Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09-04-25 Planning Commision Regular Meeting Agenda PacketThursday, September 4, 2025 7:00 PM City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA Library Parks & Recreation Building, Council Chambers 901 Civic Campus Way, South San Francisco, CA Planning Commission SARAH FUNES-OZTURK, Chairperson AYSHA PAMUKCU, Vice Chairperson JOHN BAKER, Commissioner MICHELE EVANS, Commissioner NORMAN FARIA, Commissioner SAM SHIHADEH, Commissioner ALEX TZANG, Commissioner Regular Meeting Agenda 1 September 4, 2025Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda How to observe the Meeting (no public comment): 1) Local cable channel: Astound, Channel 26, Comcast, Channel 27, or AT&T, Channel 99 2) https://www.ssf.net/Government/Video-Streaming-City-and-Council-Meetings/Planning-Commission 3) https://www.youtube.com/@CityofSouthSanFrancisco/streams How to Submit written Public Comment before the meeting: Email: PCcomments@ssf.net Members of the public are encouraged to submit public comments in writing in advance of the meeting. The email will be monitored during the meeting.The City encourages the submission of comments by 6:00pm on the date of the Public Hearing to facilitate inclusion in the meeting record. Written comments received prior to 6:00pm on the day of the meeting will be included as part of the meeting record, but will not be read aloud at the meeting. How to provide Public Comment during the meeting: COMMENTS ARE LIMITED TO THREE (3) MINUTES PER SPEAKER During a meeting, comments can only be made in person: Complete a Speaker Card located at the entrance to the Council Chambers. Be sure to indicate the Agenda Item # you wish to address or the topic of your public comment. When your name is called, please come to the podium, state your name and address (optional) for the Minutes. American Disability Act: The City Clerk will provide materials in appropriate alternative formats to comply with the Americanswith Disabilities Act. Please send a written request to City Clerk Rosa Govea Acosta at 400 Grand Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080, or email at all-cc@ssf.net. Include your name, address, phone number, a brief description of the requested materials, and preferred alternative format service at least 72-hours before the meeting. Accommodations: Individuals who require special assistance of a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in the meeting, including Interpretation Services, should contact the Office of the City Clerk by email at all-cc@ssf.net, 72-hours before the meeting. Page 2 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/2/2025 2 September 4, 2025Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE AGENDA REVIEW ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF PUBLIC COMMENT Members of the public may speak on any item not listed on the Agenda, and on any items listed under the Consent Calendar. Pursuant to the provisions of the Brown Act, no action may be taken on a matter unless it is written on the agenda, or unless certain emergency or special circumstances exist. Written comments received prior to 6:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be included as part of the meeting record, but will not be read aloud. DISCLOSURE OF EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS This portion of the meeting is reserved for Planning Commissioners to disclose any communications, including site visits, they have had on current agenda items, or any conflict of interest regarding current agenda items. CONSENT CALENDAR Consideration and approval of minutes from the August 21, 2025 Planning Commission meeting. 1. 08-21-25 PC Draft MinutesAttachments: PUBLIC HEARING Page 3 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/2/2025 3 September 4, 2025Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Report regarding consideration of resolutions making findings and recommending that the City Council adopt an Environmental Impact Report, including a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program, and approve applications for a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Design Review, Transportation Demand Management Plan, Vesting Tentative Map, and Development Agreement for the proposed Infinite 131 Project to redevelop the 17.67-acre Produce Terminal site at 131 Terminal Court in the Lindenville sub-area with up to 1.7 million square feet of office / R&D and associated amenity uses, and to rezone five adjacent private parcels at 120 Terminal Court, 196 Produce Avenue, 160 Produce Avenue and 140 Produce Avenue from Mixed Industrial High (MIH) to Business Technology Park High (BTP-H). (Billy Gross, Principal Planner) 2. Att 1 - GGPT Letter, October, 2020 Att 2 - GGPT Letter, May, 2025 Att 3 - Infinite 131 Parking Management Plan Att 4 - Design Review Board Letter, July 2023 Att 5 - ALUC Reso 25-35 Attachments: Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the Infinite 131 Project. 2a. Exhibit A - Infinite 131 Draft EIR and Appendices Exhibit B - Infinite 131 FEIR Exhibit C - Statement of Overriding Considerations Exhibit D - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachments: Page 4 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/2/2025 4 September 4, 2025Planning Commission Regular Meeting Agenda Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment, Use Permit, Design Review, Tentative Parcel Map, Transportation Demand Management Plan and Development Agreement to construct a life science campus totaling approximately 1,700,000 square feet on a 17.67-acre site at 131 Terminal Court. 2b. Exhibit A - General Plan Amendments Exhibit B - Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments Exhibit C - Zoning Map Amendments Exhibit D - Project Plans Exhibit E - Vesting Tentative Map Exhibit F - Transportation Demand Management Program EXHIBIT G_101 and 131 Terminal - Draft Development Agreement Exhibit H - Conditions of Approval Attachments: The Commission has adopted a policy that applicants and their representatives have a maximum time limit of 20 minutes to make a presentation on their project. Non-applicants may speak a maximum of 3 minutes on any agenda item. Questions from Commissioners to applicants or non-applicants may be answered by using additional time. ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION ADJOURNMENT **Any interested party will have 15 calendar days from the date of an action or decision taken by the Planning Commission to appeal that action or decision to the City Council by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk as provided under Chapter 20.570 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code. In the event an appeal period ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or any other day the City is closed, the appeal period shall end at the close of business on the next consecutive business day. The cost to appeal for applicants, residents, and all others is as set forth in the City’s Master Fee Schedule. Page 5 City of South San Francisco Printed on 9/2/2025 5 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:25-929 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:1. Consideration and approval of minutes from the August 21, 2025 Planning Commission meeting. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 1 of 1 powered by Legistar™6 August 21, 2025 Minutes Page 1 of 3 MINUTES AUGUST 21, 2025 CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TIME: 7:00 PM AGENDA REVIEW No changes ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM STAFF None PUBLIC COMMENTS ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA None CONSENT CALENDAR – Voting Key: (yes, no, abstain) 1. Consideration and approval of minutes from the August 7, 2025 Planning Commission Motion to approve: Commissioner Baker, Second – Commissioner Faria, approved by roll call (5-0-0) Meeting Video: Planning Commission on 08-21-2025 PUBLIC HEARING 2. Report regarding consideration and recommendation of approval to City Council of a Zoning Text Amendment to make minor revisions to South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) Section 20.110 (Civic Districts) related to building height, consideration of a Variance, and Design Review for the redevelopment of the Boys and Girls Club facility at 201 West Orange Avenue in the Parks and Recreation (PR) ROLL CALL / CHAIR COMMENTS PRESENT: Vice Chair Pamukcu, Commissioners: Baker, Faria, Shihadeh, Tzang ABSENT: Chair Funes-Ozturk Commissioner: Evans STAFF PRESENT: Adena Friedman – Chief Planner, Billy Gross – Principal Planner, Kimia Mahallati – City Attorney, Cynthia Fregoso – Clerk 7 August 21, 2025 Minutes Page 2 of 3 Zoning District in accordance with Title 20 of the SSFMC, and determination under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that the project is categorically exempt as an Infill Development Project. (CEQA Guidelines Section 15332.) (Adena Friedman, Chief Planner) Public Hearing Opened 7:05pm Public Hearing Closed 7:48pm 2a. Resolution making findings and a determination that the Peninsula Boys and Girls Club Orange Park Clubhouse Project located at 201 West Orange Avenue qualifies for a categorical exemption, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15332, Infill Development. Motion to approve: Commissioner Baker, Second – Commissioner Zhang, approved by roll call (5-0-0) 2b. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Ordinance to make minor revisions to South San Francisco Municipal Code (SSFMC) Section 20.110 (Civic Districts) related to building height and recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution approving a Variance, and Design Review for the redevelopment of the Boys and Girls Club facility at 201 West Orange Avenue in the Parks and Recreation (PR) Zoning District. Motion to approve: Commissioner Zhang, Second – Commissioner Faria, approved by roll call (5-0-0) Meeting Video: Planning Commission on 08-21-2025 3. Report regarding a proposed Development Agreement to extend approved entitlements to construct a new Office/R&D Campus and multi-family residential building at 180 El Camino Real in the Planned Development (PD) Zoning District for a period of ten (10) years in exchange for payment of Community Benefits Monetary Contribution obligations in accordance with Title 19 and 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and making findings regarding the consistency of the proposed action with the adopted Addendum to the 2009 Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. (Billy Gross, Principal Planner) Public Hearing Opened 8:01pm Public Hearing Closed 8:14pm 3a. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve a proposed Development Agreement to extend approved entitlements to construct a new Office/R&D Campus and multi-family residential building at 180 El Camino Real in the Planned Development (PD) Zoning District for a period of ten (10) years in exchange for payment of Community Benefit Monetary Contribution obligations in accordance with Title 19 and 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code and making findings regarding the consistency of the proposed action with the adopted Addendum to the 2009 Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the California 8 August 21, 2025 Minutes Page 3 of 3 Environmental Quality Act. Motion to approve: Commissioner Shihadeh, Second – Commissioner Faria, approved by roll call (5-0-0) Meeting Video: Planning Commission on 2025-08-21 ITEMS FROM THE COMMISSION None ADJOURNMENT Vice Chair Pamukcu adjourned the Planning Commission meeting at 8:18PM. Adena Friedman, Chief Planner Sarah Funes-Ozturk , Chairperson or Aysha Pamukcu, Vice Chairperson Secretary to the Planning Commission Planning Commission City of South San Francisco City of South San Francisco AF/af 9 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. Report regarding consideration of resolutions making findings and recommending that the City Council adopt an Environmental Impact Report,including a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program,and approve applications for a General Plan Amendment,Zoning Map Amendment,Design Review,Transportation Demand Management Plan,Vesting Tentative Map,and Development Agreement for the proposed Infinite 131 Project to redevelop the 17.67-acre Produce Terminal site at 131 Terminal Court in the Lindenville sub-area with up to 1.7 million square feet of office /R&D and associated amenity uses,and to rezone five adjacent private parcels at 120 Terminal Court,196 Produce Avenue,160 Produce Avenue and 140 Produce Avenue from Mixed Industrial High (MIH)to Business Technology Park High (BTP-H).(Billy Gross, Principal Planner) MOTIONS TO ADOPT STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS: 1.Move to adopt the resolution recommending certification of the EIR. 2.Move to adopt the resolution recommending adoption of the Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments,General Plan Amendments,Zoning Map Amendments,Development Agreement, and approval of Planning entitlements. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and adopt the following resolutions recommending City Council actions: 1.Adopt a resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR23-0001),including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. 2.Adopt a resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve the entitlements request for the Infinite 131 Project (P23-0003)including General Plan Amendment (GPA25-0002), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA25-0001),Design Review (DR23-0002),Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM23-0002),and Vesting Tentative Map (PM23-0001),adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Map (ZA23-0001),and adopt an ordinance approving a Development Agreement (DA23-0002). PROJECT OVERVIEW Infinite 131 Project Application Overview The project applicant,US 131 Terminal Court Owner,LLC (Steelwave),has submitted an application for a new research and development (R&D)campus at 131 Terminal Court,which is within the Lindenville Specific Plan City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 1 of 15 powered by Legistar™10 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. research and development (R&D)campus at 131 Terminal Court,which is within the Lindenville Specific Plan Area.The project site currently contains the existing Golden Gate Produce Terminal,consisting of approximately 126,750 square feet (sq.ft.)of industrial and operational uses,along with approximately 116,500 sq.ft.of open-air structures (e.g.,loading docks,trash compactor areas),on a 17.67 acre site.The project site is bounded by Terminal Court and the Park N Fly use to the north,the 101 Terminal Court property and U.S.101 to the east,a navigable slough to the south,and existing commercial and industrial development to the west. The project is referred to as the “Infinite 131 Project”and would consist of the demolition of the existing structures and the construction of approximately 1.7 million sq.ft.of office/research and development (R&D) uses and amenities within seven buildings,ranging from one to six stories,along with two parking garages and additional surface parking.The Infinite 131 Project would require general plan,specific plan,and zoning code amendments to change the existing land use and zoning designations from Mixed Industrial High (MIH)to Business Technology Park High (BTP-H)and allow development of the R&D campus.In addition,five parcels north of the project site at 120 Terminal Court,196 Produce Avenue,160 Produce Avenue,and 140 Produce Avenue (off-site redesignation parcels),which are currently designated and zoned as MIH,would also seek general plan,specific plan and zoning code amendments to be redesignated as BTP-H.The proposed project would not include the construction of any new uses on the off-site redesignation parcels,but the CEQA analysis includes the rezoning of these parcels. Relationship to Infinite 101 Project Steelwave received entitlements for the Infinite 101 Project,located at 101 Terminal Court (immediately adjacent to the east of the 131 Terminal site),in September,2023.As approved,the Infinite 101 Project would allow approximately 743,000 sq. ft. of office/R&D space and associated amenities on a 9.98-acre lot. Each of the Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 Projects have been structured as stand-alone projects that comply with the underlying development standards on their own,but upon full build-out of the two projects the overall site design would ultimately result in a seamless campus on the two sites.The proposed Development Agreement terms apply to both the Infinite 131 and the Infinite 101 Projects. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION Infinite 131 Project Description Building Architecture and Site Design The Infinite 131 Project compliments the previously entitled design of the Infinite 101 Project,with buildings that have primarily glass facades,thereby bringing an abundance of natural light into each building.Building exteriors would also incorporate combinations of terra cotta,aluminum panels,wooden columns and beams to evoke a modern aesthetic.As with the Infinite 101 Project,the buildings are curved,which creates interesting courtyards between the building masses and provide significant usable on-site open space. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 2 of 15 powered by Legistar™11 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. Landscaping and Open Space The life-science campus would be tied together as an independent project and with the Infinite 101 Project through a cohesive network of landscaping and open space.A center landscaped courtyard would be located along the interior of the project site and framed by the shape of the proposed buildings to prioritize pedestrian-and bike-friendly connections and outdoor amenities.The campus open space includes multiple planting concept areas,including riparian forest,coastal meadow and redwood groves that will provide a different feel throughout the site.The courtyards contain raised planters with benches,seating areas with movable furniture,wind screen elements,bike racks,as well as in-ground plantings that serve as bio-retention areas.Open space areas are organized to connect internally,with pathways and crosswalks,and are also designed to connect to the surrounding development area. As discussed below in the “Environmental Review”section,the existing Golden Gate Produce Terminal is considered a historical resource for CEQA compliance.One of the proposed mitigation measures is the design and installation of a public interpretation program on the project site to document the history of the Golden Gate Produce Terminal.Such a public interpretation program would be required to be at least partially located in publicly accessible open spaces throughout the project site.The final design and location of such a public interpretation program would be subject to City Council review and approval prior to the construction of any phases of the Infinite 131 Project. The project would also provide infrastructure upgrades,and circulation improvements to the pedestrian and bicycle networks and neighborhood connectivity.The proposed site design,architectural details,and landscaping plans are all detailed in the project plan set,prepared by SOM Architects (Exhibit D to the Entitlements Resolution). Site Access and Circulation The project site is currently only accessed from Terminal Court,which branches off Produce Avenue prior to the beginning of the southbound onramp to U.S.101.A second site access point is proposed from Shaw Road along a former rail right-of-way that will connect to the southwest corner of the site.Internal roads would be configured in a loop pattern,providing vehicular access to buildings,parking,and on-site amenities. Pedestrians and cyclists are separated from vehicle traffic,with separate sidewalks and pathways,as well as speed humps and raised crosswalks included on internal roadways to prevent high vehicle traffic speeds where there may be conflicts with other road users.Bike rooms would be located throughout the life science buildings and the parking structures, and bike racks provided near building entrances, and within plazas. The Project site is located within 1/2-mile of the San Bruno BART station and 2/3-mile of the South San Francisco Caltrain station.Employees and visitors to the site will be encouraged to access the site via public transportation,or through non-single occupancy vehicles,as will be reflected in a comprehensive Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 3 of 15 powered by Legistar™12 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. Entitlements Request The Infinite 131 Project is seeking the following entitlements: ·General Plan Amendments ·Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments ·Zoning Map Amendments ·Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program ·Vesting Tentative Map ·Design Review ·Development Agreement ·CEQA Determination GENERAL PLAN, LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN AND ZONING AMENDMENTS The current General Plan Land Use Designation,Lindenville Specific Plan Land Use Designation and Zoning Classification for the project site and off-site redesignation parcels is Mixed Industrial High (MIH).During the initial 2040 General Plan Update process to select a preferred land use alternative,the City contemplated high- density mixed-use land uses for these parcels immediately west of U.S.Highway 101.The current property owner and occupant,Golden Gate Produce Terminal (“GGPT”),indicated via letter (Attachment 1 to this staff report)that they intended to remain at this location indefinitely.Because the GGPT has been designated a legacy use within South San Francisco since at least the 1999 General Plan,and such a use is not generally compatible with residential uses due to incompatibilities in hours of operation,the 2040 General Plan ultimately designated the property Mixed Industrial to allow for the continued conformity with the existing users. The Lindenville Specific Plan was adopted in 2023, and it includes the following policy specific to the GGPT: Policy LU-5.2:Golden Gate Produce Terminal and Park N’Fly sites.Encourage parcel assemblage of the Park ‘N Fly site (160 Produce Avenue)and the Golden Gate Terminal site (131 Terminal Court)and encourage developers to create a master plan and appropriate environmental analysis for office and R&D uses on the site. Subsequent to adoption of the General Plan and the Lindenville Specific Plan,GGPT indicated via letter (Attachment 2 to this staff report)that they have determined that remaining at the 131 Terminal site is no longer feasible due in part to the age and condition of the facility,which requires complete renovation.They have entered into an agreement with Steelwave to re-envision the property into a life science campus. As indicated above in the “Project Overview and Background”section,Steelwave obtained entitlements for the Infinite 101 Project in 2023.That site currently has as a General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning designation of Business Technology Park High (BTP-H),which allows for “High-density corporate headquarters,research and development facilities,and offices.”To facilitate a unified life science campus on both the 101 Terminal Ct and 131 Terminal Ct sites,Steelwave is requesting amendments to the General Plan, City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 4 of 15 powered by Legistar™13 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. both the 101 Terminal Ct and 131 Terminal Ct sites,Steelwave is requesting amendments to the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Map to revise the land use designation and zoning for the 131 Terminal Ct property from MIH to BTP-H. In keeping with Lindenville Specific Plan Policy LU-5.2,staff is also recommending that the five parcels north of the project site comprising the Park ‘N Fly site and Shell gas station site also be redesignated as BTP-H.This change to the off-site redesignation parcels has been included in the environmental analysis,as discussed in more detail in the “Environmental Review” section below. Lastly,staff is recommending that General Plan Sub-Area Element Policy SA-25.2 be amended as follows,to be consistent with the subsequently adopted Lindenville Specific Plan Policy LU-5.2: Policy SA-25.2:Continue to recognize the Golden Gate Produce Terminal as a legacy use.Recognize the Golden Gate Produce Terminal as a legacy use;permit it as a conforming use,allowing for expansion and contraction as necessary.If in the future the Golden Gate Produce Terminal stops operation at this site,require any new uses or new development of the site to be in conformance with the Mixed Industrial Business Technology Park High Designation Subject to these amendments,the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Map would each be consistent with one another. ZONING CONSISTENCY ANALYSIS Business Technology Park High (BTP-H) District / Site and Building Design Standards The maximum base floor area ratio (FAR)in the BTP-H district is 0.5,with up to 2.0 permitted with community benefits,and the height maximum is the maximum permitted by FAA regulations.As proposed,the project would be developed at a FAR of 2.0,consistent with the FAR permitted per a community benefits agreement (or in this case,a Development Agreement),per SSFMC Section 20.395.003(A)(2).The height of each building has been preliminarily determined to be consistent with FAA regulations. In addition to the development standards in the BTP-H zoning district,the Zoning Ordinance contains general citywide site and building design standards,to supplement district-specific standards (SSFMC Section 20.310). These standards contain requirements for building entrances,open space design and orientation,on-site circulation and parking,building materials and textures,and architectural integrity.The design of the project meets these standards,with a focus on high-quality design and materials,usable open spaces,and pedestrian and bicycle connections to and throughout the site.The project is designed to meet the BTP-H district zoning standards, as well as the citywide development standards. Vehicle Parking The Zoning Ordinance includes parking ratios that reflect the need to provide fewer parking spaces in order to incentivize and support alternative modes of transportation and reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips.SSFMC Section 20.330.004 (Required Parking Spaces)states that parking ratios required in the Zoning Ordinance are City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 5 of 15 powered by Legistar™14 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. parking maximums. The maximum parking ratio for R&D uses is 1.5 spaces /1,000 sq.ft.of gross floor area (SSFMC Table 20.330.004 Required On-Site Parking Spaces).The project is proposing 2,434 spaces for the approximately 1,632,000 sq.ft.of office/R&D area,in keeping with the maximum parking ratio.The project is also providing an additional 542 parking spaces for other amenity uses which lack parking maximums,accommodating about 17 percent of the total capacity of these spaces based on maximum occupancy allowed.Together,the proposed 2,976 parking spaces would accommodate approximately 42 percent of the expected peak occupancy of the project,in support of the TDM requirements discussed below.The Infinite 131 Parking Management Plan memorandum from Fehr &Peers is provided as Attachment 3 to this staff report.Staff has included a condition of approval requiring that all identified amenity spaces must be open to the public for these additional parking spaces to be allowed;if at any time the amenity spaces are restricted so as to only be available to campus tenants,the associated additional parking spaces must be removed and replaced by landscaping/open space improvements. Bicycle Parking The Infinite 131 project includes short-term and long-term bike parking options for employees and visitors. SSFMC Section 20.330.007 includes standards for bicycle parking: ·Any establishment with 10 or more employees shall provide long-term bicycle parking in an amount equivalent to five percent of required vehicular spaces. Based on this requirement,Infinite 131 is required to provide 149 long-term bicycle parking spaces,which will be located throughout the project site,along with 27 short-term parking spaces.SSFMC Section 20.330.007 (Bicycle Parking)includes design and location,and security requirements for long-and short-term bicycle parking.As designed,the Infinite 131 Project meets these requirements,and a project condition of approval is included to ensure that these requirements are met during project construction. TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN SSFMC Section 20.400 establishes regulations related to Transportation Demand Management (TDM)plans, using a points-based TDM planning approach to ensure that each development project contributes its fair share toward reducing vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled (VMT),while providing flexibility to be sensitive to the local development context,project type,and scale of the project.Required points are intended to align with the approximate level of auto travel reductions needed to achieve consistency with city,regional and state environmental goals.The TDM ordinance includes four tiers of compliance for different types and scales of development, based on their anticipated effects on the City’s transportation network. The Infinite 131 project is classified as a Tier 4 project,as it is an R&D project with at least 400,000 sq.ft.of floor area. Tier 4 projects include the most stringent TDM requirements, such as: ·A total of 50 points ·Annual monitoring to achieve a maximum of 50 percent of employees commuting via driving alone ·Annual monitoring of a site-specific trip cap City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 6 of 15 powered by Legistar™15 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. The proposed TDM Plan,prepared by Fehr &Peers (Associated Amendments and Entitlements Resolution, Exhibit F)includes a checklist,which achieves the required 50 points through a mix of required and optional trip reduction measures designed to reduce the number of peak hour vehicle trips,auto dependency,and the need for commuting by single-occupancy vehicle for project employees and visitors.The project design,transit -oriented location and programmatic TDM elements encourage alternative modes of transportation including walking, bicycling, micro-mobility options, carpooling, vanpooling, remote work, and public transit. VESTING TENTATIVE MAP As part of the overall entitlements,the applicant has submitted a Vesting Tentative Map that encompasses both the Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 Project sites,prepared by Ware Malcomb and their consultant team,dated August 25, 2025, to separate the existing two parcels into eight separate lots. All of the proposed lots are detailed in the Vesting Tentative Map plan set,on Sheet C1.1,(Associated Amendments and Entitlements Resolution,Exhibit E).Per Section 20.090.004 of the SSFMC,the minimum lot size in the BTP-H zoning district is 10,000 sq.ft.,with a minimum lot width of 50 ft.Each of the proposed lots meets the development standards.The Engineering Division has reviewed the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map application and has included relevant conditions of approval. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD The Design Review Board (DRB)reviewed the project on July 18,2023.As the overall design complemented the previously approved 101 Terminal Project,the Board was supportive of the overall project,site planning and architecture.The only comment was to request taller trees where allowed by Fire Code on the north side of the parking structure. The DRB comment letter is included as Attachment 4 to this staff report. SUSTAINABILITY / CLIMATE ACTION PLAN The proposed project is consistent with recent sustainability regulations that have been adopted at State and local levels.Examples include Senate Bill 375,passed in 2008,which aims to create more efficient communities by providing alternatives to using single occupancy vehicles.Projects that link higher density development to transit help meet this goal.At the local level,the General Plan policies and implementing zoning for this area focus on linkages to both San Bruno BART and South San Francisco Caltrain,other regional transit including SamTrans, and community amenities. The Infinite 131 Project is designed as a high-density transit-oriented development,located proximate to both BART and Caltrain stations,several bus routes and commuter shuttles,residential development in the Downtown,and retail and services.The proposed project would be designed to achieve a minimum Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED)version 4.1 Building Design and Construction Core and Shell Gold rating as well as WELL v2 Core Gold certification.Proposed sustainability measures include an all- electric building design,on-site renewable energy in the form of rooftop photovoltaic panels,and high- performance building envelope and HVAC systems, as well as other measures. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 7 of 15 powered by Legistar™16 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. IMPACT FEES The Infinite 131 Project is subject to the City’s impact and development fees,which are used to offset the impacts of new development on City services and infrastructure.The draft Conditions of Approval (Exhibit H to the Associated Amendments and Entitlements Resolution)list out the relevant impact fee estimates, summarized below: ·Childcare Fee: $2.5M ·Citywide Transportation Fee: $58.6M ·Commercial Linkage Fee: $28.5M ·Public Safety Impact Fee: $2.1M ·Parks Fee: $5.8M ·Library Impact Fee: $232,000 ·Public Art Requirement: On-site, or in-lieu contribution of .5% of construction costs DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT Steelwave is requesting to enter into a Development Agreement with the City.Key features of the Development Agreement include: ⦁Incorporation of the Infinite 101 entitlements into the overall Development Agreement terms (all other Infinite 101 entitlements would remain in place) 1 Twelve (12)year term,with the option for an additional five (5)years if 700,000 square feet of life science uses have been constructed within seven (7) years of the effective date 2 Payment of all applicable Development Fee rates at time of permit issuance 3 Child Care Space Design and Construction,minimum capacity of fifty-five (55)children,or payment of $4,000,000 4 Point of Sale for Project Construction for Sales Tax Allocation 5 All-Electric Buildings 6 Payment of Community Benefit Monetary Contributions, as follows: ⦁First Payment of $1,000,000 by the 1st anniversary of the effective date 1 Second Payment of $1,000,000 by the 3rd anniversary of the effective date 2 Third Payment of $1,000,000 by the 5th anniversary of the effective date ⦁In lieu of paying the Third Payment as of the fifth (5th)anniversary date,Developer may elect to provide written notice to the City of its desire to terminate the Agreement 1 All fees paid are non-refundable but can be transferred to a new project owner/developer The draft Development Agreement is included as Exhibit G to the Associated Amendments and Entitlements Resolution.The parties are in substantial agreement on the agreement deal terms,but are still finalizing some of the language in the draft Development Agreement.The language of the Development Agreement will be finalized at the time it is considered by the City Council. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 8 of 15 powered by Legistar™17 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. Draft Environmental Impact Report A Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR)analyzing the potential environmental impacts of the Infinite 131 Project and the change in land use designation of the off-site redesignation parcels was prepared by the environmental consulting firm ICF.The purpose of an EIR is to disclose information to the public and to decision makers about the potential environmental effects of a proposed project.An EIR does not recommend either approval or denial of a proposed project;rather,it is intended to provide a source of independent and impartial analysis of the foreseeable environmental impacts of a proposed course of action.Per the requirements of CEQA,the City circulated the DEIR from June 20,2024 -August 5,2024,for a 45-day public review period.The Planning Commission held a public hearing on August 1,2024 to take comments on the DEIR during the public review period The DEIR provides a project-level analysis of the proposed Infinite 131 Project as well as the off-site transportation and circulation improvements,pursuant to Section 15161 of the CEQA Guidelines,and is intended to provide the environmental review needed under CEQA to support all necessary approvals and entitlements for implementation of the Infinite 131 Project.The DEIR also provides a program-level analysis of the redesignation and rezoning of the five off-site parcels,pursuant to Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines, and is intended to be used for streamlined environmental review for future phases of development within these off-site redesignation parcels.The DEIR is available online <https://weblink.ssf.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx? id=585606&dbid=0&repo=SSFDocs> and is also attached as Exhibit A to the Associated CEQA Resolution. The Infinite 131 DEIR identifies all of the mitigation measures that will be implemented to reduce the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project.ICF has prepared a Mitigation and Monitoring Plan (MMRP)to ensure that mitigation measures will be properly implemented.The MMRP is attached to the Associated CEQA Resolution (Exhibit D).The MMRP is organized to correspond to environmental issues and significant impacts discussed in the EIR,and the City will use it to track mitigation measures,timing for implementation, responsible party, the action, and ongoing monitoring responsibility. Response to Comments (RTC) Following the public review period,ICF prepared a Response to Comments (RTC)document,to respond in writing to comments on environmental issues,and revise the DEIR as necessary to provide additional clarity. The RTC document also provides limited responses,for informational purposes,to general comments on the draft EIR received during the public review period that were not related to environmental issues.The RTC document also includes EIR text changes made in response to the comments;the changes and minor errata items do not result in significant new information with respect to the proposed project,including the level of significance of project impacts or any new significant impacts.The RTC document,together with the DEIR, comprise the Final EIR (FEIR), which is attached to the Associated CEQA Resolution (Exhibit B). Significant and Unavoidable Impacts A significant and unavoidable impact is an impact that cannot be mitigated to a less than significant level if the project is implemented,because no feasible mitigation has been identified.The Infinite 131 Project EIR identifies several impacts related to Air Quality,Cultural Resources,and Transportation that would be City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 9 of 15 powered by Legistar™18 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. identifies several impacts related to Air Quality,Cultural Resources,and Transportation that would be significant and unavoidable even with mitigation that would result if the project were implemented. Air Quality Operational impacts from the proposed project are primarily a result of area-source emissions (use of consumer products,architectural coatings,landscaping equipment),as well as stationary-source emissions (emergency diesel generators),mobile-source emissions (daily employee trips to and from the site)and laboratory operations.Together,all of these operational impacts result in daily reactive organic gas (ROG)emissions from the proposed project that exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD)allowed threshold (Impacts AQ-2 and C-AQ-2).This impact can be partially reduced through implementation of mitigation measures that require low-volatile organic compound (VOC)coatings,low-VOC cleaning supplies and use of zero-emission landscape equipment,but total ROG emissions would continue to be above the BAAQMD threshold and there are no additional measures to reduce these emissions further. The project also could expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations (Impacts AQ-3 and C-AQ-3),specifically with particulate matter (PM2.5)emissions from exhaust and fugitive dust sources that exceed the BAAQMD threshold for worker receptors within 1,000 feet of the project site. While a mitigation measure is proposed to reduce dust emissions during construction,no mitigation measure has been identified that would reduce exposure to PM2.5 concentrations during normal project operations (on-road vehicle trips to and from the site). Cultural Resources The existing Golden Gate Produce Terminal is recommended as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR)and the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)and is therefore considered a historical resource for CEQA compliance.Based on this,the demolition of Golden Gate Produce Terminal within the project site would result in a substantial adverse change to the historical resource (Impact CULT-1). Two separate mitigation measures are proposed,the first requiring written and photographic documentation of the significant and character-defining features of the property and recordation of the historic and architectural characteristics,and the second requiring the design and installation of a public interpretation program on the project site.These mitigation measures would reduce adverse impacts to the greatest extent possible, but this impact would remain significant and unavoidable. Transportation The proposed project was not identified or studied in the General Plan Update or Lindenville Specific Plan,and the intensification of uses would occur in a location with insufficient access and circulation facilities,limited transportation options and challenging connectivity to the regional transportation network.Therefore,the project conflicts with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan (Impacts TRANS-1 and C-TR-1).As mitigation,the project would be required to implement various actions consistent with those identified in the General Plan,Lindenville Specific City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 10 of 15 powered by Legistar™19 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. implement various actions consistent with those identified in the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Active South City Plan.One of these actions is the construction of a Class IV separated bikeway along Airport Blvd and Produce Ave from Terminal Court to Baden Ave,connecting the site to the South San Francisco Caltrain Station Plaza.The project would also fund engineering studies for a new trail crossing of US 101 south of the project site,and for a new southbound US 101 off-ramp connecting to a future Utah Ave Overpass.With implementation of these measures,the project would adequately address its effects.However,part of this right-of-way is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and another part is under the jurisdiction of the City of San Bruno,and neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding this mitigation.Therefore,the impact would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure its implementation. The other potentially significant impact related to transportation is a substantial increase to hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses (Impacts TRANS-3 and C-TR-3).The project would increase vehicle trips at several streets and freeway ramps with unsignalized intersections adjacent to the project site.Implementation of new traffic signals along Produce Avenue and San Mateo Avenue would reduce the potential for conflicts and queueing at affected intersections.However,part of this right-of-way is under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the jurisdiction of the City of San Bruno,and neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding this mitigation.Therefore,the impact due to design hazards would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure full implementation of the mitigations. Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program A Statement of Overriding Considerations (SOC)has been prepared for the Infinite 131 Project pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081.The SOC is included with the required CEQA Findings and attached to the Associated CEQA Resolution as Exhibit C.The City Council must adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations for those impacts identified as significant and unavoidable in the Infinite 131 Project EIR and the project cannot be approved unless a SOC is adopted which balances the benefits of the proposed project against the unavoidable impacts. Staff supports adoption of the SOC because the Infinite 131 Project will provide economic,social, technological,and other benefits that balance the significant and unavoidable impacts of the project.Project benefits that balance the impacts include: ·Alternative Transit Supportive Development.The proposed project would include various design features consistent with General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan goals,as well as the Active South City Plan and TDM ordinance,in an effort to reduce VMT and resulting GHG emissions and provide connections to nearby BART and Caltrain stations.The proposed project’s TDM plan would include measures such as providing first-/last-mile shuttle service to the San Bruno BART station and South San Francisco Caltrain station,fully subsidized transit passes,and on-site amenities for bicyclists and pedestrians. ·Sustainability.The proposed project would incorporate sustainability features to reduce energy City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 11 of 15 powered by Legistar™20 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. ·Sustainability.The proposed project would incorporate sustainability features to reduce energy consumption,water consumption,and waste generation.The proposed project,at a minimum,would achieve a LEED,version 4.1,Building Design and Construction Core and Shell Gold rating as well as WELL v2 Core certification.Other proposed sustainability measures would include an all-electric building design;on-site renewable energy in the form of rooftop photovoltaic panels;a high- performance building envelope and heating,ventilation,and air-conditioning system;ultra-efficient WaterSense-labeled flush and flow fixtures;low-water demand native and/or adapted vegetation with efficient irrigation systems;on-site recycling and composting facilities;and electric-vehicle charging infrastructure.In addition,the proposed project would also be designed to conserve resources and protect water quality through the management of stormwater runoff using low-impact development methods,where feasible,to allow stormwater filtering,storage,and flood control.Bioretention basins, flow-through planters,Silva Cell units,and other design features would be located throughout the project site. ·Groundwater Recharge.The proposed project would increase the pervious surface area on the project site by approximately 18 percent.The increase in pervious surface area would increase infiltration and recharge of the underlying aquifer.It would also reduce the amount of precipitation running into storm sewers or nearby surface waters.In addition,native and/or adapted vegetation and other landscape features,including trees,would provide opportunities for improved groundwater infiltration. Landscaped spaces would allow for an increase in groundwater recharge.New vegetation zones would slow water,allowing water to percolate into the ground,thereby providing increased benefits related to groundwater recharge.Furthermore,the proposed project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge because it would not increase groundwater demand or decrease the size of groundwater recharge areas. ·Remediation of Hazardous Materials.The project site has historically been occupied by industrial uses.Prior releases of hazardous materials have occurred within various portions of the project site,and contaminated soils and groundwater are known,or have the potential,to occur on-site.The proposed project would remove or remediate existing hazards in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements,and as outlined in the project’s Phase II Environmental Site Assessment recommendations.In addition,the proposed project would also remove older buildings and structures within the project site that may contain asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint,and ensure treatment or disposal of these substances in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and the project’s asbestos, lead, and PCB recommendations. ·Economic Development.The proposed project would provide a positive impact on the local economy by redeveloping an underutilized,transit-accessible location for R&D,biotechnology and office uses, creating a substantial number of new jobs across a diverse set of skills and experience levels during project construction and operations.By developing new state-of-the art facilities,the proposed project helps advance South San Francisco’s economic development goals of enhancing the competitiveness of the local economy,maintaining a strong and diverse revenue and job base.The proposed project willCity of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 12 of 15 powered by Legistar™21 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. the local economy,maintaining a strong and diverse revenue and job base.The proposed project will also generate substantial regional economic benefits,as money spent by employees within the general project area circulates through the local economy. ·Fiscal Health.The proposed project would promote the City’s fiscal health by enhancing property values,and generating increased property taxes,development impact fees,and other general fund revenues for the City.At stabilized occupancy,the proposed project would contribute millions of dollars per year to the City in ongoing general fund revenue,including through tax revenue generation.The proposed project would also generate impact and service capacity fee contributions as set forth in Exhibit C.2 of the Development Agreement to be utilized for affordable housing development;park, recreation,childcare,library,and public safety facilities;bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure;sewer capacity improvements,and school district facilities.The proposed project would privately fund all development and improvements described herein, at no cost to the City. ·Community Benefits Obligations.The project’s Development Agreement establishes the proposed project would provide the City a total of $23 million in community benefits obligations,including specific improvements,features,and direct payments.The City has sole discretion to allocate and spend the community benefits payments for any authorized governmental purpose. ·Circulation Improvements &Public Transit Connectivity.The proposed project will advance the off -site improvements consistent with and as identified in the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Active South City Plan.These improvements will substantially enhance vehicular,bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access within and surrounding the proposed project and Specific Plan area. The proposed project will promote the use of non-single occupancy vehicle transportation,including through implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program to achieve 50%alternative mode usage. ·Provision of Open Space and Project Amenities.The proposed project would include two centrally located landscaped courtyards,prioritizing pedestrian and bike friendly connections with approximately 115,130 square feet of publicly accessible open space.The proposed courtyards and open space will provide areas for outdoor work,recreation and socializing.The proposed project will provide amenities,including a day-care center,fitness center,restaurant/café,conference rooms and ground floor lobbies, accessible from a network of interconnected pathways and central courtyards. ·Infrastructure Improvements.The proposed project will upsize,improve and/or reconfigure a wide range of wet and dry utilities services to increase capacity and also to modernize existing facilities by replacing,improving and/or undergrounding certain existing infrastructure,to serve off-site users as well as the project itself.Among other improvements,the proposed project will construct a new extension to the public 12-inch water main in Terminal Court;construct a new 18-inch sewer main through the southwest corner of the proposed project to a 21-inch main on Shaw Road;construct new stormwater facilities and storm drain mains;and include the installation of new connections for dry City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 13 of 15 powered by Legistar™22 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. stormwater facilities and storm drain mains;and include the installation of new connections for dry utility services. AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION On June 12,2025,the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG)Board of Directors,acting as the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC),determined that the Infinite 131 Project is consistent with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport. The ALUC Resolution 25-35 is attached as Attachment 5 to this staff report. CONCLUSION The proposed Infinite 131 Project is consistent with General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan policies to provide initial master planning and appropriate environmental analysis for office and R&D uses within the Produce /Terminal corridor.The Project proposes a state-of-the-art life science campus that combines with the previously entitled Infinite 101 Project to transform a underutilized site in the U.S.Highway 101 corridor.The Project aims to bring high-quality architectural design and significant public realm improvements to reimagine the Project site and the surrounding area as a destination accessible by foot,bicycle,or public transit.Given the Project's high visibility along the Highway 101 corridor and proximity to public transportation,the campus will serve as a landmark for the City of South San Francisco. Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1.Adopt a resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR23-0001),including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. 