Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 89-2008 RESOLUTION NO. 89-2008 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA A RESOLUTION APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE 2006 FINAL TERRABA Y SPECIFIC PLAN, AND AMENDMENTS TO WHEREAS, the TelTabay lands have an extensive pla111ung history dating to the early 1980s; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of South San Francisco approved the Final TelTabay Specific Plan Phase III of the Terrabay Developlnent on Novelnber 21, 2000, and have since approved anlendnlents, most recently in June 2008, to the Final TelTabay Specific Plan, approved Precise Plan, and Chapter 20.63 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code, "TelTabay Specific Plan Zoning District"; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environlnental Quality Act (CEQA), envirolmlental inlpacts of the proj ect and various mnendlnents have been analyzed, resulting in celiification of a 1982 Envirolunental I1npact Report (EIR), a 1996 Supplelnental EnvirOlll11ental I1npact Repoli (SEIR), a 1998/99 SEIR, a 2005 SEIR and a 2006 Addendum; and, WHEREAS, the applicant now requests an anlendll1ent to the 2006 Final TelTabay Specific Plan, Precise Plan, and a zoning text mnendment, to allow as a pellnitted use, a Product Desigtl Studio ("Studio") as a suppoli use to the approved office use on the site, and to be located above the approved gt"ound floor retail concourse attached to the site's North Tower ("2008 Project"); and, WHEREAS, together, the proposed amendlnents to the 2006 Final TelTabay Specific Plan, the Precise Plan, and the zoning text amendments, are refelTed to as the "AInendlnents"; and, WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA, changes to projects for which an EIR has been certified do not require subsequent EIRs, unless the lead agency detellnines that the changes will result in new significant ilnpacts or mitigation lneasures, or substantially nlore severe ilnpacts than those analyzed . in the previous EIR; and WHEREAS, the prior celiified EIR, SEIRs and Addendum fully analyzed all potentially significant inlpacts and proposed nlitigation for said impacts; and, WHEREAS, the City Council previously adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progranl for the project and Statelnent ofOvelTiding Considerations for the project's significant and unavoidable ilnpacts, both of which remain in full force and effect; and, WHEREAS, based on the foregoing and CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no further enviromnental review is required, and the appropriate CEQA docunlent for approval of the 2008 Project is an Addenduln, as prepared and adopted by separate resolution; and, WHEREAS, on July 17, 2008, the Plmll1ing Conlnlission held a properly noticed public hearing to consider the proposed Anlendlnents to the Final TelTabay Specific Plan, the Precise Plan, and the TelTabay Specific Plan District Zoning Ordinance. NOW THEREFORE, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes without lilnitation, (1) the South San Francisco General Plan, and General Plan Enviromnental 1111pact Repoli; (2) The Final Tell"abay Specific Plan, as a1nended in 2000,2006 and proposed in 2008; (3) The 2005 Celiified Supplemental Environmental Impact Repoli and 2006 Addendunl and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progranl, 1998-99 Certified TelTabay Supplelnental EnvirolIDlentall1npact Report, which includes the 1982 Certified TelTabay EnvirolUl1entall111pact Report, the Certified 1996 TelTabay Supplenlental Environmental Inlpact Repoli and Addenduln to the 1998-1999 Celiified TelTabay Supplelnental Enviroll111ental Ilnpact Repoli and Addendllln; (4) All public hearings on the project, including nlinutes and reports prepared for such hearings, the City Council 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 AInendlnents are consistent with the South San Francisco General Plan. AInendlnents proposed relate only to the development of the Product Desigtl Studio. All findings and analysis lnade in support of cOlnpliance of the project with the General Plan are unchanged. The approved 2006 Final TelTabay Specific Plan would be lnodified 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 TelTabay Specific Plan would not be altered. Specific General Plan consistency findings are as follows: Chapter 2.6 Land Use Policies 2-G-l: Preserve the scale and character of established neighborhoods, and protect residents from changes in non-residential areas. AIlalysis: The proposed Project will be a pmi the approved 2006 Project. The 2008 Project would complilnent the existing land uses on the project site, and the existing approved proj ect 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. Al1alysis: The approved Project has imlnediate 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 Proj ect will add to the City's tax base. The 2008 Project proposes a supporting use for the approved office cOlnponent of the 2006 Project and enhances the Project's overall marketability. The existing FAR is 0.78 and the 2008 Proj ect would increase that to a O. 84 FAR under the 1. 0 FAR maximuln for Business Commercial land use designations with structured parking. 