissioners
Marty VanDuyn, Assistant City Manager
JOINT STUDY SESSION: THE STATUS OF THE BIOTECHNOLOGY
CLUSTER IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council conduct a Joint Study Session to receive a report on
the status of the biotechnology cluster in South San Francisco.
BACKGROUNDIDISCUSSION
The purpose of the Study Session is to discuss the status of the biotechnology cluster in South San
Francisco and long-term economic de:velopment and marketing strategies to attract and retain
companies. To better understand the future challenges and opportunities for growth of the bioscience
industry in South San Francisco, the City has embarked on an effort to gauge the growth of this
important cluster of bioscience companies and develop forward-looking strategies to retain and
expand the local industry base. The City has hired Peter Pellerito, a national advisor to the
biotechnology industry, to help update ,md refine the City's Economic Development Strategy. Mr.
Pellerito will summarize the key points of a report on the biotechnology industry, summarize
interviews with company officials, and present a draft marketing strategy.
America's Biotechnology Zip Code
From one small company in rented space in 1976 to a major hub of bioscience industry
commercialization in 2008, the City of South San Francisco and the 70-plus bioscience firms located
in this community represent the full development spectrum of growth and opportunity in this
industry.
This city has consistently reinvented its economic base by adapting to changing economic conditions
and has transformed itself from an old industry economy of farming and steel production into a
world-renowned center for biomedical innovation and commercialization, and the largest municipal
cluster oflife sciences company jobs in California. California-based life science companies thrive
Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Planning Commissioners
Subject: Joint Study Session: Biotechnology Report
Date: February 20, 2008
Page 2
alongside international research units in the East of 1 01 area. There are also a score of development-
stage companies, who are thriving examples of the next generation of innovators in biomedical
development that will create new high-wage jobs in the community.
While South San Francisco is the top city in bioscience jobs in San Mateo County and Northern
California, sustained growth of the industry in the city is not guaranteed as more states and nations
attempt to capture these quality jobs. Even in San Francisco, projects in Mission Bay and Hunters
Point Naval Base are aggressively vying for some of the companies already located in South San
Francisco.
Economic Base and Job Generator
As documented in a series oflocal reports dating back to 1995, South San Francisco is the hub of a
vibrant and dynamic cluster of Northem California life science companies. The expansion of the
cluster over the past dozen years has btmefited the city in many ways:
. First, the local bioscience industry provides an important contribution to the region's durable
goods manufacturing and software development base in the face of mounting international
competition.
. Second, the industry has assisted state efforts to diversify the city's economic base. In the past
ten years, the number of bioscience companies in South San Francisco has nearly doubled and
this continued growth means new, higher paying jobs and an improved standard ofliving for
South San Francisco and the Bay Area.
. Finally, the local industry takt:s advantage of the Bay Area's research and development
infrastructure already in place at the outstanding universities and federal research facilities
that provide vital support to tht: industry.
For bioscience companies located in our city, a continued positive relationship with local, regional,
and state units of government is essential. The costs associated with conducting the research and
development to bring a biopharmaceutical drug to the market exceeds $900 million and 8-10 years in
FDA testing. Delays in processing pemlits for small and medium sized companies, in particular, add
considerable costs to the "bum rate" typical to companies with high R&D expenditures.
CONCLUSION
Mr. Pellerito's report will help City Officials understand the future challenges and opportunities for
growth of the bioscience industry in South San Francisco. The City has embarked on an effort to
gauge the growth of this important cluster of bioscience companies and develop forward-looking
Staff Report
To: Honorable Mayor, City Council Members and Planning Commissioners
Subject: Joint Study Session: Biotechnology Report
Date: February 20,2008
Page 3
strategies to retain and grow the local industry base. Staff recommends that the City Council and
Planning Commission conduct a Joint Study Session to receive a report on the status of the
biotechnology cluster in South San Francisco.
Marty VanDuyn
Assistant City Manager
APproV~ - G~
. Nage
City Manager
By:
Attachments: Draft Marketing Strategy
MVD/SKlml/bla
DRAFT RECOMMENDED SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO BIOSCIENCES
"94080: AMERICA'S BIOSCIENCES ZIP CODE" MARKETING STRATEGY
lFEBRUARY 20, 2008
The following recommendations are draft only and serve as a guideline for
discussion by City officials and staff. The draft marketing and promotion
strategy for the South San Francisco bioscience in ustry will be presented in
three parts: I) image and branding, 2) ove id' te ology marketing
concepts; and 3) technology marketing strat s.
1. DIVERSIFYING TI
LIFE SCIENCES.
gencies have
. .
Clence
Across the nation, many cities and econo
adopted a comprehensive marketing pro
companies. The components of a success
emphasized in our many individual an
of industry in the city. The co
marketing and promotion strategy
I'
CUTTING EDGE
G STRATEGIC ALLIANCES
TENTIAL MAJOR PLAYERS
REPRENEURlAL MANAGEMENT AND
ORT ENVIRONMENT
5. RAISING THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCOAL IMAGE IN THE
NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL HIGH TECHNOLOGY
WORLD
DRAFT ONLY
PETER PELLERITO
SSF LIFE SCIENCES CONSULTANT
FEBRUARY 20, 2008
Emplovment
9,000
8,150
1,100
798
68
27
20
19
#of
Companies
~~i~;;.~~~~~~'_"":.;!If~~""'''!;\i':\~_~'''''''''~~_
ns
,~~~;~~""^~~d'fT"~~""~N!iI~~l'"",,,,~~.....
C mpacts OirecUlndirect
...... -
12,587
- -
A verage Salaries $67,150
- -
Total Salaries (Jobs # x $67,150 average) $845.2 Million
State Income Tax Revenues ( 6.2% Average) $52.4 Million
Indirect/Induced Jobs Impact (2.6x Direct Jobs)
(Direct and Indirect)
Impact@ $44, 021 x 34,970 Jobs
Grand
III
S I
Estimated Cost
$150m
$120rr
· dentify unique setting for promotion of the South San Francisco industry
cluster including organizing efforts to highlight the city at premier international
meeting similar to the forthcoming BID 2008 in San Diego, California.
· Market the "94080" theme to a variety of industry specific organization and
media inserts that focus on the city assets that embrace industry retention and
sion, the most effective attraction tool.
Though well"known as thebirthplaceofbiotechnologyasan industry,
stakeholders in. the. conti nuedg rowth.. of the. ind ustryshouldstrong Iyu rge city staff
tore-dou ble effortstoactively 'p romote awareness..ofj ncu m bent co m panies.a nd
city.servicesto su p portthem.
I
io!i
ng/and<Promotion Function
c.e
I
~~
t
riorit
es