2.Adopt a resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve the entitlements request for the Infinite 131 Project (P23-0003)including General Plan Amendment (GPA25-0002), Specific Plan Amendment (SPA25-0001),Design Review (DR23-0002),Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM23-0002),and Vesting Tentative Map (23-0001),adopt an ordinance amending the Zoning Map (ZA23-0001),and adopt an ordinance approving a Development Agreement (DA23- 0002. Attachments 1.Golden Gate Produce Terminal Letter, October, 2020 2.Golden Gate Produce Terminal Letter, May, 2025 3.Infinite 131 Parking Management Plan, prepared by Fehr & Peers 4.Design Review Board Letter, July, 2023 5.ALUC Resolution 25-35 Associated Resolutions and Exhibits 1.CEQA Resolution (25-774) a.Exhibit A:Infinite 131 Project DEIR and appendices,available online City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 14 of 15 powered by Legistar™23 File #:25-773 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2. a.Exhibit A:Infinite 131 Project DEIR and appendices,available online <https://weblink.ssf.net/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=585606&dbid=0&repo=SSFDocs> b.Exhibit B: Infinite 131 Project FEIR c.Exhibit C: Statement of Overriding Considerations d.Exhibit D: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2.Amendments and Entitlements Resolution (25-775) a.Exhibit A: General Plan Amendments b.Exhibit B: Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments c.Exhibit C: Zoning Map Amendments d.Exhibit D: Infinite 131 Project Plan Set e.Exhibit E: 101-131 Terminal Vesting Tentative Map f.Exhibit F: Transportation Demand Management Program g.Exhibit G: Development Agreement h.Exhibit H: Conditions of Approval City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 15 of 15 powered by Legistar™24 From:Steven Hurwitz To:Gross, Billy; Greenwood, Alex Cc:CCD Law Subject:Comments for tonight"s Planning Commission Study Session 10/22/2020 Date:Thursday, October 22, 2020 4:50:19 PM Dear Planning Commissioners, I am submitting this email on behalf of Golden Gate Produce Terminal (GGPT) in response to the latest preferred land use options that are a part of the City of South San Francisco’s General Plan Update. GGPT has been in South San Francisco for close to 60 years and have taken great pride in being located in the “Industrial City.” We appreciate the City’s efforts to update its land use policies, especially with the regional changes that affect our dynamic economy and the importance of providing more housing in appropriate locations in South San Francisco. The GGPT is concerned about the Preferred Land Use Plan released last week. The need for healthy and safe food has never been more important and our specific location in South San Francisco has allowed us to respond quickly to the changing needs of the Bay Area. It is critical that we are allowed to keep operating in this strategic location, for both the success of our business and to properly serve our customers and community. A typical work day at the GGPT starts at 2 AM with dozens and dozens of huge semi’s delivering produce and we are concerned that any residential uses too close to GGPT will lead to complaints that could create political pressure for us to modify our hours of operation. The GGPT is an essential business and we cannot modify our hours of operation without jeopardizing the viability of the business, local food distribution channels and the relationships we have with our customers. We respectfully ask the City to allow maximum flexibility in the land use definitions for our site and surrounding uses, to ensure we have the ability to stay at our location for another 60 years and beyond. We are specifically concerned that under the proposed High Density Mixed Use designation, residential must be built “on-site” for commercial uses to qualify for additional density. On site residential will create a conflict between the residents’ quiet enjoyment of their homes with our business operations, which will inevitably create political issues that the City will be forced to solve. We recommend that residential uses should not be required on site and that instead commercial uses should be required to make contributions to the City to build affordable off-site residential. Please take these comments into consideration when updating the Preferred Land Use Plan. Sincerely, Joe Carcione and Steven Hurwitz Directors, Golden Gate Produce Terminal -- Steven Hurwitz www.stevenhurwitzphotography.com 25 26 27 345 California Street | Suite 450 | San Francisco, CA 94104 | (415) 348-0300 | www.fehrandpeers.com Memorandum Date: March 14, 2024 To: Billy Gross, City of South San Francisco and Bridget Metz, US 131 Terminal Court Owner, LLC, c/o Steelwave, LLC From: Daniel Jacobson and Samantha Ellman, Fehr & Peers Subject: Infinite 131 Parking Management Plan SF23-1281 This memorandum presents a parking management plan for the Infinite 131 Project (“Project”) consistent with Chapter 20.330.004 of the City’s Zoning Code. The Project (summarized in Table 1) would include approximately 1,632,000 square feet of R&D space along with amenities including 21,000 square feet of conference space, a 20,000 square foot fitness center, 27,000 square feet of restaurant space, and a 4,050 square foot daycare facility. The Project includes 2,976 proposed stalls, including 50 accessible spaces and 1,339 electric vehicle capable spaces. Of the total onsite parking, 2,434 spaces would be used primarily for R&D uses (compliant with the City’s maximum allowable parking supply of 1.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet) and 542 spaces would be used for other amenity uses (see Table 1). This Parking Management Plan documents the Project’s approach to utilizing these spaces. Table 1: Project Summary Land Use Quantity (Square Feet) Expected Peak Occupancy City Requirement Parking Spaces Max % Occupants Served with Parking R&D 1,632,000 3,928 1.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet maximum 2,434 62% Conference Center 21,000 1,399 1 space per 50 square feet seating 280 20% Fitness Center 20,000 400 1 space per 150 square feet seating 80 20% Restaurant/Bar 27,000 1,394 1 space per 150 square feet seating 173 12% Daycare 4,050 9 1 per employee 9 100% Total 1,704,050 7,130 2,976 42% 28 Page 2 of 3 Parking Supply and Demand The Project’s amenity parking spaces would serve a conference center, fitness center, restaurant, bar, and daycare. As illustrated in Table 1, parking would be provided to serve a portion of the capacity of each use: ▪ The conference centers would have a combined expected peak occupancy of 1,399 occupants; 280 parking spaces would serve about 20 percent of the total expected peak occupancy. ▪ The gym would have a peak occupancy of 400 occupants; 80 parking spaces would serve about 20 percent of the total expected peak occupancy. ▪ The restaurant/bar would have a combined expected peak occupancy of 1,394 occupants; 173 parking spaces would serve about 13 percent of the total expected peak occupancy. ▪ The daycare would serve 50 students with nine employees and be served by nine parking spaces. It is not necessary to provide parking to serve the full capacity of each use. Amenity uses are expected to primarily serve Project tenants, so this parking is intended only for off-site visitors. Some walking, bicycling, carpooling, and shuttle use is also expected for visitors to access these amenities. Moreover, not all uses would reach capacity at the same time, so there would be some sharing between spaces. Overall, the Project’s proposed amenity parking would serve less than half of the total capacity of each use, which is consistent with the intent of the Project’s TDM Plan. Nonetheless, active management of these spaces is necessary to comply with the Project’s maximum parking requirements for office/R&D uses, as described in the following section. Parking Management Approach The Project’s approach to parking management should focus on two topics: limiting the use of amenity parking spaces by tenant employees and coordinating parking needs for conferences and special events. Limit Use of Amenity Parking Spaces by Tenant Employees. The Project should limit the use of amenity parking spaces by employees through signage, wayfinding, and active management of parking spaces. Use of amenity parking spaces by tenant employees poses two issues: it is inconsistent with the Project’s TDM requirements to limit auto commuting and impedes visitor access to amenities. To avoid this, the Project should designate surface parking spaces and lower-floor garage parking for amenity uses, while identifying mid- and upper-floor garage spaces for employee use. Amenity spaces should include a time 29 Page 3 of 3 restriction for ease of enforcement by onsite security (e.g. three or four hours) with license plate registration for all-day visitors. Clear signage and wayfinding should be provided to ensure that various users understand where they’re expected to park. A similar parking management approach would be enacted for the neighboring Infinite 101 site. Coordinate Parking Needs for Conferences and Special Events Conferences and special events that draw large groups may cause surges in parking demand that exceeds supply, particularly for larger events during workdays when the office/R&D portions of the site are being fully utilized. In order to manage parking supply and demand, the conference center spaces would be subject to the following management practices: ▪ Event Planning & Scheduling: Event sponsors shall work with the property manager to develop a parking management approach tailored to the scale and market of each event. In general, events expecting larger offsite attendance that may exceed the available parking supply would either occur during off-peak hours or require additional measures as noted below. ▪ Trip Planning Assistance: For all events, the event sponsor should work with the site’s TDM coordinator to provide trip planning assistance that prominently features wayfinding instructions for transit, carpooling, active transportation, and ride-hailing access (as well as instructions for valet or offsite parking if applicable). Non-auto modes of access should be promoted to reduce overall vehicle trips to the site, especially for events targeted to employers in the nearby area. ▪ Valet Parking, Remote Parking, and Parking Reservations: Large events that may exceed available parking supply should include some combination of valet parking, remote parking, and/or parking reservations to appropriately manage supply and demand. ▪ Shuttle Charters or Ride-Hailing Promotions: Large events, especially those oriented toward specific nearby employers, may consider shuttle charters or ride-hailing credit promotions. Some events may also consider allowing guests to use the proposed Project shuttle to access BART and/or Caltrain. ▪ Event Monitoring: The property manager shall be responsible for monitoring parking demand for special events and adjust its management practices as needed, by pursuing certain strategies above more or less actively, depending on effectiveness. By implementing these practices, the Project should be able to appropriately manage the conference center parking supply while accommodating a range of event types and sizes. A similar parking management approach would be enacted for the neighboring Infinite 101 site. 30 Page 4 of 3 Condition of Approval: Parking Management Plan Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit a Final Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Chief Planner. If the Final Parking Management Plan identifies non-office/research and development building square footage that is no longer accessible to the general public, the total amount of parking provided on the site will be reduced proportionally and replaced with open space and/or landscaping in keeping with adjacent areas. Commented [DJ1]: Inserted per Billy’s comment 31 32 RESOLUTION 25-35 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE CITY/COUNTY ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENTS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, ACTING AS THE SAN MATEO COUNTY AIRPORT LAND USE COMMISSION, DETERMINING THAT PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN, SPECIFIC PLAN AND ZONING MAP AMENDMENTS RELATED TO AN OFFICE/LIFE SCIENCE CAMPUS AT 131 TERMINAL CT., AND REDESIGNATION OF FIVE ADDITIONAL SITES ALONG TERMINAL CT. AND PRODUCE AVE. IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN FOR THE ENVIRONS FOR SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. RESOLVED, by the Board of Directors of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG), in its capacity as the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission, that, WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of California Public Utilities Code (PUC) Section 21676(b) a local agency General Plan, Zoning Ordinance and/or any affected specific plan must be consistent with the applicable airport/land use criteria in the relevant adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan; and WHEREAS, the City of South San Francisco has received an application for general plan, specific plan and zoning map amendments to accommodate a proposed office/life science campus at 131 Terminal Ct., and redesignation of five additional sites along Terminal Ct. and Produce Ave. in South San Francisco, which falls within Airport Influence Area (AIA) B for San Francisco International Airport, and has referred the project to C/CAG, acting as the Airport Land Use Commission, for a determination of consistency with relevant airport / land use compatibility criteria in the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Francisco International Airport (SFO ALUCP); and WHEREAS, the SFO ALUCP contains policies and criteria to address four issues: (a) aircraft noise compatibility; (b) safety compatibility; (c) height of structures/airspace protection; and (d) Airport Influence Area (AIA) Real Estate Disclosure notification, as discussed below: (a) Noise Compatibility – The 65 dB CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) aircraft noise contour defines the threshold for airport noise impacts established in the SFO ALUCP. All land uses located outside this contour are deemed consistent with the noise policies of the ALUCP. Per SFO ALUCP Exhibit IV-6, a small strip along the southern edge of the property lies within the CNEL 65dB noise contour, with the majority of the site lying outside of the noise impact area. In accordance with Table IV- 1 of the SFO ALUCP, Noise/Land Use Compatibility Criteria, the uses proposed within the noise impact boundaries, industrial and office use, are identified as compatible, so the proposed project would be consistent. (b) Safety Policy Consistency – The SFO ALUCP includes five sets of safety zones and related land use compatibility policies and criteria. Per SFO ALUCP Exhibit IV-8, the project site is not located within a Safety Zone, so is not impacted by ALUCP safety policies and criteria. 33 (c) Airspace Protection Policy Consistency – To be deemed consistent with the ALUCP, the maximum height of a new building must be the lower of (1) the height shown on the critical aeronautical surfaces map or (2) the maximum height determined not to be a “hazard to air navigation” by the FAA in an aeronautical study prepared pursuant to the filing of Form 7460-1. a.As shown on SFO Exhibit IV-17 and clarified in a comment letter from SFO Planning and Environmental Affairs dated May 8, 2025, the elevation of the critical aeronautical surfaces at the project site range from approximately 125 to 150 feet above mean sea level (AMSL). The maximum height of the structures would be 127 feet and 6 inches AMSL, which would be below the elevation of the lowest critical aeronautical surfaces. b.Per SFO ALUCP Exhibit IV-11, the project is located in an area that requires FAA notification for projects greater than 30-65 feet tall. The requirement for such projects to file form 7460-1with the FAA and to receive a Determination of No Hazard to Air Navigation as a condition of approval for a building permit is reflected in South San Francisco’s Zoning Ordinance and Lindenville Specific Plan, so the project is consistent with the Airspace Protection Policies of the ALUCP. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, by the Board of Directors of the City/County Association of Governments for San Mateo County, acting as the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission, that proposed general plan, specific plan and zoning map amendments related to an office/life science campus at 131 Terminal Ct., and redesignation of five additional sites along Terminal Ct. and Produce Ave. in South San Francisco are consistent with the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs for San Francisco International Airport . PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED, THIS 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2025. Adam Rak, Chair 34 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:25-774 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2a. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council certify the Environmental Impact Report, including adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, for the Infinite 131 Project. WHEREAS,US 131 Terminal Court Owner,LLC (“Applicant”)has submitted an application requesting approval to redevelop a 17.67-acre industrial site in the Lindenville Sub-Area with up to 1.7 million square feet of R&D /office development,commercial amenities,open space improvements,and on-and off-site infrastructure improvements at 131 Terminal Court,which would require approval of Design Review,Vesting Tentative Map,Transportation Demand Management Plan and a Development Agreement,as well as amendments of the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Map to change the existing land use and zoning designations from Mixed Industrial High (“MIH”)to Business Technology Park -High (“BTP-H”) (“Infinite 131 Project”); and WHEREAS,in addition to the 131 Terminal Court site,five parcels north of the project site at 120 Terminal Court,196 Produce Avenue,160 Produce Avenue and 140 Produce Avenue would also be redesignated from MIH to BTP-H (“Off-Site Redesignation Parcels”)in the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan,and Zoning Map; and WHEREAS,approval of the entitlements for the Infinite 131 Project and the Off-Site Redesignation Parcels is considered a “Project”for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act,Pub.Resources Code §21000, et seq. (“CEQA”); and WHEREAS,in accordance with CEQA the City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”)was required to evaluate the impacts of the proposed Project; and WHEREAS, the City issued a Notice of Preparation of an EIR for the Project on November 1, 2023; and WHEREAS,per CEQA Guidelines Section 15063(c)(3)an Initial Study was prepared prior to the EIR,which determined that the potential environmental effects of the Project would be less than significant or would have no impact in the topics of Aesthetics;Agricultural and Forestry Resources;Biological Resources;Energy; Geology and Soils;Hazards and Hazardous Materials;Hydrology and Water Quality;Land Use and Planning; Mineral Resources;Population and Housing;Public Services;Recreation;Tribal Cultural Resources;Utilities and Service Systems; and Wildfire; and WHEREAS,the City prepared a Draft EIR (“DEIR”)(State Clearinghouse No.2023110023),which addressed environmental topics that were not covered in the Initial Study,including environmental impacts in the areas of Air Quality;Cultural Resources;Greenhouse Gas Emissions;Noise and Vibrations;and Transportation and Circulation;and cumulative impacts of the Project,growth-inducing impacts of the Project,as well as potential City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 1 of 3 powered by Legistar™35 File #:25-774 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2a. Project Alternatives; and WHEREAS,the DEIR was circulated for a 45-day public/agency review period from June 20 to August 5, 2024; and WHEREAS,Notices of the Availability of the DEIR were posted to the San Mateo County Clerk’s Office, mailed to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the site,noticed to local agencies and cities,and circulated through the State Clearinghouse; and, WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a duly noticed meeting during the review period on August 1,2024 to take public testimony on the DEIR; and, WHEREAS,the City prepared written responses to comments received on the DEIR and prepared a Final EIR (“FEIR”)for circulation,which consists of the DEIR (incorporated by reference),all comments received on the DEIR,written responses to comments received on the DEIR,revisions to the DEIR,and a Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program (“MMRP”); and, WHEREAS,where feasible,mitigation measures have been incorporated into the Project to reduce identified impacts to a level of less than significant; and WHEREAS,no feasible mitigation exists for certain significant and unavoidable air quality,cultural resources and transportation impacts that would reduce the impacts to a less-than-significant level; and WHEREAS,under applicable provisions of CEQA Guidelines section 15092(b),the Project may not be approved or carried out unless the City has eliminated or substantially lessened all significant effects on the environment where feasible,or determined that any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to overriding concerns; and WHEREAS,a Statement of Overriding Considerations has been prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15092(b)and 15093,which evaluates the benefits of the proposed Infinite 131 Project against its unavoidable impacts and sets forth the Project’s specific benefits and overriding concerns; WHEREAS,the Planning Commission has reviewed and carefully considered the information in the DEIR,the FEIR,the Statement of Overriding Considerations,and the MMRP,respectively attached hereto as Exhibits A,B ,C,and D,at a duly noticed public hearing held on September 4,2025 as objective and accurate documents that reflect the independent judgment of the City in the identification,discussion and mitigation of the Project’s environmental impacts,and considered all testimony and evidence presented at the hearing and in the record before it. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it,which includes without limitation,the California Environmental Quality Act,Public Resources Code §21000,et seq. (“CEQA”)and the CEQA Guidelines,14 California Code of Regulations §15000,et seq.;the South San Francisco 2040 General Plan and General Plan EIR;the South San Francisco Municipal Code;the Project applications;the Project Plans,as prepared by SOM Architects,dated August 25,2025;the Draft Transportation Demand Management Plan prepared by Fehr &Peers,dated March,2024;the Infinite 131 Project EIR, City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 2 of 3 powered by Legistar™36 File #:25-774 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2a. Demand Management Plan prepared by Fehr &Peers,dated March,2024;the Infinite 131 Project EIR, including the Draft and Final EIR and all appendices thereto;the draft General Plan Amendments;the draft Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments;the draft Zoning Map Amendments;the draft Development Agreement, all reports,minutes,and public testimony submitted as part of the Planning Commission’s duly noticed September 4,2025 public hearing;and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code §21080(e)and §21082.2),the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows: 1.The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution. 2.The exhibits and attachments,including the Environmental Impact Report consisting of the Draft EIR and Final EIR (attached as Exhibits A and B,respectively),the CEQA Findings including Statement of Overriding Considerations (attached as Exhibit C),and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (attached as Exhibit D),are each incorporated by reference and made a part of this Resolution, as if set forth fully herein. 3.The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco,315 Maple Avenue,South San Francisco,CA 94080, and in the custody of the Chief Planner. 4.Based on the Planning Commission’s independent judgment and analysis,the Planning Commission makes the findings regarding the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts,potentially significant impacts,and less than significant impacts;makes the findings regarding the proposed mitigation measures,and the Project alternatives;and adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations,finding that the benefits of the Project outweigh the significant and unavoidable environmental impacts,for the reasons, and as further set forth in Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated by reference. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution and recommends that the City Council:certify EIR23-0001 attached as Exhibits A and B;adopt the Statement of Overriding Consideration attached as Exhibit C;and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, attached as Exhibit D. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 3 of 3 powered by Legistar™37 Exhibit A Infinite 131 Project Draft EIR and Appendices Links: • Draft EIR • Technical Appendices o Appendix A – NOP Comments o Appendix B – Initial Study o Appendix C – AQGHG Tech Report o Appendix D – AQ Modeling Files and Calcs o Appendix E – Built Enviro Resources Study o Appendix F – Tribal Outreach o Appendix G – Noise Report o Appendix H – Transportation Impact Analysis o Appendix I – Transportation Demand Management o Appendix J – Biological Species Database Search o Appendix K – Arborist Report o Appendix L – Bird Safe Design Strategy o Appendix M – Prelim Geotech Investigation o Appendix N – Phase I and II ESAs o Appendix O – Water Supply Assessment 38 FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT INFINITE 131 PROJECT CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2023110023 DRAFT EIR PUBLICATION DATE: JUNE 20, 2024 DRAFT EIR PUBLIC HEARING DATE: AUGUST 1, 2024 DRAFT EIR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD: JUNE 20–AUGUST 5, 2024 WRITTEN COMMENTS SHOULD BE SENT TO: City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, California 94080 Contact: Billy Gross (650) 877-8535 billy.gross@ssf.net State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 August 2025 39 ICF. 2025. Final Environmental Impact Report, Infinite 131 Project. August. (ICF 104668.0.001.01.) San Francisco. Prepared for the City of South San Francisco, South San Francisco, CA. 40 Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 1-1 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Chapter 1 Introduction The purpose of this responses-to-comments (RTC) document is to present comments submitted on the proposed Infinite 131 Project (proposed project), respond in writing to comments on environmental issues, and revise the draft environmental impact report (EIR) as necessary to provide additional clarity. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code Section 21091(d)(2)(A) and (B), the City of South San Francisco Planning Division (Planning Division) has considered the comments received, evaluated the environmental issues raised, and provides written responses herein that fully address the comments regarding significant environmental issues raised by the commenters. This RTC document also provides, for informational purposes, limited responses to general comments on the draft EIR received during the public review period that were not related to environmental issues. Where appropriate, this RTC document also includes EIR text changes made in response to the comments or initiated by City of South San Francisco (City) staff members. The draft EIR and this RTC document constitute the final EIR for the proposed project, in fulfillment of CEQA requirements and consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15132. 1.1 Environmental Review Process This EIR has been prepared by the Planning Division, the Lead Agency for the proposed project, in compliance with the provisions of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. and California Code of Regulations Title 14, Section 15000 et seq.). The draft EIR was published and posted on the City’s website on June 18, 2024. A Notice of Availability was distributed to state and local agencies, neighbors, and other interested parties to solicit public comment. The draft EIR was available for public comment from June 20, 2024, to August 5, 2024. The notice solicited comments on the adequacy and accuracy of the information presented in the draft EIR. Comments were made in written form during the public comment period and as oral testimony at the public hearing on the draft EIR before the Planning Commission held on August 1, 2024. The comments received during the public review period are the subject of this RTC document, which addresses all substantive written and oral comments on the draft EIR. Minutes of the proceedings at the public hearing on the draft EIR and all written comments are included in their entirety in this document. The final EIR will consist of the draft EIR and this RTC document, which includes comments received during the public review period, responses to the comments on environmental issues, and any revisions to the draft EIR that resulted from staff-initiated text changes or text changes in response to the comments. Information provided in the responses to the comments and in the revisions to the draft EIR clarifies and amplifies the analysis presented in the draft EIR. No significant new information, as defined by CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5, was added that would trigger recirculation of the draft EIR. Specifically, there is no new significant environmental impact and no substantial increase in the severity of a significant impact. Furthermore, no new alternatives or mitigation measures were identified in the comments or responses that were not already identified in the draft EIR. 41 City of South San Francisco Introduction Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 1-2 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 The City has distributed this RTC document to the City Council. The City Council will review the final EIR for adequacy and, at its discretion, certify that the EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and that it reflects the City’s independent judgment pursuant to the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15090. The City will consider certification of the final EIR and then consider the project separately for approval or denial. The City Council will hold a hearing on September 24, 2025, to consider the adequacy of the final EIR. If the City Council finds the EIR to be in compliance with CEQA requirements, it will certify the final EIR. The City decision-makers will consider the certified final EIR, along with other information received during the public process, to determine whether to approve, modify, or disapprove the proposed project and specify the mitigation measures that will be required as conditions of project approval in a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. If City decision-makers decide to approve the proposed project, even though the significant environmental impacts identified in the final EIR would not be avoided or reduced to less-than-significant levels, they must indicate that any such unavoidable significant impacts are acceptable due to overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, as described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15093. This is known as a Statement of Overriding Considerations, in which the City balances the benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks. If the benefits of a project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093). If an agency adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations, the statement must be included in the record of project approval. 1.2 Document Organization This RTC document consists of the following chapters:  Chapter 1, Introduction, discusses the purpose of the RTC document, the environmental review process for the EIR, and the organization of the RTC document. • Chapter 2, Comments and Responses, presents comments from the minutes of the public hearing on August 1, 2024, and written comments to the draft EIR. The comments are organized by agency in the order they were received. Comments from agencies are designated with an “A“ and an acronym of the agency’s name. A number at the end of the code keys each comment to the order of the comments presented within each written communication or item in the Planning Commission minutes. Thus, each discrete comment has a unique comment code. Following the Planning Commission minutes and each comment letter are the City’s responses. The responses generally clarify the draft EIR text. They may also reference revisions or additions to the draft EIR shown in Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR.  Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR, presents text changes to the draft EIR made as a result of a response to comments and/or a staff-initiated text changes identified by City staff to update, correct, or clarify the draft EIR text. New text is underlined and deleted text is shown in strikethrough. 42 Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-1 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Chapter 2 Comments and Responses 2.1 Introduction This chapter contains responses to the comments from the August 1, 2024, City of South San Francisco Planning Commission (Planning Commission) hearing as well as written comments on the draft environmental impact report (EIR) received during the public comment period. In addition to the comments received during the Planning Commission hearing, the City of South San Francisco (City) received one letter commenting on the draft EIR during the comment period. The Planning Commission hearing comments and the comment letter are organized by agency (A) in order of date received, as follows. • A-PC: Planning Commission Hearing (August 1, 2024) • A-Caltrans: Yunsheng Luo, California Department of Transportation (August 2, 2024) Where revisions to the draft EIR are appropriate to respond to the comments, such changes are noted in the responses and shown in full in Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. These include changes in response to the comments as well as staff-initiated changes. 2.2 Responses to Specific Comments This section includes comments on the draft EIR and responses to those comments. Comments from the Planning Commission hearing and comments from the letter that raise environmental issues are bracketed and numbered; each comment is followed by the responses to the comments raised. Where revisions to the draft EIR are appropriate to respond to comments, such changes are shown in full below and consolidated in Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. Staff-initiated text changes regarding typographical and other minor errors are also presented in Chapter 3. In other cases, the information provided in the responses is deemed adequate in itself, and modification to the draft EIR text is not necessary. 43 1 I131 Project Planning Commission Draft EIR Comment Hearing August 1, 2024 Transcript 0:34:32 – Billy Gross (BG) – “The primary purpose of tonight’s meeting is to take public comments on the draft environmental impact report, but I would say for the rest of the project, if you have any design-level comment, or if there are things that you would like us to go into more detail on when we come back for entitlement hearings, if there’s specific things that you’ve seen that you’d like to have more information on, that would also be useful so we make sure that we adequately address that when we’re back before you again at some point in the future.” 0:35:05 – Chair Norm Faria (NF) – “I would now turn over to the commission for questions. Mr. Tzang?” 0:35:10 – Commissioner Alex Tzang (AT) – “Through the chair, so I’m not going comment on whether I really like it or not. But questions; normally I don’t ask this many questions, but I don’t remember any project in front of us with so many S/U, like unavoidable mitigations. And my first question, if we just accept it with a statement of declaration—you know, why we accept it—who is ultimately going to pay for the consequence of accepting these? So, my thinking is our neighborhood, our citizens, not the applicant, not even the city. So, in order—I’m glad that Billy mentioned that this is not approvable right now, because as much as I love how it looks, I do want to know: should we accept who is paying for it? Let’s say if the answer is the citizen, then just because we love the building, it does not grant us the right to just say ‘yeah, I want the job opportunity, I want the income,’ or stuff like that in return for their suffering. For example, traffic and circulation. I know we have a lot of EIRs stating that it is maybe unavoidable but bearable on the heavy developments, like near El Camino/Chestnut area. Using some of my people, saying every time they try to pass that traffic light, in my language, they ‘want to die.’ So there is a discrepancy with what the EIR portrays and what people are experiencing. I get more and more uncomfortable when we just think that things will wing it on the traffic, transportation, congestions, and annoyance to the City. So my question for that in particular: can this project be further phased out—hypothetically phased out—so that the transportation issue can be further mitigated? I know right now there are two big buildings. Let’s say, creatively-speaking, if those two big buildings can be built in halves, kind of like a burrito sliced into half and then eventually built to the complete form of each of those. Even though there is a lot of waste factor, is phasing that out further, can that help transportation issues? And then air quality, that’s my second question. The air quality impact, is it because the nature of this is a lab that the air quality will be impacted a lot more, versus if we pick an 80% office, then the air quality impact would be a lot less: is that how I should comprehend it? The reason why I ask is I’m thinking that if we have to change the proposed use, it might not be possible, which also means that I have to understand this project more correctly. Is it because the amount of R&D proposed is too much for our city to take? If the answer is yes, the R&D part is really the main reason for the air quality problem, then we have to hear that. Because otherwise, like changing it to 80%, if it works, then okay great, do office. But probably that’s not what the applicant is proposing, and we’re talking about different things. And, you know what? It’s too heavy; I’ll save my other three for later. Thank you.” 44 2 0:39:40 – BG – “Would you like me to start on answering his questions? Okay. I will say that prior to the General Plan Update, for the majority of office R&D projects in the east of 101, for basically every project, we had significant unavoidable transportation impacts because there were often impacts of, for instance, queuing onto the freeway main line, and there are mitigation measures that can be implemented that would mitigate that. But because Caltrans ultimately has to say yes to that project, and we can’t guarantee it, we would always find those significant and unavoidable. Air quality was also very typically a significant and unavoidable. I will say for this instance the air quality, for instance one of them was related to work receptors. And so, because 101 Terminal is entitled first, they can start construction on that project at any time. If that was constructed, and then you start construction of the 131 Terminal projects, you already have worker receptors there. If they were to come in, for instance, in reverse order, where 131 Terminal was built first and 101 Terminal was built second, you would not have that impact, because the worker receptors would be upwind in that case. So this is a new—we have not had that impact before because worker receptors were not considered sensitive receptors under previous Bay Area Air Quality Management District thresholds. The architectural codings, all of the consumer products, that type of thing, you see that used in every project. One of the other things I wanted to say with the air quality portion is a lot of the overall impacts are also due to other things in the area for Lindenville. For instance, there is the concrete batch plant; a large part of area sources comes from that. So just by being in somewhat close proximity to those projects, you’re already really close to the air quality thresholds, just as a high level for those. In terms of the—asking about phasing out for transportation issues. One of the requirements is that any of the transportation mitigation measures have to be installed before any occupancy can happen at the 131 Terminal project. So the class four bikeway, the signalization improvement, everything definitely that’s within the city’s jurisdiction; those have to completed before we would allow them any tenants to occupy the sites. We would then continue to work with—so the portion that’s somewhat within the City of San Bruno’s jurisdiction are any of those improvements to the Sneath, Tanforan intersection, my estimation is that they want all of that to work well in addition to the city. Same thing with Caltrans. Caltrans wants the project impacts to freeway… to not have impacts—And so we’ll work very closely with all of those organizations if we need to make slight modifications to make this work. But ultimately we can’t guarantee that. That’s why they’re still considered significant and unavoidable. But that has typically been the case for these kinds of projects in the east 101. We have less of that now with the General Plan Update EIR, but because this project is an intensification of what we looked at, that’s why we’re having to look at these in more detail. It’s more square footage than we expected.” 0:44:36 – Adena Friedman (AF) – “Thank you Billy. Through the chair, if I could just add one thought. One thing I was thinking when Billy was explaining some of the mitigation measures and thresholds is that the CEQA standards—and I would ask our EIR consultants from ICF to jump in if I’m misstating anything—the CEQA standards and thresholds change over time and have gotten more strict. There’s a higher threshold, there’s a higher bar, which is great, that’s really good and that’s what we want so there’s more emphasis on environmental impacts. And it’s also pushing projects further to do more mitigation and to do higher quality materials, and use all the low-water landscaping and all that, but it’s a little hard to compare. Because of changes over time, it’s hard to compare projects that may have been approved five or six years ago with projects now in terms of the number of significant unavoidables, because there may be new impact areas that we’re studying that didn’t exist. So it’s just something to think about, in terms of it may not be apples to apples to say a project of the same square 45 3 footage was designed in a way five years ago; it may have actually had larger effects, but was studied differently. I’m not speaking to this project, I mean Billy obviously knows way more, knows all the details about this one. But just kind of a philosophical thought on how CEQA changes over time. 0:46:30 – BG – “The last thing I wanted to speak to—thanks for letting me think through this a little more—you’d asked how do we balance looking at each of the impacts. Basically, we have to look at each of these—there’s the five significant and unavoidable impacts—we would look at each one separately to say ‘are we okay with the benefits from the projects? Do we believe they outweigh the significant impacts?’ And so for the cultural resources, you look at that, what they’re doing and what the proposed mitigation is to those [unintelligible]. You have to look at each of those separately, and some of these are much more local impacts, some of them you could maybe have a little bit greater, but I think ultimately that’s what we would be looking at: do we agree that the benefits of the project balance any negative impacts? And we’ll look through that and we’ll have that discussion in more detail, but it’s good to know those. It’s ultimately the planning commission providing recommendations, city council having to say yes to that for any other further entitlements to be made for this project. 0:47:50 – Chair NF – “Thank you very much. Commissioner Shihadeh?” 0:47:54 – Commissioner Sam Shihadeh (SS) - “Through the chair. Staff, isn’t SteelWave the developer for the Safeway project as well? 0:48:01 – BG – “Yes, correct.” 0:48:05 – SS – “So, if they’re not able to develop that project, they’ve already got entitlements, how could they be applying for a new project, which is massive, which is going to cost a lot more? And how could the community accept us engaging such a massive project? We all know that everybody in the community’s been asking about Safeway. We need a supermarket in South City; we don’t even know the status of that project yet. So that’s question number one. I’m being asked to look into a massive project while we have another one on hold.” 0:48:53 – BG – “I’ll start by saying obviously we have lots of different projects entitled. One of the things that we will come back for with the 131 Terminal Project is SteelWave will be asking for a development agreement, and so, uncertain what that timeframe is—that is also typical for a project of this size, that likely could be built in phases; we saw that with the Vantage Project on Forbes, Brittania Cove—and so each entitlement project stands on its own merits; we can’t look at that in relation to other projects. The Safeway and the 180 El Camino Projects don’t have standing related to the application that we’re being asked to review and ultimately approve. 0:49:55 – SS – “I understand that. I fully understand that. My approach is the community. We’re accountable to the community. One of the main issues that I have with a massive project like this: we’ve seen the development on Airport Boulevard. You know, all the changes; we only have one lane that’s going to the freeway. I can’t imagine the massive tie-up that’s going to be created, and the mitigation measures or CEQA analysis clearly state that there’s going to be a big problem. Circulation, transportation. The other question I have is: we’ve faced a major issue when it rains, that floods. And that’s a major issue that the City has not resolved yet. My understanding is that, is that Caltrans’ responsibility? Is it going to be the developer’s responsibility? Is it going to be the City? But these are real issues that we 46 4 need to address, and I’m sure CEQA is addressing it. Or are they? I’m talking about transportation, all the impact to the community, not only through the development stage, but… ” 0:51:23 – BG – “So obviously, CEQA is looking at the environmental impacts, but it has very specific topics that it looks at. I will say for the entitlements that are coming before, one of the things that we’ll talk to you about in more detail is the zoning ordinance has a sea-level rise floodplain ordinance, and so the project site will be raised rather significantly to bring it outside of both sea-level rise and floodplain concerns. So we’ll be able to talk through those in more detail when we actually get through the entitlement portion. But this is good for us to know the specific items to focus on more when we do come back before you. The one comment related to transportation impacts; the CEQA Draft EIR does indicate that with the implementation of the mitigation measures, the additional traffic that would be created by this project would be able to function. I will note that CEQA no longer looks at Level of Service, that is not something that CEQA considers. But the trips that would be created by the proposed developments would be able to be mitigated adequately with the implementation of the mitigation measures that are included in the Draft EIR.” 0:53:13 - CHAIR NF – “Mr. Baker?” 0:53:14 – Commissioner John Baker (JB) – “Thank you. I remember when we had the 101 project come before us a while back, and I’m really happy to see the quote-unquote ‘sister’ project here, because it’s really helpful for me to think of this as basically one giant campus. And I see that in some of these mitigation measures, notably when 101 came before us, we talked about we’re really worried about that on-ramp at Produce Avenue, people speed down it now, and if we’re using that as an exit, we’d be seeing potentially a lot of accidents. And even in this EIR on page 216, it notes that those traffic impacts are potentially significant. And you just mentioned while LOS is not considered, VMT is, and I do think we’re going to definitely see a lot of additional VMT out of this. But can we confirm that the circulation patterns in this whole campus are taken together as basically one thing, because I’ll re-mention a concern I had before with the other project: that if there is an emergency situation—I believe it was Sam who said that’s a ‘one-lane highway’ on the Produce side and the Shaw entrance would just be one lane—do we have enough capacity for a simultaneous evacuation and emergency vehicles going in at the same time. That concern; has that been looked at? I didn’t see anything specifically about evacuation or anything in the Draft EIR.” 0:55:03 – BG – “I will say we will definitely bring back graphics that will show this in more detail when we come back, but I do know that the fire marshal has looked at that closely, and is comfortable with the access that’s being provided. The Shaw Road actually would be able to do two-way for those purposes. One note I will give is yes, the 101 Terminal Project had certain improvements that were intended for the square footage of additional area that it would provide; this then builds on those. So there are certain improvements that will be done to the Terminal Court/Produce/Airport intersection as part of the 101 Project, and then additional improvements would need to happen to accommodate the additional square footage of part of the 131 Terminal. The entire site was looked at, for this project, as it working together, both of them in collaboration with one another. But I do know from circulation and emergency vehicle, kind of circulation standpoint, that City staff, including police and fire, have reviewed and were comfortable with it. But we’ll bring more detail for that when we come back before you.” 47 5 0:56:23 – JB – “I have a question that came on the fly that Alex brought up about the preferred environmental alternative being the R&D. Is that because if there are more office options, there would be more people, more cars, et cetera to the site?” 0:56:44 – BG – “When you look at alternative scenarios, one of the requirements is that one of those— you do a minimum of three, some people do more than that—one of those has to be considered the environmentally superior. I would say looking at it as ‘it’s the environmentally superior of those three alternatives.’ It might not be environmentally superior to the proposed project, and that’s ultimately what we look at. And those alternatives are identified trying to, can you reduce one or all of the identified significant and unavoidable impacts. And so the thought was if your laboratory space is one of the areas that is creating air quality impacts, if you reduce that, does that have a noticeable impact or reduction in the air quality impact overall. And it reduced it, but it still exceeded the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s threshold. So even if that were the project to come in, we would still be coming before you with, this is considered significant and unavoidable because it exceeds the thresholds. One of the results of reducing the laboratory space, you have the office space, you have a lot more people on the site, so all of the transportation impacts ended up becoming more severe, so we would have to create then additional, what other mitigation measures could we do for that. All of this to say that it’s the environmentally superior of the three alternatives that we looked at, does not mean that it’s necessarily environmentally superior over the propose project itself, as part of the ultimate conversation that we have when we entitle. 0:58:43 – JB – “Let’s stay on the natural environment a second. On page 2-22 of the EIR, it notes that riparian impacts are less than significant, yet there is the San Bruno Canal or Slough immediately to the very south of the project, at the edge of the parking lot. Can you assure me that that’s been looked into, what construction and/or new use will have on the slough there?” 0:59:14 – BG – “We definitely have been looking at that. We have worked in conjunction with One Shoreline, which is the San Mateo County flood control and sea level rise management district, to make sure—and BCDC has some jurisdiction because this is tidal—and so yes that is being looked at and all the impacts as the environmental document states, no CEQA-related impacts, and then also looking outside of CEQA at what are One Shoreline and BCDC’s requirements, this has been designed to adequately address all the comments and issues from all of the different agencies.” 1:00:00 – JB – “Thanks, and while we’re on the slough, I’ll go back to one of the potentially significant identified impacts on page 2-7 about the cultural values. Is there a way you can describe—we’ll actually give a little context on this. As we know when the taller buildings on the side of San Bruno Mountain were built, there were a significant number of shellmounds, et cetera; the Ohlone people basically were fishing and harvesting from the shore there. Part of that was because it came up sloughs of what is now our eastside. So I’m worried that this, having been a marshland environment in the past, we might find some significant impact. Can you tell me what outreach has been made to either the local tribal leaders or what databases have been searched?” 1:00:56 – BG – “As part of the CEQA requirements, every jurisdiction is required to travel outreach. I believe we have six identified tribal contacts that we have sent letters and emails to—for any project that requires CEQA review—that outreach has been done. We have not received any response. I will also note there has been quite a bit of analysis completed in this area related to archaeological/cultural resources. One of the background documents in the past I believe identified a potential resource, and 48 6 there’s been lots of additional analysis to determine was that done, could someone else find that. I believe that there’s been extra borings completed and ultimately was determined that that likely was mistakenly identified. I might ask if Devan or Heidi want to provide any additional background to that. But that is an area where there has been quite a bit of analysis done to determine that there isn’t anything there, and we still have mitigation measures that if anything were to be found, that you immediately stop work, you bring professional archaeologists, someone who has the correct credentials to come out and take a look at the site, and try to determine who else could be contacted for that. But at this point we have not received any feedback from any of the tribal contacts. 1:02:57 – JB – “Okay, thank you. That’s all I have for now.” 1:03:06 – Commissioner Aysha Pamukcu (AP) – “Thank you so much for all the work that’s gone into this and the thoughtful presentations. A lot of the questions I had have been asked, but one that I was curious about was how a portion of the mitigation is out of the jurisdiction of South City, because that falls under the City of San Bruno and Caltrans, and so either could be answered here or something looked more into, I’m curious if there is either context for past successful collaborations that we could look to and count on, or even potentially initial agreements or conversations indicating interest in that kind of cross-jurisdiction collaboration.” 1:04:01 – AF – “A great example of this is the Southline Project, which, as the commission probably recalls, is right on the border of San Bruno and had the same condition, where there was a significant and unavoidable impact because intersection improvements would—to bring the impact down to a less- than-significant with mitigation—had to occur within the City of San Bruno. And the applicant for that project was actively working with the City of San Bruno to come up with an agreement to implement those improvements required. However, because we as the City are the agency that has to certify the EIR and could not guarantee—at the last minute, what if fell apart, or what if San Bruno decided we don’t want to make that improvement—we can’t make that guarantee, so we still had to find it significant and unavoidable. But that is a good example where we know, we worked hand-in-hand with this developer and with the City of San Bruno to come up with a plan to solve those issues, and we do know that they will be implemented in the future as that project is built out. I think that’s a good example of that relationship and those improvements being realized. But not being able to, we as the City can’t guarantee; it’s not in our CIP, we don’t control the funding.” 1:05:37 – BG – “And I was going to say, similar with Caltrans, we’re in collaboration with them on many projects. For instance, Utah Avenue Overpass, which had passed environmental design, now we’re moving forward to 35% design, because the overpass itself will go over U.S. 101, but also it touches some of the on-ramps/off-ramps; we’re in contact with Caltrans staff often on that. And so, for instance the San Mateo/Airport/Produce intersection leads in to some of those, so they are looking at those improvements as well. It’s similar. We’re all working to figure out what is that ultimate solution that everyone can agree to, we just can’t guarantee that they’re ultimately going to say yes. But we haven’t had them not say yes, that I’m aware of up to this point. 