2-1-4: Require all new developments seeking an FAR bonus set forth in Table 2.2-2 to achieve a progressively higher alternative mode usage. Al1alysis: 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 progt"anl for the Project. The TDM Progrmn is approved and the 2008 Project will be a part of the approved TDM Progra1n. 2-1-13: 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. Al1alysis: 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. TelTabay Phase III was approxinlately 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: Plmuling Sub-Areas Element: Paradise Valley/TelTabay 3-8-G-2: Improve accessibility to neighborhood shopping opportunities. Al1alysis: The 2006 Project provides office, restaurant and retail land uses and a performing arts center. The 2008 Proj ect does not alter these conditions and cOlnplies with this policy. Chapter 4: Transportation 4-2-G-7: Provide afair and equitable meansfor payingfor future street improvements,' and, 4-2-1-6: Incorporate as part of the City's CIP needed intersection and roadway improvements including Bayshore (now Airport) Boulevard and U.s. 101 Hook Ramps. Al1alysis: The 2006 Project sponsor contributed land and $8.5 million to construct the hook ramps. The traffic ilnprovenlents are in place and operational. The 2008 Proj ect 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 residential neighborhoods, and to transit centers. Al1alysis: 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; on~ fi"om the second floor office and the second froln the ground floor retail area. The 2008 Project wculd not impact pedestrian and bikeways and links to transit and complies with this policy. 4-3-G-3 : operations. In partnership with local employers, continue efforts to expand shuttle A11alysis: The TelTabay project inlplelnents a shuttle service for Peninsula Mandalay. The shuttle service will be expanded to cover the Phase III Proj ect including the 2008 Project. 4-3-1-4: Require provision of secure and covered bicycle parking. Analysis: The approved TDM Progranl 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. A11alysis: TelTabay Phase I and II include a linear parle. The park tellninates within the Phase III site. The 2006 Project includes a trail to the westell1 pOliion of the site for an overlook area. The 2008 Project would not alter these conditions. Chapter 6: Economic Developlnent 6-G-I: In partnership with business and community groups, proactively participate in the City's economic development. A11alysis: TelTabay has had a long (25 year plus) history that has been controversial. Begilming in 1999 through to the present, nluch of the controversy has been abated largely as a result of the following actions: . The Plmuling Commission and City Council desigtlated the Preservation Parcel as permanent open space. . Myers Development, City leaders and City staff worked with c0111111unity 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 COlnment letter on the 2005 SEIR also lauded the restoration of the 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 Comlnission sub committee worked to develop a land plan that in the words of one sub conlmittee 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 Proj ect will enhance these conditions. The addition of a product desigtl studio will serve to enhance the lnarketability of the project. 3. The Amendlnents are consistent with the Airport Land Use Plan. Dave Carbone, Staff Adlninistrator of the C/CAG San Mateo County Airport Land Use Conllnittee (ALUC) previously reviewed the Final TelTabay Specific Plan and found it cOlnplied with the ALUC requirenlents (letter of October 25, 2000). The proposed AIl1endnlents will allow for develoPlnent 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 proj ect, as proposed by the Alnendlnents, will be well below the project site's height lilnit of360 feet. Accordingly, the conlpliance letter of October 25, 2000 supports approval of the AInendnlents with the conditions inlposed. 4. The Amendnlents are consistent with the Habitat Conservation Plan. (HCP) Victoria Harris, biologist with Thomas Reid Associates (The Plan Adnlinistrator) reviewed the previously approved Final TelTabay Specific Plan and found the Specific Plan complied with the HCP boundary and grading linlits (letter of October 25, 2000) celiified 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 TelTabay Phase II and Phase III. The proposed Alnendlnents would allow development of the Studio on top of previously approved developnlent. The AInendlnents would not result in any additional grading on the site and would renlain well within the previously approved grading lilnits, therefore, the AInendlnents are consistent with the HCP. 5. Proper envirolunental 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 liInited to the following: the City Council's independent review of the proposed Amendnlents; the SEIR and relevant sections of the 1982 EIR and the 1996 Supplelnental EIR and the entire 1999 SEIR, and Addendum thereto, which demonstrate that any significant ilnpacts fi"om the proposed developlnent have either been avoided or mitigated to a level of less than sigtlificance or were addressed in the Statement ofOvelTiding Considerations. No further envirolll11ental analysis is required when a prior EIR has been prepared for a proj ect 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 nleasures. Therefore, in accordance with CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15164, no additional environmental review is required, and an Addendum is the appropriate CEQA document for approval of the Amendments. 6. The site is physically suitable for the proposed type and density of develoPlnent. 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 Addendunl, are incorporated into the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progra1n. No changes to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are required as a result of the Amendlnents. 7. The desigtl, improvelnents and constructions standards included within the AInenmnents are not likely to cause environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife in their habitat and are desigtled to achieve compliance with the development and/or construction standards of the TelTabay Specific Plan. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not liInited to the following: the 1982 EIR, 1996 SEIR, 1998/99 SEIR, and 2005 SEIR and 2006 Addenduln analyze the anticipated envirolllnental effects of the proposed Phase III develoPlnent and together with the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Repoliing Progranl demonstrate that the project will either avoid or nlitigate iInpacts of the project that are likely to cause serious public health problems, to cause substantial envirolunental dmnage, or to cause substantial and avoidable injuries to fish, wildlife or their habitat. 