1:06:44 – AP – “Thank you, that’s really helpful. I know there is a lot of analysis here too around the existing cultural impacts and what is currently there, specifically the Produce Terminal, and something I’d also be curious about is a future-looking cultural analysis, particularly with Lindenville and some of the aspirations there around an artist-maker cultural hub, how this might square with what is envisioned 49 7 around Lindenville and the Specific Plan. And again, that could be something to report back on or speak to a little bit now.” 1:07:38 – BG – “I think we would bring that back. I know we’ve had some high-level discussions. The project team was excited about the direction that Lindenville Specific Plan was going, so I think they have some ideas. But that feels like that would be a good one to be part of the next discussion with Planning Commission, unless Heidi wants to speak to that tonight… we’ve move that to the next one.” 1:08:15 – AP – “Just the last thing I think around context for some of the CEQA analysis around transportation and potential impacts is, some of what I was seeing was also not just mitigation, but also improvements to existing infrastructure to be more in line with Complete Streets, and usage not just for cars but for pedestrians and cyclists. So, I would be interested in—again, either now or as a future topic—of seeing how some of the mitigation strategies are also pushing us towards, potentially pushing us towards, other separate policy goals, such as Complete Streets.” 1:09:10 – BG – “That will be definitely something we can highlight. This project would be implementing quite a few of our active mobility projects, for instance a north-south bike/pedestrian path to be able to get from, helping to connect from Southline up toward the Caltrain station. So this project’s definitely implementing some of the active [unintelligible] things and we can highlight what those are.” 1:09:44 – AP – “Thank you, and I’m sorry I said last, but now I mean it. Billy did you say that, when you were talking about Alternative B, that that one might not be economically feasible?” 1:09:57 – BG – “Any of these projects, if they were developed—for instance if you’re developing at a lower FAR, the entire project might not be financially feasible. I would ultimately think that the applicant team would need to speak to that. Right now, under current conditions, no projects are financially feasible. Nothing is moving forward because it doesn’t make sense from a financial standpoint. But there are always, depending on what your purchase price is for a property and what you can develop on it, certain thresholds of what can and can’t be done. And so the project team could speak more to that, but that was one of the considerations of a reduced floor area alternative, is that it might make it less feasible from a financial standpoint.” 1:11:02 – Vice-Chairperson Sarah Funes-Ozturk (SF) – “I really appreciate all the work you guys have done for this. I know you guys work really hard on these presentations and it really does show. And I love all the comments and questions my fellow commissioners have put forward; I agree with all of them. For me what I would love to see is a definite intention to really talk about the transportation mitigation efforts that will happen here, because with Commissioner Baker, we always talk about parking. If it’s getting us towards connections with Caltrain and with San Bruno BART, why is there going to be X number of parking? I’d really love for the public to have that information going in; I think that’s going to be really imperative. Thank you.” 1:11:50 – Chair NF – “Pretty much most of the questions have been answered. I do have one thing just for my own education and also for someone who may be watching at home. On the historical site or national historical site, if it is determined one, what are potential impacts—because that would be potential acreage loss where you [unintelligible] from, you could build on—if it is determined a national site, historical site?” 50 8 1:12:11 – BG – “It’s been determined that it’s eligible but it’s not actually been submitted, correct.” 1:12:19 – Chair NF – “And then basically on the transportation part, I don’t want to digress, but the area I’m concerned about—because we know there’s very little access into that site, because of how Shaw Road is, and prior projects we’ve always discussed just the general flow of traffic leaving it without being a job site or a construction site—the one part I’ll be really critical on is, let’s say we—I know we’re at stage one—when we finally get to the phase where we do start, this project does start potentially building, are they going to be doing multiple buildings? One at a time? Are they going to be, you know just the flow of materials in and out? Because sometimes you’ve got to get by 101 where they’re going southbound. I’ve been really asking critical questions on that whole dynamic. I know we have our construction teams to discuss how the flow will be and all that, but it’s certainly to be concerned about because we know automatically no construction site—that corner over there is busy, period. When you start talking about going to Airport Boulevard and out in the freeway, then you put the needs of something of that magnitude, there’ll be a lot of construction sites that need materials, parking for the employees when they’re working there, the construction workers. All of those type of things, staging equipment, I know that this is all part of the project, but these are the questions that I’ll be asking when it does come back to us, that we know that there is a defined plan. Because at 1.7 million square feet, especially when it’s all done concurrent, that’s massive. So I really have a lot of operational questions. Otherwise, again, the commission did a very good job with all types of questions. I understand we do have some public comments. So is there nothing else from the commission before I close it?” 1:13:58 – AF – “Have you opened the public hearing?” 1:14:01 – Chair NF – “It’s still open.” 1:13:02 – AF – “Okay, great. We have two public comments. The first one is John Medina. For public comments if you could just wait until the timer starts, and then at three minutes your time is up. I will now start the timer now.” 1:14:26 – John Medina (JM) – “Good evening planning commission members and staff. I’m John Medina, I’m a business agent with Sprinkler Fitters Local 483, also executive board member with the San Mateo Building and Construction Trades Council. I first want to congratulate you guys on probably the best chambers I’ve seen in the Bay Area. Of course this was built by Union labor, and under a project labor agreement or community workforce agreement, which you guys may know. I’m speaking about the Infinite project tonight, Local 483, and really all of labor is really excited about the opportunities that project this size creates for the local community. We look forward to much needed project like these that SteelWave, and really all the developers in South San Francisco, are presenting to this commission. We hope that these projects will benefit the community, like our Local members, and future people looking for pathways into the middle class working through the building trades: community workforce agreements like the one that built this facility, benefit programs like the Trades Introduction Program, that prioritizes veterans, women, and those from underserved populations here in San Mateo County. We hope this commission joins us in asking all of the developers that come to you guys what benefits they plan to give the local community as far as construction goes. We hope that they reach out to the 51 9 building trades to ensure the use of local apprentices and area standard wages and benefits. Thank you.” 1:16:03 – AF – “We have a second speaker card for Tom Treyor.” 1:16:17 – Tom Treyor (TT) – “It’s an honor for me to speak in this building. Like John said, this is built by Local Union labor, and it’s a beautiful, beautiful building. It is definitely one of the finest commission buildings I’ve been in. Local apprenticeships offer local families the opportunity to move into the middle class. I’m second generation sheet metal worker with Local 104, and having a good Union job and the benefits of those paychecks and that healthcare offered my family, allowed my family to live and work on the Peninsula and allows me and my wife to live and work on the Peninsula. These kinds of projects really offer a great opportunity to help bring up the middle class and help people live and work in this community. Local 104 is really excited to support these kinds of projects when they bring in local families, local hires, local apprentices, and good area standard wages. These jobs can offer healthcare to our local families and can help boost the economy for everybody around. We really like to support projects like this that bring local families this kind of work. Thank you so much.” 1:17:16 – Chair NF – “Do we have anyone else who would like to make a comment on any of the cards?” 1:17:22 – AF – “We do not have any other speaker cards at this time.” 1:17:25 – Chair NF – “Before I close the public hearing, any more questions from the commission? With that I will close the public hearing and turn it back to commissioners with any final statements before we move on from this item. Commissioner Tzang?” 1:17:41 – AT – “Through the chair. I really like how Billy attempted to answer my questions. How you just did is exactly what I would need in the next round when I actually am about to make a vote. It’s like, okay, you’re voting against this even though we’re doing this, this, et cetera, that are unavoidable, that are significant, however our benefit is this. Give me some comparison to the past, reference to current projects; those would help me determine making the exception. You guys probably know me enough that every time I make an exception, I really am nervous. I don’t want to start an exception that’s unprecedented or that will set pathways to future leeway and stuff like that. So, any time with those kinds of ‘even though, but’ will assist me greatly with making an alignment with your recommendation.” 1:18:57 – Chair NF – “Commissioner Shihadeh?” 1:19:00 – SS – “Thank you. Billy, great presentation, and thanks. I mean the team. I love the design, the concept, the landscaping, it’s great. The issue we’re addressing here is the impact on the community. We all recognize—you know now I live in that neighborhood, and I go to—now it takes us five minutes from the Grand Avenue and Airport intersection. Sometimes it’s five minutes. Never used to take that. We can’t, no red turn on—imagine with the 450 units built on Airport Boulevard, and this massive project, you only have one lane going onto 101. So I would hope you would take these issue real seriously because the community is really impacted and really concerned about. I know that mitigation measures are being taken, but there are great challenges. So I hope you take that in real consideration. 1:20:12 – JB – “I think you heard most of my comments. What I’d like to see in the Final EIR, the only other comment is, I do think it’s a well-designed project, and I think when both projects are finished it’s going to be a really good looking campus if we could get to these last, final nudges. Thanks.” 52 10 1:20:38 – AP – “Echoing the appreciation. This is huge and really complex. I’m grateful for the patience and hard work that goes into this. I would say, just what I would like to see—in addition to the excellent information presented here—is, I think we can safely say the community will be impacted. Period. And it’s just a question of will it be a net positive or a net negative, and we’ll make our assessments accordingly. But I think because of the—I don’t know how much leeway you have in your presentation for this, but CEQA necessarily is framed in terms of like ‘this is the bad thing, and this is the mitigation measure.’ And some of the mitigation measures actually bring us closer to important public policy goals. And so I think what I would like to see is, to help understand where this could lean net-positive, is where the place is that this is actually advancing quality of life, and vision, public policy goals in keeping with policies we have on the books—Specific Plan, General Plan—if that makes sense.” 1:21:59 – Chair NF – “Again, thank you. The project itself is beautiful, I mean I have to admit it’s a very impressive project, everyone sees the magnitude of it, it’s going to be great. I think hopefully—first of all for the presenter, thank you very much. I think we’ve given you enough insights that you will know when the devs come back at us, as the commission has said, we will be addressing transportation issues and many phases: construction, during it, the whole bit. So that will be coming back again at you hot and heavy. The traffic issues will be coming again. There were questions about circulation within the actual compounds. So, I think as you can see the areas that’ll be hit upon after all these mitigated items have been determined and stuff, because it’s no fault of anyone in that area when you develop, it’s just the nature of the way the current streets are laid out. You have egress coming out of eastern 101, and that’s just one of the major areas that’s unavoidable, and now we’re throwing more on top of it. So that’s why it's such a critical area when we bring it to the attention of any going away. It’s no fault of those trying to build, because as we’ve said it’s a beautiful building. So again thank you, and it sounds like we will be seeing you again, so we hope you prep for the kind of things that we will be asking. Thank you. There’s no other questions? Okay, thank you again.” 53 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-12 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Letter A-PC: Planning Commission Hearing (August 1, 2024) Response to Comment PC-1 The comment expresses concerns about the effects of the project on traffic congestion and questions whether the EIR fully captures the range of transportation impacts; the commenter considers phasing to be a means for addressing transportation issues. As described in Section 4.6.4.1, Significance Criteria, in Section 4.6, Transportation and Circulation, of the draft EIR, the analysis of transportation impacts was based on Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, including topics such as consistency with plans and policies, vehicle miles traveled (VMT), design hazards, and emergency access. As required by Senate Bill (SB) 743, CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 no longer considers automobile delay, as described by level of service (LOS) or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion, as an environmental impact for proposed projects. However, an LOS analysis was included for informational purposes as part of the local transportation analysis included in the transportation impact assessment (Appendix H to the draft EIR). As decribed in Section 3.6, Project Construction, in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the draft EIR, the proposed project would be constructed in eight phases over an approximately 5-year period. Construction on the southern portion of the project site would begin in March 2026 and end in October 2028; construction on the northern portion of the project site would begin in November 2028 and end in May 2031. Construction-related impacts, including transportation and circulation, are evaluated for each resource topic throughout the draft EIR. In addition, the draft EIR considers several alternatives that would reduce the proposed project’s significant impacts, including those related to transportation and circulation. As detailed in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the draft EIR, although none of the project alternatives evaluated would avoid the significant and unavoidable transportation impacts, Alternative B, the BTP-M Alternative, would result in reduced transportation impacts compared to the proposed project. Response to Comment PC-2 The comment expresses concern about the proposed project’s air quality impacts and asks for the reason(s) behind the air quality impacts. The comment also asks if Alternative C, Increased Office Space, would result in fewer air quality impacts. As discussed in Section 5.7.3.1 of the Draft EIR, emissions from Alternative C would be similar to those of the proposed project and would result in similar impacts related to air quality. The significant and unavoidable air quality impacts of the project would also occur under Alternative C. The project’s operational impact related to reactive organic gas (ROG) is because of the many sources of ROG associated with the project, including consumer products, such as cleaning products; architectural coatings (e.g., paint); vehicles; emergency generators; and laboratories. Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1, 2, and 3 would reduce this impact but not to a less-than-significant level. In addition, the project’s impact on worker receptors from the annual concentration of particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5) is due mainly to fugitive dust from on-road vehicles and the proximity of receptors downwind of the project site at the adjacent Infinite 101 site. Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-4 would reduce this impact but not to a less-than-significant level. Lastly, the cumulative impact from the annual concentration of PM2.5 is due primarily to two existing facilities within 1,000 feet of the 54 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-13 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 project site; these contribute high levels of PM2.5 to the area surrounding the project site. The contribution from the proposed project would be substantially less than the contribution from the existing facilities; however, as discussed above for project-level impacts, the contribution of the project alone would exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) project-level threshold. Mitigation Measure MM-AQ-4 would reduce this impact but not to a less-than-significant level. Response to Comment PC-3 The comment states that the proposed project would result in transportation and circulation impacts. As noted by the commenter and detailed in Section 4.6, Transportation and Circulation, of the draft EIR, the proposed project would result in significant impacts related to transportation and circulation. Specifically, the proposed project would result in significant transportation impacts from conflicts with programs, plans, or policies for addressing issues related to circulation systems and hazards due to a geometric design or incompatible uses. It should be noted that the proposed project would include the transportation improvements outlined in Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1 to reduce the proposed project’s significant transportation impacts. However, because part of the transportation improvements would be under the jurisdiction of either the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) or the City of San Bruno, the impact would be significant and unavoidable because the City of South San Francisco cannot ensure full implementation of the mitigation measure. Response to Comment PC-4 The comment expresses concern regarding flooding. Portions of the project site are within a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 100-year flood zone, although the remaining portions of the project site are outside of the 100-year flood zone. Areas of the project site are also subject to inundation from a moderate flood event (i.e., flooding with a 0.2 percent annual chance). The applicant is required to comply with stormwater and flood risk requirements including Provision C.3 and LID requirements of the municipal regional permit, to ensure that implementation of the proposed project would not result in flooding. Flooding impacts were evaluated in in the draft EIR Section 6.4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, as well as Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Initial Study (Appendix B to the draft EIR). To comply with FEMA requirements and combat future sea-level rise and flooding, the site would be raised to at least 13 feet; structures would be designed with first-floor elevations of 14 feet. Fill would be placed to raise existing grades and allow structures to meet the natural grade; as a result, structures would be outside of the floodplain. A flood-proofing certificate would be submitted to the City. Under the proposed project, the project site would have nine drainage management areas to collect, treat, store, and discharge stormwater runoff. Project runoff would flow into the city storm drain system. For the majority of the project site, flows from storm drains would flow into the adjacent slough. Oversized underground pipes would control flows prior to discharge to the slough. Storage pipes would connect to existing outfalls and ultimately discharge to the slough. On the lower portions of the site, smaller areas would drain to the City’s municipal separate storm sewer system within Terminal Court. Furthermore, the proposed project would increase the amount of pervious surface on the largely paved project site. Landscaped and vegetated areas would provide stormwater treatment and manage stormwater runoff. Overall, the amount of 55 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-14 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 stormwater that would be discharged with implementation of the project would decrease compared to existing conditions. On-site storm drain improvements would include the installation of bioretention ponds, flow-through planters, and Silva Cell units to provide treatment on the project site and convey water to storage pipes. Water would be released at the designed flow rate. Response to Comment PC-5 The comment expresses concerns regarding the project’s effects on safety, VMT, and emergency vehicle access. These topics are addressed in Section 4.6.4.3, Impact Evaluation, in Section 4.6, Transportation and Circulation, of the draft EIR. The project would increase hazards by increasing the number of vehicle trips on several streets and freeway ramps with unsignalized intersections adjacent to the project site. Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1 identifies new traffic signals and street design changes to address this impact, thereby reducing the potential for conflicts as well as queueing at affected intersections. However, some of these rights-of-ways are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and the jurisdiction of the City of San Bruno; therefore, the City of South San Francisco cannot guarantee their enforcement. The impact due to design hazards would be significant and unavoidable. The project’s impact on VMT would be less than significant. As shown in Table 4.6-4 on page 4.6-19 of the draft EIR, without a transportation demand management (TDM) program, home-based work (HBW) VMT per employee under existing conditions is expected to be 17.5, which is greater than the City’s significance threshold of 12.7 for HBW VMT. However, implementation of a TDM program would reduce VMT to 12.3, which is below the City’s threshold of significance of 12.7 for HBW VMT per employee. Therefore, the project’s impact would be less than significant. The project would not include features that would alter emergency vehicle access routes or roadway facilities; fire and police vehicles would continue to have access to all facilities around the entire city. Emergency vehicles would have full access to the project site from all driveways connecting to adjacent streets; each driveway would be equipped to handle all types of emergency vehicles. Therefore, the project would provide adequate emergency access, and the project’s impacts on emergency access would be less than significant. Response to Comment PC-6 The comment asks for clarification about the environmentally superior alternative and related air quality impacts. As detailed in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the draft EIR, the environmentally superior alternative is Alternative B, BTP-M Alternative, because it would reduce, but not avoid, all of the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts. Specifically, Alternative B would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in any criteria air pollutant for which the San Francisco Bay Area Air Basin is designated as a nonattainment area with respect to federal or state ambient air quality standards due to the reduction in overall building square footage, number of employees, and number of emergency generators. With these reductions under Alternative B, daily operational ROG emissions would very likely be reduced enough to be below BAAQMD’s thresholds of significance, along with other pollutants. As such, Mitigation Measures MM-AQ-1 through MM-AQ-3 would not be required under Alternative B, and the impact would be less than that of the proposed project. However, as detailed in Section 5.6.2, Ability to Meet Project Objectives, of the draft EIR, Alternative B would meet some, but not all, of the project objectives. 56 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-15 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Response to Comment PC-7 The comment asks if impacts on the navigable slough and riparian habitat were evaluated in the draft EIR. Impacts on the navigable slough south of the project site along with the associated habitat were evaluated in the draft EIR, as summarized in Chapter 6, Other CEQA Considerations, and the Initial Study (Appendix B). As detailed in Section 3.4, Biological Resources, of the Initial Study, no riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community is present on the project site. In addition, the proposed project would incorporate an approximately 15-foot buffer between construction work areas on the southern portion of the project site and the top of the bank of the navigable slough. Furthermore, as detailed in Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Initial Study, the project storm drain system would use LID areas to treat and control flows prior to discharge to the adjacent slough. The proposed project would also be required to comply with the NPDES regional permit requirements and would not result in adverse water quality impacts to the navigable slough. Impacts would be less than significant. Response to Comment PC-8 The commenter asks what outreach and databases were used to inform the archaeological resources analysis. As detailed on pages 4.3-30 and 4.30-31 in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources, of the draft EIR, a records search at the Northwest Information Center (NWIC), a Sacred Land File search through the Native American Heritage Commission, and tribal consultation with eight Native American tribes took place to inform the archaeological resources analysis. The records search concluded that there may be one known cultural resource within the project site, P-41-000051 (CA-SMA-47), that was identified during a survey in the early 1900s. However, no evidence of the resource was identified at the location during subsequent archaeological surveys conducted in 1998 or 1995, nor was evidence identified during a geoprobe in 2016. Response to Comment PC-9 The commenter asks for clarification regarding the proposed project’s impacts on the Golden Gate Produce Terminal and its consistency with the artist-maker cultural hub goals and policies envisioned in the Lindenville Specific Plan. As detailed on pages 4.3-32 to 4.3-35 in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources, of the draft EIR, the proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts on historical resources because it would demolish the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, which is recommended as eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) and the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and therefore considered to be a historical resource for CEQA compliance. However, to reduce the adverse impact to the greatest extent possible, the proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-CULT-1, Prepare Documentation in the Likeness of the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) in Consultation with Interested Parties, and Mitigation Measure MM-CULT-2, Initiate Interpretive Signage Plan or Public Interpretation Program. The mitigation measures would ensure that documentation and recordation of the Golden Gate Produce Terminal would reduce the loss by preserving the history of the resource and its role within the region’s historical context for the public’s benefit and understanding. The measures would also provide signage or an interpretative program, creating opportunities for the public to learn about South San Francisco’s industrial heritage and the history of land uses within the project site. Furthermore, the proposed project’s consistency with City plans, such as the Specific Plan, are discussed and evaluated throughout the draft EIR and Initial Study (Appendix B to the draft EIR). Specifically, Section 3.11, Land Use and Planning, of the Initial Study discusses the proposed project’s consistency with the City’s goals and policies, including Specific Plan goals and policies; the proposed project was found to be consistent, resulting in a less-than-significant impact. 57 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-16 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Response to Comment PC-10 The comment expresses an interest in aligning the transportation mitigation measures with the City’s policy goals regarding complete streets and pedestrian and bicycle improvements. Consistency with plans and policies is analyzed under Impact TRANS-1 in Section 4.6.4.3, Impact Evaluation, in Section 4.6, Transportation and Circulation, of the draft EIR. Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1 calls for implementation of the transportation improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan, including new bikeways, traffic signals, pedestrian crossings, and intersection and ramp reconfiguration. Response to Comment PC-11 The comment asks for clarification of the economic feasibility of Alternative B, which was identified as the environmentally superior alternative. The range of alternatives required in an EIR is governed by a “rule of reason” that requires the EIR to set forth only those potentially feasible alternatives necessary to foster informed public participation and an informed and reasoned choice by the decision-making body (per CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[f]). An EIR does not need to address every conceivable alternative or consider infeasible alternatives. CEQA Guidelines Section 15364 generally defines “feasible” to mean the ability to be accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social, technological, and legal factors. The identification of Alternative B was based on the existing zoning on the project site. Specific financial details such as net profit and loss have not been evaluated, nor is such an evaluation required under CEQA. However, it is reasonable to assume that Alternative B would be less profitable than the project, given its reduced size. Response to Comment PC-12 The comment seeks clarification regarding the consistency of the project’s proposed parking supply with City requirements. The project proposes 2,434 parking spaces for office/research-and-development uses, consistent with the City’s maximum rate of 1.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet; it also proposes 534 dedicated spaces for amenity uses. The project would not exceed the City’s adopted parking maximums; therefore, its approach to parking would not present a significant impact related to VMT or consistency with plans and policies. Response to Comment PC-13 The comment asks for clarification regarding the historical status of the Golden Gate Produce Terminal. As detailed on page 4.3-16 in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources, of the draft EIR, the Golden Gate Produce Terminal was determined to be eligible for listing in the NRHP and CRHR for its association with the development of the South San Francisco Industrial Park and the produce industry in the San Francisco Bay Area. As such, the Golden Gate Produce Terminal is considered a historical resource under CEQA. The proposed project would result in significant and unavoidable impacts on historical resources because it would demolish the Golden Gate Produce Terminal. However, as detailed in Section 4.3, Cultural Resources, of the draft EIR, to reduce the adverse historical resource impact to the greatest extent possible, the proposed project would implement Mitigation Measure MM-CULT-1, Prepare Documentation in the Likeness of the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) in Consultation with Interested 58 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-17 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Parties, and Mitigation Measure MM-CULT-2, Initiate Interpretive Signage Plan or Public Interpretation Program, which would ensure proper documentation of the historical resource and minimization of project construction impacts. Response to Comment PC-14 The comment asks for clarification regarding the proposed project’s construction information and expresses concerns regarding construction impacts on the local transportation network. As detailed in Section 3.6, Project Construction, of Chapter 3, Project Description, of the draft EIR, the proposed project would be constructed over an approximately 5-year construction period, with construction on the southern portion of the project site beginning in March 2026 and ending in October 2028 and construction on the northern portion of the project site beginning in November 2028 and ending in May 2031. With respect to impacts on the local transportation network during project construction, the haul route for demolition materials would be U.S. 101, with trucks traveling from the project site either northbound or southbound. Trucks using the northbound haul route would exit the project site, travel from Produce Avenue to Mitchell Avenue, then continue to South Airport Boulevard and the on-ramp located off the boulevard. Trucks using the southbound haul route would exit the project site, then make a right turn from Terminal Court to the Produce Avenue on-ramp. The haul route for deliveries or trucks returning to the project site would be in the opposite direction. In addition, other construction-related impacts are evaluated for each resource topic throughout the draft EIR, including construction-related air quality impacts (Section 4.2, Air Quality, pages 4.2-31 through 4.2-41), construction-related greenhouse gas emissions impacts (Section 4.4, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, pages 4.4-18 through 4.4-40), and construction-related noise impacts (Section 4.5, Noise and Vibration, pages 4.5-27 through 4.5-54). Response to Comment PC-15 The comment expresses support for the proposed project. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concerns regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment PC-16 The comment expresses support for the proposed project. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concerns regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment PC-17 The comment expresses concern regarding the proposed project’s cumulative transportation impacts. See Response to Comment PC-1 regarding traffic congestion, which is outside the scope of CEQA. CEQA does, however, require an evaluation of transportation impacts in the context of circulation and safety, along with VMT. As detailed on pages 4.1-4 through 4.1-9 of the draft EIR, the cumulative land use assumptions for the proposed project include the citywide 2040 projections used in the Shape SSF 2040 General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report and the Lindenville Specific Plan Addendum, with refinements to reflect development projects that are under construction, approved, or pending within the city as well as additional reasonably foreseeable large development projects that are near the project site but outside the jurisdiction 59 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-18 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 of the City. These projects considered in the draft EIR are depicted in Figure 4.1-1, Cumulative Project Locations, and include projects for which the City of South San Francisco, as well as the City of San Bruno, had an application on file or projects that have been entitled but not yet constructed at the time the EIR analysis was initiated (i.e., November 2023). Cumulative impacts are evaluated within each topical section of the draft EIR. As summarized in the draft EIR, the proposed project in combination with the cumulative projects identified would have significant and unavoidable transportation and circulation impacts with mitigation. The analysis presented within the draft EIR appropriately and adequately describes the potential for cumulative transportation and circulation impacts. Response to Comment PC-18 The comment asks for information regarding how the project would be advancing the goals or policies in the City’s General Plan or Specific Plan. The proposed project’s consistency with City plans, such as the General Plan and Specific Plan, is discussed and evaluated throughout the draft EIR and Initial Study (Appendix B to the draft EIR). Specifically, Section 3.11, Land Use and Planning, of the Initial Study discusses the proposed project’s consistency with City General Plan goals and policies, Specific Plan goals and policies, the Active South City Plan, the San Francisco International Airport (SFO) Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), and the San Francisco Bay Plan. The proposed project would not conflict with any of the aforementioned plans and policies, and impacts would be less than significant. 60 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” DISTRICT 4 OFFICE OF REGIONAL AND COMMUNITY PLANNING P.O. BOX 23660, MS–10D | OAKLAND, CA 94623-0660 www.dot.ca.gov August 2, 2024 SCH #: 2023110023 GTS #: 04-SM-2023-00583 GTS ID: 31241 Co/Rt/Pm: SM/101/21.398 Billy Gross, Principal Planner City of South San Francisco 315 Maple Street South San Francisco, CA 94080 Re: Infinite 131 Project ─ Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) Dear Billy Gross: Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in the environmental review process for the Infinite 131 Project. The Local Development Review (LDR) Program reviews land use projects and plans to ensure consistency with our mission and state planning priorities. The following comments are based on our review of the June 2024 DEIR. Please note this correspondence does not indicate an official position by Caltrans on this project and is for informational purposes only. Project Understanding The proposed project would demolish approximately 126,750 square feet (sq. ft.) of industrial and operational uses along with 116,572 sq. ft. of open-air structures to construct approximately 1.7 million sq. ft. of research and development (R&D) uses and amenities within seven buildings, along with two parking garages and additional surface parking. The project site is in the vicinity of U.S. Route 101 (U.S. 101). Travel Demand Analysis The project’s Vehicle-miles Traveled (VMT) analysis and significance determination are undertaken in a manner consistent with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) VMT analysis guidelines. Per the DEIR, this project is found to have a less than significant VMT impact with implementation of the Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Program. Caltrans commends the Lead Agency in developing the TDM Program to reduce employee and guest , therefore working towards meeting the State’s goal of a 15-percent reduction. The proposed 61 Billy Gross, Principal Planner August 2, 2024 Page 2 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” measures identified in the TDM program should be documented with annual monitoring reports to demonstrate effectiveness. Pedestrian and Bicycle The proposed project may affect pedestrian and bicycle transportation near the U.S. 101 on- and off-ramps at Produce Ave. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 (MM TRANS-1) of the proposed project includes improvements to the pedestrian and bicycle facilities at the following intersections: • U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Ave • U.S. 101 on-ramp/Produce Ave/Terminal Ct • Produce Ave/San Mateo Ave/ Airport Blvd MM TRANS-1 also includes construction of a Class IV separated Bikeway from Baden Ave to Terminal Ct via Airport Blvd and Produce Ave. Please incorporate higher visibility striping for any pedestrian crosswalks planned within the project limit and consider providing both short-term bike parking and long-term secure bike parking for the users of the facilities in the new development. Please also consider “YIELD TO PEDS” signs within the project limit when necessary. Construction-Related Impacts Project work that requires movement of oversized or excessive load vehicles on State roadways requires a transportation permit that is issued by Caltrans. To apply, please visit Caltrans Transportation Permits (link). Prior to construction, coordination may be required with Caltrans to develop a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) to reduce construction traffic impacts to the State Transportation Network (STN). The proposed project may overlap with Caltrans Project 04-4H360 to incorporate safety enhancements and improve traffic operations at Produce Ave and the U.S. 101, such as installation of new signals at the Produce Ave/San Mateo Ave/Airport Blvd intersection. For future project coordination, please contact Rommel Pardo, Senior Project Manager of Program Project Management for San Mateo County at Rommel.Pardo@dot.ca.gov. Lead Agency As the Lead Agency, the City of South San Francisco is responsible for all project mitigation, including any needed improvements to the STN. The project’s fair share contribution, financing, scheduling, implementation responsibilities and lead agency monitoring should be fully discussed for all proposed mitigation measures. The DEIR has identified that Impact TRANS-1 would be significant and unavoidable. To address the project impact, the DEIR proposes Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 that 62 Billy Gross, Principal Planner August 2, 2024 Page 3 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” includes several transportation improvement projects within Caltrans’ Right-of-Way (ROW). Please contact Caltrans for the potential coordination opportunities. Hydrology Please ensure that any increase in storm water runoff to State Drainage Systems or Facilities be treated, contained on project site, and metered to preconstruction levels. Any floodplain impacts must be documented and mitigated. The Office of Hydraulics would like to ensure that the discharge from the new development will not impact the existing draining system at U.S. 101 during the raining season and that no surface flow will get into the roadside ditch between the development and southbound U.S. 101. For future design phase review, please submit plan views, profiles, cross-sections, details of all draining facilities, and hydrologic calculations showing conditions before and after development at this location. Archaeology The Cultural Resources studies and mitigation measures in the Cultural Resources Section of the DEIR satisfy environmental legal compliance for cultural resources within Caltrans’ ROW. Should construction activities within Caltrans’ ROW take place in relation to this project, these mitigation measures shall be implemented if there is an archaeological discovery. If there is an inadvertent archaeological or burial discovery within Caltrans’ ROW, please immediately contact the Caltrans Office of Cultural Resource Studies at (510) 847-1977. A staff archaeologist will evaluate the finds within one business day after contact. Caltrans requires review of any potential data recovery plans within Caltrans’ ROW. Aeronautics The project site is located within one mile of the San Francisco International Airport. One of the goals of the Caltrans Aeronautics Program, is to assist cities, counties, and Airport Land Use Commissions or their equivalent (ALUC), to understand and comply with the State Aeronautics Act pursuant to the California Public Utilities Code (PUC), Section 21001 et seq. The proposed Project is in the Airport Influence Area B (AIA) of the San Francisco International Airport, established by the San Mateo County ALUC pursuant to Section 21675(c). Therefore, the proposed project shall adhere to the safety and land use criteria and restrictions defined in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) formed by the ALUC pursuant to the PUC, Section 21674 and Section 21676 and is subject to review authority by the ALUC. Per the California Public Utilities Code Section 21001 et seq. relating to the State Aeronautics Act, Section 21676(b) prior to the amendment of a general plan, within the planning boundary established by the ALUC pursuant to Section 21675, the local 63 Billy Gross, Principal Planner August 2, 2024 Page 4 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” agency shall first refer the proposed action to the ALUC. If the ALUC determines that the proposed action is inconsistent with the ALUC’s plan, the referring agency shall be notified. Any proposed development in the defined safety zones or AIA, therefore, must adhere to the safety criteria and restrictions defined in the (ALUCP) adopted by the ALUC pursuant to the PUC, Section 21674. The proposed project site is partially located in the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) 65 decibel (dB) noise contour. While the proposed land uses of the project include commercial, office, and/or research and development land use and are considered compatible per the ALUCP, the proposed daycare associated with these uses should be considered for noise compatibility. It is recommended that the day care site be located in the portion of the Project site outside of the 65 dB noise contour or be made conditionally compatible per the ALUCP. Caltrans Aeronautics also strongly recommends an onsite noise review to determine if additional noise attenuation is necessary to maintain interior noise levels below 45 CNEL, or lower. Interior CNEL calculations should assume windows are closed. The proposed project should also be reviewed to comply with 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 77 Conical Surface standards, United States Standard for Terminal Instrument Procedures (TERPS) Approach, and One Engine Inoperative (OEI) Departure Surfaces in applicable areas. Equitable Access If any Caltrans facilities are impacted by the project, those facilities must meet American Disabilities Act (ADA) Standards after project completion. As well, the project must maintain bicycle and pedestrian access during construction. These access considerations support Caltrans’ equity mission to provide a safe, sustainable, and equitable transportation network for all users. Encroachment Permit Please be advised that any permanent work or temporary traffic control that encroaches onto Caltrans’ ROW requires a Caltrans-issued encroachment permit. As part of the encroachment permit submittal process, you may be asked by the Office of Encroachment Permits to submit a completed encroachment permit application package, digital set of plans clearly delineating Caltrans’ ROW, digital copy of signed, dated and stamped (include stamp expiration date) traffic control plans, this comment letter, your response to the comment letter, and where applicable, the following items: new or amended Maintenance Agreement (MA), approved Design Standard Decision Document (DSDD), approved encroachment exception request, and/or airspace lease agreement. The Office of Encroachment Permit requires 100% complete design plans and supporting documents to review and circulate the permit application package. To 64 Billy Gross, Principal Planner August 2, 2024 Page 5 “Provide a safe and reliable transportation network that serves all people and respects the environment.” obtain more information and download the permit application, please visit Caltrans Encroachment Permits (link). Please note that the checklist TR-0416 is used to determine the appropriate Caltrans review process for encroachment projects. Your application package may be emailed to D4Permits@dot.ca.gov. Thank you again for including Caltrans in the environmental review process. Should you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Luana Chen, Transportation Planner, via LDR-D4@dot.ca.gov. For future early coordination opportunities or project referrals, please visit the Caltrans LDR website (link) or contact LDR-D4@dot.ca.gov. Sincerely, YUNSHENG LUO Branch Chief, Local Development Review Office of Regional and Community Planning c: State Clearinghouse 65 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-24 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Letter A-California Department of Transportation (Caltrans): Yunsheng Luo, Caltrans (August 2, 2024) Response to Comment A-Caltrans-1 The comment expresses appreciation from Caltrans for the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR and provides a summary of the description of the proposed project. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concerns regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-2 The comment acknowledges that the proposed project’s analysis of VMT and travel demand is consistent with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County VMT analysis guidelines and that the proposed project would have a less-than-significant impact with respect to VMT. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concerns regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-3 The comment requests that specific design requirements be incorporated as part of the Class IV separated bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court proposed as part of the transportation improvements provided in Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1. This includes incorporating high-visibility striping for pedestrian crosswalks, short-term and long-term bicycle parking, and “Yield to Pedestrians” signs within the project site when necessary. As detailed in Chapter 3, Project Description, of the draft EIR, the proposed project would include a total of 176 bicycle parking spaces throughout the project site, including 149 long-term bicycle parking spaces and 27 short-term bicycle parking spaces. The short-term bicycle parking spaces would be located near the lobby entrances to the proposed buildings. The long-term bicycle parking spaces, as well as showers, would be provided on the ground floor of the I131N and I131S buildings and within a bicycle storage room in the parking garage. Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1 has been revised to include other design requirements, as requested by Caltrans and shown in Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR. The revisions requested by Caltrans would further reduce hazard impacts, and do not alter the findings in the draft EIR. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-4 The comment states that, if project work requires the movement of oversized or excessive-load vehicles on state roadways, it may require a transportation permit from Caltrans as well as a transportation management plan. Comment noted. Project construction would involve the routine transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and would be required to be comply with applicable requirements and regulations set forth by Caltrans as well as the California Highway Patrol, U.S. Department of Transportation, and BAAQMD. The project would acquire permits from Caltrans as well as a transportation management plan if deemed necessary during the permitting and entitlement process. 66 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-25 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Response to Comment A-Caltrans-5 The comment states that the proposed project could overlap with the U.S. Highway 101/Produce Avenue Interchange Project (Caltrans Project 04-4H360), which would incorporate safety enhancements and improve traffic operations at Produce Avenue and U.S. 101; the commenter provides a contact for future project coordination. Comment noted. As detailed on page 4.1-8 of the draft EIR, the U.S. Highway 101/Produce Avenue Interchange Project was included as part of the proposed project’s cumulative analysis. The project applicant would coordinate with Caltrans as described in the comment. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-6 The comment reiterates that the City is responsible for advancing project mitigation on the state transportation network, including Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concens regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-7 The comment asks if increases in stormwater runoff would be treated and managed, particularly where the project is in proximity to U.S. 101. As detailed in Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Initial Study (Appendix B to the draft EIR), construction of the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area in a manner that would substantially increase the rate or amount of runoff or result in flooding on- or off-site. For the majority of the project site, storm drain lines would outfall into the adjacent slough. Oversized underground pipes would control flows prior to discharge to the slough. On the lower portions of the site, smaller areas would drain to the City’s municipal separate storm sewer system within Terminal Court. On-site storm drain improvements would include the installation of bioretention ponds, flow-through planters, and Silva Cell units to provide treatment on the project site and convey water to storage pipes. Stormwater treatment controls would be in compliance with the requirements of Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit. Water would be released at the designed flow rate. Through compliance with state and local regulations, as well as implementation of best management practices, the project would not contribute runoff water that would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems, including systems maintained by Caltrans. The comment requests that, for future design-phase review, plan views, profiles, cross-sections, details of all drainage facilities, and hydrologic calculations showing conditions before and after development at the U.S. 101 location be submitted. The project is required to comply with Caltrans’ drainage facility requirements. When the project applicant submits plans to Caltrans for review, the project design materials and runoff calculations requested by Caltrans will be provided. The comment expresses concern regarding floodplain impacts, which are addressed in Section 3.10, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the Initial Study (Appendix B to the draft EIR). To comply with FEMA requirements and combat future sea-level rise and flooding, the site would be raised to at least 13 feet; structures would be designed with first-floor elevations of 14 feet. Fill would be placed to raise existing grades and allow structures to meet the natural grade; as a result, structures would be outside of the floodplain. A flood-proofing certificate would be submitted to the City. The site would file for the LOMR-F and would not be required to pay for flood insurance. 67 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-26 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Response to Comment A-Caltrans-8 The comment states that the cultural resources analysis and mitigation measures provided in the draft EIR satisfies environmental compliance requirements for potential cultural resources found within the Caltrans right-of-way and provides a contact should inadvertent archaeological or burial discoveries occur within the Caltrans right-of-way during project construction. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concerns regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-9 The comment states that the proposed project is within SFO’s Airport Influence Area and that it is required to be consistent with the ALUCP. As detailed in Section 3.9, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and Section 3.11, Land Use and Planning, of the Initial Study (Appendix B to the draft EIR), the project site is within Airport Influence Area B of the SFO ALUCP and required to comply with policies and actions concerning interior noise levels and maximum building heights, as included in the General Plan, Specific Plan, and City Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance. In addition, because the proposed project is within Area B, consultation with the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) would be required prior to project construction. This would include determining the need to file form 7460-I, Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration, with the FAA, which applies to any project that would exceed FAA notification heights, as shown on ALUCP Exhibit IV-10, and complying with the FAA aeronautical study findings. With the 7460-I filing, the FAA then undertakes an aeronautical study for the project and issues a “determination of no hazard” or a “determination of hazard.” A determination of hazard is made when a project would cause an obstruction to air navigation, resulting in a substantial aeronautical impact. The project would, therefore, require a consistency determination with the ALUCP to comply with FAA regulations regarding height. The project applicant would be required to receive a determination of no hazard to air navigation as a condition of approval for a building permit for the proposed project. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-10 The commenter is correct that the project site is partially located within the 65-decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) contour for SFO. The commenter recommends that the day-care site be located on the portion of the project site outside the 65 dB CNEL contour or be made conditionally compatible per the SFO ALUCP. The day care associated with the proposed project is on the northern portion of the project site and outside the 65 dB CNEL contour for SFO, per Exhibit IV-6 – Noise Compatibility Zones – Detail from the SFO ALUCP (City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County 2012). According to Table IV-1, Noise/Lane Use Compatibility Criteria, of the ALUCP, public and private schools are considered compatible with aircraft noise levels below 65 dB CNEL. Therefore, the day care associated with the project would be considered compatible with the ALCUP for SFO. Measured noise levels at the project site resulting from other sources (e.g., traffic along U.S. 101 rather than aircraft noise) are such that additional design features may be required to ensure interior noise levels are adequate for the proposed day-care use. Compliance with applicable General Plan Actions, however, would ensure that the project would be designed such that interior noise levels would be appropriate for the day-care use. Specifically, General Plan Actions NOI-1.1.1, 68 City of South San Francisco Comments and Responses Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 2-27 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Enforce Exterior and Interior Noise Limits, and 1.1.2, Incorporate Noise Compatibility Conditions of Approval, pertain to the enforcement of appropriate interior noise limits throughout the city and include mechanisms by which appropriate interior noise levels can be ensured (e.g., through development review processes and conditions of approval). Response to Comment A-Caltrans-11 The comment states that the proposed project would be required to comply with 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 77, Conical Surface Standards; United States Standards for Terminal Instrument Procedures Approach; and One Engine Inoperative Departure Standards. Refer to response to comment A-Caltrans-9, above. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-12 The comment states that Caltrans facilities affected by the proposed project must be designed to meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards and that bicycle and pedestrian access must be maintained during project construction. As discussed in draft EIR Chapter 3, Project Description, the need for Caltrans review of the proposed project as a responsible agency is identified in Table 3-2, Required Permits and Approvals for the Proposed Project. As noted under Impact TRANS-1 on pages 4.6-19 through 4.6-22 of the draft EIR, implementation of the transportation improvements identified under Mitigation Measure MM-TRANS-1 would be partially under the jurisdiction of Caltrans and would require right-of-way acquisitions, encroachment permits, and/or review and approval by Caltrans. Where Caltrans' facilities and intersections would be affected as a result of the proposed project, improvements would be designed to meet ADA standards. In addition, project-related construction activities occurring within the Caltrans’ right-of-way would require an encroachment permit and be required to meet temporary traffic control and detour requirements in accordance with the permit to maintain bicyclist and pedestrian access during construction. In addition, as stated on page 4.6-19 of the draft EIR, the proposed project would be consistent with General Plan and Specific Plan goals and policies, as well as the Active South City Plan, related to pedestrian and bicyclist circulation, including policies to improve bicycle and pedestrian access through the city. No revisions to the draft EIR are required. Response to Comment A-Caltrans-13 The comment states that any project-related permanent or temporary traffic control that encroaches onto a Caltrans right-of-way would require an encroachment permit. Furthermore, required items, including 100 percent design plans, must be provided in order to issue the encroachment permit. Comment noted. The comment does not contain questions or concerns regarding the adequacy of the draft EIR analysis. The encroachment permit process will be completed separate from the CEQA or environmental review process. No substantive response or revisions to the draft EIR are required. 69 Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 3-1 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Chapter 3 Revisions to the Draft EIR This section lists revisions that have been made to the draft environmental impact report (EIR) following the 45-day public comment period. Revisions were made either in response to the comments received on the draft EIR or as a result of staff-initiated changes to correct typographical errors. Staff-initiated text changes are indicated by an asterisk (*). The changes and minor errata items do not result in significant new information with respect to the proposed project, including the level of significance of project impacts or any new significant impacts. Therefore, recirculation of the draft EIR pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15088.5 is not required. Chapter 2, Executive Summary The following correction has been made to Table 2-1, Summary of Project Impacts, Mitigation Measures, and Improvements Measures, on EIR p. 2-17, under Impact TRANS-1 (new text is italicized):1 Potential Environmental Impact Level of Significance before Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation Impact TRANS-1: The project would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicyclist, and pedestrian facilities. PS Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements Identified in General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan The project sponsor shall and/or fund, as indicated below, the following improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan: 1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections: The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 on-ramp/ Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. SUM 1 For purposes of this specific revision to the draft EIR, the new text was italicized instead of underlined for clarity. 70 City of South San Francisco Revisions to the Draft EIR Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 3-2 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Potential Environmental Impact Level of Significance before Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation The traffic signals shall be accompanied by changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies. 2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection: The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City. 3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue: The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain station to the project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain station, and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the west 71 City of South San Francisco Revisions to the Draft EIR Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 3-3 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Potential Environmental Impact Level of Significance before Mitigation Recommended Mitigation Measure Level of Significance after Mitigation side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue, transitioning to a pair of one-way facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue. High- visibility striping for pedestrian crosswalks and “YIELD TO PEDS” signs would be incorporated where necessary and within project limits. Section 4.6, Transportation and Circulation The following correction has been made to the third paragraph of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 on EIR p. 4.6-21 (new text is underlined): Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements Identified in General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan The project shall implement and/or fund, as indicated below, the following improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan: 1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections. The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 on-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The traffic signals shall be accompanied by changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies. 2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City. 72 City of South San Francisco Revisions to the Draft EIR Infinite 131 Project Final EIR 3-4 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain Station to the project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain Station, and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the west side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue, transitioning to a pair of one-way facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue. High-visibility striping for pedestrian crosswalks and “YIELD TO PEDS” signs would be incorporated where necessary and within project limits. Appendix B, Initial Study The following correction has been made to the last paragraph in Section 3.10.2.3, Drainage and Flooding, of the Initial Study (Appendix B to the EIR) on p. 3-49 (deleted text has strikethrough):* Fill would be placed to raise existing grades and allow structures to meet the natural grade; as a result, structures would be outside of the floodplain. A flood-proofing certificate would be submitted to the City. The site would file for a Letter of Map Revision-Based on Fill (LOMR-F) and would not be required to pay flood insurance.66 73 Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-0 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Exhibit C CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Introduction Statutory Requirements for Findings These findings of fact have been prepared by the City of South San Francisco (City) as the lead agency pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code (PRC) and Section 15091 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines concerning the environmental impact report (EIR) prepared for the Infinite 131 Project. Section 21081 of the PRC and Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines provide that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified that identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: 1. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project, which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. 2. Such changes or alterations are the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. 3. Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including the provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. A lead agency need not make any findings for impacts that the EIR concludes are less than significant. (See Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland [1993] 23 Cal. App. 4th 704, 716.) The findings included in this Exhibit C support adoption of the proposed project as well as adoption of the mitigation measures set forth below to avoid or substantially lessen significant environmental effects identified in the EIR to the extent feasible. In these findings, references to certain pages or sections of the draft or final EIR, which together constitute the EIR, are for ease of reference; they are not intended to provide an exhaustive list of the evidence relied upon for these findings. A full explanation of the substantial evidence supporting these findings can be found in the EIR. These findings incorporate by reference the discussion and analyses in the EIR regarding the project's impacts as well as the mitigation measures designed to address those impacts. In addition, the lead agency must not approve a project that will have a significant effect on the environment unless it finds that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits, of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, thereby rendering them “acceptable” to the decision-maker (PRC Section 21081[b]; 14 California Code of Regulations [CCR] 30, Section 15093). 74 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-1 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 This document presents the statement of overriding considerations for this project, as set forth below, which identifies the specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the recommended alternative that outweigh the significant environmental impacts identified in the final EIR. Environmental Review Process Pursuant to CEQA, lead agencies are required to consult with public agencies having jurisdiction over a proposed project and provide the general public with an opportunity to comment on the draft EIR. On November 1, 2023, the City circulated a notice of preparation (NOP) for a 30-day comment period to identify the types of impacts that could result from the Infinite 131 Project as well as potential areas of controversy. The NOP was filed with the County Clerk and mailed to public agencies, including the State Clearinghouse, the Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART), and the Bay Conservation and Development Commission (BCDC). Comments received by the City on the NOP were taken into account during preparation of the draft EIR. The draft EIR was made available on the City’s website for public review on June 18, 2024. The notice of availability of a draft EIR was posted with the County Clerk; mailed to local, regional, state, and other public agencies, including the State Clearinghouse, BART, and BCDC; and provided to nearby property owners and occupants. Hard copies of the draft EIR were available for public review upon request. The draft EIR public comment period began on June 20, 2024, and ended on August 5, 2024. The Planning Commission conducted a public hearing to receive comments on the draft EIR on August 1, 2024. In addition to Planning Commission comments, the City received one letter that commented on the draft EIR. Subsequent to the end of the public review period for the draft EIR, and consistent with the requirements of Section 15088(a) of the CEQA Guidelines, the City, as the lead agency, considered the public comments received on the draft EIR and prepared written responses to each of the comments received related to environmental issues. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the mitigation measures that have been proposed for adoption is attached with these findings as Exhibit D, as required by PRC Section 21081.6, subdivision (a)(l), and CEQA Guidelines Sections 15091, subdivision (d), and 15097. The MMRP provides a table that sets forth each mitigation measure listed in the EIR required to reduce or avoid a significant adverse impact. The MMRP also specifies the agency responsible for implementation of each measure. Where the project sponsor is required to participate in implementation of a mitigation measure, the MMRP also states that requirement. The MMRP also sets forth agency monitoring actions and a monitoring schedule for each mitigation measure. Where mitigation measures must be adopted and/or implemented by particular responsible agencies, the MMRP identifies the agencies involved and the actions they must take. All of the City’s specific obligations are also described. The full text of each mitigation measure summarized or cited in these findings is also set forth in the MMRP. Pursuant to Section 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines, the final EIR consists of the following, referred to herein as the EIR:  The draft EIR, including all of its appendices;  The responses to comments (RTC), providing responses to significant environmental points raised during the review and consultation process as well as revisions to the draft EIR;1 1 Revisions to the draft EIR are included in Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft EIR, of the RTC document. 75 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-2 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01  A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the draft EIR, included in the RTC document; and  Copies of all emails and letters received by the City on the draft EIR. Record of Proceedings and Custodian of Record Pursuant to Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines, these findings must be supported by substantial evidence in the record. For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, including for the City’s decision on the recommended alternative, the record of proceedings consists of a) matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to, federal, state and local laws and regulations, and b) the following documents, which are in the custody of the City:  NOP and other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the proposed project (see Appendix A of the draft EIR for the NOP);  The public review draft EIR and supporting documentation prepared for the proposed project (draft EIR dated June 2024 and Appendices A through O), along with all documents cited, incorporated by reference, or referred to therein;  The written and verbal comments and documents submitted to the City by agencies, organizations, and members of the public before, during, and after the close of the draft EIR public comment period;  The MMRP;  The final EIR for the Infinite 131 Project dated August 2025 and all documents cited, incorporated by reference, or referred to therein;  All findings and resolutions adopted by the City in connection with certification of the EIR, as well as adoption of a statement of overriding considerations and a MMRP, and documents cited or referred to therein;  Minutes or verbatim transcripts of information and study sessions, workshops, public meetings, and public hearings held by the City in connection with the proposed project; and  Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by PRC Section 21167.6, subdivision (e). The custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings is: City of South San Francisco Planning Division, City Hall Annex 315 Maple Avenue South San Francisco, California 94080 Contact: Billy Gross (650) 877-8535 billy.gross@ssf.net 76 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-3 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Infinite 131 Project Project/CEQA Objectives The underlying purpose of the project is to create a research-and-development (R&D) campus with supporting amenities (e.g., conference space, fitness center, restaurant space, day care), along with improved pedestrian and bicyclist circulation and access. Other objectives of the project include the following:  Redevelop the property with R&D, biotechnology, and office uses in a secure and integrated campus setting;  Create an iconic, inspiring, and dynamic gateway presence along U.S. 101 with high visibility;  Incorporate a building and landscape design that sets a unique identity within the city;  Use a shifting and articulated building massing that creates visual, desirable, and usable amenities, including outdoor terraces for tenants;  Provide an activated landscape area that, in addition to being pedestrian friendly, encourages walking and biking, interaction, and collaboration, along with a wide range of opportunities for wind-protected outdoor activities;  Integrate sustainable strategies to advocate an energy-efficient and performative design, including water-saving strategies;  Provide a highly efficient and flexible workplace with daylight for interior spaces and outward views of the surrounding areas;  Provide a positive fiscal impact on the local economy through the creation of jobs, enhancement of property values, support for local transportation infrastructure, and the generation of property taxes and development fees; and  Provide well-designed, flexible buildings and floor plates that can accommodate a variety of tenants, ensuring the proposed project will be responsive to market conditions and demands. Summary of the Proposed Project The proposed project evaluated in the EIR involves redevelopment of a 17.67-acre site at 131 Terminal Court, including demolition of approximately 126,750 square feet (sf) of the industrial and operational uses that are currently part of the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, along with approximately 116,752 sf of open air structures (e.g., loading docks, trash compactor areas). In their place, the proposed project would construct approximately 1.7 million sf of R&D uses and amenities within seven buildings, ranging from one to six stories, along with two parking garages and additional surface parking. The approximately 17.67-acre project site is made up of one parcel at 131 Terminal Court in the city of South San Francisco, identified as assessor’s parcel number (APN) 015-113-210. The project site outside the footprint of the existing buildings is covered with asphalt and concrete paving, with minimal surrounding landscaping and no trees. The proposed project would include the construction of new R&D and amenity uses with a maximum anticipated building area of up to approximately 1.7 million sf. Specifically, the proposed project would demolish all existing on-site uses and construct six buildings (I131S A, I131S B, 77 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-4 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 I131S C, I131S D, I131N A, and 131N B), collectively referred to as the I131N and I131S buildings, and a day-care center with approximately 1,632,000 sf of R&D uses and approximately 72,050 sf for amenity uses. Building heights would range from one to six stories, with the maximum building height being 113 feet, 6 inches. In addition, the proposed project would include two parking garages, associated with the I131N and I131S buildings, as well as surface parking. The I131N parking garage would be approximately 551,631 sf and approximately 100 feet tall. It would include three levels of below-grade parking as well as nine levels of above-grade parking. The I131S parking garage would be approximately 453,034 sf and include two levels of below-grade parking. In total, the proposed project would provide approximately 2,976 parking spaces. The proposed buildings would be tied together through a cohesive network of landscaping and open space. Two central courtyards would be located along the interior of the project site and framed by the shape of the I131N and I131S buildings to prioritize pedestrian- and bike-friendly connections. The proposed project would also include associated utility and circulation improvements. In addition, it would require amendments to the City Shape SSF 2040 General Plan (General Plan), Lindenville Specific Plan (Specific Plan), and City Zoning Code to change the existing land use and zoning designations from Mixed Industrial High (MIH) to Business Technology Park High (BTP-H) and allow development of the R&D campus. The proposed project would require off-site transportation and circulation improvements to accommodate the traffic that would be generated. Such improvements would include new traffic signals, crosswalks, sidewalks, bikeways, and driveway connections along Terminal Court, Shaw Road, and/or Produce Avenue. In addition to the General Plan, Specific Plan, and City Zoning Code amendments required for the proposed project, other amendments would be required to redesignate five parcels north of the project site and across Terminal Court at 120 Terminal Court, 196 Produce Avenue, 160 Produce Avenue, and 140 Produce Avenue (APNs 015-113-350, 015-113-290, 015-113-340, 015-113-330, 015-113-320). The five off-site redesignation parcels are currently designated MIH under the General Plan, Specific Plan, and City Zoning Code but would be redesignated BTP-H, consistent with the proposed land use and zoning for the project site. The five parcels cover approximately 7.28 acres and currently comprise a large Park N’ Fly surface parking lot and a Shell gas station. The purpose of the off-site redesignation parcels is to ensure that future development will be cohesive and consistent with the development proposed as part of the project. Because the project sponsor does not own the five off-site redesignation parcels, the proposed project would not include the construction of any new uses or any other type of development within the five parcels as part of redesignation; the existing uses would be maintained. Therefore, no direct impacts on the environment would occur. However, the analysis in the draft EIR evaluates the reasonably foreseeable indirect impacts that could result from the proposed off-site redesignation parcels. Future development within the five parcels, should it occur, would be subject to additional environmental review in accordance with CEQA. If the requested project entitlements are approved by the City, construction of the proposed project would be implemented over time and in a phased approach, with full project buildout anticipated in 2031. Eight phases are anticipated, with construction on the southern portion of the project site beginning in March 2026 and ending in October 2028 and construction on the northern portion of the project site beginning in November 2028 and ending in May 2031. 78 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-5 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Findings Regarding Impacts, Including Cumulatively Considerable Impacts, Determined to Be Less than Significant after Mitigation The EIR identified certain potentially significant impacts that could result from the proposed project. However, the City finds, for the reasons stated in the EIR, that mitigation identified in the EIR would reduce these impacts to less-than-significant levels. The City finds that all of the mitigation measures described below are feasible and agrees to adopt them as conditions of approval for the proposed project. Accordingly, based on the information and analyses set forth in the EIR, as well as the entirety of the record of proceedings before it, including, without limitation, the MMRP and the conditions of approval, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects identified in the EIR. Adoption of the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce the significant or potentially significant effects to less-than-significant levels. As further described below and in the EIR, the impacts discussed below will be less than significant with identified feasible mitigation measures. Biological Resources Impact BIO-a (from the initial study checklist [Appendix B of the draft EIR]): The project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special-status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by CDFW or USFWS. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Existing on-site structures, as well as landscaping (e.g., trees, shrubs, ornamental grasses) near the project site, could provide suitable nesting habitat for migratory birds and raptors that are protected under state (California Fish and Game Code Sections 3503 and 3513) and federal laws (e.g., Migratory Bird Treaty Act); special-status bat and other bat species are protected under state law (California Fish and Game Code 4150). Construction activities, including structure demolition associated with the proposed project, could affect nesting birds and bats, resulting in take (i.e., direct mortality for adult or young birds or bats, the destruction of active nests, disturbance of nesting adults, with associated nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort), which would be a significant impact. Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Special-Status Species, Migratory Birds, and Nesting Birds (from the General Plan EIR) Special-status species are those listed as endangered, threatened, or rare or candidates for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or designated as Rare Plant Rank 1B or 2B species by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). This designation also includes CDFW Species of Special Concern and Fully Protected Species. Applicants or sponsors of projects on sites where potential special-status species, migratory birds, or nesting birds are present shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a focused survey, per applicable regulatory agency protocols, to determine whether 79 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-6 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 such species occur on a given project site. The project applicant or sponsor shall ensure that, if development of occupied habitat must occur, species impacts shall be avoided or minimized; if required by a regulatory agency or the CEQA process, any loss of wildlife habitat or individual plants shall be fully compensated on the site. If off-site mitigation is necessary, it shall occur within the South San Francisco Planning Area whenever possible, with priority given to existing habitat mitigation banks. Habitat mitigation shall be accompanied by a long-term management plan and monitoring program prepared by a qualified biologist and include provisions for the protection of mitigation lands in perpetuity through the establishment of easements and adequate funding for maintenance and monitoring. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 3.4.2.1 of Appendix B to the EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 will ensure that potential adverse impacts on nesting birds and raptors, or roosting bats, will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels, as the project would be required to retain a qualified biologist to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds and roosting bats. If nesting birds or roosting bats are identified on the project site or in an area that could be disturbed during project construction, measures would be identified to avoid or minimize impacts on the individuals. In addition, if any loss of wildlife habitat or individual plants would occur as a result of the project, and as required by a regulatory agency, full compensation would be required on the project site or off-site, if necessary. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. Impact BIO-d (from the initial study checklist [Appendix B of the draft EIR]): The project would not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) As discussed above under Impact BIO-a, existing buildings and landscaping on the project site could provide nesting habitat for resident and migratory birds and bats; therefore, the proposed project has the potential to affect a native wildlife nursery site, which would be a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Special-Status Species, Migratory Birds, and Nesting Birds (from the General Plan EIR). See above (pages 6 and 7) for the full mitigation measure. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 3.4.2.4 of Appendix B to the EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-1 will ensure that potential adverse impacts on native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, and native wildlife nursery sites will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels, as the project would be required to retain a qualified biologist to conduct pre-construction surveys for nesting birds and roosting bats. If nesting birds or roosting bats are identified on the project site or in an area that could be disturbed during project construction, measures would be identified to avoid or minimize impacts on the individuals. In addition, if any loss of wildlife habitat or individual plants would occur as a result of the project, and as required by a regulatory agency, full compensation would be required on the project site or off-site, if necessary. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. 80 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-7 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Cultural Resources Impact CULT-2: The project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) The proposed project would require grading and excavation to construct the proposed buildings, parking garages, and utility improvements. The project would excavate to a depth of approximately 3 to 7 feet below the ground surface for utility work. The maximum depth of excavation would be approximately 5 feet below sea level for the sanitary sewer main upgrade; the average level of the project site is 6 feet above sea level. A records search indicated that one previously recorded archaeological resource is located within the project site, and four previously recorded archaeological resources are within 0.25 mile of the project site. Due to the presence of precontact midden deposits within and near the project site, there is increased potential for encountering as-yet undocumented archaeological deposits during project-related ground disturbance, given the magnitude of excavation associated with construction of the proposed project. This impact is considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Train Workers to Respond to the Discovery of Cultural Resources A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to conduct cultural resources awareness training to all project personnel, prior to the start of construction. A qualified professional archaeologist is one that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in archaeology, as promulgated in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 36. The qualified archaeologist should note the names of all personnel who attend the cultural resources awareness training and email the information to the City for its records. The training shall include basic information about the types of artifacts that might be encountered during construction activities and procedures to follow in the event of a discovery. The training shall be provided for any additional personnel added to the project, even after the initiation of construction and ground-disturbing activities. Mitigation Measure CUL-4: Retain a Qualified Archaeologist to Perform Construction Monitoring, Evaluate Uncovered Archaeological Features, and Mitigate Potential Disturbance for Identified Significant Resources at the Project Site An archaeological monitor shall be on-site to monitor all construction-related ground disturbing activities. The archaeological monitoring, treatment, and evaluation of discoveries should be overseen by a qualified archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and is experienced in archaeological resource identification in the Bay Area. The archaeological monitor should identify archaeological remains that might be exposed by equipment during ground-disturbing construction activities. The monitor should observe all excavation activities associated with trenching, as well as inspect backdirt piles for evidence of pre-European contact, historical, or other culturally sensitive materials. If it is safe to do so, the monitor should inspect the sidewalls of trenches and pits as they are exposed. If warranted by their observations, the monitor should be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction to examine soils or inspect the potential resources. Archaeological monitors shall collect photographs and maintain notes (including documentation of stratigraphy and culturally sterile soils) and complete daily monitoring logs. The monitoring logs shall record the daily activities, including project locations and times, stratigraphic 81 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-8 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 information, and findings of archaeological monitoring activities. An Archaeological Monitoring Results Report (AMRR) shall be prepared at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. The AMRR would include an introduction, regulatory context, monitoring methods, and findings. Daily monitoring logs, monitoring photographs, and figures depicting monitoring locations would be provided as appendices to the report. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.3.4.4 of the EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measures CULT-3 and CULT-4 will ensure that adverse impacts on archaeological resources will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels by ensuring that project activities would not result in the inadvertent destruction of archaeological resources through requiring a qualified archaeologist to conduct a cultural resources awareness training for all project personnel, which would include basic information about the types of artifacts that might be encountered during construction activities and procedures to follow in the event of a discovery. In addition, an archaeological monitor would be required to be on-site to monitor all construction-related ground disturbing activities to observe and inspect for evidence of pre-European contact, historical, or other culturally sensitive materials. If warranted by their observations, the monitor should be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction to examine soils or inspect the potential resources, and collect photographs and maintain notes (including documentation of stratigraphy and culturally sterile soils) and complete daily monitoring logs. Furthermore, an Archaeological Monitoring Results Report (AMRR) shall be prepared at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. Impact C-CUL-2: The project, inclusive of the off-site redesignation parcels, together with the cumulative projects identified, would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to significant cumulative impacts on archaeological resources or human remains. (Less than Cumulatively Considerable with Mitigation) As discussed under Impact CULT-2, ground-disturbing activities under the proposed project would have the potential to result in the inadvertent destruction of archaeological resources. Cumulative impacts on archaeological resources are considered potentially significant because reasonably foreseeable projects would most likely involve ground-disturbing activities that could uncover resources related to the resources that could be uncovered by the proposed project. The project has the potential to contribute to this cumulative impact considerably. Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Train Workers to Respond to the Discovery of Cultural Resources. See above (page 8) for the full mitigation measure. Mitigation Measure CULT-4 Retain a Qualified Archaeologist to Perform Construction Monitoring, Evaluate Uncovered Archaeological Features, and Mitigate Potential Disturbance for Identified Significant Resources at the Project Site. See above (pages 6 and 7) for the full mitigation measure. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.3.4.5 of the EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-3, and Mitigation Measure CULT-4 would ensure that the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts on archaeological resources would be less than cumulatively considerable with mitigation by ensuring that project activities would not result in the inadvertent destruction of archaeological resources through requiring a qualified archaeologist to conduct a cultural resources 82 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-9 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 awareness training for all project personnel, which would include basic information about the types of artifacts that might be encountered during construction activities and procedures to follow in the event of a discovery. In addition, an archaeological monitor would be required to be on-site to monitor all construction-related ground disturbing activities to observe and inspect for evidence of pre-European contact, historical, or other culturally sensitive materials. If warranted by their observations, the monitor should be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction to examine soils or inspect the potential resources, and collect photographs and maintain notes (including documentation of stratigraphy and culturally sterile soils) and complete daily monitoring logs. Furthermore, an Archaeological Monitoring Results Report (AMRR) shall be prepared at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. Geology and Soils Impact GEO-f (from the initial study checklist [Appendix B of the draft EIR]): The project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Geologic units underlying the project site, specifically the Colma Formation and Merced Formation, are known to be potentially fossiliferous. Therefore, the paleontological sensitivity of these geologic units is considered to be high. The geologic units have the potential to contain significant fossils at the project site. Because paleontological resources are located below the ground surface, ground disturbances such as excavating, grading, and resurfacing could affect any paleontological resources that may be present. Therefore, it is possible for construction activities in certain areas to directly or indirectly destroy paleontological resources within the project site. This could result in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure GEO-6 (from the General Plan EIR): Applicants, owners, and/or sponsors of all future development or construction projects shall be required to perform or provide paleontological monitoring for all proposed excavations in the Colma Formation and Merced Formation, including those buried in the shallow subsurface below Quaternary deposits, due to high paleontological sensitivity for significant resources in these areas. Should significant paleontological resources (e.g., bones, teeth, well-preserved plant elements) be unearthed by the future project construction crew, the project activities shall be diverted at least 15 feet from the discovered paleontological resources until a professional vertebrate paleontologist has assessed such discovered resources; if deemed significant, such resources shall be salvaged in a timely manner. The applicant/owner/ sponsor of said project shall be responsible for diverting project work and providing the assessment, including retaining a professional vertebrate paleontologist for such purpose. Collected fossils shall be deposited by the applicant/owner/sponsor in an appropriate repository (e.g., University of California Museum of Paleontology [UCMP], California Academy of Sciences) where the collection shall be properly curated and made available for future research. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 3.7.2.9 of Appendix B to the EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure GEO-6 will ensure that adverse impacts on paleontological resources will be mitigated to less-than-significant levels by requiring paleontological monitoring for all proposed excavation. In addition, should significant paleontological resources be unearthed during 83 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-10 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 construction activities, all project activities shall be diverted within15 of the discovery until it has been appropriately assessed, documented, and collected, if necessary, by a qualified paleontologist. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. Noise and Vibration Impact NOI-2: The project would not generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground- borne noise levels. (Less than Significant with Mitigation) Construction of the proposed project would involve the use of equipment that could generate ground-borne vibration. The potential for structural damage to occur at adjacent or nearby buildings can be evaluated by estimating PPV levels from construction equipment at nearby uses and comparing those levels to the Caltrans damage criterion for that type of building. The nearest off-site structures to the project site are the commercial and industrial buildings located along the western border of the project site. A setback from the property line is anticipated to keep vibration-intensive construction equipment away from these structures. However, the size of the setback is not known at this time. This analysis conservatively assumed that a large bulldozer, or similar equipment, would be operated with a 10-foot setback from the closest structure in place. The structures along the western border of the project site (parallel to San Mateo Avenue) would be categorized as “historic” and “some old buildings,” according to the Caltrans vibration guidelines for damage to structures. The applicable damage criterion for these buildings from the Caltrans vibration damage guidelines is a PPV of 0.25 in/sec. Because the estimated vibration level from an excavator at 10 feet (PPV of 0.352 in/sec) would exceed the applicable criterion, vibration-related damage could occur at this structure if vibration-intensive equipment were to be used at this distance. Therefore, this impact is considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Protect Adjacent Structures from Construction-Generated Vibration For construction with heavy ground-disturbing equipment that occurs within 13 feet of neighboring buildings, a construction vibration control plan shall be required to mitigate potential construction vibration impacts. The project sponsor shall incorporate into construction specifications for the proposed project a requirement for the construction contractor(s) to use all feasible means to avoid damage to adjacent and nearby buildings. Such methods to help reduce vibration-related damage effects may include maintaining a safe distance between the construction site and the potentially affected building (e.g., at least 13 feet for large earth-disturbing equipment) or using smaller and less-vibration-intensive equipment in proximity to the potentially affected building. In the event that vibration-generating construction activity is required within 13 feet of nearby older buildings similar to “historic and some old buildings,” the construction contractor shall implement a monitoring program to minimize damage to adjacent buildings and ensure that any such damage is documented and repaired. If required, the monitoring program shall include the following components: 84 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-11 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 • Prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activity within 13 feet of adjacent buildings, the construction contractor shall engage a structural engineer or other professional with similar qualifications to document and photograph the existing conditions of potentially affected buildings within 13 feet of proposed vibratory-generating construction activities. • Based on the construction and condition of the resource(s), the consultant shall also establish a standard maximum vibration level that will not be exceeded at nearby buildings, based on existing conditions, character-defining features, soil conditions, and anticipated construction practices (a common standard is a peak particle velocity of 0.25 inch per second for “historic and some old buildings,” as shown in Table 5-1). • To ensure that vibration levels do not exceed the established standard, the project sponsor shall monitor vibration levels at each structure and prohibit vibratory construction activities that generate vibration levels in excess of the standard. • Should vibration levels be observed in excess of the selected standard, construction shall be halted and alternative construction techniques put in practice, to the extent feasible. • When vibration-intensive activity (e.g., heavy earth-disturbing equipment) occurs within 13 feet of a building, the structural engineer shall conduct an inspection of the building for damage within 7 days of that activity. If inspections determine that no damage occurred, the 7-day period may be increased to 30 days for that activity. Should damage to adjacent buildings occur, the building(s) shall be remediated to their preconstruction condition at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activity on the site. • Should all ground-disturbing construction activity occur 13 feet or more from the nearest existing structure, this monitoring plan shall not be required. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.5.5.1 of the EIR, implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1 will reduce impacts related to vibration during project construction to less-than-significant levels by requiring construction activities with vibration-generating equipment that would operate within 13 feet of adjacent structures to prepare a construction vibration control plan with specific measures to ensure that vibration would be kept below the level that may cause damage. In addition, a monitoring program shall be implemented to minimize damage to adjacent buildings and ensure that any such damage is documented and repaired. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR. Findings Regarding Significant and Unavoidable Impacts, Including Cumulatively Considerable Impacts A significant and unavoidable impact is an impact that cannot be mitigated to a less-than-significant level if the project is implemented because no feasible mitigation has been identified. Except for the impacts described below, all significant impacts associated with the proposed project would be reduced to a less-than-significant level with incorporation of the mitigation measures identified in the EIR. The proposed project would result in the significant unavoidable impacts described below. However, the City has determined that the impacts are acceptable because of overriding economic, social, or other considerations, as described in the statement of overriding considerations on page 28. 85 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-12 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Air Quality Impact AQ-2: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is classified as nonattainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. (Significant and Unavoidable) During project operation, the proposed project would result in area source emissions, specifically reactive organic gas (ROG) emissions, from the use of consumer products, such as cleaning products, within the buildings, as well as landscaping equipment, off-gassing from architectural coatings (e.g., paint), and mobile, stationary, and laboratory sources. It was determined that unmitigated daily ROG emissions from operation of the proposed project would exceed the Bay Area Air Quality Management District’s (BAAQMD’s) threshold, but no other pollutants would exceed the threshold. Therefore, this impact is considered potentially significant. Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Require Low-VOC Coatings during Project Operation The project sponsor shall require contractors, as a condition of contract, to reduce construction-related fugitive ROG emissions by ensuring that low-VOC coatings with a VOC content of 50 grams per liter or less are used during operation. Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Require Low-VOC Cleaning Supplies The project sponsor shall provide educational resources for tenants concerning zero- or low-VOC cleaning products. Prior to receipt of any certificate of final occupancy, the project sponsor shall work with the City of South San Francisco to develop the electronic correspondence to be distributed by email to new commercial tenants regarding a requirement to purchase cleaning products that generate less than the typical VOC emissions. Mitigation Measure AQ-3: Require Use of Zero-Emission Landscape Equipment The project sponsor shall provide educational resources for tenants concerning zero-emission landscape equipment. The project sponsor, as a condition of contract, shall require all tenants to use only electric landscaping equipment throughout project operation to reduce ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.2.4.6 of the EIR, with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3, ROG emissions would be reduced because the products used on the project site, such as coatings and cleaning products, would result in less off-gassing of ROGs compared to typical products. In addition, ROGs and other pollutants from combustion associated with landscaping equipment would be eliminated through the use of zero-emission equipment. However, net emissions of ROG would still exceed BAAQMD’s threshold with implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-3; there are no additional measures to reduce these emissions further. As such, operation of the proposed project would generate ROG emissions in excess of BAAQMD’s thresholds. This impact would be significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR to the greatest extent feasible. However, with implementation of identified mitigation measures, ROG emissions would still be above BAAQMD’s threshold, and impacts would remain significant and 86 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-13 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 unavoidable. The City also finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make any additional mitigation measures infeasible as the best available technology to reduce impacts has been identified and incorporated as part of the project mitigation measures. Impact AQ-3: The project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (Significant and Unavoidable) Project-related construction activities would generate diesel particulate matter (DPM) (i.e., particulate matter [PM] PM10 exhaust from diesel vehicles) from off-road equipment and heavy-duty trucks. PM2.5 exhaust and fugitive dust emissions would be generated from off-road equipment, on-site material movement, and on-road travel by heavy-duty tricks and workers’ vehicles. Operational sources of PM2.5 exhaust and fugitive dust emission would be generated by emergency generators and employees’ vehicles. These activities could expose adjacent sensitive receptors to health risks in excess of applicable thresholds. As detailed in the EIR, PM2.5 concentrations would exceed the BAAQMD threshold as a result of dust and exhaust generated during construction that could affect workers. Accordingly, sensitive worker receptors would be exposed to substantial concentrations of PM2.5 during construction. During operations, the worker receptor maximally exposed individual (MEI) for operational PM2.5 is located at a different location than for construction PM2.5. The primary reason for the exceedance of BAAQMD’s threshold is the proximity of worker receptors to sources of PM2.5 from project operations (on-road trips to and from the site). Mitigation Measure AQ-4: Implement Construction Mitigation Measures to Reduce Dust Emissions. The project sponsor shall require all construction contractors to implement the dust-reducing measures listed below, which are based on BAAQMD’s Basic Best Management Practices for Construction-Related Fugitive Dust Emissions but include more stringent measures to obtain greater reductions. The project sponsor shall provide documentation to the City of South San Francisco that the construction measures have been reflected in all construction contracts prior to the commencement of project construction activities. • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, unpaved access roads) shall be watered at least three times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per month. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading, unless seeding or soil binders are used. • All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph. • All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site. 87 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-14 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 • Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel. • Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the name and telephone number of the person to contact at the City regarding dust complaints. That person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s general air pollution complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.2.4.6 of the EIR, to reduce PM2.5 concentrations during construction, the project sponsor would need to implement Mitigation Measure AQ-4, which would require construction mitigation measures to reduce dust emissions based on BAAQMD’s Best Management Practices for Construction-Related Fugitive Dust Emissions but with more stringent measures to obtain greater reductions in dust emissions. In addition, operational sources of PM2.5 exhaust and fugitive dust emissions would be generated by emergency generators and employees’ vehicles. Without implementation of dust reduction measures, the maximum PM2.5 concentration would result from construction activities. However, with reduction measures implemented, construction PM2.5 concentrations would be reduced, and the annual PM2.5 concentration during operations would become the maximum value. The primary reason for the PM2.5 exceedance is the proximity of worker receptors to sources of PM2.5 from project operations (e.g., on-road vehicle trips to and from the site). The worker receptors who would be exposed to the PM2.5 exceedance would be those at the adjacent site east of the Infinite 101 site. The distance between workers at the adjacent site and operations at the project site would be minimal and would not allow pollutant concentrations to disperse. As such, the exceedance of the threshold would be largely due to the proximity of the receptors. No additional measures have been identified to avoid this exceedance. This impact would be significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR to the greatest extent feasible. However, because mitigation to address project health risks and pollutant concentrations would not reduce impacts to levels that would be below BAAQMD thresholds, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The City also finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make any additional mitigation measures infeasible as the minimal distance between workers at the adjacent site and operations at the project site would not allow pollutant concentrations to disperse, and the best available technology to reduce impacts has been identified and incorporated as part of the project mitigation measure. Impact C-AQ-2: The project, inclusive of the off-site redesignation parcels, together with the cumulative projects identified, would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. (Significant and Unavoidable) As discussed under Impact AQ-2, the proposed project would generate ROG emissions in excess of BAAQMD’s construction and operational thresholds. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1, AQ-2, and AQ-3, which would require low-VOC coatings during project operation, low-VOC cleaning supplies, and use of zero-emission landscape equipment, would help reduce emissions, but not to a less-than-significant level. Accordingly, the proposed project’s contribution to a cumulative criteria pollutant emissions impact would be significant and unavoidable. Mitigation Measures: Refer to Impact AQ-2 (page 12). 88 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-15 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Findings: For the reasons stated under Impact AQ-2 (page 12), based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR to the greatest extent feasible. However, with implementation of identified mitigation measures, ROG emissions would still be above BAAQMD’s threshold, and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, the proposed project’s contribution to a cumulative criteria pollutant emissions impact would be significant and unavoidable. The City also finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make any additional mitigation measures infeasible, as the best available technology to reduce impacts has been identified and incorporated as part of the project mitigation measures. Impact C-AQ-3: The project, inclusive of the off-site redesignation parcels, together with the cumulative projects identified, would expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. (Significant and Unavoidable) As stated in Impact AQ-3, sensitive worker receptors would be exposed to substantial concentrations of PM2.5 from off-road equipment and heavy-duty trucks. To reduce PM2.5 concentrations during construction, the project sponsor would need to implement Mitigation Measure AQ-4. However, PM2.5 levels would continue to exceed threshold levels. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts during construction would be significant and unavoidable. During operation, existing stationary, roadway, and railway sources in combination with the proposed project would not exceed BAAQMD cumulative thresholds for cancer risk or the hazard index. However, annual PM2.5 concentrations would exceed BAAQMD’s cumulative threshold. The primary reason for the exceedances is the high level of ambient PM2.5 emissions generated by two facilities within 1,000 feet of the project site, the Granite Rock Company at 1321 Lowrie Avenue and Central Concrete Supply at 1305 San Mateo Avenue, even though the maximally affected receptors would be at least 860 feet from the two facilities. The contribution from the project would be substantially less than the contribution from the existing stationary sources; however, as discussed for project-level impacts, the contribution of the project alone would exceed BAAQMD’s project-level threshold. Therefore, the health risks associated with toxic air contaminants (TACs) emitted by the proposed project in combination with health risks associated with existing TAC sources would result in a cumulatively considerable local health risk for sensitive receptors near the project site. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative impacts during operation would be significant and unavoidable, and the project’s contribution would be cumulatively considerable. Mitigation Measure: Refer to Impact AQ-3 (page 13). Findings: For the reasons stated under Impact AQ-3 (page 13), based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR to the greatest extent feasible. However, because mitigation to address project health risks and pollutant concentrations would not reduce impacts to levels that would be below BAAQMD thresholds, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, the proposed project’s contribution to a cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable. The City also finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make any additional mitigation measures infeasible as the minimal distance between sensitive receptors and operations at the project site would not allow pollutant concentrations to disperse, and the best available technology to reduce impacts has been identified and incorporated as part of the project’s mitigation measure. 89 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-16 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Cultural Resources Impact CULT-1: The project would cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5. (Significant and Unavoidable) The proposed project would demolish the Golden Gate Produce Terminal facility, surface parking, and limited landscaping to construct approximately 1.7 million sf of R&D and amenity space within seven buildings. The Golden Gate Produce Terminal is recommended as eligible for listing in the CRHR and NRHP and is therefore considered a historical resource for CEQA compliance. Therefore, the demolition of the Golden Gate Produce Terminal would result in a substantial adverse change to the historical resource, and this impact is potentially significant. Mitigation Measure CULT-1: Prepare Documentation in the Likeness of the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) in Consultation with Interested Parties Documentation and recordation of a historical resource that will be demolished will reduce the loss of local history by preserving the history of the resource and its role within the region’s historical context for the public’s benefit and understanding. The applicant shall consult interested third parties and qualified professionals to prepare HABS-like documentation for the CRHR- and NRHP-eligible building on the project site proposed for demolition. Using the format and standards as defined by the NPS (which administers the HABS program), the applicant shall complete written and photographic documentation of the significant and character-defining features of the property prior to construction. This documentation shall minimize impacts by capturing and preserving a description of the property’s significance, occupant and development history, and physical characteristics associated with the resource. In recent years, due to the large volume of submissions generated by environmental mitigation requirements, the NPS and National Archives have issued directives, indicating that they will not accept formal submissions under the HABS, Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS), and Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) programs unless the resource being documented is a rare, unusual, or exceptionally high-quality example of its type. Therefore, documentation at a similar level and formatting—HABS-like, with standard photography, written narrative, measured drawings—shall supplement documentation standards without formal submission to the National Park Service for review and approval. Instead, the prepared documentation shall be prepared informally for distribution to local repositories or reuse in interpretive or educational programs. Educational media, such as print materials, websites, or digital publications shall be prepared from the HABS-level documentation and donated to interested local repositories, such as the City of South San Francisco public library system and the Historical Society of South San Francisco (specifically their Historical Society Museum collections). Educational media may incorporate written, photographic, and archival documentation (e.g., informal HABS-level documentation undertaken with NPS standards); oral history interviews; videos; or animation to tell the story of the affected resource’s contribution to the broad patterns of local history and cultural heritage represented by the affected resource. 90 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-17 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Mitigation Measure CULT-2: Initiate Interpretive Signage Plan or Public Interpretation Program The applicant shall prepare an Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program, setting forth the process for the design and installation of interpretive signage and/or an interpretation program within the project site. The Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall be developed in coordination with professionals who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in History or Architectural History. The Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall include details regarding the proposed locations for the signage and/or program materials and the design of the visual components of the interpretive signage and/or interpretation program. The Interpretive Signage Plan or Public Interpretation Program shall not include cost analysis or specifications for the fabrication or installation of interpretative signage and/or interpretative program materials. The Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall be reviewed and approved by the City of South San Francisco prior to the issuance of a demolition permit for the proposed project. No further discretionary review or approvals are anticipated to be required by the City to implement the Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program. Implementation of the Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall include the following elements: Permanent Signage: The permanent interpretive signage shall include a minimum of two and a maximum of four permanent interpretive markers or signs that interpret South San Francisco’s industrial heritage and include a history of the land uses previously located within the project site. The signs shall describe the industries that operated within the project site, namely, the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, and provide a written or visual narrative that places these companies within the context of the City’s industrial development. The permanent signage shall use relevant historic photos, historic maps, and company archival materials (such as logos) to illustrate the narrative where feasible, given the availability and publication permission of the images. The signs shall be located on the interior and exterior of the proposed amenity building and/or at its adjacent courtyard within the project site. They shall be visible to both project site tenants and the general public (e.g., through an accessible and specific area or route through the grounds or buildings made legally available to the general public). Potential locations for permanent signage include the north courtyard, the south courtyard (and adjacent large-event/recreational space), the lobby entrance, and the proposed day-care facility. Permanent signage may also be incorporated into the perimeter path, promenade, or infinite loop. No more than half of the signs may be located in lobbies or other public spaces that are inside buildings. The permanent signs shall be installed prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy. Additionally, a secondary location shall be sourced for potential permanent signage with ties to local produce distribution history and/or current farmer’s markets. Public Interpretation Program: The Public Interpretation Program, including, but not limited to, self-guided walking tours, short-format films, or murals and public art, shall include materials that interpret South San Francisco’s industrial heritage and a history of the land uses previously located within the project site. The Public Interpretation Program shall describe the industries that operated within the project site (i.e., the Golden Gate Produce Terminal) and provide a written or visual narrative that places these companies within the context of the city’s industrial development. The Public Interpretation Program shall use relevant historic photos, historic 91 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-18 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 maps, and company archival materials (such as logos) to illustrate the narrative where feasible, given the availability and publication permission of the images. The Public Interpretation Program shall be located on the interior and exterior of the proposed amenity building and at its adjacent courtyard within the project site. It shall be visible to both project site tenants and the general public. Potential locations for interpretative program materials include the north courtyard, the south courtyard (and adjacent large-event/recreational space), the lobby entrance, and the proposed day-care facility. Interpretative program materials could also be incorporated into the perimeter path, promenade, or infinite loop. No more than half of the Public Interpretation Program locations may be displayed in lobbies or other public spaces that are inside buildings. The Public Interpretation Program shall be installed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. In addition, a secondary location shall be sourced for a potential interpretation program with ties to local produce distribution history and/or current farmer’s markets. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.3.4.4 if the EIR, even with implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-1 to reduce the potentially significant impact on the historical resource through written and photographic documentation of the significant and character-defining features of the property and recordation of its historic and architectural characteristics, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable because the resource would be removed in its entirety. Similarly, implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2 to document the history of the property through the design and installation of permanent signage on the project site would reduce the impact on the historic resource; however, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable because the resource would be removed in its entirety. Mitigation Measures CULT-1 and CULT-2 would be implemented to reduce adverse impacts to the greatest extent possible. However, the impacts would remain significant and unavoidable because the resource would be removed in its entirety. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the proposed project to avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects identified in the final EIR to the greatest extent feasible. However, because the proposed project would result in the demolition of a historical resource, as defined under CEQA, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The City also finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make any additional mitigation measures infeasible, because retaining the resource, or a large enough portion of the resource that would allow the resource to continue to convey its historic significance, would not allow for development of the project due to spatial and other constraints, and would be fundamentally inconsistent with the project objectives. Transportation and Circulation Impact TRANS-1: The project would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicyclist, and pedestrian facilities. (Significant and Unavoidable) The proposed project would include various design features that would be consistent with goals, policies, and actions identified in the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan, including General Plan Goals MOB-1, MOB-2, MOB-4, and MOB-5, Lindenville Specific Plan goals MOB-1, MOB-2, and MOB-3, as well as the Active South City Plan, and the TDM ordinance. Although the project’s site plan and TDM plan exhibit features that would be consistent with goals, policies, and actions identified in the General 92 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-19 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan, the project overall remains inconsistent as it would add 1.7 million square feet of land use growth beyond what the City had planned for and analyzed along the Produce Avenue corridor, Lindenville, and citywide. This intensification of uses would occur in a location with insufficient access and circulation facilities, limited transportation options, and challenging connectivity to the regional transportation network, which would result in a conflicts with the goals and policies of the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements Identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan The project shall implement and/or fund, as indicated below, the following improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan: 1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections. The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 on-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The traffic signals shall be accompanied by changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies. 2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection. The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City. 3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue. The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain station to the project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain station, and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the west side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue, transitioning to a pair of one-way facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue. High-visibility striping for pedestrian crosswalks and “YIELD TO PEDS” signs would be incorporated where necessary and within project limits. 4. Signalization of the San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue Intersection. The project shall implement a new traffic signal at the intersection of San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue. This traffic signal would facilitate access to the project site via Shaw Road while reducing potential for multimodal conflicts. The traffic signal shall be accompanied by accessible sidewalk and curb ramp upgrades at the intersection, as well as associated signal and intersection/sidewalk modifications at the adjacent San Mateo Avenue/South Linden Avenue intersection. 93 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-20 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 5. Engineering Study of a New Southbound U.S. 101 Off-ramp Connecting to the Utah Avenue Overpass. The project shall fund an engineering study of a new southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp connecting to the proposed Utah Avenue overpass as envisioned in the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. The engineering study shall be led by the city. As currently envisioned, the overpass would not include a southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp would facilitate more direct access to the overpass and address long-term queueing concerns. The off-ramp would be accompanied by a new street connection between Utah Avenue and Produce Avenue north of the project site. 6. Engineering Study and Fair-Share Contribution toward a New Trail Crossing of U.S. 101 South of the Project Site. The project shall fund an engineering study for a new Class I shared-use path crossing of U.S. 101 to connect the Bay Trail with Shaw Road. The engineering study shall be led by the city. An engineering study of the planned U.S. 101 crossing has not yet occurred, and a preferred alternative alignment has not been determined. The engineering study will consider potential trail crossing alignments, incorporate the preferred alternative alignment into its site plan, and quantify a fair share contribution toward construction of the crossing. Mitigation shall be completed by the applicant prior to the project receiving a certificate of occupancy. If the City implements these improvements in advance of the project’s construction, the project shall reimburse the City for the cost of construction. If another development implements these improvements and/or engineering studies prior to the project’s construction, the project shall be responsible for a fair-share reimbursement of construction costs to the developer leading these improvements. This funding will ensure that transportation facilities serving the project site are appropriately sized to handle multimodal travel demand associated with the project as envisioned in each plan. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.6.4.3 of the EIR, with implementation of Mitigation Measure TRANS-1, the project would advance off-site improvements consistent with Actions MOB-1.2.1, MOB-2.1.1, MOB-2.1.3, MOB-2.1.4, MOB-3.2.1, and MOB-3.2.2 to address effects on the transportation network. However, part of the right-of-way for the off-site improvements is under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the City of San Bruno. Neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding the improvements outlined in the mitigation and cannot ensure that mitigation will be implemented. In addition, the City of South San Francisco does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation in San Bruno or areas under Caltrans’ jurisdiction. There are no other feasible mitigation measures available. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations to mitigate contributions to conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing circulation are the responsibility of another public agency (i.e., the City of San Bruno and Caltrans), not the agency making the findings. Such changes should be adopted by such other agencies. Impact TRANS-3: The project would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. (Significant and Unavoidable) The project would increase vehicle trips along southbound Produce Avenue and the southbound U.S. 101 Produce Avenue off-ramp, resulting in a net increase of approximately 170 vehicle trips in the AM peak hour and 30 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour. The South San Francisco General Plan EIR (Impact TRANS-4) determined that implementation of the General Plan is likely to increase vehicle 94 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-21 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 trips on City freeway ramps, which could exacerbate vehicle queues on ramps already in excess of their storage capacity. As such, the proposed project would result in a significant impact by exacerbating freeway ramp queueing and potential for conflicts at this intersection. In addition, the proposed project would increase vehicle trips entering and exiting Terminal Court at Produce Avenue, resulting in a net increase of approximately 730 vehicle trips in the AM peak hour and 700 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour to Terminal Court. The substantial increase in vehicle trips exiting Terminal Court during the PM peak hour would create a hazardous condition due to high-speeds and signal control; pedestrians and bicyclists crossing Terminal Court may also encounter conflicts with vehicles. Furthermore, the project would also increase vehicle trips entering and exiting via Shaw Road, resulting in a net increase of approximately 360 vehicle trips in the AM peak hour and 400 vehicle trips in the PM peak hour. The increase in vehicle trips exiting Terminal Court during the PM peak hour would create a hazardous condition due to the lack of signal control. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a potentially significant impact. Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements Identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan. See above (pages 18–20) for the full mitigation measure. Findings: Based on the analysis in Section 4.6.4.3 of the EIR, the installation of new traffic signals along Produce Avenue and San Mateo Avenue under Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 would reduce the potential impact from conflicts and queuing at affected intersections to a less-than-significant level. However, two of the intersections on Produce Avenue are under the jurisdiction of Caltrans; one is under the jurisdiction of the City of San Bruno. Neither jurisdiction has a mechanism for funding this mitigation or ensuring that mitigation will be implemented. In addition, the City of South San Francisco does not have the authority to require implementation of mitigation in San Bruno or areas under Caltrans’ jurisdiction. There are no other feasible mitigation measures available. A potentially hazardous condition results from a lack of signal control at the intersections. Therefore, the impact would be significant and unavoidable. Accordingly, based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations to mitigate contributions to hazardous traffic conditions are the responsibility of another public agency (i.e., the City of San Bruno and Caltrans), not the agency making the findings. Such changes should be adopted by such other agencies. Impact C-TRANS-1: The project, inclusive of the off-site redesignation parcels, together with the cumulative projects identified, would conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian. (Significant and Unavoidable) As explained in Impact TRANS-1, the proposed project would result in a significant impact as it would exceed the level of multimodal travel that the City had planned for the Produce Avenue corridor, Lindenville, and citywide, constituting a significant impact from the lack of consistency with the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. Therefore, this cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable, and the project’s contribution would be cumulatively considerable. Findings: For the reasons stated under Impact TRANS-1 (page 21), based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations to mitigate contributions to conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing circulation are the responsibility of another public agency (i.e., the City of San Bruno and Caltrans), not the agency making the findings. Such changes should be adopted by such other agencies. 95 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-22 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Impact C-TRANS-3: The project, inclusive of the off-site redesignation parcels, together with the cumulative projects identified, would substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. (Significant and Unavoidable) As explained in Impact TRANS-3, the proposed project would increase vehicle trips along Produce Avenue at the intersections of U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 on-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The addition of vehicle trips along the U.S. 101 southbound off-ramp would cause vehicle queues to spill over onto U.S. 101, while both intersections would meet peak-hour signal warrants. The South San Francisco General Plan EIR determined that implementation of the General Plan is likely to increase vehicle trips on city freeway ramps, which could exacerbate vehicle queues on ramps already in excess of their storage capacity. The project would exacerbate this impact. Therefore, this cumulative impact would be significant and unavoidable, and the project’s contribution would be cumulatively considerable. Findings: For the reasons stated under Impact TRANS-3 (page 22), based on the EIR and the entire record before the City, the City finds that changes or alterations to mitigate contributions to hazardous traffic conditions are the responsibility of another public agency (i.e., the City of San Bruno and Caltrans), not the agency making the findings. Such changes should be adopted by such other agencies. Findings Regarding Alternatives CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 requires an EIR to evaluate a No-Project Alternative and a reasonable range of alternatives to a project that would feasibly attain most of the project’s basic objectives but also avoid or substantially reduce any identified significant environmental impacts of the project. As described in Chapter 5, Alternatives, of the EIR, three alternatives were evaluated:  Alternative A—No-Project Alternative  Alternative B—Business Technology Park-Medium (BTP-M) Alternative (environmentally superior alternative)  Alternative C—Increased Office Space (80 Percent Office/20 Percent Lab) Alternative As described in Chapter 5, Alternatives, four other alternatives were considered by the City but ultimately rejected as infeasible during the scoping and environmental review process. The alternatives rejected from further consideration consist of the Reconfigured Project Alternative, Increased Lab Space Alternative, Alternative Project Location, and Preservation Alternative. These alternatives, along with the reasons they were ultimately not selected for further evaluation, are discussed below. • Reconfigured Project Alternative. A Reconfigured Project Alternative was considered to see if the proposed new R&D uses and potential pollutant sources (e.g., operational PM2.5 generation, and construction activity, generally) by concentrating new development farther from the sensitive receptors (e.g., future workers and day-care center users) within 1,000 feet of the project site. This alternative was considered for its potential to reduce or avoid the project’s construction and operational health risks on sensitive receptors (Impact AQ-2 and AQ-3). The Reconfigured Alternative would also reduce and potentially avoid the project’s contribution to significant cumulative impacts with respect to those topics (Impact C-AQ-2 and C-AQ-3). However, like the proposed project, under a Reconfigured Project Alternative, the future worker receptors who would be exposed to 96 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-23 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 the PM2.5 impacts would be those at the adjacent Infinite 101 site east of the project site. Similarly, this impact would be primarily driven by the proximity of worker receptors to sources of PM2.5 from project operations, which would include on-road vehicle trips to and from the site. As such, air quality impacts under a Reconfigured Project Alternative would still be significant largely due to the proximity of the receptors. Furthermore, even if such a setback were possible to reduce impacts related to off-site sensitive receptors, maintaining any such length of setback would likely greatly reduce the portion of the project site available for project buildings to be developed. Therefore, there is no feasible setback that would allow for the proposed uses to be developed at such a distance without substantially reducing the project’s size to the extent where the project objectives are no longer met. Therefore, this alternative was rejected based on its infeasibility and inability to meet the basic project objectives, and reduce the proposed project’s significant impacts • Increased Lab Space Alternative. Generally, R&D uses in the city include a mix of lab and office spaces. An alternative that would include more lab space than what was assumed for the project (80 percent compared to the project’s 50 percent) was considered, based on its potential to reduce the project’s significant transportation impacts related to conflicts with a transportation program, plan, ordinance, or policy (Impact TRANS-1) and hazards due to a geometric design or incompatible uses (Impact TRANS-3), because lab uses typically generate fewer vehicle trips than office uses on a per-square-foot basis. The Increased Lab Space Alternative would develop the project site with the same total building area that would be developed under the proposed project, approximately 1,704,050 sf. The site plan for the Increased Lab Space Alternative would be similar to that of the proposed project, and all other proposed uses (e.g., the conference space, fitness center, restaurant, and day care) would remain the same. Although lab spaces typically generate fewer vehicle trips than office uses, the Increased Lab Space Alternative would still increase vehicle trips at several streets and freeway ramps with unsignalized intersections adjacent to the project site, including the U.S. 101 southbound off-ramp/Produce Avenue intersection, U.S. 101 southbound off-ramp/Terminal Court/ Produce Avenue intersection, and San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue intersection, compared to existing conditions. Increases in the number of vehicle trips at these intersections would create hazardous conditions from the lack of signal control, along with worsened freeway ramp queuing and potential vehicle conflicts with pedestrians and bicyclists at crossings, resulting in a significant and unavoidable impact. Furthermore, this alternative would have a greater potential to result in impacts on sensitive receptors from operational laboratory-generated TACs. Furthermore, the market feasibility of this alternative is uncertain. Ultimately, this alternative was rejected because it would not substantially reduce or eliminate the project’s significant transportation impacts (Impact TRANS-1 and TRANS-3) and air quality impacts (Impact AQ-2 and AQ-3) for the proposed lab and office uses. In addition, impacts related to historic resources (Impact CULT-1) and archaeological resources (Impact CULT-2) would not be any different from those of the proposed project and would remain significant and unavoidable and less than significant with mitigation, respectively. • Alternative Project Location. An alternative that would construct the proposed project at a different location in the City was considered based on its potential to reduce or avoid the project’s significant impacts related to criteria pollutants (Impact AQ-2), health risks at sensitive receptors (Impact AQ-3), historic resources (Impact CULT-1), conflicts with a transportation program, plan, ordinance, or policy (Impact TRANS-1), and hazards due to 97 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-24 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 geometric design feature or incompatible uses (Impact TRANS-3). An alternative project location could also potentially reduce or avoid the project’s contribution to significant cumulative impacts with respect to those topics (Impacts C-AQ-2, C-AQ-3, C-TRANS-1, and C-TRANS-3). However, most of the significant impacts of the proposed project would most likely occur regardless of location, meaning that an off-site alternative would not necessarily reduce or avoid any identified or potential environmental impacts. In addition, alternative locations for the proposed project are considered infeasible because the project sponsor owns the parcel that makes up the project site. An alternate location not owned by the project sponsor where R&D uses would be permitted would therefore require additional land acquisition, which is not included in the project sponsor’s plans or objectives. Furthermore, although it is possible that the proposed project could be constructed on parcels of similar size in proximity to the project site in surrounding jurisdictions (e.g., San Bruno), developing outside of South San Francisco would not meet the objective of generating property tax and development fees for the city, and providing a positive fiscal impact on the local economy through the creation of jobs. Therefore, because of the aforementioned issues related to site suitability, economic viability, acquisition and control, and inconsistency with project objectives, consideration of an alternative site for the proposed project has been rejected. • Preservation Alternative. A Preservation Alternative was considered based on potential to reduce or avoid the project’s significant impact related to historic resources (Impact CULT-1). However, the possibility of preserving the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, either via relocation or retention, was considered but rejected as infeasible. Although retaining historic resources in their original location is always preferred treatment, relocation, retention, or even partial retention of existing buildings is often considered as an alternative to demolition. The relocation, retention, or partial retention of the existing Golden Gate Produce Terminal buildings would be technically challenging and expensive due to its size, construction methods, materials, and configuration. Furthermore, preservation of the Golden Gate Produce Terminal would not allow the proposed uses to be developed to such an extent where the project objectives are no longer met. Therefore, this alternative was rejected based on its infeasibility and inability to meet the basic project objectives. Section 15091 (a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines states that one of the findings that a lead agency can make concerning significant project impacts is that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make infeasible the project alternatives identified in the final EIR. In these findings, the decision-making body is making a final determination of feasibility. CEQA Guidelines Section 15364 defines “feasible” as “capable of being accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, legal, social, and technological factors.” If an alternative has been determined to be potentially technically, logistically, and financially “feasible” in the EIR, the City may still ultimately conclude that it meets the definition of “infeasibility” per CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3) when all considerations are considered. The final determination of infeasibility “involves a balancing of various ‘economic, environmental, social, and technological factors’” (City of Del Mar v. City of San Diego [1982] 133 Cal. App. 3d 401, 417). Where there are competing and conflicting interests to be resolved, the determination of infeasibility “is not a case of straightforward questions of legal or economic 98 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-25 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 feasibility” but, rather, based on policy considerations (California Native Plant Society v. City of Santa Cruz [2009] 177 Cal. App. 4th 957, 1001-02). “[A]n alternative that is impractical or undesirable from a policy standpoint may be rejected as infeasible” (Id. at p. 1002, citing 2 Kostka & Zischke, Practice under the Cal. Environmental Quality Act [Cont. Ed. Bar 2010] Section 17.29, p. 824). The City makes the findings outlined below regarding the feasibility of the alternatives evaluated in the EIR. Alternative A – No-Project Alternative As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e), Chapter 5, Alternatives, included an evaluation of a No-Project Alternative. Alternative A – No-Project Alternative describes the environmental conditions that existed at the time when the environmental analysis commenced as well as what would reasonably be expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6[e][2]). Under Alternative A, the project would not be implemented. No demolition of existing structures (i.e., warehouse buildings, administrative buildings, open-air structures) would occur. No new R&D or amenity buildings would be built, nor would any parking garages. Existing land uses would remain unchanged and in their current physical state. No new curbs or sidewalks would be constructed, and there would be no improvements to pedestrian and bicyclist circulation and access. New restaurant, outdoor terrace, conference center, and day-care spaces would not be constructed. Existing General Plan and Specific Plan land use designations and zoning districts would be maintained. Alternative A would not preclude potential future development at the project site, with the range of land uses permitted under existing land use policies. Permitted uses under the existing MIH land use designation and zoning allow for development of a wide range of warehousing, manufacturing, processing, service commercial, and storage and distribution uses. As required under the MIH designation, truck docks, loading areas, and service areas must be located at the rear of the buildings and screened so that they are not visible from surrounding public streets, including highways. Table 5-4 in Section 5.9 of the EIR compares the impacts of the proposed project that are significant or less than significant with mitigation to the impacts of Alternative A; Table 5-5 compares the ability of Alternative A to meet the objectives of the proposed project. Because no new development would occur at the project site, the effects of the No-Project Alternative would be a continuation of existing conditions described in Chapter 4, Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation, of the EIR. Therefore, because the project would not be constructed or operated at the project site under the No-Project Alternative, none of the impacts identified for the project would occur. Findings: Alternative A – No Project Alternative would preserve existing conditions on the project site. No land use approvals would be adopted by the City. Existing facilities on the site would continue operating in their present condition. Although it would avoid the project’s significant environmental effects, the City rejects Alternative A on the basis that it would not meet any of the project objectives (see Section 3.4 as well as Table 5-5 in the EIR) and would not result in redevelopment of the project site with the improvements that would be provided by the proposed project. Accordingly, the City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make adoption of Alternative A infeasible. The City also finds that each of the reasons set forth above would be an independent ground for rejecting Alternative A and would justify rejection of Alternative A. 99 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-26 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Alternative B – BTP-M Alternative (Environmentally Superior Alternative) Alternative B—BTP-M Alternative would develop the proposed project in accordance with the requirements for the BTP-M zoning designation, resulting in a floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 instead of 2.0, as allowed under the BTP-H zoning designation. Consequently, there would be a reduction in the amount of floor area for R&D and amenity uses as well as the number of project-generated employees. With the reduction in FAR, maximum building heights under Alternative B would be reduced to 57 feet, or three stories, compared to the maximum heights that would be developed under the proposed project (approximately 114 feet, or six stories). The amount of new development would be reduced to approximately 768,440 sf compared to approximately 1,7040,050 sf under the proposed project. As a result, Alternative B would result in the generation of approximately 1,708 employees compared to the approximately 3,787 employees that would be generated under the proposed project. The site plan for Alternative B would be similar to that of the proposed project but at a reduced scale. In addition, all proposed uses (e.g., the conference space, fitness center, restaurant, day care) would be incorporated as part of the alternative but also at a reduced scale. These uses would be accessible from a network of interconnected pathways as well as central courtyards. The overall design of Alternative B would be similar to that of the proposed project. It would incorporate two central courtyards along the interior of the project site. These would be framed by the proposed buildings to prioritize pedestrian- and bike-friendly connections and outdoor amenities. Alternative B would also achieve a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) Gold rating for building design and construction as well as WELL v2 Core certification. Furthermore, the transportation demand management (TDM) program, which would be implemented to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the alternative, would be similar to that for the proposed project. As mentioned above, Alternative B would not change the permitted uses that would be allowed to occur under the project or the footprint of proposed buildings; however, it would change the intensity at which they would occur due to the reduced intensity and, consequently, building height (57 feet, or three stories). Alternative B would still include R&D, conference, fitness center, restaurant, and day-care uses. Specifically, Alternative B would involve approximately 734,500 sf of new R&D uses and 33,940 sf of amenity uses, instead of 1,632,000 sf of R&D uses and 72,050 sf of amenity uses as proposed under the project. However, because Alternative B would result in less building area for R&D and amenity uses and fewer employees, the amount of parking would be reduced. With the reduction in required parking spaces, Alternative B would eliminate two levels of below-grade parking, resulting in only one below-grade level for parking. Utility improvements associated with Alternative B would be similar to those described for the proposed project. The project site is serviced by existing water, wastewater, stormwater, electricity, telecommunications, and waste and recycling services. New on-site facilities would be connected to new services through the installation of new localized connections. Any expansion or increase in the capacity of off-site infrastructure would occur as required by utility providers. Street improvements along Terminal Court and the right-of-way connection to Shaw Road would include new curbs, landscaping, and sidewalks. The construction activities and the types of construction equipment used for Alternative B would be similar to those under the proposed project; however, there would be a few key differences. 100 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-27 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 The construction schedule for Alternative B may be substantially shorter than that for the proposed project, occurring over approximately 46 months, or approximately 4 years. In addition, Alternative B would require less ground disturbance compared to the proposed project with the reduction in underground parking. The existing land use and zoning designation on the site is MIH. Therefore, Alternative B would still require a General Plan amendment, Specific Plan amendment, zoning map and text amendment, TDM plan approval, design review, tentative map approval, and a development agreement. Alternative B would also require standard City engineering, building, and fire permits, along with other agency approvals (e.g., California Department of Transportation, Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board, Bay Area Air Quality Management Agency (BAAQMD), City/County Association of Governments Airport Land Use Commission, Federal Aviation Administration, and Bay Conservation and Development Commission). Under Alternative B, the five off-site redesignation parcels that are currently designated as MIH under the general plan, specific plan, and City Zoning Code would be redesignated to BTP-M, consistent with the proposed land use and designation for the alternative. This would ensure that future development would be cohesive and consistent with the development proposed under Alternative B. Alternative B would not include the construction of any new uses on the off-site redesignation parcels. Table 5-4 in Section 5.9 of the EIR compares the impacts of the proposed project that are significant or less than significant with mitigation to the impacts of Alternative B, and Table 5-5 compares the ability of Alternative B to meet the objectives of the proposed project. The EIR concluded that Alternative B, would reduce, but not avoid, all of the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts. Alternative B would also not result in any new significant and unavoidable impacts. The EIR found that Alternative B would meet some but not all of the project objectives. Findings: The City rejects Alternative B – BTP-M Alternative on the basis that it would reduce, but not avoid, any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. The City also rejects the Alternative B on the basis that it would only partially meet the project objective to “create an iconic, inspiring, and dynamic gateway presence along U.S. 101 with high visibility” because it would involve constructing buildings that would range from one to three stories, or up to 57 feet tall, and would not be as visible as the proposed project buildings, which would be up to six stories, or 114 feet tall. In addition, Alternative B would only partially meet the project objective to “redevelop the property with R&D, biotechnology, and office uses in a secure and integrated campus setting” because it would involve constructing buildings that are at reduced height when compared to the project, but with the same ratio of R&D and amenity uses at approximately 50 percent less square footage. Similarly, Alternative B would only partially meet the project objective to “incorporate a building and landscape design that sets a unique identity within the city” because it would not maximize the site’s potential uses to the same extent as the project. Alternative B would generate fewer jobs than the proposed project. Alternative B would only partially meet the project objectives to “provide well-designed, flexible buildings and floor plates that can accommodate a variety of tenants to ensure the proposed project will be responsive to market conditions and demands” and to “provide a positive fiscal impact on the local economy through the creation of jobs, enhancement of property values, support for local infrastructure, and the generation of property tax and development fees” because it would be less viable, generate fewer jobs, enhance the property to a lesser extent, and generate fewer taxes and fees compared to the proposed project. Accordingly, the City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make adoption of this alternative infeasible. The City also finds that each of the reasons set forth above would be an independent ground for rejecting Alternative B, and by itself would justify rejection of Alternative B. 101 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-28 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Alternative C – Increased Office Space (80 Percent Office/20 Percent R&D) Alternative Generally, R&D uses in the city include a mix of lab and office spaces. Alternative C—the Increased Office Space Alternative, would develop the project site with the same total building area that would be developed under the proposed project, approximately 1,704,050 sf, but the total buildout would comprise approximately 80 percent office uses and no more than 20 percent lab uses. Alternative C would reduce the amount of floor area for lab uses as well as the number of lab and amenity employees compared with the proposed project, resulting in approximately 876 employees. However, there would be more total on-site employees under this alternative due to the increase in office space. Alternative C would result in approximately 3,072 office employees. The number of day-care employees (i.e., nine) would remain the same under Alternative C as with the proposed project. Therefore, there would be a total of 3,957 total employees on the project site under Alternative C compared to 3,787 total employees under the proposed project. The site plan for Alternative C would be similar to that of the proposed project but with internal building reconfigurations to account for the reduced amount of lab space and an increase in the amount of office space. However, all other proposed uses (e.g., the conference space, fitness center, restaurant, and day care) would remain the same and would be accessible from a network of interconnected pathways as well as the central courtyards. Because the building footprints would be the same, all footprint-based impacts would be the same as those of the proposed project. The maximum building height, approximately 114 feet, would be the same as under the proposed project. In addition, the overall design of Alternative C would be similar to that of the proposed project and would incorporate two central courtyards along the interior of the project site that would be framed by the proposed buildings to prioritize pedestrian and bike-friendly connections and outdoor amenities. The landscape and circulation features under Alternative C would be similar to those the proposed project would incorporate. This would include providing approximately 115,130 sf of open space in the courtyards, which would be publicly accessible, and provide space for outdoor work, recreation, and socializing through the use of seat walls, paved areas, turf, as well as shade structures. Alternative C would also achieve LEED Gold rating for building design and construction as well as WELL v2 Core certification. Furthermore, the TDM program, which would be implemented to reduce the amount of traffic generated by the Alternative, would be similar to that for the proposed project. However, because Alternative C would result in less building area for lab uses and fewer lab employees, but additional office area with more office employees, the amount of parking would increase. The proposed project in total would provide 2,976 parking spaces. Alternative C would provide 3,843 total parking spaces. The additional parking would be accommodated in the underground parking garage under the I131S building by adding one additional level of underground parking. Utility improvements associated with Alternative C would be similar to those described for the proposed project. The project site is serviced by existing water, wastewater, stormwater, electricity, telecommunications, and waste and recycling services. New on-site facilities would be connected to new services through the installation of new localized connections. Any expansion or increase in the capacity of off-site infrastructure would occur as required by utility providers. Street improvements along Terminal Court and the right-of-way connection to Shaw Road would include new curbs, landscaping, and sidewalks. Alternative C would also provide pedestrian pathways along the exterior and throughout the interior of the site to provide connections between buildings and the courtyards. 