8. The desigtl and type of ilnprovelnents proposed in the Amendlnents do not conflict with public easenlents for access through or use of the property within the Phase III areas of the TelTabay developlnent and confolln to the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and Chapter 19.48.080 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code as to desigtl, drainage, utilities, road improvenlents and offers of dedication or deed. This finding is based upon all evidence in the record as a whole, including, but not linlited to the following: The City Council's independent review of the proposed Amendlnents and the reports of the city engineer and other appropriate departlnent heads. 9. As previously detellnined by the City Council, Phase III of the TelTabay develoPlnent provides, to the extent feasible, future passive or natural heating or cooling opportunities. No changes are proposed in the AInendments that would alter passive or natural heating and cooling oppoliunities. 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 inlpacts 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 City Council of the City of South San Francisco does hereby: A. Approve an amendment to the 2006 Final TelTabay Specific Plan to pernlit development of the Studio as proposed, and authorize staff to lnake changes to the plan consistent with the City Council's approval of same. B. Approve an amendlnent to the Precise Plan for the project to permit developnlent of the Studio as proposed. * * * * * I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular lneeting held on the 23rd day of July 2008 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Mark N. Addiego, Richard A. Garbarino and Kevin Mullin, Mayor Pro Te1n Karyl Matsumoto and Mayor Pedro Gonzalez NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: None ATTEST: EXHIBIT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 2008 SECOND AMENDMENT TO THE FINAL TERRABAY PHASE III SPECIFIC PLAN, PRECISE PLAN AND ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT P08-0002: SPM08-0002; ZA08-004 A. PLANNING DIVISION 1. The Applicant/Project shall conform to all the conditions of approval identified in Resolution 82-2006 as well as the following conditions contained herein. 2. The Applicant/Project shall implement all the mitigation measures identified in the adopted Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progranl for Terrabay adopted by City Council Resolution 81-2006 and as readopted in 2008. 3. The Product Design Studio shall serve as a support use to the office use on the Project site. The Product Design Studio shall not generate more that 58 daily vehicle trips to the site in absence of additional environmental review. 4. The Product Design Studio shall not be used for industrial purposes or biotechnical research pnd development. The permitted use shall comply with the provisions of the Terrabay Specific Plan Zoning District which allo'ws the production of audio, visual and performance arts, and similar uses. 5. The rooftop mechanical units shall be screened from view from the office towers and said screening shall be reviewed and approved by the Chief Planner. Contact: Allison Knapp, Planning Consultant: (650) 829-6633. B. BUILDING DIVISION 1. Project construction shall comply with the 2007 California Building Code. 2. The permitted occupancy is retail and office. Any use more hazardous that these uses shall require additional review. 3. Detailed construction plans shall be provided and a building permit shall be issued prior to commencing construction. Contact: Jim Kirkman, Chief Building Official: (650) 8829-6670 C. FIRE DEPARTMENT 1. Install fire sprinkler system per NFP A 13 and The South San Fra11cisco Fire Department (SSSFD) Municipal Code requirements. Permit shall be under a separate fire plan check and permit for overhead. 2. Install exterior listed horn/strobe alarm device. 3. This portion of the building is also requi~ed to have a fire alarm system per NFP A 72 and the SSSPD Municipal Code. 4. The fire sprinkler system shall be monitored by a central station per California Fire Code Section 1003.3. 5. This portion of the building is also required to have a smoke control system per Section 905 of the California Fire Code and the SSSFD Mll11icipal Code. 6. The elevator shall not have shunt-trip. 7. The service/maintenance access road at the rear of the building leading to the catch basin shall be an all weather road (paved). 8. All the previous agreed to conditions of approval are still in effect and enforceable. Contact: Luis Da Silva, Fire Marshal: (650) 8294320 EXIllBIT B PROPOSED ZONING TEXT LANGUAGE The following language is recommended to accommodate the Product Design Studio in Chapter 20.63 of the Zoning Ordinance. 1) The following definition would be added to the "Definitions" section of the Terrabay Specific PlaIl Zoning District text (20.63.010 Product Design Studio is permitted as an accessory or support use to the office component of the TelTabay Phase III Proiect. The Product Design Studio shall serve as a support use to the anchor tenant of the office component of Terrabay and shall not add to the aggregate employee base of the Phase III comrnercial component in absence of environmental review. Uses may include the production of audio, video, design and performance arts aIld similar uses. 2) The addition of a Product Design Studio as a permitted use: 20.63.030.(b)(14) Product Design Studio as a support use to the office component and as defined in the definition section contained herein consisting of approximately 15,010 square feet. 3) Modifications to the existing T errabay Specific Plan Zoning District text: Section 20.63.030 (b) (8) Class A office buildings for a gross square footage of approximately 665,000 square feet; 4) Modify Section 20.63.140 (e) (1) A parking capacity of one thousand nine hlUldred and fifty two cars in striped stalls is required based upon the parking requirements of ~2.74 spaces per one thousand gross square feet of floor area as set forth in the final Terrabay Specific Plan.