102 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-29 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Overall, the construction activities and types of equipment used for Alternative C would be similar to those for the proposed project. In addition, construction and demolition activities within the project site would be similar to those under the proposed project. Construction activities under Alternative C would be slightly reduced compared to the proposed project and would occur over an approximately four-and-a-half-year construction period instead of an approximately five years under the proposed project. As for anticipated approvals, Alternative C would still require a general plan amendment, specific plan amendment, zoning map and text amendment, TDM plan approval, design review, tentative map approval, and development agreement. Alternative C would also require standard City engineering, building, and fire permits, along with other agency approvals (e.g., Caltrans, San Francisco Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board, BAAQMD, City/County Association of Governments, Airport Land Use Commission, Federal Aviation Administration, BCDC). Under Alternative C, the five off-site redesignation parcels that are currently designated as MIH under the General Plan, Specific Plan, and City Zoning Code would be redesignated as BTP-H, consistent with the proposed land use and designation for the alternative. This would ensure that future development would be cohesive and consistent with the development proposed under Alternative C. Alternative C would not include the construction of any new uses on the off-site redesignation parcels. Table 5-4 in Section 5.9 of the EIR compares the impacts of the proposed project that are significant or less than significant with mitigation to the impacts of Alternative C; Table 5-4 compares the ability of Alternative C to meet the objectives of the proposed project. The EIR concluded that Alternative C, Increased Office Space Alternative, would not avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. In fact, Impact TRANS-1, TRANS-3, C-TRANS-1, and C-TRANS-3 would increase in severity under this alternative. The EIR concluded that Alternative C would meet some of the project objectives but to a reduced degree. Findings: The City rejects the Alternative C – Increased Office Space Alternative on the basis that it would not meet project objectives to the same extent as the proposed project. Because it is assumed that the building would not be substantially different under Alternative C, the objective to redevelop the property with R&D, biotechnology, and office uses in a secure and integrated campus setting would be achieved, as under the proposed project. Alternative C would also provide new open spaces and additional landscaped areas with water-conserving plant species, similar to the proposed project and consistent with project objectives to provide an activated landscape and sustainable strategies that include water-saving strategies. Alternative C would develop a highly connected campus, similar to the proposed project. Specifically, Alternative C would include bicycle lanes, pedestrian paths, and open spaces and promote alternative modes of transportation by encouraging walking and biking. However, Alternative C would only partially meet the primary project objective of redeveloping the project site with R&D, biotechnology, and office uses due to the reduction in lab uses. Because of the reduced amount of lab space and increase in office space, Alternative C would translate into approximately 3,957 employees instead of 3,787 as under the proposed project, which would meet the project objective related to creating jobs. It is likely that Alternative C could generate similar tax revenue and development fees for the City, consistent with the project objective of providing “a positive fiscal impact on the local economy through…the generation of property taxes and development fees.” However, Alternative C would not avoid any of the significant and unavoidable impacts of the proposed project. In fact, Impact TRANS-1, TRANS-3, C-TRANS-1, and CTRANS-3 would increase 103 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-30 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 in severity under this alternative. Accordingly, the City finds that specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make adoption of Alternative C infeasible. The City also finds that each of the reasons set forth above would be an independent ground for rejecting Alternative C and would justify rejection of Alternative C. Other Required Findings Absence of Significant New Information The City recognizes that the RTC document incorporates information obtained and produced after the draft EIR was completed and that the RTC document contains additions, clarifications, and modifications. The City has reviewed and considered the complete EIR, consisting of the draft EIR, the RTC document, and attachments to those documents. The RTC document does not add significant new information to the draft EIR that would require recirculation of the EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5. More specifically, the new information added to the EIR in the RTC document does not involve a new significant environmental impact, a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental impact, or a feasible mitigation measure or alternative considerably different from others previously analyzed that the project sponsor declines to adopt and that would clearly lessen the significant environmental impacts of the project. No information indicates that the draft EIR was inadequate or conclusory or that the public was deprived of a meaningful opportunity to review and comment on the draft EIR. Thus, recirculation of the EIR is not required. In conclusion, the City finds that the changes and modifications made to the EIR after the draft EIR was circulated for public review and comment do not individually or collectively constitute significant new information within the meaning of PRC Section 21092.1 or Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines. Findings Regarding Independent Review and Judgment Each member of the City Council was provided a complete copy of the final EIR in advance of the hearing on the proposed project. The City hereby finds that the final EIR reflects its independent judgment. The City also finds that it has independently reviewed and analyzed the final EIR prior to taking final action with respect to the project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15090). Statement of Overriding Considerations CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable risks when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[a]). CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when not all significant impacts are avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the final EIR or elsewhere in the administrative record (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093[b]). The proposed project would result in significant unavoidable impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, and transportation and circulation. No feasible mitigation measures or alternatives have been identified that would reduce these impacts to a less-than-significant level. The significant unavoidable impacts, and the feasibility of additional mitigation measures or alternatives, are discussed in these findings. 104 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-31 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 With respect to the foregoing findings, in recognition of those facts included in the record, the City further specifically finds that the significant unavoidable impacts on air quality, cultural resources, and transportation and circulation are outweighed by the proposed project’s benefits and that such unavoidable impacts are acceptable in light of the benefits of the proposed project, based on the findings below:  The City has made a reasonable and good-faith effort to avoid, eliminate, or substantially mitigate the potential impacts resulting from the project, as described above.  All mitigation measures recommended in the final EIR have been incorporated into the project and will be implemented through the MMRP, as incorporated by reference herein.  In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City has, in determining whether or not to approve the project, balanced the economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits, including region-wide or statewide environmental benefits of the project, against the unavoidable environmental risks and found that the benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects. The statements below specify the reasons why, in the City’s judgment, the benefits of the project outweigh its unavoidable environmental risks. The substantial evidence supporting the City findings and the benefits described below can be found in the record of proceedings, which includes, but is not limited to, the policy determinations of the City Council, as set forth in the General Plan and the Infinite 131 Project development agreement. Environmental Benefits  Alternative Transit Supportive Development. The proposed project would include various design features consistent with General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan goals, as well as the Active South City Plan and TDM ordinance, in an effort to reduce VMT and resulting GHG emissions and provide connections to nearby BART and Caltrain stations. The proposed project’s TDM plan would include measures such as providing first-/last-mile shuttle service to the San Bruno BART station and South San Francisco Caltrain station, fully subsidized transit passes, and on-site amenities for bicyclists and pedestrians.  Sustainability. The proposed project would incorporate sustainability features to reduce energy consumption, water consumption, and waste generation. The proposed project, at a minimum, would achieve a LEED, version 4.1, Building Design and Construction Core and Shell Gold rating as well as WELL v2 Core certification. Other proposed sustainability measures would include an all-electric building design; on-site renewable energy in the form of rooftop photovoltaic panels; a high-performance building envelope and heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning system; ultra-efficient WaterSense-labeled flush and flow fixtures; low-water demand native and/or adapted vegetation with efficient irrigation systems; on-site recycling and composting facilities; and electric-vehicle charging infrastructure. In addition, the proposed project would also be designed to conserve resources and protect water quality through the management of stormwater runoff using low-impact development methods, where feasible, to allow stormwater filtering, storage, and flood control. Bioretention basins, flow-through planters, Silva Cell units, and other design features would be located throughout the project site. 105 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-32 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01  Groundwater Recharge. The proposed project would increase the pervious surface area on the project site by approximately 18 percent. The increase in pervious surface area would increase infiltration and recharge of the underlying aquifer. It would also reduce the amount of precipitation running into storm sewers or nearby surface waters. In addition, native and/or adapted vegetation and other landscape features, including trees, would provide opportunities for improved groundwater infiltration. Landscaped spaces would allow for an increase in groundwater recharge. New vegetation zones would slow water, allowing water to percolate into the ground, thereby providing increased benefits related to groundwater recharge. Furthermore, the proposed project would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge because it would not increase groundwater demand or decrease the size of groundwater recharge areas.  Remediation of Hazardous Materials. The project site has historically been occupied by industrial uses. Prior releases of hazardous materials have occurred within various portions of the project site, and contaminated soils and groundwater are known, or have the potential, to occur on-site. The proposed project would remove or remediate existing hazards in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements, and as outlined in the project’s Phase II Environmental Site Assessment recommendations. In addition, the proposed project would also remove older buildings and structures within the project site that may contain asbestos-containing materials and/or lead-based paint, and ensure treatment or disposal of these substances in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements and the project’s asbestos, lead, and PCB recommendations. Economic Benefits  Economic Development. The proposed project would provide a positive impact on the local economy by redeveloping an underutilized, transit-accessible location for R&D, biotechnology and office uses, creating a substantial number of new jobs across a diverse set of skills and experience levels during project construction and operations. By developing new state-of-the art facilities, the proposed project helps advance South San Francisco’s economic development goals of enhancing the competitiveness of the local economy, maintaining a strong and diverse revenue and job base. The proposed project will also generate substantial regional economic benefits, as money spent by employees within the general project area circulates through the local economy.  Fiscal Health. The proposed project would promote the City’s fiscal health by enhancing property values, and generating increased property taxes, development impact fees, and other general fund revenues for the City. At stabilized occupancy, the proposed project would contribute millions of dollars per year to the City in ongoing general fund revenue, including through tax revenue generation. The proposed project would also generate impact and service capacity fee contributions as set forth in Exhibit C.2 of the Development Agreement to be utilized for affordable housing development; park, recreation, childcare, library, and public safety facilities; bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure; sewer capacity improvements, and school district facilities. The proposed project would privately fund all development and improvements described herein, at no cost to the City.  Community Benefits Obligations. The project’s Development Agreement establishes the proposed project would provide the City a total of $23 million in community benefits obligations, including specific projects and direct payments. The City has sole discretion to allocate and spend the community benefits payments for any authorized governmental purpose. 106 City of South San Francisco CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations Infinite 131 Project Final EIR C-33 August 2025 ICF 104668.0.001.01 Social and Other Benefits  Circulation Improvements & Public Transit Connectivity. The project would provide new connections and on-site circulation paths with pedestrian walkways between all core buildings, bicycle routes through the site, and a new trail along the navigable slough that would connect to Shaw Road. The proposed project will also advance the off-site improvements consistent with and as identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan and Active South City Plan. These improvements will substantially enhance vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian circulation and access within and surrounding the proposed project and Specific Plan area. The proposed project will promote the use of non-single occupancy vehicle transportation, including through implementation of a Transportation Demand Management program to achieve 50% alternative mode usage.  Provision of Open Space and Project Amenities. The proposed project would include two centrally located landscaped courtyards, prioritizing pedestrian and bike friendly connections with approximately 115,130 square feet of publicly accessible open space. The proposed courtyards and open space will provide areas for outdoor work, recreation and socializing. The proposed project will provide amenities, including a day-care center, fitness center, restaurant/café, conference rooms and ground floor lobbies, accessible from a network of interconnected pathways and central courtyards.  Infrastructure Improvements. The proposed project will upsize, improve and/or reconfigure a wide range of wet and dry utilities services to increase capacity and also to modernize existing facilities by replacing, improving and/or undergrounding certain existing infrastructure, to serve off-site users as well as the project itself. Among other improvements, the proposed project will construct a new extension to the public 12-inch water main in Terminal Court; construct a new 18-inch sewer main through the southwest corner of the proposed project to a 21-inch main on Shaw Road; construct new stormwater facilities and storm drain mains; and include the installation of new connections for dry utility services. Conclusion After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the proposed project, as well as the other alternatives evaluated in the EIR, the City has determined that the unavoidable adverse environmental impacts identified may be considered acceptable due to the specific considerations listed above, which offset the unavoidable adverse environmental impact that would be caused by implementation of the project. Recognizing that significant and unavoidable impacts would result from implementation of the project, the City adopts and makes this statement of overriding considerations. Having adopted all feasible mitigation measures and recognizing the project’s significant and unavoidable impacts, the City hereby finds that each of the separate benefits of the project, as stated herein, is determined to be by itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, that warrants approval of the project and outweighs and overrides its unavoidable significant effect, thereby justifying approval of the project. 107 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 1 The environmental impact report (EIR) for the Infinite 131 Project (proposed project or project) identifies the mitigation measures that will be implemented to reduce the environmental impacts associated with the proposed project. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a public agency to adopt a monitoring and reporting program for assessing and ensuring compliance with any required mitigation measures applied to proposed development. As stated in Section 21081.6(a)(1) of the Public Resources Code: The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project, or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. Section 21081.6 also provides general guidelines for implementing mitigation monitoring programs. The mitigation monitoring table lists those mitigation measures that may be included as conditions of approval for the project. To ensure that the mitigation measures are properly implemented, a monitoring program has been devised that identifies the timing and responsibility for monitoring each measure. The first column identifies mitigation measures that were identified in the EIR. The second column, entitled “Action Required,” refers to the action that must be taken by the implementing party, usually the project applicant, to ensure implementation of the measure. The third column, entitled “Monitoring Timing,” refers to when the monitoring will occur, ensuring that the action will be completed. The fourth column, “Monitoring Responsibility,” refers to the agency responsible for overseeing or ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. The fifth column, entitled “Compliance Verification,” is where the Responsible Agency verifies that the measures have been implemented. 108 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 2 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Air Quality Mitigation Measure AQ-1: Require Low-VOC Coatings during Project Operation The project sponsor shall require contractors, as a condition of contract, to reduce construction-related fugitive ROG emissions by ensuring that low-VOC coatings with a VOC content of 50 grams per liter or less are used during operations. Project sponsor to provide City of South San Francisco (City) applicable provisions of construction contract requiring coatings with low levels of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during operation. Prior to issuance of building permit for any building or structure requiring coatings. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) Mitigation Measure AQ-2: Require Low-VOC Cleaning Supplies The project sponsor shall provide educational resources for tenants concerning zero- or low-VOC cleaning products. Prior to receipt of any certificate of final occupancy, the project sponsor shall work with the City of South San Francisco to develop the electronic correspondence to be distributed by email to new commercial tenants regarding a requirement to purchase cleaning products that generate less than the typical VOC emissions. Project sponsor to provide City with the electronic correspondence to be distributed to new commercial tenants regarding the requirement for low-VOC cleaning supplies. Prior to receipt of certificate of final occupancy. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) Mitigation Measure AQ-3: Require Use of Zero-Emission Landscape Equipment The project sponsor shall provide educational resources for tenants concerning zero-emission landscape equipment. The project sponsor, as a condition of contract, shall require all tenants to use only electric landscaping equipment throughout project operation to reduce ROG, NOX, PM10, and PM2.5 emissions. Project sponsor to provide to City applicable provisions of contracts requiring all tenants to use only electric landscaping equipment throughout project operation to reduce emissions of reactive organic gas (ROG), nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter with a diameter of 10 microns or less (PM10), and particulate matter with a diameter of 2.5 microns or less (PM2.5). Prior to receipt of certificate of final occupancy. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 109 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 3 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Mitigation Measure AQ-4: Implement Construction Mitigation Measures to Reduce Dust Emissions The project sponsor shall require all construction contractors to implement the dust-reducing measures listed below, which are based on BAAQMD’s Basic Best Management Practices for Construction-Related Fugitive Dust Emissions but include more stringent measures to obtain greater reductions. The project sponsor shall provide documentation to the City of South San Francisco that the construction measures have been reflected in all construction contracts prior to the commencement of project construction activities. • All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, unpaved access roads) shall be watered at least three times per day. • All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered. • All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per month. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited. • All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 miles per hour. Project sponsor to demonstrate that all construction mitigation measures to reduce dust emissions have been incorporated into contract specifications. Once prior to issuance of grading permit. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 110 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 4 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments • All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading, unless seeding or soil binders are used. • All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph. • All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site. Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel. • Publicly visible sign shall be posted with the name and telephone number of the person to contact at the City regarding dust complaints. That person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The air district’s general air pollution complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations. 111 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 5 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Biological Resources Mitigation Measure BIO-1: Special-status Species, Migratory Birds, and Nest Birds (from the General Plan EIR) Special-status species are those listed as endangered, threatened, or rare or candidates for listing by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or designated as Rare Plant Rank 1B or 2B species by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS). This designation also includes CDFW Species of Special Concern and Fully Protected Species. Applicants or sponsors of projects on sites where potential special-status species, migratory birds, or nesting birds are present shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a focused survey, per applicable regulatory agency protocols, to determine whether such species occur on a given project site. The project applicant or sponsor shall ensure that, if development of occupied habitat must occur, species impacts shall be avoided or minimized; if required by a regulatory agency or the CEQA process, any loss of wildlife habitat or individual plants shall be fully compensated on the site. If off-site mitigation is necessary, it shall occur within the South San Francisco Planning Area whenever possible, with priority given to existing habitat mitigation banks. Habitat mitigation shall be accompanied by a long-term management plan and monitoring Project sponsor to obtain a qualified biologist to conduct pre-construction survey and mitigation and monitoring program (if required); the qualified biologist will submit the survey and monitoring documents to the City for review. Once prior to issuance of grading permit. As needed during demolition and construction. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 112 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 6 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments program prepared by a qualified biologist and include provisions for the protection of mitigation lands in perpetuity through the establishment of easements and adequate funding for maintenance and monitoring. Cultural Resources Mitigation Measure CULT-1: Prepare Documentation in the Likeness of the Historic American Building Survey (HABS) in Consultation with Interested Parties Documentation and recordation of a historical resource that will be demolished shall reduce the loss of local history by preserving the history of the resource and its role within the region’s historical context for the public’s benefit and understanding. The applicant shall consult interested third parties and qualified professionals to prepare HABS-like documentation for the CRHR- and NRHP-eligible building on the project site proposed for demolition. Using the format and standards defined by NPS (which administers the HABS program), the applicant shall complete written and photographic documentation of the significant and character-defining features of the property prior to construction. This documentation shall minimize impacts by capturing and preserving a description of the property’s significance, occupant and development history, and physical characteristics associated with the resource. Project sponsor, in consultation with third parties and qualified professionals, shall prepare HABS-like documentation, which shall be provided to the City and distributed to local repositories. Prior to issuance of demolition permit. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 113 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 7 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments In recent years, due to the large volume of submissions generated by environmental mitigation requirements, NPS and the National Archives have issued directives, indicating that they will not accept formal submissions under the HABS, Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS), and Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) programs unless the resource being documented is a rare, unusual, or exceptionally high-quality example of its type. Therefore, documentation at a similar level and formatting—HABS like, with standard photography, written narrative, measured drawings—shall supplement documentation standards without formal submission to NPS for review and approval. Instead, the prepared documentation shall be prepared informally for distribution to local repositories or reuse in interpretive or educational programs. Educational media, such as print materials, websites, or digital publications, shall be prepared from the HABS-level documentation and donated to interested local repositories, such as the City of South San Francisco Public Library System or the Historical Society of South San Francisco (specifically, the Historical Society Museum Collections). Educational media may incorporate written, photographic, and archival documentation (e.g., informal HABS-level documentation undertaken with NPS standards); oral history interviews; videos; or animation to 114 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 8 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments tell the story of the affected resource’s contribution to the broad patterns of local history and cultural heritage represented by the affected resource. Mitigation Measure CULT-2: Initiate Interpretive Signage or Public Interpretation Program The applicant shall prepare an Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program, setting forth the process for the design and installation of interpretive signage and/or an interpretation program within the project site. The Interpretive Signage and/or Interpretation Program shall be developed in coordination with professionals who meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in History or Architectural History. The interpretive signage and/or interpretation program shall include details regarding the proposed locations for the signage and/or program materials and the design of the visual components of the interpretive signage and/or interpretation program. The Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall not include cost analysis or specifications for the fabrication or installation of interpretative signage and/or interpretative program materials. The Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall be reviewed and approved by the City prior to the Project applicant to submit interpretive signage plan or public interpretation program to City for review and approval. Project applicant to implement interpretive signage plan or public interpretation program. Interpretive signage plan and/or public interpretation program to be reviewed and approved by City prior to issuance of a demolition permit. Interpretative signage and/or public interpretation program to be implemented prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 115 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 9 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments issuance of a demolition permit for the proposed project. No further discretionary review or approvals are anticipated to be required by the City to implement the Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program. Implementation of the Interpretive Signage Plan and/or Public Interpretation Program shall include the following elements: Permanent Signage: The permanent interpretive signage shall include a minimum of two and a maximum of four permanent interpretive markers or signs that interpret South San Francisco’s industrial heritage and include a history of the land uses previously located within the project site. The signs shall describe the industries that operated within the project site, namely, the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, and provide a written or visual narrative that places these companies within the context of the city’s industrial development. The permanent signage shall use relevant historic photos, historic maps, and company archival materials (such as logos) to illustrate the narrative where feasible, given the availability and publication permission of the images. The signs shall be located in the interior and exterior of the proposed amenity building and/or at its adjacent courtyard within the project site. They shall be visible to both project site tenants and the general public (e.g., through an accessible and specific area or route through the grounds or buildings 116 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 10 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments made legally available to the general public). Potential locations for permanent signage include the north courtyard, the south courtyard (and adjacent large-event/recreational space), the lobby entrance, and the proposed day-care facility. Permanent signage may also be incorporated into the perimeter path, promenade, or infinite loop. No more than half of the signs may be located in lobbies or other public spaces that are inside buildings. The permanent signs shall be installed prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. In addition, a secondary location shall be sourced for potential permanent signage with ties to local produce distribution history and/or current farmer’s markets. Public Interpretation Program: The Public Interpretation Program, including, but not limited to, self-guided walking tours, short-format films, or murals and public art, shall include materials that interpret South San Francisco’s industrial heritage and include a history of the land uses previously located within the project site. The Public Interpretation Program shall describe the industries that operated within the project site, namely, the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, and provide a written or visual narrative that places these companies within the context of the city’s industrial development. The Public Interpretation Program shall use relevant historic photos, historic maps, and company archival 117 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 11 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments materials (such as logos) to illustrate the narrative where feasible, given the availability and publication permission of the images. The Public Interpretation Program shall be located in the interior and exterior of the proposed amenity building and its adjacent courtyard within the project site. It shall be visible to both project site tenants and the general public. Potential locations for interpretative program materials include the north courtyard, the south courtyard (and adjacent large-event/recreational space), the lobby entrance, and the proposed day-care facility. Interpretative program materials could also be incorporated into the perimeter path, promenade, or infinite loop. No more than half of the Public Interpretation Program locations may be displayed in lobbies or other public spaces that are inside buildings. The Public Interpretation Program shall be installed prior to the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy. In addition, a secondary location shall be sourced for a potential interpretation program with ties to local produce distribution history and/or current farmer’s markets. 118 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 12 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Mitigation Measure CULT-3: Train Workers to Respond to the Discovery of Cultural Resources A qualified shall be retained to conduct cultural resources awareness training to all project personnel, prior to the start of construction. A qualified professional archaeologist is one that meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualification Standards in archaeology, as promulgated in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 36. The qualified archaeologist should note the names of all personnel who attend the cultural resources awareness training and email the information to the City for its records. The training shall include basic information about the types of artifacts that might be encountered during construction activities and procedures to follow in the event of a discovery. The training shall be provided for any additional personnel added to the project, even after the initiation of construction and ground-disturbing activities. Qualified archaeologist (retained by the project sponsor) to conduct training. Once prior to issuance of the grading permit. As needed during duration of soil-disturbing or excavating activities and throughout ground-disturbing activities. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 119 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 13 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Mitigation Measure CULT-4: Retain a Qualified Archaeologist to Perform Construction Monitoring, Evaluate Uncovered Archaeological Features, and Mitigate Potential Disturbance for Identified Significant Resources at the Project Site. An archaeological monitor shall be onsite to monitor all construction-related ground disturbing activities. The archaeological monitoring, treatment, and evaluation of discoveries should be overseen by a qualified archaeologist who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Archaeology and is experienced in archaeological resource identification in the Bay Area. The archaeological monitor should identify archaeological remains that might be exposed by equipment during ground-disturbing construction activities. The monitor should observe all excavation activities associated with trenching, as well as inspect backdirt piles for evidence of pre-European contact, historical, or other culturally sensitive materials. If it is safe to do so, the monitor should inspect the sidewalls of trenches and pits as they are exposed. If warranted by their observations, the monitor should be empowered to temporarily halt or redirect construction to examine soils or inspect the potential resources. Archaeological monitors shall collect photographs and maintain notes (including documentation of stratigraphy and Qualified archaeologist (retained by the project sponsor) to monitor construction activities, complete daily monitoring logs, and provide the AMRR to the City at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. As needed for duration of soil-disturbing or excavating activities and throughout all ground-disturbing activities. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Community Development Director) 120 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 14 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments culturally sterile soils) and complete daily monitoring logs. The monitoring logs shall record the daily activities, including project locations and times, stratigraphic information, and findings of archaeological monitoring activities. An Archaeological Monitoring Results Report (AMRR) shall be prepared at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. The AMRR would include an introduction, regulatory context, monitoring methods, and findings. Daily monitoring logs, monitoring photographs, and figures depicting monitoring locations would be provided as appendices to the report.  Geology and Soils Mitigation Measure GEO-6 (from General Plan EIR): Applicants, owners, and/or sponsors of all future development or construction projects shall be required to perform or provide paleontological monitoring for all proposed excavations in the Colma Formation and Merced Formation, including those buried in the shallow subsurface below Quaternary deposits, due to high paleontological sensitivity for significant resources in these areas. Should significant paleontological resources (e.g., bones, teeth, well-preserved plant elements) be unearthed by the future project construction crew, the project activities shall be diverted at least 15 feet from the Project sponsor to retain a professional paleontologist for monitoring as well as verifying that all activity within 15 feet of a find is halted until the find is evaluated by a qualified professional. If needed, project sponsor to verify that the find has been evaluated by a qualified professional and that data recovery has occurred, if required. As needed for duration of soil-disturbing or excavating activities and throughout all ground-disturbing activities. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 121 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 15 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments discovered paleontological resources until a professional vertebrate paleontologist has assessed such discovered resources; if deemed significant, such resources shall be salvaged in a timely manner. The applicant/owner/ sponsor of said project shall be responsible for diverting project work and providing the assessment, including retaining a professional vertebrate paleontologist for such purpose. Collected fossils shall be deposited by the applicant/owner/sponsor in an appropriate repository (e.g., University of California Museum of Paleontology [UCMP], California Academy of Sciences) where the collection shall be properly curated and made available for future research. Noise Mitigation Measure NOI-1: Protect adjacent structures from construction-generated vibration. For construction with heavy ground-disturbing equipment that occurs within 13 feet of neighboring buildings, a construction vibration control plan shall be required to mitigate potential construction vibration impacts. The project sponsor shall incorporate into construction specifications for the proposed project a requirement for the construction contractor(s) to use all feasible means to avoid damage to adjacent and nearby buildings. Such methods to help reduce vibration-related Project sponsor to submit a construction vibration control plan to City. In addition, project sponsor to provide to City applicable provisions of construction contract requiring the use of all feasible means to avoid damage to adjacent and nearby buildings. Once prior to issuance of grading permit. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 122 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 16 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments damage effects may include maintaining a safe distance between the construction site and the potentially affected building (e.g., at least 13 feet for large earth-disturbing equipment) or using smaller and less-vibration-intensive equipment in proximity to the potentially affected building. In the event that vibration-generating construction activity is required within 13 feet of nearby older buildings similar to “historic and some old buildings,” the construction contractor shall implement a monitoring program to minimize damage to adjacent buildings and ensure that any such damage is documented and repaired. If required, the monitoring program shall include the following components: • Prior to the start of any ground-disturbing activity within 13 feet of adjacent buildings, the construction contractor shall engage a structural engineer or other professional with similar qualifications to document and photograph the existing conditions of potentially affected buildings within 13 feet of proposed vibratory-generating construction activities. • Based on the construction and condition of the resource(s), the consultant shall also establish a standard maximum vibration level that will not be exceeded at nearby buildings, based on existing conditions, character-defining features, 123 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 17 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments soil conditions, and anticipated construction practices. A common standard is a peak particle velocity of 0.25 inch per second for “historic and some old buildings,” as shown in Table5-1. • To ensure that vibration levels do not exceed the established standard, the project sponsor shall monitor vibration levels at each structure and prohibit vibratory construction activities that generate vibration levels in excess of the standard Should vibration levels be observed in excess of the selected standard, construction shall be halted and alternative construction techniques put in practice, to the extent feasible. • When vibration-intensive activity (e.g., heavy earth-disturbing equipment) occurs within 13 feet of a building, the structural engineer shall conduct an inspection of the building for damage within 7 days of that activity. If inspections determine that no damage occurred, the 7-day period may be increased to 30 days for that activity. Should damage to adjacent buildings occur, the building(s) shall be remediated to their preconstruction condition at the conclusion of ground-disturbing activity on the site. • Should all ground-disturbing construction activity occur 13 feet or more from the nearest existing structure, this monitoring plan shall not be required. 124 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 18 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements Identified in General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan The project sponsor shall and/or fund, as indicated below, the following improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan: 1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections: The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 on-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The traffic signals shall be accompanied by changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies. 2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection: The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard intersection to improve Project sponsor to implement or fund transportation improvements. If the City implements the improvements in advance of project construction, the project sponsor shall reimburse the City for the cost of construction. If another development implements the improvements prior to project construction, the project sponsor shall be responsible for a fair-share reimbursement of the construction costs to the developer leading these improvements. Prior to receipt of certificate of final occupancy. City of South San Francisco Economic and Community Development Department (Building Division) 125 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 19 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City. 3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue: The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain station to the project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain station, and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the west side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue, transitioning to a pair of one-way 126 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 20 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue. High-visibility striping for pedestrian crosswalks and “YIELD TO PEDS” signs would be incorporated where necessary and within project limits. 4. Signalization of the San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue Intersection: The project shall implement a new traffic signal at the intersection of San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue. This traffic signal would facilitate access to the project site via Shaw Road while reducing potential for multimodal conflicts. The traffic signal shall be accompanied by accessible sidewalk and curb ramp upgrades at the intersection as well as associated signal and intersection/sidewalk modifications at the adjacent San Mateo Avenue/South Linden Avenue intersection. 5. Engineering Study of a New Southbound U.S. 101 Off-ramp Connecting to the Utah Avenue Overpass: The project shall fund an engineering study of a new southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp connecting to the proposed Utah Avenue overpass as envisioned in the general plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. The engineering study shall be led by the City. As currently 127 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 21 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments envisioned, the overpass would not include a southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp would facilitate more direct access to the overpass and address long-term queueing concerns. The off-ramp would be accompanied by a new street connection between Utah Avenue and Produce Avenue north of the project site. 6. Engineering Study and Fair-share Contribution toward a New Trail Crossing of U.S. 101 South of the Project Site: The project shall fund an engineering study for a new Class I shared-use path crossing of U.S. 101 to connect the Bay Trail with Shaw Road. The engineering study shall be led by the City. An engineering study of the planned U.S. 101 crossing has not yet occurred, and a preferred alternative alignment has not been determined. The engineering study will consider potential trail crossing alignments, incorporate the preferred alternative alignment into its site plan, and quantify a fair-share contribution toward construction of the crossing. The mitigation shall be completed by the applicant prior to the project receiving a certificate of occupancy. If the City implements these improvements in advance of the project’s construction, the project shall reimburse the City for the cost of construction. If another development 128 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Infinite 131 Project City of South San Francisco State Clearinghouse No. 2023110023 22 Mitigation Measure Action Required Monitoring Timing Monitoring Responsibility Compliance Verification Initial Date Comments implements these improvements and/or engineering studies prior to the project’s construction, the project shall be responsible for a fair-share reimbursement of construction costs to the developer leading these improvements. This funding will ensure that transportation facilities serving the project site are appropriately sized to handle multimodal travel demand associated with the project, as envisioned in each plan. 129 City of South San Francisco Legislation Text P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue) South San Francisco, CA File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. Resolution making findings and recommending that the City Council approve a General Plan Amendment, Zoning Map Amendment,Use Permit,Design Review,Tentative Parcel Map,Transportation Demand Management Plan and Development Agreement to construct a life science campus totaling approximately 1,700,000 square feet on a 17.67-acre site at 131 Terminal Court. WHEREAS,US 131 Terminal Court Owner,LLC (“Applicant”)has submitted an application requesting approval to redevelop a 17.67-acre industrial site in the Lindenville Sub-Area with up to 1.7 million square feet of R&D /office development,commercial amenities,open space improvements,and on-and off-site infrastructure improvements at 131 Terminal Court,which would require approval of Design Review,Vesting Tentative Map,Transportation Demand Management Plan and a Development Agreement,as well as amendments of the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Map to change the existing land use and zoning designations from Mixed Industrial High (“MIH”)to Business Technology Park -High (“BTP-H”) (“Infinite 131 Project”); and WHEREAS,in addition to the 131 Terminal Court site,five parcels north of the project site at 120 Terminal Court,196 Produce Avenue,160 Produce Avenue and 140 Produce Avenue would also be redesignated and rezoned from MIH to BTP-H (“Off-Site Redesignation Parcels”); and WHEREAS,the proposed amendments to the General Plan,Lindenville Specific Plan and Zoning Map would also be in keeping with the adjacent office /R&D project at 101 Terminal Court (“Infinite 101 Project”)that was entitled by the Planning Commission in September 2023; and WHEREAS,approval of the entitlements for the Infinite 131 Project and the Off-Site Redesignation Parcels is considered a “Project”for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act,Pub.Resources Code §21000, et seq. (“CEQA”); and WHEREAS,in accordance with CEQA,the City has prepared a Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) which evaluates the significant and potentially significant impacts of the Project,the growth inducing impacts of the Project, the cumulative impacts of the Project, and alternatives to the proposed Project; and WHEREAS,the DEIR was circulated for the required 45-day public comment period from June 20 to August 5, 2024; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission held a lawfully noticed public hearing on August 1,2024 to solicit public comment on the DEIR; and City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 1 of 8 powered by Legistar™130 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. WHEREAS,the Design Review Board reviewed the Infinite 131 Project at its July 23,2023 meeting and recommended approval of the project; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed and carefully considered in the information in the DEIR and FEIR (EIR),and by separate resolution,recommended that the City Council certify the EIR and adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission reviewed and carefully considered the proposed Specific Plan Amendments, General Plan Amendments, and Zoning Map Amendments; and, WHEREAS,on September 4,2025 the Planning Commission for the City of South San Francisco held a lawfully noticed public hearing to solicit public comment and consider the Project EIR and the proposed entitlements, take public testimony, and make a recommendation to the City Council on the Project; and WHEREAS,the Planning Commission exercised its independent judgment and analysis,and considered all reports, recommendations, and testimony before making a determination on the Project; and WHEREAS,the San Mateo County Airport Land Use Commission reviewed the proposed legislative enactments associated with the Project on June 12,2025 and found them consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED that based on the entirety of the record before it,which includes without limitation,the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§21000,et seq.)(“CEQA”)and the CEQA Guidelines (14 California Code of Regulations §§15000,et seq;the South San Francisco 2040 General Plan and General Plan EIR;the South San Francisco Municipal Code;the Project applications;the Project Plans, as prepared by SOM Architects,dated August 25,2025;the Draft Transportation Demand Management Plan prepared by Fehr &Peers,dated March,2024;the Infinite 131 Project EIR,including the Draft and Final EIR and all appendices thereto;the draft General Plan Amendments;the draft Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments;the draft Zoning Map Amendments;draft Development Agreement,all reports,minutes,and public testimony submitted as part of the Planning Commission’s duly noticed September 4,2025 public hearing;and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code §21080(e)and §21082.2),the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows: SECTION 1 FINDINGS A.General Findings City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 2 of 8 powered by Legistar™131 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. 1.The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this Resolution. 2.The Exhibits attached to this Resolution,including the General Plan Amendments (Exhibit A), Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments (Exhibit B),Zoning Map Amendments (Exhibit C),the Project Plan Set (Exhibit D),101-131 Terminal Vesting Tentative Map (Exhibit E),Draft Transportation Demand Management Program (Exhibit F),Development Agreement (Exhibit G)and Draft Conditions of Approval ( Exhibit H),are each incorporated by reference and made a part of this Resolution,as if set forth fully herein. 3.The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the Planning Division for the City of South San Francisco,315 Maple Avenue,South San Francisco,CA 94080, and in the custody of the Chief Planner. 4.By separate resolution,the Planning Commission,exercising its independent judgement and analysis, has recommended that the City Council find that an EIR was prepared for the Project in accordance with CEQA,which EIR adequately discloses and analyzes the proposed Project’s potentially significant environmental impacts,its growth inducing impacts,its cumulative impacts,and analyzed alternatives to the Project.For those impacts that could potentially exceed CEQA thresholds of significance,where feasible the City has identified and imposed mitigation measures that avoid or reduce the impact to a level of less-than-significant.The Planning Commission has further recommended that the City Council find that the benefits of approving the Project outweigh the Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts. Accordingly,the Planning Commission has recommended that the City Council certify the EIR for the Project and adopt a statement of overriding considerations, in accordance with CEQA. B.General Plan Amendment 1.The proposed General Plan Amendment for the Project,attached hereto as Exhibit A,will modify the Land Use Element Figure 6 (General Plan Land Use)on pgs.62-63 and the Planning Sub-Areas Element Lindenville Figure on pg.100 to reflect the land use redesignation from Mixed Industrial High to Business and Technology Park -High.The amendments are intended as minor alterations to the General Plan to reflect the revised land use designation as proposed in the amendments to the Lindenville Specific Plan. 2.As required under State law,the South San Francisco General Plan,and the South San Francisco Municipal Code,in support of General Plan Amendments,the Planning Commission finds that the proposed General Plan Amendments are otherwise consistent with the South San Francisco General Plan, do not obstruct or impede achievement of any General Plan policies,and furthers a number of important Goals and Policies set forth in the Land Use and Planning Sub-Areas Elements, including: ·Goal LU-5: South San Francisco remains a hub of R&D employment, operations, and City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 3 of 8 powered by Legistar™132 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. innovation and is home to the largest worldwide cluster of life science uses. ·Policy LU-5.1: Maintain a critical mass of land zoned for R&D . ·Goal SA-27: There are safe, comfortable, and accessible pedestrian and bicycle facilities that connect people to Downtown, El Camino, and East of 101. ·Policy SA-27.4: Develop new roadway connections to better connect people to and within Lindenville. C.Specific Plan Amendment 1.With minor revisions to the General Plan through the associated General Plan Amendments,the Lindenville Specific Plan as proposed to be amended,attached hereto as Exhibit B,will be consistent with the General Plan. 2.Adoption of the Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments will not be detrimental to the public interest, health,safety,convenience,or welfare of the City because the Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments do not alter any of the previously adopted development,land use,and performance standards related to new development.More specifically,the Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments reflect the change in land use designation from Mixed Industrial High to Business and Technology Park -High,in keeping with other existing parcels in the immediate area. 3.The Lindenville Specific Plan area,as evaluated as part of the CEQA process,is physically suitable for the proposed land use designation(s)and the anticipated development will redevelop underutilized industrial sites with a high-quality employment campus proximate to multi-modal transit,will assist in the implementation of new bicycle and pedestrian connections through the Lindenville sub-area,will update infrastructure and utilities,will provide publicly-accessible open space,and will contribute to the City’s public services and amenities. 4.The Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments does not make any changes to the development and design standards adopted within the existing Lindenville Specific Plan,and therefore will continue to be superior to development otherwise allowed under conventional zoning classifications since the Lindenville Specific Plan provides additional development and design standards to promote a mixture of high density residential,industrial and life sciences development,and concurrently,proposes enhancements to circulation,parking,utilities,and public services to accommodate anticipated growth within the employment districts. D.Zoning Map Amendment 1.The proposed Zoning Map amendments,attached hereto as Exhibit C,are consistent with the SSF 2040 General Plan,as amended per the General Plan Amendment,because the Zoning Map Amendments will rezone parcels from Mixed Industrial High to Business and Technology Park High,ensuring consistency with City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 4 of 8 powered by Legistar™133 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. rezone parcels from Mixed Industrial High to Business and Technology Park High,ensuring consistency with the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. 2.The subject properties,including the Infinite 131 Project site and the Off-Site Redesignation Parcels,are suitable for the uses permitted in the Business and Technology Park High Zoning District in terms of access, size of parcel,relationship to similar or related uses,and other considerations deemed relevant by the Planning Commission and City Council because the proposed uses would redevelop large underutilized sites with high density life science developments in close proximity to the previously entitled Infinite 101 project, and all of the properties are in close proximity to the U.S. Highway 101 corridor. 3.The proposed Zoning Map Amendments are not detrimental to the use of land in any adjacent zone because the Zoning Map Amendments would provide for sufficient development,land use,and performance standards related to new development or alteration. E.Design Review Findings 1.The Project,including Design Review,is consistent with Title 20 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code because the Project has been designed as a high-quality R&D /office development,which will provide a pedestrian-and bicycle-friendly,transit-oriented environment,new bicycle and pedestrian connections to the South San Francisco Caltrain Station and the rest of the Lindenville Specific Plan area, updated utilities and public infrastructure, and sustainable building and landscape design. 2.The Project,including Design Review,is consistent with the General Plan (as proposed with minor amendments)and the Lindenville Specific Plan (as proposed with minor amendments)because the proposed high-intensity development is consistent with the policies and design direction provided in the South San Francisco General Plan for the Business Technology Park High (BTP-H)land use designation by developing high-density corporate headquarters,research and development facilities and offices within close proximity to the San Bruno BART Station and South San Francisco Caltrain Station. 3.The Project,including Design Review,is consistent with the applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council in that the proposed Project is consistent with the BTP-H Zoning District development standards,and the Citywide development standards,as evaluated in the Zoning Ordinance Compliance analysis for the Project. 4.The Project is consistent with the applicable design review criteria because the Project has been evaluated by the Design Review Board on July 26,2023 and found to be consistent with each of the eight criteria set forth in South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.480.006 (Design Review Criteria). F.Transportation Demand Management Plan Findings 1.The Infinite 131 Project’s proposed TDM program,attached hereto as Exhibit F,is feasible andCity of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 5 of 8 powered by Legistar™134 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. 1.The Infinite 131 Project’s proposed TDM program,attached hereto as Exhibit F,is feasible and appropriate for the project,considering the proposed use or mix of uses and the project’s location proximate to the San Bruno BART station,South San Francisco Caltrain station and introduction of a commuter shuttles,and reduced on-site parking that will encourage alternative transportation modes and reduce single occupant vehicle use. 2.The proposed TDM program meets the points requirements for a Tier 4 office / R&D project (50 points) 3.The proposed performance measures will ensure that the target 50%alternative mode use established for the project will be achieved and maintained.Conditions of approval have been included to require that the Final TDM Plan,which must be submitted for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit,shall outline the required process for on-going monitoring including annual surveys and trip cap reporting. G.Vesting Tentative Map 1.The proposed Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 Projects’vesting tentative map,prepared by Ware Malcomb and dated August 25,2025,(attached hereto as Exhibit E)including the proposed designs and improvements,is consistent with the City’s General Plan (as proposed to be amended)and the Lindenville Specific Plan (as proposed to be amended)because the vesting tentative map would facilitate the redevelopment of underutilized industrial parcels with transit-oriented office and R&D development,which would implement the goals of the General Plan and the Lindenville Specific Plan. 2.The proposed vesting tentative map is consistent with the standards and requirements of the City’s Zoning Ordinance (as proposed to be amended) and with the provisions of the Lindenville Specific Plan. 3.The vesting tentative map complies and meets all of the requirements of Title 19 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code (“Subdivisions”) and with the requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act. 4.The Project site is physically suitable for the type of development and density proposed,as the project will redevelop underutilized industrial parcels adjacent to the U.S.Highway 101 corridor and will improve vehicular,pedestrian,and bicycle connections which is envisioned in the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. 5.The vesting tentative map is consistent with the analysis included in the Infinite 131 EIR,recommended for certification by separate resolution. 6.The design and improvements of the vesting tentative map are not in conflict with any existing public easements. 7.The property is located in a developed,urban setting,and is not subject to a Williamson Act contract,on open space easement,a conservation easement,or an agricultural conservation easement.The surrounding land uses and resulting parcels would not support agricultural uses;the resulting parcels would result in City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 6 of 8 powered by Legistar™135 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. land uses and resulting parcels would not support agricultural uses;the resulting parcels would result in mixed-use development not incidental to commercial agricultural use of the land. H.Development Agreement 1.The Applicant and City have negotiated a Development Agreement pursuant to Government Code section 65864 et seq.The Development Agreement,attached hereto as Exhibit G,sets forth the duration, property,project criteria,and other required information identified in Government Code section 65865.2. The Development Agreement,as proposed,is consistent with the objectives,policies,general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan and the Lindenville Specific Plan (both as proposed with minor amendments),both of which envision a high-quality transit-oriented employment development adjacent to the U.S.Highway 101 corridor.Further,the land uses,development standards,densities and intensities, buildings and structures proposed are compatible with the goals,policies,and land use designations established in the General Plan,as proposed with minor amendments,(see Gov’t Code,§65860),and none of the land uses,development standards,densities and intensities,buildings and structures will operate to conflict with or impede achievement of the any of the goals,policies,or land use designations established in the General Plan. 2.The Development Agreement,as proposed,is compatible with the proposed high intensity,transit- oriented employment use and the regulations prescribed for the land use district (Business Technology Park -High)in which the real property is located and complies with all applicable zoning,subdivision,and building regulations and with the guiding policies of the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan,both as proposed with minor amendments. 3.The Development Agreement,as proposed,remains in conformity with public convenience,general welfare and good land use practice,since the project would provide adequate parking,conform to the height,density,and floor area ratio (FAR)standards set forth in the Zoning Ordinance as proposed to be amended,and confirm the land use goals of both the General Plan and the Lindenville Specific Plan that support redevelopment adjacent to the U.S. Highway 101 corridor. 4.The Development Agreement,as proposed,will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values since the project must conform to the City’s development standards.New circulation,open space,and infrastructure improvements are proposed that will enhance the existing City infrastructure in the area,the Project will not preclude similar development from occurring on adjacent parcels,and the Project will enhance property values since long-term underutilized parcels will be redeveloped. SECTION 2 DETERMINATION NOW,THEREFORE,BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that subject to the Conditions of Approval,attached as Exhibit H to this Resolution,the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 7 of 8 powered by Legistar™136 File #:25-775 Agenda Date:9/4/2025 Version:1 Item #:2b. to this Resolution,the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in this Resolution and recommends that the City Council approve the entitlements request for the 131 Terminal R&D project (P23-0003),including the General Plan Amendments,Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments, Design Review, Transportation Demand Management Plan and Vesting Tentative Map. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance adopting the Zoning Map Amendments (attached as Exhibit C). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the Development Agreement between the City of South San Francisco and Applicant name (attached as Exhibit G) BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage and adoption. City of South San Francisco Printed on 8/29/2025Page 8 of 8 powered by Legistar™137 Exhibit A – General Plan Amendments Chapter 6: Sub-Areas Element 1. Page 124 - update Policy SA-25.2 to read: • Policy SA-25.2: Continue to recognize the Golden Gate Produce Terminal as a legacy use. Recognize the Golden Gate Produce Terminal as a legacy use; permit it as a conforming use, allowing for expansion and contraction as necessary. If in the future the Golden Gate Produce Terminal stops operation at this site, require any new uses or new development of the site to be in conformance with the Mixed Industrial Business Technology Park High Designation Update the following figures to revise the Infinite 131 Project parcels from Mixed Industrial High (MIH) to Business Technology Park – High (BTP-H). • Land Use Element Figure 6: General Plan Land Use (pgs. 62-63) • Sub-Areas Element Unnumbered Figure: Lindenville (pg. 100) 138 Exhibit B – Lindenville Specific Plan Amendments Update Figure 11: Land Use Districts to revise the highlighted parcels from Mixed Industrial High (MIH) to Business Technology Park – High (BTP-H). 139 Exhibit C – Zoning Map Amendments Update Zoning Map to revise the Infinite 131 Project parcels from Mixed Industrial High (MIH) to Business Technology Park – High (BTP-H). 140 INFINITE 131 REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT 131 TERMINAL COURT, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, 94080 ARCHITECT, INTERIORS, STRUCTURAL ENGINEER: SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRILL LLP CLIENT: STEELWAVE LLC August 25, 2025 LANDSCAPE: CARDUCCI ASSOCIATES LIGHTING: FRANCIS KRAHE CIVIL: WARE MALCOMB 131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 141 NAME: ADDRESS: PARCEL AREA: LOT COVERAGE: INFINITE 131 NORTH AND SOUTH 131 TERMINAL COURTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, 94080 768,447 SF I131S: 52.46% (<60% MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE)I131N: 54.33% (<60% MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE)I131N GARAGE: 45.57% (<60% MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE) ZONING MAP FROM CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GENERAL PLAN UPDATE 2022 OCCUPANCIES: OCCUPANCY SEPARATIONS: APPLICABLE CODES & STANDARDS: PROJECT DATUM: INFINITE 131 BUILDINGS (I131 N A & B, I131 S A, B, & C) CONSTRUCTION TYPE: FIRE RESISTIVE REQUIREMENTS: NUMBER OF STORIES: SPRINKLER SYSTEM: FIRE ALARM: SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: AMENITY PAVILIONI131 S D CONSTRUCTION TYPE: FIRE RESISTIVE REQUIREMENTS: NUMBER OF STORIES: SPRINKLER SYSTEM: FIRE ALARM: SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: PARKING GARAGE CONSTRUCTION TYPE: OCCUPANCY: FIRE RESISTIVE REQUIREMENTS: NUMBER OF STORIES: SPRINKLER SYSTEM: FIRE ALARM: SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM: SPECIAL CONDITIONS: BUILDING 131NA: A-2, A-3 (ASSEMBLY), B (OFFICE), S-1 (HAZMAT STORAGE), S-2 (MEP, AND GENERAL STORAGE) BUILDING 131NB: A-2, A-3 (ASSEMBLY), B (OFFICE), S-1 (HAZMAT STORAGE), S-2 (MEP, AND GENERAL STORAGE) BUILDING 131N GARAGE : S-2 (MEP, AND PARKING) BUILDING 131SA: A-2, A-3 (ASSEMBLY), B (OFFICE), S-1 (HAZMAT STORAGE), S-2 (MEP, AND GENERAL STORAGE) BULDING 131SB: A-2, A-3 (ASSEMBLY), B (OFFICE), S-1 (HAZMAT STORAGE), S-2 (MEP, AND GENERAL STORAGE) BUILDING 131SC: A-2, A-3 (ASSEMBLY), B (OFFICE), S-1 (HAZMAT STORAGE), S-2 (MEP, AND GENERAL STORAGE) BUILDING 131SD: A-2, A-3 (ASSEMBLY), B (OFFICE), S-2 (MEP, AND GENERAL STORAGE) NOT REQUIRED FOR "NON-SEPARATED" OCCUPANCIES, PER CBC 508.3EXCEPT FOR THOSE LISTED IN CBC 508.3.3 EXCEPTION 1 2022 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND APPENDICES2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE2022 CALIFORNIA PLUMBING CODE2022 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA MECHANICAL CODE2022 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE2022 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE, CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGULATIONS(TITLE 24 ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS)CAL OSHA -CALIFORNIA OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY HAZARD AUTHORITYADAAG -AMERICAN WITH DISABILITIES ACT ACCESSIBILITY GUIDELINES PROJECT DATUM IS 1ST FLOOR = 0'-00"(+14'.0" ASL). ALL FLOOR ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCE FLOOR ELEVATIONS RFE IS TOP OF STRUCTURAL SLAB TO THE HIGH POINT AT THE PERIMETER TYPE I-A (PER CBC 603) PRIMARY STRUCTURAL FRAME 3 HREXTERIOR BEARING WALLS 3 HRFLOOR CONSTRUCTION 2 HRROOF CONSTRUCTION 1 1/2 HRSHAFT ENCLOSURES 2 HRSTAIR ENCLOSURES 2 HR 6 FULLY SPRINKLERED (PER CBC 403.3) YES (PER CBC 403.4.2 AND 907.2.13) REQUIRED (PER HIGHRISE, CBC 403.4.7) HIGHRISE (HIGHEST OCCUPIED FLOOR >75' ABOVE GRADE, PER CBC 403.1)LABORATORY (PER CBC 453) TYPE IV-HT (PER CBC 603) PRIMARY STRUCTURAL FRAME HTEXTERIOR BEARING WALLS 2 HRINTERIOR BEARING WALLS 1HR / HTINTERIOR NONBEARING WALLS & PARTITIONS 1HR (PER CBC 2304.11.2.2)FLOOR CONSTRUCTION HTROOF CONSTRUCTION HTSHAFT ENCLOSURES 1 HRSTAIR ENCLOSURES 1 HR 2 FULLY SPRINKLERED (PER CBC 903.1) YES (PER CBC 404.2) NOT REQUIRED FOR BUILDING ELEMENTS LISTED AS "HT" A ONE-HOURFIRE RATING IS APPLIED PER CBC 2304.11.2.2 WHERE COMPONENTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE TWO-HOUR FIRE RATED, A TWO-HOUR FIRE RATED SUPPORTCONSTRUCTION IS PROVIDED PER CBC 707.5.1 TYPE I-B(CBC TABLE 601 & SECTION 602.2) S-2 OPEN PARKING GARAGE PER CBC406.5 PRIMARY STRUCTURAL FRAME 2 HREXTERIOR BEARING WALLS 2 HRFLOOR CONSTRUCTION 2 HRROOF CONSTRUCTION 1 HRSHAFT ENCLOSURES 2 HRSTAIR ENCLOSURES 2 HR 8 FULLY SPRINKLERED (PER CBC 903.1) YES (PER CBC 404.2) NOT REQUIRED OPEN PARKING GARAGE ABOVE GRADE © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/22/2025 7:31:45 PM A0.0.1 PROJECT INFORMATION INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A PROJECT INFORMATION SITE MAP ZONING MAP APPLICABLE CODES & STANDARDS AREA & PARKING SUMMARY 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL PLANNING SHEET INDEX SHEET #SHEET NAME 20 2 3 . 0 1 . 0 6 - P L A N N I N G A P P L I C A T I O N 20 2 3 . 0 5 . 0 4 - T 1 3 1 R E P O S I T I O N I N G / P L A N N I N G A P P L I C A T I O N P A C K A G E 20 2 5 . 0 5 . 2 3 - P L A N N I N G A P P L I C A T I O N R E S U B M I T T A L GENERAL A0.0.0 COVER SHEET ● ● ● A0.0.1 PROJECT INFORMATION ● ● ● A0.0.2 EXISTING SITE PHOTOS ● ● ● A0.0.3 I131 - SHADOW STUDY ● ● ● A0.2.2 EXTERIOR RENDERINGS ● ● A0.2.3 AMENITY EXTERIOR RENDERINGS ● ● A0.3.1 ABBREVIATIONS, SYMBOLS & NOTES ● ● ● A0.5.01 I131 - AREA PLAN - FAR ● ● ● A0.5.02 I131 - AREA PLAN - FAR ● ● ● A0.6.1 I131 - FIRE ACCESS & EGRESS DIAGRAM - GROUND ● ● ● A0.6.2 I131 - FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM - ROOF ● ● ● A0.6.5 I131N - FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM - SECTIONS ● ● ● A0.6.6 I131S - FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM - SECTIONS ● ● ● 13 CIVIL C0.0 COVER SHEET ● C1.0 EXISTING PARCEL MAP ● C1.1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (SUBDIVISION MAP FOR UP TO 17 COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS) ● C2.0 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY ● ● C2.1 PRELIMINARY DEMOLITION PLAN ● ● C3.0 PRELIMINARY OVERALL GRADING PLAN ● ● C3.1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN ● C3.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN ● C4.0 PRELIMINARY OVERALL UTILITY PLAN ● ● C5.0 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN ● ● C5.1 STORMWATER CONTROL DETAILS ● ● C6.0 PRELIMINARY SITE FIRE APPARATUS PLAN ● 12 LANDSCAPE L01.01 GROUNDREGIONAL CIRCULATION PLAN ● L01.02 GROUNDSITE CIRCULATION PLAN ● L01.03 SITE ANALYSIS PLAN ● L01.04 GROUNDACTIVITY DIAGRAM PLAN ● L02.00A CONCEPT IMAGERY ● L02.00B MATERIALS IMAGERY ● L02.01 LANDSCAPE PLAN ● L03.01 I131S ENLARGEMENT PLAN ● L03.02 I131S MATERIALS ENLARGEMENT PLAN ● L03.03 I131S SECTION ELEVATION NORTH ● L04.01 I131N ENLARGEMENT PLAN ● L04.02 I131N MATERIALS ENLARGEMENT PLAN ● L04.03 I131N SECTION ELEVATION SOUTH ● L05.00 PLANTING COMMUNITY IMAGERY ● L05.01 PLANTING COMMUNITY LEGEND ● L05.02 PLANTING COMMUNITY TREE PLAN ● L05.03 PLANTING COMMUNITY UNDERSTORY PLAN ● 17 ARCHITECTURAL A1.1.0 OVERALL SITE PLAN - GROUND ● ● ● A1.1.1 OVERALL SITE PLAN - ROOF ● ● ● A2.0.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - TYPICAL BASEMENT LEVEL ● ● ● A2.1.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 ● ● ● A2.2.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 ● ● ● A2.3.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 3 ● ● ● A2.4.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 4 ● ● ● A2.5.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 5 ● ● ● A2.6.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 6 ● ● ● A2.7.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - PH ● ● ● A2.8.0 I131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - PH ROOF ● ● ● A5.N1.1 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131N ● ● ● A5.N1.2 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131N ● ● A5.N2.1 OVERALL BUILDING SECTIONS - I131N ● ● ● A5.NG1.1 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131N GARAGE ● ● A5.S1.1 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131S ● ● ● A5.S1.2 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131S ● ● A5.S1.3 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131S ● ● A5.S2.1 OVERALL BUILDING SECTIONS - I131S ● A5.SD1.1 OVERALL BUILDING ELEVATIONS - I131S AMENITY ● 20 LIGHTING AL0.0.01 I131 SITE DRB BG I131 - SITE LIGHTING ● ● AL0.0.02 I131 - LIGHTING DESIGN CRITERIA ILLUMINANCE ● AL0.0.03 I131 - LIGHTING DESIGN CRITERIA LIGHT POLLUTION ● AL0.0.04 I131 SITE DRB BG I131 - SITE LIGHTING PROGRAM ● ● AL0.0.05 I131S - FACADE LIGHTING PROGRAM ● ● AL0.0.06 I131N - FACADE LIGHTING PROGRAM ● ● AL0.0.07 i131 PARKING FACADE LIGHTING PROGRAM ● 7 TOTAL SHEETS: 69 142 8 2 1 6 5 4 3 7 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:36:55 PM A0.0.2 EXISTING SITE PHOTOS INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A VIEW 1 - SITE ENTRANCE VIEW 2 - SITE ENTRANCE VIEW 5 - FROM FREEWAY 101 VIEW 6 - FROM FREEWAY 101 RAMPVIEW 8 - FROM SAN MATEO AVE VIEW 7 - VIEW FROM SAN MATEO AVE VIEW 4 - WAREHOUSEVIEW 3 - WAREHOUSE T131 - EXISTING CONDITIONS T131 PARCEL ADJACENT PROPERTY 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 143 ADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTY ADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 3:40:38 PM A0.0.3 I131 - SHADOW STUDY INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - WINTER SOLSTICE AT 3PM 01SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - WINTER SOLSTICE AT 12PM 06SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - WINTER SOLSTICE AT 9AM 16 SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - EQUINOX AT 3PM 02SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - EQUINOX AT 12PM 07SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - EQUINOX AT 9AM 17 SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - SUMMER SOLSTICE AT 12PM 08 SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - SUMMER SOLSTICE AT 3PM 03SCALE: 1" = 160'-0" T131 - SHADOW STUDY - SUMMER SOLSTICE AT 9AM 18 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 144 4 13 3 52.2 6546 4 2.2 3 6 314552.2 1 415 4352.2 6 5 1.Coated Aluminum Panel at Curtain Wall 2.1 Aluminum withMetallic Coating,Silver,Mechanical Screen,Horizontal 4. Clear Glazed IGU VisionGlass with Low E 3. Aluminum withMetallic Coating,Silver 6. Low Iron LaminatedGlass Guardrail 5. Clear Glazed IGU withLow E at Shadowbox 2.2 Aluminum withMetallic Coating,Silver,Mechanical Screen,Vertical 7.18 109 7.2 7.1 Perforated Metal Panel, White 8. Painted Concrete Structure 10. Clear Glazed IGU VisionGlass with Low E 9. Aluminum withMetallic Coating7.2 Perforated Metal Panel, Dark Gray © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:38:40 PM A0.2.2 EXTERIOR RENDERINGS INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A I131N B - LOBBY ENTRY I131N - FWY VIEW I131S A - LOBBY ENTRY I131 MATERIAL PALLETE I131 GARAGE - COURTYARD VIEW I131 GARAGE MATERIAL PALLETE 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 145 11.1 12.1 12.21315 11.2 11.1 12.112.21315 11.111.111.1 12.2 11.1 11.1 12.2 13 12.1 11.1 13 16 1611.111.1 11.112.112.213 15 11.1. Douglas Fur Clt andGlulam Beams and Columns 12.1. Aluminum withMetallic Coating,Silver 13. Clear Glazed IGU VisionGlass with Low E 12.2. Aluminum withMetallic Coating,Silver, Corrugated 15. Low Iron LaminatedGlass Guardrail 14. Clear Glazed IGU withLow E at Shadowbox 11.2. Douglas Fur Tongueand Groove Panel 16. Textured Cast-in-Place Concrete © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:38:46 PM A0.2.3 AMENITY EXTERIOR RENDERINGS INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL AMENITY BUILDING NE APPROACH AMENITY BUILDING FOOD HALL FACADE AMENITY BUILDING W CORRIDOR AMENITY BUILDING GATHERING STAIR AMENITY BUILDING MATERIAL BOARD 146 A/C Air Conditioning A/V Audio Visual ACST Acoustical ACT Acoustical Ceiling Tile AD Area Drain ADDL Additional ADJ Adjacent ADR Access Door AF Access Floor AFF Above Finished Floor AGGR Aggregate AHU Air Handling Unit ALS Assisted Listening SystemALT Alternate ALUM Aluminum ANOD Anodized APPROX Approximate(ly) APT Apartment ARC Architectural Concrete ARCH Architect(ural) AUTO Automatic AUX Auxiliary AVG Average B/ Bottom of BD Board BEV Beveled BG Bumper GuardBLDG Building BLKG Block(ing) BM Beam BMK Benchmark BOC Bottom of Curb BOMA Bldg. Owners and Managers Assoc. BR Bedroom BRK Brick BRZ Bronze BSMT Basement BS BrassBTU British Thermal Unit(s) CAP Capacity CB Catch Basin CCTV Closed Circuit Television CFM Cubic Feet Per Minute CG Corner Guard(s) CI Cast Iron CJ Control Joint CL Center Line CLG Ceiling CLG HT Ceiling Height CLO Closet CLR OPNG Clear Opening CMU Concrete Masonry Unit(s) CO Cleanout COL Column CONC Concrete CONF Conference CONN Connect(ion) CONSTR Construction CONT Continuous / Continue CONV Convector CORR Corridor CPOT Continuous Path Of Travel CPT Carpet(ed) CSK Countersink / Countersunk CSWK Casework CT Ceramic Tile CTR Center(ed) CU Cubic CW Cold Water DB Decibel DBL Double DD Deck Drain DEG Degree(s) DEPT Department DET Detail(s) DF Drinking Fountain DH Double Hung DIA Diameter DIAG Diagonal DIFF Diffuser(s) DIM Dimension(s) DISP Dispenser DIV Divide / Division DL Dead Load DMPF Dampproofing DMPR Damper DN Down DP Drainage PanelDR Dining Room DRP DraperyDWG Drawing(s) DWTR Dumbwaiter EA Each EC Exposed ConstructionEC Elastomeric Coating EIFS Exterior Insulated Finish System EJ Expansion JointEL Elevation (Grade) ELAST Elastomeric ELEC Electric(al) ELEC CL Electric Closet ELEV Elevator ELEV Elevation (Bldg) EM Entrance Mat EMER Emergency ENCL Enclosure / Enclose(d) ENTR Entrance EOS Edge of Slab EQ Equal EQUIP Equipment ESC Escalator EW Each Way EWC Electric Water Cooler EXH Exhaust EXIST Existing EXP Exposed EXPN Expansion EXT Exterior F Fahrenheit FA Fire AlarmFAF Fluid Applied FlooringFAAP Fire Alarm Annunciator Panel FAB Fabric FAI Fresh Air Intake FD Floor Drain FDMPR Fire Damper FDTN Foundation FE Fire Extinguisher FEC Fire Extinguisher Cabinet FH Fire Hydrant FHC Fire Hose Cabinet FHR Fire Hose Rack (Reel) FIN Finish(ed) FIN FL Finish Floor FIN GR Finish Grade FLEX Flexible FLH Flashing FLMT Flush Mounted FLR Floor(s) FLS Floor Sealer FLUOR Fluorescent FO Finished Opening FP FireproofingFPM Feet per Minute FR Fire Retardant / Rating / Resist. FRM Frame FRTW Fire Retardant Treated Wood FS Full Size FSS Fire Stopping SystemFSE Food Service Equipment FSP Fire Standpipe FT Feet (Foot) FTG Footing FWP Fabric Wrapped Panel G Gas GA Gauge GAL Gallon(s) GALV Galvanized GFRC Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete GFRG Glass Fiber Reinforced Gypsum GI Galvanized Iron GL Glass GL BLK Glass Block GND Ground GPH Gallons per Hour GPM Gallons per Minute GRD Grade GRL GrilleGWB Gypsum Wallboard HB Hose Bib HD Head HDW Hardware HEX Hexagon(al) HM Hollow Metal HNDRL Handrail HO Hold Open HORIZ Horizontal HPT High Point HR Hour(s) (Fire Resistance Rating) HT Height HVAC Heating, Ventilating, Air ConditioningHWY Highway ID Inside DiameterIDF Intermediate Distribution Facility INCL Include(d) / Inclusive / Including INFO Information INS Insulation / Insulate(d) INT Interior JC Janitor Closet JF Joint FillerJG Joint GasketJT Joint KD Knockdown KIT Kitchen KO Knockout KPL Kickplate / Angle LAB Laboratory LAM Laminate(d) LAV Lavatory LBS Pound(s) LD Linear Diffuser LH Left Hand LIN Linear LONG Longitudinal LPT Low Point LR Living Room LTG Lighting LVR Louver(ed) MACH Machine MAINT Maintain / Maintenance MATL Material MAX Maximum MB Metal BaseMDF Main Distribution FacilityMECH Mechanical MED Medium MEZZ Mezzanine MFR Manufacturer MH Manhole MIN Minimum MISC Miscellaneous ML Metal Lath ML WK Millwork MLDG Molding MO Masonry Opening MP Metal Panel MTD Mounted MTL Metal MUL Mullion N North NA Not Applicable NC Noise Criteria NIC Not in Contract NO Number NOM Nominal NRC Noise Reduction Coefficient NTS Not to Scale OA Outside Air OC On Center OD Outside Diameter OF Outside Face OFD Overflow Drain OFF Office OH DR Overhead Coiling Door OPH Opposite Hand OPNG Opening OPP Opposite OPR Operating / Operable ORD Overflow Roof Drain OZ Ounce PA Public Address PAR Parallel PART Partial PAV Pavers PB Particle BoardPCC Precast Concrete PERF Perforated PERP Perpendicular PL Plastic Laminate PLA Plaster PLBG Plumbing PLYWD Plywood PNEU Pneumatic POL Polished PR Pair PREFAB Prefabricate(d) PROJ Project(s) PROP Property PSF Pounds per Square Foot PSI Pounds per Square Inch PT Paint(ed) PTN Partition PVC Polyvinyl Chloride PVG Paving PWR Power QT Quarry Tile QTY Quantity R Riser RA Return Air RAD Radius RB Resilient Base RC Reinforced Concrete RD Roof Drain RECPT Receptacle RECT Rectangle REF Reference REFR Refrigerator REG Register REINF Reinforce(d, -ing, -ment)REQD Required REV Revised / Revision RF Resilient Flooring RFA Roofing AccessoriesRH Right Hand RM Room RMX Resin Matrix RND Round(ed) RO Rough Opening ROT RotatedROW Right of Way RPM Revolutions per Minute RR Railroad RS Roofing System SA Supply Air SAN Sanitary SB Splash Block SCHED Schedule(d) SE SealantSECT Section SHR Shower SHT Sheet SHTHG Sheathing SIM Similar SLDG Slide / Sliding SMR Sheet Metal RoofingSPC Synthetic Polymer CountertopSPEC Specification(s) SQ Square SQ FT Square Foot / Feet STL ST Stainless Steel ST Stone STC Sound Transmission Class STD StandardSTL Steel STOR Storage STRUCT Structure / Structural SURF MTD Surface Mounted SUSP Suspend(ed) / Suspension SWBD Switchboard SYMM Symmetrical T Tread T&G Tongue and Groove T/ Top of TA Toilet Accessory(ies)TC Traffic Coating TD Trench Drain TEL Telephone TEMP Temperature TER Terrazzo THK Thick(ness) THRES Threshold TOC Top of Curb TOPO Topography Map TRANS Transom TV TelevisionT.W. Tread WidthTYP Typical UC Undercut UNFIN Unfinished UNO Unless Noted Otherwise UPS Uninterrupted Power Supply VAC Vacuum VERT Vertical VEST Vestibule VIF Verify in Field VNR / VE Veneer VOL Volume W/ With W/O Without WB Wood Base WC Wheel ChairWCV Wall Covering WD Wood WDF Wood Door and Frame WH Wall Hydrant WI Wrought Iron WP Work Point WPS Waterproofing System WR Weather Resistant WRB Wardrobe WS Weatherstrip(ping) WT Weight WTR Window Treatment WV Wood Veneer WWF Welded Wire Fabric X Y Z 31 - ASPHALT 31 - GRAVEL 31 - EARTH 09 - GROUT 09 - TILE 09 - TERRAZZO 09 - RESILIENT FLOORING 09 - LATH AND PLASTER 09 - GYPSUM 09 - CARPET 09 - ACOUSTICAL CEILING BOARD 07 - FOAM, FILLER, GASKET 07 - SEMI RIGID INSULATION 07 - RIGID INSULATION 07 - FIREPROOFING 07 - BATT INSULATION 06 - WOOD GRAIN 06 - PLYWOOD 06 - MEDIUM DENSITY FIBERBOARD 06 - DISCONTINUOUS WOOD BLOCKING 06 - CONTINUOUS WOOD BLOCKING 05 - BRONZE 05 - STEEL/STAINLESS STEEL 05 - ALUMINUM 04 - SETTING BED 04 - MORTAR 04 - STONE 04 - CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT 04 - BRICK 03 - CONCRETE TOPPING SLAB 03 - CONCRETE LEVELER 03 - LIGHTWEIGHT CONCRETE 03 - PRECAST CONCRETE 03 - CONCRETE (RE: STRUCTURAL) 03 - CONCRETE 02 - EXISTING CONCRETE AREA NAME 150 SF (OLF 100)200 OCC A-3 9' - 0" ACT-1 101 ROOM NAME 150 SF E12 A1 22RFI #44 ROOM TAGROOM NAME INDICATORROOM NUMBERAREA ROOM NAME ROOM TAGROOM NAME INDICATORROOM NUMBER AREA TAGAREA NAME INDICATORAREA AREA NAME 150 SF OCCUPANCY TAGOCCUPANCY GROUPAREA NAME INDICATORAREANUMBER OF OCCUPANTS WALL TAGPARTITION TYPEACOUSTIC RATING (WHERE INDICATED)FIRE RATING (WHERE INDICATED) CEILING TAGCEILING FINISHCEILING HEIGHT (AFF) DOOR NUMBER REVISION TAGREVISION NUMBERRFI ACCESSORY NUMBER0000 GRAIN DIRECTION X PATTERN START POINT CENTERLINE ALIGN NORTH SYMBOL BREAK LINE FLOOR MATERIAL TRANSITIONMATERIAL 1MATERIAL 2AF-1 CONC ø 5'-0" Note to specifier: These are the most common 36 " 24 " 12" 36" 12" 30" 48 " 60 " 60" 1. REFER TO CIVIL FOR PROJECT DATUM. DRAWING TITLEDRAWING NAMEDRAWING NUMBERDRAWING SCALE FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"01 BUILDING SECTION INDICATORSECTION IDENTIFIERDRAWING NUMBER 1 A10.20.30 1 A10.20.30 CALLOUT INDICATORCALLOUT IDENTIFIERDRAWING NUMBER A10.20.30 1 DETAIL INDICATORDETAIL IDENTIFIERDRAWING NUMBER 1 A10.20.30 EXTERIOR ELEVATION INDICATORELEVATION IDENTIFIERDRAWING NUMBER A10.20.30 INTERIOR ELEVATION INDICATORELEVATION IDENTIFIERDRAWING NUMBER 12 12 12 12 RE: 01 / A2.0 MATCHLINE & VIEW REFERENCEDRAWING NUMBERDRAWING IDENTIFIER VIEW REFERENCEDRAWING NUMBERDRAWING IDENTIFIERRE: 01 / A2.0 AA AA EXISTING COLUMN LINE INDICATOR COLUMN LINE INDICATOR LEVEL 01+20' - 0" LEVEL HEADLEVEL NAMEELEVATION REFERENCE POINT; WORK POINT;DIMENSION POINT; START POINT POINT ELEVATIONELEVATIONPREFIX XX +1' - 6" HIGH POINTHP +1' - 6" LOW POINTLP +1' - 6" SURFACE ELEVATIONELEVATIONPREFIXXX +1' - 6" SITE ELEVATIONELEVATIONPREFIX XX +1' - 6" © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:38:51 PM A0.3.1 ABBREVIATIONS, SYMBOLS & NOTES INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A ABBREVIATIONS MATERIALS TAGS MISC. SYMBOLS WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE SPACE GENERAL NOTES DRAWING REFERENCE SYMBOLS DATUM SYMBOLS 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 147 UP 55,030.67 SF R&D 36,891.87 SF R&D 49,987.78 SF R&D 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 646.26 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT 584.26 SF EXEMPT 2% 153.64 SF EXEMPT107.29 SF EXEMPT 459.1 SF EXEMPT 584.24 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 230.35 SF EXEMPT 69,972.97 SF R&D 63,859.25 SF R&D 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 70.66 SF EXEMPT 6,005.36 SF FITNESS 250.35 SF EXEMPT 356.67 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 190.32 SF EXEMPT 272.88 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 552.36 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 227.09 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 272.88 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 248.93 SF EXEMPT 188.36 SF EXEMPT 2% 469.98 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2%248.92 SF EXEMPT 152.62 SF EXEMPT 274.19 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 62.75 SF EXEMPT 2% 673.09 SF EXEMPT 5,246.02 SF RESTAURANT 92.01 SF EXEMPT 230.35 SF EXEMPT 646.06 SF EXEMPT 2% 356.67 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT 249.9 SF EXEMPT 157.83 SF EXEMPT 299.08 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 227.93 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 4,124.55 SF AMENITY 116.74 SF EXEMPT 2% 159.7 SF EXEMPT 2% 426.27 SF KITCHEN 2,797.48 SF R&D 3,094.1 SF R&D 3,521.42 SF LOBBY 21,388.8 SF R&D 1,764.43 SF R&D 1,766.18 SF R&D 3,095.56 SF R&D 1,190.59 SF LOBBY 1,749.03 SF R&D 9,970.98 SF EXEMPT 2%11,533.43 SF EXEMPT 2% 19,203.15 SF R&D 21,118.81 SF R&D 26,504.41 SF R&D 20,897 SF R&D 14,655.77 SF R&D 1,625.4 SF R&D 3,093.06 SF R&D 4,634.01 SF LOBBY 15,668.25 SF R&D 4,989.87 SF R&D 8,636.83 SF EXEMPT 2% 5,447.96 SF EXEMPT 2% 26,247.28 SF R&D 9,160.34 SF CONFERENCE 88.94 SF EXEMPT 1,780.14 SF R&D 441.31 SF R&D 4,468.69 SF LOBBY 3,777.08 SF R&D 9,614.8 SF EXEMPT 2% 4,730.19 SF LOBBY 1,348.62 SF EXEMPT 2% 1,780.14 SF R&D 409.22 SF EXEMPT 70.67 SF EXEMPT 6,185.51 SF FOOD HALL 435.16 SF EXEMPT 2% 5,866.58 SF FITNESS 3,020.95 SF CAFE 1,395.82 SF R+D 4,944.34 SF CONFERENCE 1,244.24 SF EXEMPT 2%2,368.39 SF EXEMPT 2% 2,174.43 SF R&D 1,913.6 SF EXEMPT 2% 1,599.07 SF AMENITY 591.99 SF R&D 2,651.94 SF R&D 517.27 SF EXEMPT 2% 4,066.21 SF EXEMPT 2% 213.74 SF EXEMPT 2% 3,371.97 SF AMENITY 7,361.62 SF AMENITY 1,600.87 SF KITCHEN 496.35 SF AMENITY 437.7 SF EXEMPT 2% 49,253.81 SF R&D 39,449.03 SF R&D 30,742.48 SF R&D 55,372.46 SF R&D 63,677.3 SF R&D 443.29 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 645.49 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT 583.61 SF EXEMPT 2% 166.53 SF EXEMPT 92.01 SF EXEMPT 457.53 SF EXEMPT 584.31 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 230.35 SF EXEMPT 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 250.35 SF EXEMPT 352.5 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 190.32 SF EXEMPT 272.88 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 552.36 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 258.78 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 272.88 SF EXEMPT 444.78 SF EXEMPT 2% 248.92 SF EXEMPT 188.37 SF EXEMPT 2% 470.01 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2%248.92 SF EXEMPT 152.62 SF EXEMPT 274.19 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 230.35 SF EXEMPT 645.4 SF EXEMPT 2% 356.67 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT249.9 SF EXEMPT 157.83 SF EXEMPT 299.08 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 369.98 SF EXEMPT 83.24 SF EXEMPT 186.69 SF EXEMPT 2% 70.67 SF EXEMPT 73.03 SF EXEMPT 2% 49,298.47 SF R&D 39,680.81 SF R&D 30,788.74 SF R&D 55,811.17 SF R&D 63,685.02 SF R&D 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 645.94 SF EXEMPT 2% 248.9 SF EXEMPT 583.71 SF EXEMPT 2% 153.11 SF EXEMPT 584.91 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.38 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 230.35 SF EXEMPT 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 250.35 SF EXEMPT 356.67 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 191.46 SF EXEMPT 226.26 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 227.09 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 226.26 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 226.26 SF EXEMPT 188.31 SF EXEMPT 2% 470.02 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 226.26 SF EXEMPT 152.62 SF EXEMPT 227.93 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 230.35 SF EXEMPT 646.26 SF EXEMPT 2% 356.67 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT 249.9 SF EXEMPT 299.08 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT190.29 SF EXEMPT 369.97 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 158.08 SF EXEMPT 109.31 SF EXEMPT 47,685.36 SF R&D 39,667.55 SF R&D 29,025.57 SF R&D 56,548.66 SF R&D 60,623.61 SF R&D444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 645.49 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT 584.38 SF EXEMPT 2% 153.11 SF EXEMPT 584.31 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 230.35 SF EXEMPT 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 250.35 SF EXEMPT 352.5 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 191.46 SF EXEMPT 272.88 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 552.36 SF EXEMPT 2% 151.92 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 227.09 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 283.48 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 248.93 SF EXEMPT 214.65 SF EXEMPT 2% 469.98 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2%248.92 SF EXEMPT 152.62 SF EXEMPT 274.19 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 230.35 SF EXEMPT 644.68 SF EXEMPT 2% 356.67 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT199.74 SF EXEMPT 299.08 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT190.36 SF EXEMPT 369.98 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:39:17 PM A0.5.01 I131 - AREA PLAN - FAR INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" LEVEL 02 02 SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)01SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" LEVEL 03 16 SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" LEVEL 04 17 SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" LEVEL 05 19 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 148 47,711.68 SF R&D 39,858.32 SF R&D 29,071.82 SF R&D 56,505.63 SF R&D 60,619.44 SF R&D444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 645.94 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT 584.31 SF EXEMPT 2% 153.11 SF EXEMPT 584.31 SF EXEMPT 2% 249.9 SF EXEMPT190.32 SF EXEMPT 230.35 SF EXEMPT 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 250.35 SF EXEMPT 356.67 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 190.32 SF EXEMPT 272.88 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 227.09 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 198.85 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 248.92 SF EXEMPT 188.36 SF EXEMPT 2% 470.02 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2%248.92 SF EXEMPT 152.62 SF EXEMPT 227.93 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 152.63 SF EXEMPT 74.9 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 2% 230.35 SF EXEMPT 646.26 SF EXEMPT 2% 351.67 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT249.9 SF EXEMPT 299.08 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT190.29 SF EXEMPT 190.32 SF EXEMPT 369.97 SF EXEMPT 1,436.84 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 1,270.21 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 984.98 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 444.5 SF EXEMPT 2% 230.35 SF EXEMPT 593.41 SF EXEMPT 2% 92.01 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT1,734.71 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 8,883.09 SF EXEMPT 2% 9,234.68 SF EXEMPT 2% 1,254.08 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 1,262.57 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 484.65 SF EXEMPT 2% 230.35 SF EXEMPT 7,762.16 SF EXEMPT 2% 494.86 SF EXEMPT 2% 385.27 SF EXEMPT 92.01 SF EXEMPT 445.51 SF EXEMPT 152.62 SF EXEMPT 440.37 SF EXEMPT 152.63 SF EXEMPT 490 SF EXEMPT 2% 3,959.63 SF EXEMPT 2% 4,451.84 SF EXEMPT 2% 5,708.74 SF EXEMPT 2% 74.9 SF EXEMPT 1,807.56 SF EXEMPT 2% 445.51 SF EXEMPT 993.68 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 337.51 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 598.83 SF EXEMPT 2% 3,185.49 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 1,325.29 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 297.22 SF EXEMPT 119.72 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 92.01 SF EXEMPT 153 SF EXEMPT 297.22 SF EXEMPT 119.72 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 152.62 SF EXEMPT 93 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 274.19 SF EXEMPT 92.01 SF EXEMPT 1,091.32 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 91.98 SF EXEMPT 241.04 SF TENANT MECHANICAL 1,244.78 SF TENANT MECHANICAL © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:39:30 PM A0.5.02 I131 - AREA PLAN - FAR INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" LEVEL 06 01 SCALE: 1" = 100'-0" MECH PENTHOUSE 02 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 149 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 Y XN 25.00 10.00 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 25.0 0 10.00 GEN E R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X25 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 90°GAT E 90°GAT E 25.00 10.00 GEN E R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X2 5 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 25.00 10.0 0 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 90°GATE 90°GATE C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 _LAND ARCHUCS TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TC 7 . 7 6 TC 7 . 5 5 TC 7 . 2 5 TC 6 . 9 4 TC 7 . 7 8 TC 7 . 6 9 TC 1 1 . 5 4 TC 1 1 . 1 4 TC 9 . 3 4 TC 9 . 1 2 TC 1 1 . 6 1 TC 7 . 3 4 FG10.42 FG10.26 FG11.30 FG9.51 FG9.82 FG10.04 FG10.23 FG9.77 F G 9 . 3 0 FG 9 . 6 5 F G 9 . 8 1 FG 9 . 1 2 FG 9 . 4 9 TC 7 . 3 4 TC 8 . 7 9 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TP 1 0 . 3 4 TP 1 1 . 0 89 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15. 5 15. 0 14.5 14 . 0 14. 0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 STAGE AT 3.5 4.16 3.30 STOPSTOP 26. 0 0 UPUP BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SL O U G H T E R M I N A L C T ( R I G H T O F W A Y ) 28 A0.6.6 16 A0.6.6 26 A0.6.6 18 A0.6.6 131S C 131S B 131S A 131N B 131N A 131S D 131 PARKING GARAGE 16 A0.6.5 02 A0.6.5 01 A0.6.5 01 A0.6.6 01 A0.6.6 17 A0.6.5 LINE OF BREEZEWAY NOTCH AT ROOFNO FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS ROOF ACCESS 17'-6" 26 A0.6.5 27 A0.6.5 33 ' - 0 " LINE OF BREEZEWAY NOTCH AT ROOFNO FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS ROOF ACCESS 340'-7" 1 4 1 ' - 3 " 2 3 9 ' - 2 " 20'- 1 " 29'-9" 25' - 1 0 " 13 ' - 1 0 " 13'-10" FIRE ACCESS ROAD MINIMUM 26' WIDE SERVICE ELEVATOR TO ROOF STAIR TO ROOF PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY TO PUBLIC WAY LINE OF BUILDING ABOVE T131 N 996' - 8" TOTAL PROVIDED FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING LENGTH WITH ROOF ACCESS T131 S 759' - 5" TOTAL PROVIDED FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING LENGTH WITH ROOF ACCESS STAIR TO ROOF STAIR TO ROOF T131 PARKING GARAGE481' - 10" TOTAL PROVIDED FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING LENGTH WITH ROOF ACCESS PRO P E R T Y L I N E PROPERTY L I N E SERVICE ELEVATOR TO ROOF SERVICE ELEVATOR TO ROOF STAIR TO ROOF P R O P E R T Y L I N E NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVILANDNEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVILANDNEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVILANDNEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL STAIR TO ROOF SERVICE ELEVATOR TO ROOF NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVILANDNEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL STAIR TO ROOF NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVILANDNEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL NEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL < 20 0 ' F I R E H O S E < 2 0 0 ' F I R E H O S E < 2 0 0 ' F I R E H O S E 15 0 ' - 0 " 1 5 0 ' - 0 " 157'-6" 26 ' - 0 " 26'-0" 22 ' - 0 " 26'-0" 26'-0" 26'-0" 26'-0" 399 ' - 7 " 19 3 ' - 9 " 6 6 ' - 5 " 124' - 4 " 66' - 7" 95' - 2" 29' - 5" 62' - 0" 59' - 9 " 22 ' - 9 " 119' - 1 0 " NEW FIRE DEPTARTMENT CONNECTIONRE: CIVIL NEW FIRE HYDRANTRE: CIVIL NEW FIRE DEPTARTMENT CONNECTIONRE: CIVILNEW FIRE HYDRANTRE: CIVIL NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVILANDNEW FIRE HYDRANT RE: CIVIL NEW FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RE: CIVIL NEW FIRE HYDRANTRE: CIVIL EXTERIOR STAIR TO LEVEL 03 23' - 0" 2 0 ' - 0 " 9 0 ' - 9 " 45'-0" ADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTY FIRE HOSE LINE REACH PEDESTRIAN EGRESS PATH FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD - 20' WIDE MINIMUM FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD - 26' WIDE FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING ZONE - 15'~30' TO ROOF NEW FIRE HYDRANT (TBD FOR NEXT SUBMISSION) NEW FIRE DEPARTMNET CONNECTION FCC ROOM © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 3:58:30 PM A0.6.1 I131 - FIRE ACCESS & EGRESS DIAGRAM - GROUND INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" I131 - FIRE ACCESS PLAN DIAGRAM - GROUND 01 FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM LEGEND 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 150 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 Y XN 25.00 10.00 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 25.0 0 10.00 GEN E R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X25 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 90°GAT E 90°GAT E 25.00 10.00 GEN E R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X2 5 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 25.00 10.0 0 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 90°GATE 90°GATE C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 _LAND ARCHUCS TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TC 7 . 7 6 TC 7 . 5 5 TC 7 . 2 5 TC 6 . 9 4 TC 7 . 7 8 TC 7 . 6 9 TC 1 1 . 5 4 TC 1 1 . 1 4 TC 9 . 3 4 TC 9 . 1 2 TC 1 1 . 6 1 TC 7 . 3 4 FG10.42 FG10.26 FG11.30 FG9.51 FG9.82 FG10.04 FG10.23 FG9.77 F G 9 . 3 0 FG 9 . 6 5 F G 9 . 8 1 FG 9 . 1 2 FG 9 . 4 9 TC 7 . 3 4 TC 8 . 7 9 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TP 1 0 . 3 4 TP 1 1 . 0 9 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15. 5 15. 0 14.5 14 . 0 14. 0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 STAGE AT 3.5 4.16 3.30 STOPSTOP 26. 0 0 SSS UPDN FIRE HOSE LINE REACH PEDESTRIAN EGRESS PATH FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD - 20' WIDE MINIMUM FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS ROAD - 26' WIDE FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING ZONE - 15'~30' TO ROOF NEW FIRE HYDRANT (TBD FOR NEXT SUBMISSION) NEW FIRE DEPARTMNET CONNECTION FCC ROOM 28 A0.6.6 16 A0.6.6 26 A0.6.6 18 A0.6.6 BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SL O U G H T E R M I N A L C T ( R I G H T O F W A Y ) T131S C T131S B T131S A T131N B T131N A T131S D T131 PARKING GARAGE 16 A0.6.5 02 A0.6.5 01 A0.6.5 01 A0.6.6 17 A0.6.5 26 A0.6.5 27 A0.6.5 T131 N 1,090' - 6" TOTAL PROVIDED FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING LENGTH WITH ROOF ACCESS T131 S 643' - 0" TOTAL PROVIDED FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING LENGTH WITH ROOF ACCESS T131 PARKING GARAGE503' - 0" TOTAL PROVIDED FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING LENGTH WITH ROOF ACCESS 30'-0"ADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 3:57:57 PM A0.6.2 I131 - FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM - ROOF INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM LEGEND SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" I131 - FIRE ACCESS PLAN DIAGRAM - ROOF 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 151 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 15 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" PR O P E R T Y L I N E 9' - 0" ASL R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PV CANOPY 13'-10" OUTDOOR TERRACE 11 2 ' - 0 " 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 10'-0" R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'-0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" 9' - 0" ASL R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PV CANOPY 22'-2" OUTDOOR TERRACE 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 11 2 ' - 0 " OUTDOOR TERRACE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" 13' - 6" ASL R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PV CANOPY 18'-4" OUTDOOR TERRACE 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 11 2 ' - 0 " 11'-8" PENTHOUSE R&D / OFFICE BOH LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'-0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" 13' - 0" ASL PV CANOPY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE 11'-0" OUTDOOR TERRACE 11 2 ' - 0 " 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 12'-0" R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE 10' - 0" ASL PR O P E R T Y L I N E 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'-0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0"10'-1" PARKING PARKING T131 GARAGE LEVEL 01-1' - 0" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 02+10' - 4" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 03+20' - 6" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 04+30' - 8" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 05+40' - 10" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 06+51' - 0" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 07+61' - 2" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 08+71' - 4" T131 GARAGE PENTHOUSE+99' - 5" T131 GARAGE ROOF+81' - 6" 11 ' - 4 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 7 ' - 1 1 " 10 0 ' - 5 " PARKING (13' ABV SEA LEVEL) PARKING PARKING PARKINGT131 GARAGE LEVEL B7+0' - 0" 11' - 2" ASL 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0"13'-10" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 01-1' - 0" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 02+10' - 4" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 03+20' - 6" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 04+30' - 8" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 05+40' - 10" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 06+51' - 0" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 07+61' - 2" T131 GARAGE LEVEL 08+71' - 4" T131 GARAGE PENTHOUSE+99' - 5" T131 GARAGE ROOF+81' - 6" 11 ' - 4 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 7 ' - 1 1 " 10 0 ' - 5 " PARKING PARKING PARKING (13' ABV SEA LEVEL) PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING T131 GARAGE LEVEL B7+0' - 0" © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:40:32 PM A0.6.5 I131N - FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM - SECTIONS INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131N A - 1 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131N A - 2 02 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131N B - 1 16 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131N B - 2 17 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131 GARAGE - 1 26 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131 GARAGE - 2 27 NOTE: ALL FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS ZONES TO BE CONFIRMED WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 152 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6"PV CANOPY 15 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" PR O P E R T Y L I N E 13' - 6" ASL 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 25'-6"27'-5" PENTHOUSE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE BOH LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " 26'-0" 13' - 6" ASL 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " PV CANOPY BOH 15° 1 5 ° 13'-0" 13'-0" R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE 22'-0" LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6"PV CANOPY 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'-0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" 11' - 0" ASL PR O P E R T Y L I N E 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 12'-10" OUTDOOR TERRACE BOH R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE 11'-0" LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" PR O P E R T Y L I N E 11' - 0" ASL PV CANOPY 18'-9" 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 11'-0" BOH R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" PV CANOPYPV CANOPY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE 13' - 6" ASL 1' - 6 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 12'-0" 11'-0" 26'-0"23'-0" 15 ° 13'-0" 13'-0" 15° 1 0 0 ' - 0 " 5 ' - 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" 1 5 ° 13'-0"13'-0" 15° 10 0 ' - 0 " 5'- 0 " FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS STAGING 26'-0" OUTDOOR TERRACE OUTDOOR TERRACE R&D / OFFICE PENTHOUSE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE RESTAURANT R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:40:40 PM A0.6.6 I131S - FIRE ACCESS DIAGRAM - SECTIONS INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131S C - BREEZEWAY 26 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131S C - 2 28 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131S B - 1 16 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131S B - 2 18 NOTE: ALL FIRE AERIAL APPARATUS ZONES TO BE CONFIRMED WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" FIRE ACCESS SECTION - I131N B TO I131 S A 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 153 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 0 . 0 _ C O V R . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 8 : 3 8 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN VICINITY MAP SHEET INDEX SUBJECT PARCEL:131 TERMINAL COURT APN: 015-113-210 APPLICANT:US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and GOLDEN GATE PRODUCE TERMINAL, LTD., a California limited partnership STEELWAVE, LLC 101 CALIFORNIA ST, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111CONTACT: BRIDGET METZ ARCHITECT:SKIDMORE, OWINGS & MERRIL LLP (SOM) ONE MARITIME PLAZA SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 CIVIL ENGINEER:WARE MALCOMB 4683 CHABOT DR #300 PLEASANTON, CA 94588CONTACT: JON LORENZO, P.E.(925) 480-6083SITE AREA: GROSS 26.310± AC NET 26.310± AC NUMBER OF EXISTING PARCELS:6 PARCEL: PARCEL 1: 8.690 AC TRACT A, PARCEL 1: 15.757 AC TRACT A, PARCEL 2: 0.352 AC TRACT A, PARCEL 3: 0.243 AC TRACT B, PARCEL B: 0.579 AC TRACT C, PARCEL B: 0.689 AC TOTAL EXISTING LOT AREA: 26.310 AC NET NUMBER OF PROPOSED PARCELS: 8 PARCEL: PARCEL 1: 0.579 AC PARCEL 2: 8.081 AC PARCEL 3: 2.074 AC PARCEL 4: 0.352 AC PARCEL 5: 6.534 AC PARCEL 6: 1.948 AC PARCEL 7: 2.532 AC PARCEL 8: 4.210 AC TOTAL PROPOSED LOT AREA: 26.310 AC SUBDIVISION MAP FOR UP TO 17 COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS GENERAL PROJECT NOTESSURVEY NOTES SURVEY BENCHMARK UTILITY PROVIDERS LEGEND WATER SYSTEM:CAL WATER STORM DRAIN SYSTEM:CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GAS & ELECTRIC:PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC (P.G.&E.) CABLE:COMCAST SEWER:CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO GRADING:TENTATIVE GRADES FOR THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION IS SHOWN ON SHEETS C2.0 DIMENSIONS:LOT DIMENSIONS AND AREAS SHOWN HEREIN ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO MINOR CHANGES DURING FINAL DESIGN UTILITIES:ALL PROPOSED UTILITIES SHALL BE PLACED UNDERGROUND. ALL STORM DRAINS, SANITARY SEWERS AND WATER MAINS SHALL ADHERE TO MINIMUM SIZES & SLOPES PER THE GOVERNING AGENCIES. LEGEND BUILDING FACE BUILDING OVERHANG CURB LINE RETAINING / SCREENING WALL, HEIGHT AS INDICATED C-CURBBACK-L C-DWY-L C-RAMP-L C-STAIR-L FENCE LINE, TYPE / HEIGHT AS INDICATED STORM DRAIN LINE SANITARY SEWER LINE WATER LINE NATURAL GAS LINE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC LINE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC LINE COMMUNICATION LINE UNKNOWN UTILITY LINE STORM DRAIN MANHOLE DRAIN INLET DRAIN INLET ON CURB SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT WATER METER / BOX WATER VALVE BACKFLOW PREVENTOR BACKFLOW PREVENTOR WATER VALVE FIRE HYDRANT POST INDICATOR VALVE HOSE BIBB IRRIGATION CONTROL / VALVE BOX GAS VALVE COMMUNICATIONS MANHOLE COMMUNICATIONS VAULT / PULLBOX ELECTRIC VAULT / PULLBOX ELECTROLIER WITH MAST ARM DOUBLE ELECTROLIER WITH MAST ARMS POWER POLE GUY WIRE ANCHOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL WITH ELECTROLIER STREET LIGHT PULLBOX MISCELLANEOUS MANHOLE MISCELLANEOUS PULLBOX MISCELLANEOUS CLEANOUT SIGN BOLLARD SPOT ELEVATION19 7 . 3 0 STR I P E 198. 7 0 CON C 198. 7 6 BOW 19 5 . 1 7 TC 19 4 . 7 6 FL TREE WITH DRIPLINE, SIZE AS INDICATED12 " O A K TRAFFIC SIGNAL ON POLE M MONITORING WELL C-0.0 COVER SHEET 1. ALL DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED IN A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT, PREPARED BYFIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 22, 2022, ORDER NO. NCS-1111976-SC. NO LIABILITY ISASSUMED FOR MATTERS OF RECORD NOT STATED IN SAID PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT THAT MAY AFFECT THEBOUNDARY LINES, EXCEPTIONS, OR EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY. 3. THE TYPES, LOCATIONS, SIZES AND/OR DEPTHS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WERE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES OF VARYING RELIABILITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THAT ONLY ACTUAL EXCAVATION WILL REVEAL THE TYPES, EXTENT, SIZES, LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (A REASONABLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO LOCATE AND DELINEATE ALL UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.) HOWEVER, THE SURVEYOR CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THECOMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF ITS DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY BEENCOUNTERED, BUT WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. 4. A.P.N.: 015-113-210, 015-113-240, 015-113-420,015-113-440 AND 015-113-450 5. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASES UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 3, EPOCH DATE OF 2010.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTIONS 8801-8819; SAID BEARINGS ARE BASED LOCALLY UPON GPS FIELD-OBSERVED TIES TO TO THE FOLLOWING CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE NETWORK, OR EQUIVALENT STATIONS: CORS ID: PID:NORTHING: EASTING:CAPO DP2481 2,087,091.26 6,063,572.64P176DN7542 1,999,593.78 6,022,762.07TIBBDO2389 2,152,696.66 5,999,690.58 6. BENCHMARK: NGS MONUMENT "HPGN D CA 04 FG": NGS BRASS DISK LOCATED ON THE WEST SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY 101. ELEVATION: 8.0 FEET (GPS OBSERVED) (DATUM) NAVD 1988 7. FLOOD ZONE NOTE:THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD INSURANCERATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL NUMBER 065062 0043 F, DATED APRIL 5, 2019, AS BEING LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONES"AE (EL 10)" AND "X"; ZONE "AE (EL 10)": AREAS OF THE 1% ANNUAL FLOOD (100-YEAR FLOOD), ALSO KNOW AS THE BASE FLOOD, IS THE FLOOD THAT HAS A 1% CHANCE OF BEING EQUALED OR EXCEEDED IN ANY GIVEN YEAR; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS DETERMINED. ZONE "X":AREAS OF 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS OFPROTECTED LEVEES FROM 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD. INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE FEMA WEBSITE (WWW.FEMA.GOV) ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2022. NOT TO SCALE ABBREVIATIONS ARV AIR RELEASE VALVE CB CATCH BASIN COM COMMUNICATION BOX CP CONCRETE PIPE DI IE INVERT ELEVATION EB ELECTRIC BOX EP EDGE OF PAVEMENT EV ELECTRIC VAULT EW EDGE OF WALK FL FLOW LINE FOB FIBER OPTIC BOX GV GAS VALVE LIP LIP OF GUTTER PED PEDESTAL PV PAVEMENT RE RIM ELEVATION SDCO STORM DRAIN CLEAN OUT SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE SLB STREET LIGHT BOX SSCO SANITARY SEWER CLEAN OUT SSMH SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE TC TOP OF CURB TSB TRAFFIC SIGNAL BOX UB UTILITY BOX WB WATER BOX GRADING ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION BW BACK OF WALKBOWBOTTOM OF WALKBTMBOTTOMCCONCRETE DG DECOMPOSED GRANITE EC EXISTING CONCRETE EFL EXISTING FLOWLINE EG EXISTING GROUND EL ELEVATIONEPEXISTING PAVEMENTEXEXISTINGFFFINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FG FINISHED GROUND FP FINISHED PAD ELEVATION FL FLOWLINE G GROUND GB GRADE BREAKMAXMAXIMUMMEMATCH EXISTINGMINMINIMUMPPAVEMENTRLRIDGE LINE TC TOP OF CURB TOW TOP OF WALL TYP TYPICAL GENERAL ABBREVIATION DESCRIPTION LSCP LANDSCAPE CAUTION!! THE EXISTING UTILITIES AND SITE CONDITIONS ON THESE DRAWINGS ARE BASED ON VARYING SOURCES OF DATA. NOT ALL INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY BACKGROUNDS HAS BEEN FIELDVERIFIED. ALL CONDITIONS SHALL BE CONFIRMED IN THE FIELD PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING THE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL LOCATION OF ALL UTILITIES PRIOR TO COMMENCING WORK. EXISTING UTILITIES EXISTING WITHIN THE PROJECT AREA MUST BE POTHOLED ANDFIELD-VERIFIED PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION. THE ENGINEER SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY DAMAGE OR REPAIRS TO EXISTING UTILITIES DUE TO DISCREPANCIES BETWEEN FIELD CONDITIONS AND THOSE SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. BACKGROUND DATA NOTE BENCHMARK: NGS MONUMENT "HPGN D CA 04 FG":NGS BRASS DISK LOCATED ON THE WEST SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY 101. ELEVATION: 8.0 FEET (GPS OBSERVED) (DATUM) NAVD 1988 SHEET NUMBER SHEET NAME C0.0 COVER SHEET C1.0 EXISTING PARCEL MAP C2.0 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY C2.1 DEMOLITION PLAN C3.0 PRELIMINARY OVERALL GRADING PLAN C3.1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN C3.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN C4.0 PRELIMINARY OVERALL UTILITY PLAN C5.0 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN C5.1 STORMWATER DETAILS C6.0 PRELIMINARY SITE FIRE APPARATUS PLAN INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL COURT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94080 C1.1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 15 4 5.0 0 ' E A S E M E N T [4 3 3 3 O . R . 5 9 4 ] N 03°47'44" W 836.44'N 03°42'49" W 300.04'N 05°53'54" W 260.38'N 02°48'57" W 170.27' S 8 0 ° 1 8 ' 4 3 " E 44 8 . 3 1 ' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1233.00' S 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " W 9 0 . 5 1 ' S 02°48'28" E 249.20' N 50 ° 0 2 ' 4 7 " W 460. 4 9 ' 22.7 5 ' 483. 2 4 ' NON-ACCESS[6127 O.R. 582] N 7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " W 12 0 . 0 0 ' N 75°29' 0 8 " W 13.66' S 14°12'16" E 245.36' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 275.00' N 77°10' 0 8 " W 33.00' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1350.37' R=596.14'D=31°26'47"L=327.19' R=563.14'D=32°31'08"L=319.62' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 249.85' 234.48' CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 2[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 3[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 4[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 29[2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32[2 PM 2] PARCEL A[66 PM 82] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D POINT O F B E G I N N I N G TRACT A - P A R C E L 1 N 12°49' 5 2 " E 1060.00' (N 7 8 ° 2 1 ' W ) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) (N 11°39' E ) ( S 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " W ) (S 03°59'20" E) (S 03°53' E) (S 11°39' W ) (N 5 1 ° 1 3 ' 3 9 " W ) N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 6 4 7 . 5 2 ' S 02°42'08" E35.00' 1 2 4 . 1 5 ' (N 76°40' W ) TRACT APARCEL 115.757± A C R E S 1 2 5 . 0 0 ' TRACT APARCEL 20.352± A C R E S (N 11°39' E ) POINT OF BEGINNINGTRACT A - PARCEL 2 N 02°41'04" W30.00' 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' (N 03°51'56" W) N 02°41'04" W30.00' (S 03°51'56" E) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) T R A C T A P A R C E L 3 0 . 2 4 3 ± A C R E S 908.90'908.90' TRACT BPARCEL B LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 0.689± A C R E S [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] S 77°10' 0 8 " E 33.00' (S 78°21'00 " E ) (N 78°21'00 " W ) (S 11°39' W ) TRACT CLOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 1 2 0.579± A C R E S [Doc No. 1 9 9 9 - 0 4 6 6 3 3 ] 441.47' 441.47' (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) NEW PA R C E L B (S 8 1 ° 2 9 ' 3 5 " E ) (N 03°59'20" W)(1573.72') EXCEPTION TOPARCEL ONE[6127 O.R. 582] PARCEL ONE8.690± ACRES 10 . 0 0 ' D R A I N A G E E A S E M E N T [1 3 0 9 O . R . 4 7 6 ] 6 20 . 0 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T [2 3 7 0 O . R . 2 0 2 ] [D o c N o . 2 0 1 9 - 0 4 4 2 5 6 ] 7 SPUR T R A C K E A S E M E N T [2428 O. R . 2 1 9 ] 8 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 9 9 30.00' W.L.E. [4293 O.R. 20 ]10 11 PUBLIC STRE E T E A S E M E N T [4778 O.R. 722 ] 12 40 LOT 5[35 RSM 10-11] HANNA INVESTMENTS LLC[Doc No. 2010-079898] LANDS OFT E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SHAW RD LLC[Doc No. 2019-090924] LANDS OF GIANNINI [Doc No. 2006-100091] LANDS OF CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SANITARTY SEWER PUMP STATION NO. 11 LANDS OF DEMARIA [Doc No. 2015-060382] LANDS OF PACIFIC PLATINUM TRUST [Doc No. 2016-119675] LANDS OF TWO PLUS SIX LTD [Doc No. 1999-911023] LANDS OF FJPP PARTNERS [Doc No. 1994-190267] LANDS OF SEMIEN [Doc No. 2012-017568] LANDS OF ANDRIGHETTO [Doc No. 2013-101808] LANDS OF PEKING HANDICRAFT INC [Doc No. 1995-073405] LANDS OF IPT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DC LP [Doc No. 2016-109091] LANDS OF POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCORP INC [Doc No. 2002-011514] LANDS OF [Doc No. 2004-202105] N 88°33' 5 2 " E 34.74' (N 87°23'0 0 " E ) 10 . 0 0 ' P I P E L I N E EA S E M E N T © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 1 . 0 _ E P C L . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 8 : 2 0 A M A J O R D A N 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C1.0 EXISTING PARCEL MAP NOTES PROPERTY LINE CENTERLINE EASEMENT ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE MONUMENT LINE NON-ACCESS BUILDING SETBACK LINE 1. ALL DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED IN A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT, PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 22, 2022, ORDER NO. NCS-1111976-SC. NO LIABILITY ISASSUMED FOR MATTERS OF RECORD NOT STATED IN SAID PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT THAT MAY AFFECT THE BOUNDARY LINES, EXCEPTIONS, OR EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY. 3. THE TYPES, LOCATIONS, SIZES AND/OR DEPTHS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WERE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES OF VARYING RELIABILITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THATONLY ACTUAL EXCAVATION WILL REVEAL THE TYPES, EXTENT, SIZES, LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (A REASONABLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO LOCATE AND DELINEATE ALL UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.) HOWEVER, THE SURVEYOR CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF ITS DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED, BUT WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. 4. A.P.N.: 015-113-210, 015-113-240, 015-113-420, 015-113-440 AND 015-113-450 5. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASES UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 3, EPOCH DATE OF 2010.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTIONS 8801-8819; SAID BEARINGS ARE BASED LOCALLY UPON GPS FIELD-OBSERVED TIES TO TO THE FOLLOWING CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE NETWORK, OR EQUIVALENT STATIONS: CORS ID: PID:NORTHING: EASTING:CAPO DP2481 2,087,091.26 6,063,572.64P176DN7542 1,999,593.78 6,022,762.07TIBBDO2389 2,152,696.66 5,999,690.58 6. BENCHMARK: NGS MONUMENT "HPGN D CA 04 FG": NGS BRASS DISK LOCATED ON THE WEST SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY 101. ELEVATION: 8.0 FEET (GPS OBSERVED) (DATUM) NAVD 1988 7. FLOOD ZONE NOTE:THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL NUMBER 065062 0043 F, DATED APRIL 5, 2019, AS BEING LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONES "AE (EL10)" AND "X"; ZONE "AE (EL 10)": AREAS OF THE 1% ANNUAL FLOOD (100-YEAR FLOOD), ALSO KNOW AS THE BASE FLOOD, IS THE FLOOD THAT HAS A 1% CHANCE OF BEING EQUALED OR EXCEEDED IN ANY GIVEN YEAR; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONSDETERMINED. ZONE "X":AREAS OF 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS OF PROTECTED LEVEES FROM 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD. INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE FEMA WEBSITE (WWW.FEMA.GOV) ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2022. LEGEND OWNER INFO ENGINEER INFO WARE MALCOMB4683 CHABOT DR #300 PLEASANTON, CA 94588 CONTACT: MICHAEL MURPHY, P.E. #43496 (950)480-6083 UTILITY PURVEYOR INFO WATER CALWATER ELECTRIC PG&E GAS PG&E FIRE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT SEWER CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ZONING INFORMATION 101 TERMINAL COURT - BTP-H 131 TERMINAL COURT - MIH (CURRENT PLANNING APPLICATIONS WOULD AMEND TO BTP-H) US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and GOLDEN GATE PRODUCE TERMINAL, LTD., a California limited partnership NAME: BRIDGET METZ ADDRESS: 999 BAKER WAY, SUITE 200 SAN MATEO, CA 94404 PHONE NUMBER: 925-364-0898 NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 15 5 5.0 0 ' E A S E M E N T [4 3 3 3 O . R . 5 9 4 ] N 03°47'44" W 836.44'N 03°42'49" W 300.04'N 05°53'54" W 260.38'N 02°48'57" W 170.27' S 8 0 ° 1 8 ' 4 3 " E 44 8 . 3 1 ' N 50 ° 0 2 ' 4 7 " W 425. 6 6 ' 57.5 8 ' 483. 2 4 ' NON-ACCESS[6127 O.R. 582] N 7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " W 12 0 . 0 0 ' N 75°29' 0 8 " W 13.66' S 14°12'16" E 245.36' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 275.00' N 77°10' 0 8 " W 33.00' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1350.37' R=596.14'D=31°26'47"L=327.19' R=563.14'D=32°31'08"L=319.62' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 249.85' 234.48' CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 2[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 3[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 4[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 29[2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32[2 PM 2] PARCEL A[66 PM 82] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D POINT O F B E G I N N I N G TRACT A - P A R C E L 1 N 12°49' 5 2 " E 1060.00' (N 7 8 ° 2 1 ' W ) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) (N 11°39' E ) (S 03°53' E) (N 5 1 ° 1 3 ' 3 9 " W ) N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 6 4 7 . 5 2 ' S 02°42'08" E35.00' (N 76°40' W ) PARCEL 28.081± ACRES 1 2 5 . 0 0 ' (N 11°39' E ) POINT OF BEGINNINGTRACT A - PARCEL 2 N 02°41'04" W30.00' 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' (N 03°51'56" W) N 02°41'04" W30.00' (S 03°51'56" E) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) 908.90'908.90' PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] S 77°10' 0 8 " E 33.00' (S 78°21'00 " E ) (N 78°21'00 " W ) (S 11°39' W ) TRACT C 441.47' 441.47' (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 8 1 ° 2 9 ' 3 5 " E ) (N 03°59'20" W)(1573.72') EXCEPTION TOPARCEL ONE[6127 O.R. 582] PARCEL 84.210± ACRES 10 . 0 0 ' D R A I N A G E E A S E M E N T [1 3 0 9 O . R . 4 7 6 ] 6 20 . 0 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T [2 3 7 0 O . R . 2 0 2 ] [D o c N o . 2 0 1 9 - 0 4 4 2 5 6 ] 7 SPUR T R A C K E A S E M E N T [2428 O. R . 2 1 9 ] 8 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 9 9 30.00' W.L.E. [4293 O.R. 20 ]10 11 PUBLIC STRE E T E A S E M E N T [4778 O.R. 722 ] 12 40 LOT 5[35 RSM 10-11] HANNA INVESTMENTS LLC[Doc No. 2010-079898] LANDS OFT E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SHAW RD LLC[Doc No. 2019-090924] LANDS OF GIANNINI [Doc No. 2006-100091] LANDS OF CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SANITARTY SEWER PUMP STATION NO. 11 LANDS OF DEMARIA [Doc No. 2015-060382] LANDS OF PACIFIC PLATINUM TRUST [Doc No. 2016-119675] LANDS OF TWO PLUS SIX LTD [Doc No. 1999-911023] LANDS OF FJPP PARTNERS [Doc No. 1994-190267] LANDS OF SEMIEN [Doc No. 2012-017568] LANDS OF ANDRIGHETTO [Doc No. 2013-101808] LANDS OF PEKING HANDICRAFT INC [Doc No. 1995-073405] LANDS OF IPT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DC LP [Doc No. 2016-109091] LANDS OF POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCORP INC [Doc No. 2002-011514] LANDS OF [Doc No. 2004-202105] N 88°33' 5 2 " E 34.74' (N 87°23'0 0 " E ) 10 . 0 0 ' P I P E L I N E EA S E M E N T PARCEL 56.534± ACRES PARCEL 32.074± ACRES 46 . 0 0 ' N O - B U I L D EA S E M E N T NO - B U I L D E A S E M E N T (W I D T H V A R I E S ) PARCEL 61.948± ACRES PARCEL 72.532± ACRES PARCE L 10.579± A C R E S PARCEL 40.352± ACRES PROPOSED PROPERTYLINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20.00 ' CALW A T E R EASE M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20.00'CALWAT E R EASEME N T 7.5 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00'SANITAR Y SEWEREASEME N T 10 . 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEM E N T 10.00' STORM D R A I N EASEM E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEM E N T 7.5 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 7. 5 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 20. 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEM E N T 10 . 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEMENT 10.00' PG&EEASEME N T 10.00' PG&E EASEMENT 10 . 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT STORM DRAINAGEEASEMENT 8.10'STORMDR A I N EASEMENT 10. 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' S T O R M D R A I N E A S E M E N T 10. 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&EEASEME N T 10 . 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' TE M P O R A R Y E V A E EA S E M E N T 20.00'TEMPO R A R Y EVAEEASEME N T 25 . 0 0 ' TE M P O R A R Y EV A E EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y S E W E R EA S E M E N T 10.00'SANITA R Y SEWEREASEM E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y SE W E R EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y SE W E R EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y SE W E R EA S E M E N T 15 . 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T 10.0 0 ' STO R M D R A I N EAS E M E N T 6. 5 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T N8 0 ° 1 8 ' 5 6 " W 44 6 . 3 0 ' N8 7 ° 5 4 ' 3 9 " E 36 7 . 2 7 ' S7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " E 23 6 . 6 0 ' ∆=32°19'04"R=93.00'L=52.46' S44° 5 1 ' 0 4 " E 124. 0 9 ' ∆=72°30'47"R=60.00'L=75.94' N 6 2 ° 3 8 ' 0 9 " E 1 0 9 . 3 5 ' N12°49'5 2 " E 521.80' S02°48'57"E142.13' S38°58'44"W 57.53' ∆=10°03'57" R=300.35' L=52.77'∆=21°40'28" R=150.00' L=56.74'∆=10°21'47" R=500.00' L=90.44' ∆=12°39'38" R=288.00' L=63.64' ∆=4°51'39"R=500.00'L=42.42' S06°16'21"W 122.25' ∆=52°30'16" R=50.00'L=45.82' S 5 8 ° 4 6 ' 3 7 " W 1 2 4 . 9 2 ' ∆ = 2 ° 4 7 ' 0 6 " R = 8 7 4 . 8 0 ' L = 4 2 . 5 2 ' S12°49'5 2 " W 810.54' 100.00' ( F U T U R E ) UTAH A V E N U E OVERC R O S S I N G 10 . 0 0 ' P U B L I C PE D E S T R I A N AC C E S S EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' P U B L I C PE D E S T R I A N AC C E S S EA S E M E N T 10.00' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT 10 . 0 0 ' P U B L I C PE D E S T R I A N AC C E S S EA S E M E N T 10.00' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 1 . 1 _ T M A P - S B M T . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 2 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN R E G I S T E R E D P R O F E S S I O N A L E N G I N E E R C I V I LS T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A No. 43696M I C H A E L G. M U R P H Y 08/20/2025 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROPOSED LOT LINE LEGEND CENTERLINE PROPOSED EASEMENT OWNER INFO ENGINEER INFO WARE MALCOMB 4683 CHABOT DR #300 PLEASANTON, CA 94588 CONTACT: MICHAEL MURPHY, P.E. #43496 (950)480-6083 UTILITY PURVEYOR INFO PROPOSED EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT WATER CALWATER ELECTRIC PG&E GAS PG&E FIRE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT SEWER CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C-1.1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (SUBDIVISION MAP FOR UP TO 17 COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS) PROPOSED PG&E EASEMENT PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT PROPOSED CALWATER EASEMENT ZONING INFORMATION 101 TERMINAL COURT - BTP-H 131 TERMINAL COURT - MIH (CURRENT PLANNING APPLICATIONS WOULD AMEND TO BTP-H) TEMPORARY EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT NO-BUILD EASEMENT EASEMENT DISPOSITION TABLE US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and GOLDEN GATE PRODUCE TERMINAL, LTD., a California limited partnership NAME: BRIDGET METZ ADDRESS: 999 BAKER WAY, SUITE 200 SAN MATEO, CA 94404 PHONE NUMBER: 925-364-0898 NOTES 1. ALL DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED IN A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT, PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 22, 2022, ORDER NO. NCS-1111976-SC. NO LIABILITY ISASSUMED FOR MATTERS OF RECORD NOT STATED IN SAID PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT THAT MAY AFFECT THE BOUNDARY LINES, EXCEPTIONS, OR EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY. 3. THE TYPES, LOCATIONS, SIZES AND/OR DEPTHS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WERE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES OF VARYING RELIABILITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THATONLY ACTUAL EXCAVATION WILL REVEAL THE TYPES, EXTENT, SIZES, LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (A REASONABLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO LOCATE AND DELINEATE ALL UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.) HOWEVER, THE SURVEYOR CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF ITS DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED, BUT WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. 4. A.P.N.: 015-113-210, 015-113-240, 015-113-420, 015-113-440 AND 015-113-450 5. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASES UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 3, EPOCH DATE OF 2010.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTIONS 8801-8819; SAID BEARINGS ARE BASED LOCALLY UPON GPS FIELD-OBSERVED TIES TO TO THE FOLLOWING CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE NETWORK, OR EQUIVALENT STATIONS: CORS ID: PID:NORTHING: EASTING:CAPO DP2481 2,087,091.26 6,063,572.64P176DN7542 1,999,593.78 6,022,762.07TIBBDO2389 2,152,696.66 5,999,690.58 6. BENCHMARK: NGS MONUMENT "HPGN D CA 04 FG": NGS BRASS DISK LOCATED ON THE WEST SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY 101. ELEVATION: 8.0 FEET (GPS OBSERVED) (DATUM) NAVD 1988 7. FLOOD ZONE NOTE:THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL NUMBER 065062 0043 F, DATED APRIL 5, 2019, AS BEING LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONES "AE (EL10)" AND "X"; ZONE "AE (EL 10)": AREAS OF THE 1% ANNUAL FLOOD (100-YEAR FLOOD), ALSO KNOW AS THE BASE FLOOD, IS THE FLOOD THAT HAS A 1% CHANCE OF BEING EQUALED OR EXCEEDED IN ANY GIVEN YEAR; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONSDETERMINED. ZONE "X":AREAS OF 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS OF PROTECTED LEVEES FROM 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD. INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE FEMA WEBSITE (WWW.FEMA.GOV) ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2022. PROPOSED PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACCESS EASEMENT NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 15 6 5.0 0 ' E A S E M E N T [4 3 3 3 O . R . 5 9 4 ] N 03°47'44" W 836.44'N 03°42'49" W 300.04'N 05°53'54" W 260.38'N 02°48'57" W 170.27' S 8 0 ° 1 8 ' 4 3 " E 44 8 . 3 1 ' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1233.00' S 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " W 9 0 . 5 1 ' S 02°48'28" E 249.20' N 50 ° 0 2 ' 4 7 " W 460. 4 9 ' 22.7 5 ' 483. 2 4 ' NON-ACCESS[6127 O.R. 582] N 7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " W 12 0 . 0 0 ' N 75°29' 0 8 " W 13.66' S 14°12'16" E 245.36' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 275.00' N 77°10' 0 8 " W 33.00' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1350.37' R=596.14'D=31°26'47"L=327.19' R=563.14'D=32°31'08"L=319.62' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 249.85' 234.48' CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 2[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 3[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 4[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 29[2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32[2 PM 2] PARCEL A[66 PM 82] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D POINT O F B E G I N N I N G TRACT A - P A R C E L 1 N 12°49' 5 2 " E 1060.00' (N 7 8 ° 2 1 ' W ) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) (N 11°39' E ) ( S 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " W ) (S 03°59'20" E) (S 03°53' E) (S 11°39' W ) (N 5 1 ° 1 3 ' 3 9 " W ) N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 6 4 7 . 5 2 ' S 02°42'08" E35.00' 1 2 4 . 1 5 ' (N 76°40' W ) TRACT APARCEL 115.757± A C R E S 1 2 5 . 0 0 ' TRACT APARCEL 20.352± A C R E S (N 11°39' E ) POINT OF BEGINNINGTRACT A - PARCEL 2 N 02°41'04" W30.00' 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' (N 03°51'56" W) N 02°41'04" W30.00' (S 03°51'56" E) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) T R A C T A P A R C E L 3 0 . 2 4 3 ± A C R E S 908.90'908.90' TRACT BPARCEL B LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 0.689± A C R E S [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] S 77°10' 0 8 " E 33.00' (S 78°21'00 " E ) (N 78°21'00 " W ) (S 11°39' W ) TRACT CLOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 1 2 0.579± A C R E S [Doc No. 1 9 9 9 - 0 4 6 6 3 3 ] 441.47' 441.47' (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) NEW PA R C E L B (S 8 1 ° 2 9 ' 3 5 " E ) (N 03°59'20" W)(1573.72') EXCEPTION TOPARCEL ONE[6127 O.R. 582] PARCEL ONE8.690± ACRES 10 . 0 0 ' D R A I N A G E E A S E M E N T [1 3 0 9 O . R . 4 7 6 ] 6 20 . 0 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T [2 3 7 0 O . R . 2 0 2 ] [D o c N o . 2 0 1 9 - 0 4 4 2 5 6 ] 7 SPUR T R A C K E A S E M E N T [2428 O. R . 2 1 9 ] 8 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 9 9 30.00' W.L.E. [4293 O.R. 20 ]10 11 PUBLIC STRE E T E A S E M E N T [4778 O.R. 722 ] 12 40 LOT 5[35 RSM 10-11] HANNA INVESTMENTS LLC[Doc No. 2010-079898] LANDS OFT E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SHAW RD LLC[Doc No. 2019-090924] LANDS OF GIANNINI [Doc No. 2006-100091] LANDS OF CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SANITARTY SEWER PUMP STATION NO. 11 LANDS OF DEMARIA [Doc No. 2015-060382] LANDS OF PACIFIC PLATINUM TRUST [Doc No. 2016-119675] LANDS OF TWO PLUS SIX LTD [Doc No. 1999-911023] LANDS OF FJPP PARTNERS [Doc No. 1994-190267] LANDS OF SEMIEN [Doc No. 2012-017568] LANDS OF ANDRIGHETTO [Doc No. 2013-101808] LANDS OF PEKING HANDICRAFT INC [Doc No. 1995-073405] LANDS OF IPT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DC LP [Doc No. 2016-109091] LANDS OF POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCORP INC [Doc No. 2002-011514] LANDS OF [Doc No. 2004-202105] N 88°33' 5 2 " E 34.74' (N 87°23'0 0 " E ) 10 . 0 0 ' P I P E L I N E EA S E M E N T © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 2 . 0 _ T O P O . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 4 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN BFP - BACKFLOW PREVENTOR BOLL - BOLLARD BOW - BOTTOM OF WALL BW - BACK OF WALK CLF - CHAIN LINK FENCECOL- COLUMNCOM-MH - COMMUNICATIONS MANHOLECOM-PB - COMMUNICATIONS PULLBOX CONC - CONCRETE DI - DRAIN INLET DW - DOMESTIC WATER EP - EDGE OF PAVEMENT EPB - ELECTRICAL PULLBOX FH - FIRE HYDRANT FL - FLOW LINE FND MON - FOUND SURVEY MONUMENTG- GROUNDGRATE - DRAIN INLET GRATE GUY - GUY WIRE ANCHOR GV - GAS VALVE HB - HOSE BIBB HCR - ACCESSIBLE RAMP IRR - IRRIGATION BOXLIP- LIP OF GUTTERMISC-CO - MISCELLANEOUS CLEANOUTMISC-MH - MISCELLANEOUS MANHOLE MISC-PB - MISCELLANEOUS PULLBOX OH - BUILDING OVERHANG P - PAVEMENT ELEVATION PED - ELECTRIC / TRAFFIC PEDESTAL PIV - POST INDICATOR VALVEPP - POWER POLERAIL - HANDRAIL / GUARDRAILSSCO - SANITARY SEWER CLEANOUT STL-D - DOUBLE-ARM STREET LIGHT STL-S - SINGLE-ARM STREET LIGHT STPB - STREET LIGHT PULLBOX TC - TOP OF CURB TC@CB - TOP OF CURB AT CATCH BASINTOW - TOP OF WALLTRAF-S - TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLETRANS - TRANSFORMER TS - TOP OF STAIR VGUT - VALLEY GUTTER VLT - VAULT WF - WOOD FENCE WM - WATER METER WP - SURVEY WORK POINT WV - WATER VALVE 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C2.0 TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY NOTES NITROGEN PIPE LINE CABLE TV FIBER OPTIC CABLE LIGHTING CONDUIT POST INDICATOR VALVE BACK FLOW PREVENTER CATCH BASIN / DROP INLET WATER METER FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION FENCE PROPERTY LINE LEGEND RECORD INFORMATION W/ REFERENCE TITLE REPORT EXCEPTION NUMBER GAS JOINT TRENCH OVERHEAD TELEPHONE SANITARY SEWER RETAINING WALL SIGN VALVE FIRE HYDRANT FOUND MONUMENT AS NOTED CENTERLINE EASEMENT UTILITY POLE W/ GUY WIRE BOLLARD LIGHT SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC STORM DRAIN WATER ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE STORM DRAIN MANHOLE GAS METER BUILDING LINE W/ DOOR MONITORING WELL TRANSFORMER CLEAN OUT TRAFFIC SIGNAL POLE 1 (100.00') FIRE SERVICE EDGE OF PAVEMENT MONUMENT LINE BUILDING OVERHANG FOUND IRON PIPE OR AS NOTED UTILITY BOX (SIZE VARIES) STREET LIGHT FLAG POLE NON-ACCESS BUILDING SETBACK LINE APPROX. FLOOD ZONE BOUNDARY LIGHT RECLAIMED WATER 1. ALL DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED IN A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT, PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 22, 2022, ORDER NO. NCS-1111976-SC. NO LIABILITY ISASSUMED FOR MATTERS OF RECORD NOT STATED IN SAID PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT THAT MAY AFFECT THE BOUNDARY LINES, EXCEPTIONS, OR EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY. 3. THE TYPES, LOCATIONS, SIZES AND/OR DEPTHS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WERE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES OF VARYING RELIABILITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THATONLY ACTUAL EXCAVATION WILL REVEAL THE TYPES, EXTENT, SIZES, LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (A REASONABLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO LOCATE AND DELINEATE ALL UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.) HOWEVER, THE SURVEYOR CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF ITS DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED, BUT WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. 4. A.P.N.: 015-113-210 5. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARING OF ___________ TAKEN ON THE CENTERLINE OF __________ AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP FILED FOR RECORD ON _________, 19__ IN BOOK ___ OF MAPS AT PAGE ___, _______ COUNTY RECORDS WAS TAKEN AS THE BASIS OF ALL BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON. OR BASIS OF BEARINGS:THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASES UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 3, EPOCH DATE OF 2010.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTIONS 8801-8819; SAIDBEARINGS ARE BASED LOCALLY UPON GPS FIELD-OBSERVED TIES TO TO THE FOLLOWING CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE NETWORK, OR EQUIVALENT STATIONS: CORS ID: PID:NORTHING: EASTING: XXXX AF9702 1,948,853.13 6,229,522.48 XXXX DN7479 1,978,634.36 6,066,752.57 XXXX DE6356 2,023,749.81 6,122,196.49 6. BENCHMARK: CITY OF BENCHMARK " ": THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF A CATCH BASIN HOOF LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST RETURN OF HILLSDALE AVENUE AND CHARTER PARK DRIVE.ELEVATION: XXXX FEET (VERTCON) (DATUM) NAVD 1988 7. FLOOD ZONE NOTE: THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL NUMBER 065062 0043 F, DATED APRIL 5, 2019, AS BEING LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONES "AE (EL 10)" AND "X"; ZONE "AE (EL 10)": AREAS OF THE 1% ANNUAL FLOOD (100-YEAR FLOOD), ALSO KNOW AS THE BASE FLOOD, IS THE FLOOD THAT HAS A 1% CHANCE OF BEING EQUALED OR EXCEEDED IN ANY GIVEN YEAR; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONS DETERMINED. ZONE "X":AREAS OF 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS OF PROTECTED LEVEES FROM 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD. INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE FEMA WEBSITE (WWW.FEMA.GOV) ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2022. CONCRETE INDEX CONTOUR CONTOUR CURB TREE W/ SIZE AND ELEVATION CURB & GUTTER SPOT ELEVATION NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 15 7 5.0 0 ' E A S E M E N T [4 3 3 3 O . R . 5 9 4 ] NON-ACCESS[6127 O.R. 582] CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 2[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 3[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 4[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 29[2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32[2 PM 2] PARCEL A[66 PM 82] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D TRACT APARCEL 115.757± A C R E S TRACT APARCEL 20.352± A C R E S T R A C T A P A R C E L 3 0 . 2 4 3 ± A C R E S TRACT BPARCEL B LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 0.689± A C R E S [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] TRACT CLOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 1 2 0.579± A C R E S [Doc No. 1 9 9 9 - 0 4 6 6 3 3 ] NEW PA R C E L B EXCEPTION TOPARCEL ONE[6127 O.R. 582] PARCEL ONE8.690± ACRES 10 . 0 0 ' D R A I N A G E E A S E M E N T [1 3 0 9 O . R . 4 7 6 ] 6 20 . 0 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T [2 3 7 0 O . R . 2 0 2 ] [D o c N o . 2 0 1 9 - 0 4 4 2 5 6 ] 7 SPUR T R A C K E A S E M E N T [2428 O. R . 2 1 9 ] 8 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 9 9 30.00' W.L.E. [4293 O.R. 20 ]10 11 PUBLIC STRE E T E A S E M E N T [4778 O.R. 722 ] 12 40 LOT 5[35 RSM 10-11] HANNA INVESTMENTS LLC[Doc No. 2010-079898] LANDS OFT E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SHAW RD LLC[Doc No. 2019-090924] LANDS OF GIANNINI [Doc No. 2006-100091] LANDS OF CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SANITARTY SEWER PUMP STATION NO. 11 LANDS OF DEMARIA [Doc No. 2015-060382] LANDS OF PACIFIC PLATINUM TRUST [Doc No. 2016-119675] LANDS OF TWO PLUS SIX LTD [Doc No. 1999-911023] LANDS OF FJPP PARTNERS [Doc No. 1994-190267] LANDS OF SEMIEN [Doc No. 2012-017568] LANDS OF ANDRIGHETTO [Doc No. 2013-101808] LANDS OF PEKING HANDICRAFT INC [Doc No. 1995-073405] LANDS OF IPT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DC LP [Doc No. 2016-109091] LANDS OF POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCORP INC [Doc No. 2002-011514] LANDS OF [Doc No. 2004-202105] 10 . 0 0 ' P I P E L I N E EA S E M E N T 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 3 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 1010 10 10 10 10 10 4 4 4 4 7 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 11 11 11 9 9 8 8 8 12 8 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 12 12 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 4 16 15 15 15 14 14 14 14 17 17 CAP CAP CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE REMOVAL OF EX TRANSFORMER WITH PG&E 16 CONTRACTOR TOCOORDINATE REMOVAL OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES WITH PG&E CONTRACTOR TOCOORDINATE REMOVAL OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINESWITH PG&E CONTRACTOR TOCOORDINATE REMOVAL OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES WITH PG&E CONTRACTOR TOCOORDINATE REMOVAL OF OVERHEAD UTILITY LINES WITH PG&E 5 6 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 2 . 1 _ D E M O . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 4 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C2.1 PRELIMINARY DEMOLITION PLAN DEMOLITION KEYNOTES REMOVE EXISTING ELECTRIC REMOVE EXISTING STRUCTURE REMOVE EXISTING CURB AND SIDEWALK REMOVE EXISTING STORM DRAIN FIBER ROLLS CONSTRUCTION FENCING EXISTING INLET TO REMAIN PROTECT EXISTING SANITARY SEWER PIPE PROTECT EXISTING STORM DRAIN PIPE INLET PROTECTION REMOVE AND PROTECT EXISTING SOLAR PANELS TO BE RE-PURPOSED REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER REMOVE EXISTING GAS LINE REMOVE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE PROTECT EXISTING SANITARY SEWER MANHOLE PROTECT EXISTING OUTFALL REMOVE EXISTING FH, FDC AND PIV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 REMOVE EX CURB, WALL OR CONCRETE ETC EX UTILITY TO BE REMOVED TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION FENCE EX BUILDING LINE REMOVE EXISTING BUILDING SLAB AND FOOTINGS AND ANY REBAR. RECYCLE CONCRETE PER GEOTECHNICALRECOMMENDATIONS. REMOVE AC PAVING AND BASEROCK. STABILIZE EXISTING SUBGRADE AND RECYCLE AC PAVING AND BASEROCK PER GEOTECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS. LEGEND FIBER ROLL / SILT FENCE BARRIER SEE ON SHEET C7.1 INLET PROTECTION SEE DETAIL A FOR FIELD INLET ANDDETAIL ON SHEET C7.1 EXISTING SOLAR PANELS TO BE REMOVED AND PROTECTED TO BE RE-PURPOSED NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 15 8 SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SAN M A T E O A V E N U E NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D T E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE TW15.50TP14.00 TW17.00 TW18.50 16.5 0 17.5 0 13.00 TS13.00TP14.00 TS12.00 TP11.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00 13.50 13.5 0 14.0 0 15.00 11.00 14.00 17. 0 0 TS13.00 TP14.00 TS12.00 TS11.00 12.00 ST O P CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ST O P GB GB T101-N T101-S FITNESS R&D / OFFICER&D / OFFICE CONFERENCE NORTH LOBBY MEN'S LOCKER /SHOWER BIKE RM &LOCKERS SWITCHGEAR FCC MPOE TRASHEM ELEC GENERATOR DCW PUMP RM SWITCHGEAR LOADING DOCK TRASH BIKE ROOM HAZSTOR EM ELEC PARKING FIRE WATER TANK LOADING DOCKGENERATORSUB ELEC DCWBOOSTPUMP BIKESTORAGE PG&EELECTRICALROOM KITCHEN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 13.70 TC 13.20 FL 12.93 TC 12.43 FL 12.63 TC 12.13 FL 13.53 TC 13.03 FL 13.96 FS 10.52 TC 10.02 FL 11.28 FS 13.50 TC13.00 FL 13.93 TC 13.43 FL 14.11 TC 13.61 FL 13.80 FS 13.67 FS 13.60 TC 13.10 FL 11.80 RIM 11.72 FS 13.10 TC12.60 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.84 TC13.34 FL 13.61 TC13.11 FL 13.49 TC 12.99 FL 13.72 TC13.22 FL 14.34 TC 13.84 FL 13.60 TC13.10 FL 13.60 TC 13.10 FL 13.50 TC 13.00 FL 14.17 TC 13.67 FL 10.98 TC 10.48 FL 8.90 FS 11.80 TC 11.30 FL 13.74 TC13.24 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL 13.20 FS 12.87 FS 10.8± ME 11.7± ME 12.18 RIM 12.58 TC12.08 FL 11.96 FS 13.67 TC13.17 FL 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.70 TC 13.20 FL 14.25 FS 13.03 TC12.53 FL 13.50 TC13.00 FL 9.45 TC 8.95 FL 10.00 FS 13.88 TC 13.38 FL 12.49 TC11.99 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.40 TC12.90 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL12.96 TC 12.46 FL 13.70 TC13.20 FL 14.34 TC 13.84 FL 13.77 TC13.27 FL 11.68 TC 11.18 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL 9.85 TC9.35 FL 8.82 RIM 10.30 TC9.80 FL 13.68 TC13.18 FL 13.04 TC 12.54 FL 13.95 FS 12.30 TC11.80 FL 12.81 TC12.31 FL 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.64 TC 13.14 FL 13.65 TC13.15 FL 13.74 TC13.24 FL 13.33 TC 12.83 FL 12.61 FS 12.59 RIM 12.28 FS (8.07) (7.41) (8.68) 13.41 TC12.91 FL 9.32 TC8.82 FL (8.89) (???) (???) (7.45) (7.57) 10.53 TC10.03 FL 13.00 FS 12.99 FS 13.00 FS 13.35 TC12.85 FL 11.33 FS-LP 13.00 FS 13.00 FS (10.63) (11.09) (10.94) (10.78) (11.29) (10.84) (11.09) (10.94) (10.97) (11.28) (11.95) 12.65 FS 13.92 FS 8.55 TC 8.05 FL 8.65 TC 8.15 FL 13.53 TC 13.03 FL ??? TC ??? FL 13.82 TC13.32 FL 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.33 TC12.83 FL 9.50 TC9.00 FL13.53 TC13.03 FL 13.80 TC13.30 FL 14.09 TC13.59 FL 13.00 FS 10.78 TC 10.28 FL 9.09 TC 8.59 FL 8.70 TC8.20 FL 9.49 TC8.99 FL 8.14 TC7.64 FL 10.58 TC10.08 FL 10.53 TC10.03 FL 14.00 TC13.50 FL 13.21 TC12.71 FL 14.52 TC14.02 FL 12.52 TC12.02 FL BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDING FF=14.00 BUILDING FF=14.00 INFINITE 131 PARKING GARAGE FF=13.00 BUILDING FF=14.00 BUILDING FF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 13.36 TC 12.86 FL 13.67 TC13.17 FL 11.00 RIM (???)(???) 13.22 TC 12.72 FL 0.7 % 2.0 % 0 . 3 % 0.3% 1.3% 0.4% 1.2%3.2% 0.4 % 0.3% 0.5% 3 . 5 % 1.4 % 1.8 % 0.5% 1.4% 1 . 4 % 0.7 % 0.2 % 1.3 % 2.9 % 1.8 % 1.9 % 1.9 % 1.5% 2.0 % 1.3 % 5.5 % 0.3 % 2.5% 1.9 % 0. 4 % 1.7% 1.5% 1.8 % 0.4% 0.3 % 0.3% 1.3 % 1.8% 1.3% 1.3 % 1.1 % 1.5 % 3. 7 % 1.5% 1.5 % 0.4% 1.2 % 1.7% 1.7 % 0.1% 1. 5 % 0. 3 % 1.6% 1.6% 2.1 % 0.2% 13.26 TC 12.76 FL 13.00 TC 12.50 FL 13.54 TC 13.04 FL 13.29 TC 12.79 FL 13.00 TC 12.50 FL 13.54 TC 13.04 FL 1.5 % 13.90 TC13.40 FL 9.63 FS 1.5% 11.57 RIM(11.36) 13.50 TC 13.00 FL 14.03 TC13.53 FL 1.9 % 6.4 % 12.00 FS 12.00 FS 5.0 % 9.65 TC9.15 FL 10.08 TC9.58 FL 10.26 TC 9.76 FL 11.30 FS 77 8 9 10 11 1 2 12 12 12 12 1313 891 01112 13 13 13 13 13 13 89 10 1 1 12 13 13 13 0.7 % 1.5% 1.9% 13.55 TC 13.05 FL 13.55 TC 13.05 FL 0.5 % 1.0% 0.9% 0.9% 1.1% 0.4%GB 0.5% 1.9 % 1.8% 0.0% 1.6 % 2. 0 % SUNKEN GARDEN FG=11.00 1.8 % 1.9 % 1.9 % 13.70 TC13.20 FL 13.54 TC 13.04 FL BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 3 . 0 _ G R A D . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 8 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C3.0 PRELIMINARY OVERALL GRADING PLAN . LINE TABLE LINE # L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6 L7 L8 L9 L10 L11 L12 L13 L14 L15 L16 L17 L18 L19 L20 BEARING S80°19'01"E S80°19'01"E S50°02'47"E S50°02'47"E S09°41'17"W S09°41'17"W S80°19'01"E S77°10'08"E N12°49'52"E N72°49'52"E N12°49'52"E N12°49'52"E N12°49'52"E N47°10'08"W N12°49'52"E S17°43'41"W N20°15'00"E S20°48'06"W N24°35'05"E S25°08'11"W DISTANCE 12.07' 12.07' 12.61' 12.61' 29.72' 26.64' 38.92' 20.00' 3.63' 20.21' 45.00' 40.00' 40.00' 20.21' 11.97' 14.00' 14.00' 14.00' 14.00' 14.00' LINE TABLE LINE # L21 L22 L23 L24 L25 L26 L27 L28 L29 L30 L31 L32 L33 L34 L35 L36 L37 L38 L39 L40 BEARING S28°55'09"W S30°29'07"W S35°27'30"W S37°01'29"W S40°48'27"W N41°20'50"E N25°22'21"E S77°10'08"E N77°10'08"W S12°49'52"W N84°25'40"E S12°49'52"W S12°49'52"W S12°49'52"W S77°10'08"E S77°10'08"E S12°49'52"W N77°10'08"W N77°10'08"W S12°49'52"W DISTANCE 14.00' 6.85' 6.85' 14.00' 14.00' 14.00' 14.01' 55.98' 60.98' 75.07' 32.43' 191.45' 1000.48' 25.27' 169.60' 100.00' 81.59' 17.06' 19.06' 130.00' LINE TABLE LINE # L41 L42 L43 L44 L45 L46 L47 L48 L49 L50 L51 L52 L53 L54 L55 L56 L57 L58 L59 L60 BEARING N77°10'08"W N77°10'08"W S12°49'52"W S75°59'03"W N75°59'03"E S12°49'52"W N12°49'52"E S32°10'08"E S12°49'52"W S57°49'52"W N12°49'52"E S77°10'08"E N44°51'04"W N89°51'04"W S44°51'04"E N00°08'56"E N44°51'04"W S44°51'04"E N62°38'09"E S72°21'51"E DISTANCE 19.06' 19.06' 25.74' 110.38' 279.52' 211.56' 415.91' 14.24' 60.00' 14.24' 141.45' 7.60' 4.90' 14.24' 60.00' 14.24' 24.90' 124.09' 6.26' 14.24' LINE TABLE LINE # L61 L62 L63 L64 L65 L66 L67 L68 L69 L70 L71 L72 L73 L74 L75 L76 L77 L78 L79 L80 BEARING N62°38'09"E N17°38'09"E N62°38'09"E N17°38'09"E N62°38'09"E S72°21'51"E N62°38'09"E N62°38'09"E S57°26'13"E S73°39'07"E S52°16'07"W N75°59'03"E N57°59'03"E N14°29'49"W N14°29'49"W N75°59'03"E N59°30'18"E N14°00'57"W N63°55'25"E N02°48'57"W DISTANCE 40.00' 14.24' 6.29' 14.24' 40.00' 14.24' 195.93' 202.49' 33.21' 4.40' 10.89' 50.90' 76.24' 64.06' 48.81' 18.49' 26.63' 36.40' 12.21' 83.48' LINE TABLE LINE # L81 L82 L83 BEARING N75°59'03"E N75°59'03"E N02°44'39"W DISTANCE 33.83' 198.71' 13.23' CURVE TABLE CURVE # C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 C11 C12 C13 C14 C15 C16 C17 C18 C19 C20 DELTA 30°16'14" 30°16'14" 59°44'04" 59°44'04" 91°04'04" 60°00'00" 60°00'00" 60°00'00" 180°00'00" 180°00'00" 60°00'00" 86°52'34" 7°45'04" 82°40'41" 90°09'17" 2°31'19" 90°09'17" 0°14'33" 90°09'17" 3°46'59" RADIUS 37.00' 15.00' 72.00' 50.00' 10.00' 10.00' 26.00' 26.00' 9.75' 9.75' 10.00' 15.00' 350.00' 10.00' 2.00' 727.00' 2.00' 743.00' 2.00' 727.00' LENGTH 19.55' 7.92' 75.06' 52.13' 15.89' 10.47' 27.23' 27.23' 30.63' 30.63' 10.47' 22.74' 47.35' 14.43' 3.15' 32.00' 3.15' 3.14' 3.15' 48.00' CHORD DIRECTION S65°10'54"E S65°10'54"E S20°10'45"E S20°10'45"E S55°13'19"W N42°49'52"E S42°49'52"W S17°10'08"E N77°10'08"W S77°10'08"E N17°10'08"W N56°16'09"E S76°25'02"E N31°39'03"W S27°20'58"E S71°00'40"E N65°19'38"E S69°28'27"E S24°16'32"E S67°18'25"E CHORD LENGTH 19.32' 7.83' 71.71' 49.80' 14.27' 10.00' 26.00' 26.00' 19.50' 19.50' 10.00' 20.63' 47.31' 13.21' 2.83' 32.00' 2.83' 3.14' 2.83' 47.99' C21 C22 C23 C24 C25 C26 C27 C28 C29 C30 C31 C32 C33 C34 C35 C36 C37 C38 C39 C40 90°09'17" 0°14'33" 90°09'17" 3°46'59" 90°09'17" 91°10'50" 24°16'01" 91°10'50" 0°13'51" 90°09'17" 3°46'59" 90°09'17" 0°13'50" 90°09'17" 16°21'10" 89°15'04" 28°53'40" 11°47'33" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 2.00' 743.00' 2.00' 727.00' 2.00' 15.00' 769.00' 15.00' 743.00' 2.00' 727.00' 2.00' 743.00' 2.00' 167.00' 2.00' 125.00' 151.00' 30.00' 30.00' 3.15' 3.14' 3.15' 48.00' 3.15' 23.87' 325.70' 23.87' 2.99' 3.15' 48.00' 3.15' 2.99' 3.15' 47.66' 3.12' 63.04' 31.08' 47.12' 47.12' N69°39'43"E S65°08'22"E S19°56'28"E S62°58'20"E N73°59'48"E S15°06'18"E S60°24'29"E N81°02'55"E S53°14'44"E S08°03'10"E S51°05'02"E N85°53'06"E S48°55'21"E S03°43'48"E N56°27'03"W N69°59'53"E N62°43'18"W N71°16'21"W S57°49'52"W S32°10'08"E 2.83' 3.14' 2.83' 47.99' 2.83' 21.43' 323.27' 21.43' 2.99' 2.83' 47.99' 2.83' 2.99' 2.83' 47.50' 2.81' 62.37' 31.02' 42.43' 42.43' CURVE TABLE CURVE # C41 C42 C43 C44 C45 C46 C47 C48 C49 C50 C51 C52 C53 C54 C55 C56 C57 C58 C59 C60 DELTA 71°35'48" 108°19'33" 112°33'09" 45°00'00" 22°26'51" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 63°09'11" 63°09'11" 116°50'49" 45°00'00" 45°00'00" RADIUS 15.00' 15.00' 10.00' 15.00' 50.00' 30.00' 30.00' 10.00' 2.00' 2.00' 10.00' 10.00' 2.00' 2.00' 10.00' 41.00' 67.00' 20.00' 10.00' 10.00' LENGTH 18.74' 28.36' 19.64' 11.78' 19.59' 47.12' 47.12' 15.71' 3.14' 3.14' 15.71' 15.71' 3.14' 3.14' 15.71' 45.19' 73.85' 40.79' 7.85' 7.85' CHORD DIRECTION S48°37'46"W S41°19'55"E S69°06'26"W S32°06'59"E S01°36'26"W S57°49'52"W S32°10'08"E S57°49'52"W N32°10'08"W N57°49'52"E S32°10'08"E S57°49'52"W N32°10'08"W N57°49'52"E S32°10'08"E S44°24'28"W S44°24'28"W N45°35'32"W S09°40'08"E S35°19'52"W CHORD LENGTH 17.55' 24.32' 16.63' 11.48' 19.46' 42.43' 42.43' 14.14' 2.83' 2.83' 14.14' 14.14' 2.83' 2.83' 14.14' 42.94' 70.17' 34.08' 7.65' 7.65' C61 C62 C63 C64 C65 C66 C67 C68 C69 C70 C71 C72 C73 C74 C75 C76 C77 C78 C79 C80 90°00'00" 90°00'00" 32°19'04" 32°19'04" 45°00'00" 45°00'00" 72°30'47" 72°30'47" 45°00'00" 45°00'00" 45°00'00" 45°00'00" 35°04'11" 85°00'11" 101°43'48" 2°04'18" 5°16'41" 22°58'21" 92°56'50" 92°59'20" 20.00' 20.00' 106.00' 80.00' 10.00' 10.00' 73.00' 47.00' 10.00' 10.00' 10.00' 10.00' 50.00' 15.00' 10.00' 626.00' 500.00' 288.00' 10.00' 10.00' 31.42' 31.42' 59.79' 45.12' 7.85' 7.85' 92.39' 59.48' 7.85' 7.85' 7.85' 7.85' 30.60' 22.25' 17.76' 22.63' 46.06' 115.47' 16.22' 16.23' N57°49'52"E S32°10'08"E N61°00'36"W N61°00'36"W S67°21'04"E S22°21'04"E S81°06'28"E S81°06'28"E S85°08'09"W N40°08'09"E S40°08'09"W N85°08'09"E N45°06'03"E N14°56'07"W N55°28'59"E S05°39'14"W N04°03'02"E N10°04'28"W N68°02'03"W N05°46'27"E 28.28' 28.28' 59.00' 44.53' 7.65' 7.65' 86.34' 55.59' 7.65' 7.65' 7.65' 7.65' 30.13' 20.27' 15.51' 22.63' 46.04' 114.70' 14.50' 14.51' CURVE TABLE CURVE # C81 C82 C83 C84 C85 C86 C87 C88 C89 C90 C91 C92 C93 C94 C95 C96 C97 C98 C99 C100 DELTA 48°21'29" 12°22'18" 63°09'11" 16°36'42" 18°00'00" 16°28'45" 144°35'44" 14°03'02" 122°58'33" 90°00'00" 12°03'38" 77°56'22" 45°52'56" 11°16'55" 70°00'44" 33°09'27" 31°01'48" 56°51'59" 44°20'01" 78°43'42" RADIUS 300.00' 250.00' 20.00' 60.00' 140.00' 100.00' 3.00' 326.00' 7.00' 10.00' 100.00' 35.00' 50.00' 326.00' 10.00' 30.00' 40.00' 23.00' 10.00' 40.00' LENGTH 253.20' 53.98' 22.04' 17.40' 43.98' 28.76' 7.57' 79.94' 15.02' 15.71' 21.05' 47.61' 40.04' 64.19' 12.22' 17.36' 21.66' 22.83' 7.74' 54.96' CHORD DIRECTION N67°27'55"W S82°10'12"W S44°24'28"W N67°40'42"E S66°59'03"W S67°44'40"W S12°47'34"E N78°03'55"W N47°28'19"E N59°00'57"W S69°57'14"W S24°57'14"W S36°57'25"E N54°15'26"W S83°37'20"E N44°47'34"E N12°41'57"E N31°14'56"W N81°50'56"W N36°37'12"E CHORD LENGTH 245.75' 53.88' 20.95' 17.33' 43.80' 28.66' 5.72' 79.74' 12.30' 14.14' 21.01' 44.02' 38.98' 64.09' 11.47' 17.12' 21.40' 21.90' 7.55' 50.74' NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 15 9 SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D SE E S H E E T C 3 . 1 MA T C H L I N E 13. 5 0 14. 0 0 R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBYAMENITY LOBBY R&D / OFFICE BIKE ROOMLOADINGTRASH EM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR FCC LOADING TRASH FCC BIKE ROOM EM ELEC. SWITCHGEAR SUB ELEC. CONFERENCE PREFUNCTION LOBBY FOODHALL FITNESS ? SC-PA SC-PC SB-PA SB-PB SB-PC SB-PD T101-N T101-S FITNESS R&D / OFFICER&D / OFFICE NORTH LOBBY MEN'S LOCKER /SHOWER BIKE RM &LOCKERS SWITCHGEAR EM ELEC GENERATOR DCW PUMP RM SWITCHGEAR LOADING DOCK TRASH BIKE ROOM HAZSTOR EM ELEC PARKING FIRE WATER TANK LOADING DOCKGENERATORSUB ELEC BIKESTORAGE PG&EELECTRICALROOM KITCHEN 13.70 TC13.20 FL 12.09 TC11.59 FL 12.63 TC 12.13 FL 13.53 TC13.03 FL 11.80 RIM 11.72 FS 13.10 TC 12.60 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL 13.89 TC 13.39 FL 13.84 TC13.34 FL 13.61 TC 13.11 FL 13.49 TC 12.99 FL 13.74 TC 13.24 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.20 FS 12.87 FS 10.8± ME 11.7± ME 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.70 TC13.20 FL 14.25 FS 12.49 TC11.99 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 13.40 TC 12.90 FL 13.37 TC 12.87 FL 12.98 TC 12.48 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL12.96 TC 12.46 FL 13.70 TC 13.20 FL 13.89 TC13.39 FL 12.30 TC 11.80 FL 12.81 TC 12.31 FL 13.67 TC13.17 FL 13.64 TC 13.14 FL 13.35 TC 12.85 FL 11.33 FS-LP (10.94) (10.97) (11.28) (11.95) 12.65 FS 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.21 TC12.71 FL 14.52 TC14.02 FL 12.52 TC 12.02 FL BUILDINGFF=14.00 AMENITY BUILDING FF=14.00 BUILDING FF=14.00 LOADING / TRASH AREA FF=13.17 13.36 TC12.86 FL BIORETENTION POND SILVA CELL BIOTREATMENT 0.7 % 0.3% 1.3% 0.4 % 0.3% 0.5% 3 . 5 % 1.4 % 1.8 % 0.5% 2.9 % 1.8 % 1.9 % 1.9 % 0. 4 % 1.7% 1.5% 1.8 % 0.4% 0.3% 1.3 % 0.4% 1.2 % 1.7% 1.7% 0.1% 1. 5 % 0. 3 % SILVA CELL BIOTREATMENT BIORETENTIONPOND BIORETENTION POND 1.5 % 1 2 12 12 0.7 % 1.5% 1.9% 13.55 TC 13.05 FL 13.55 TC 13.05 FL 0.5 % 1.0% 0.9% 0.9% 1.3 % 1.8 % 1.9 % 1.8 % 1.9 % 1.9 % BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDING FF=14.00 L1 C1 L2 C2 L3 L4 C3 C4 L5 L6 C 5 L7 L8 L9C6 L 1 0 C7 L11 C8 L12 C9L13 C10L14 C11L15 C 1 2 C1 3 C14 C15 L16 C16 L17 C17 C18 C19 L18 C20 L19 C21 C22C23 L20 C24 L21 C2 5 C26 L22 C27 L2 3 C 2 8 C29 C30 L2 4 C31 L2 5 C32C33C34 L2 6 C35 L27 C3 6 C37 C38 L2 8 L2 9 C 3 9 C40 L30 C 4 1 L3 1 C42 L32 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 3 . 0 _ G R A D . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 9 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 15 30 60 30' C3.1 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN SE E S H E E T C 3 . 2 MA T C H L I N E NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 16 0 SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SAN M A T E O A V E N U E T E R M I N A L C O U R T SE E S H E E T C 3 . 1 MA T C H L I N E TW15.50 TP14.00 TW17.00 TW18.50 16. 5 0 1 7 . 5 0 13.00 TS13.00TP14.00 TS12.00 TP11.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00 13.50 15.00 11.00 14.00 17 . 0 0 TS 13. 0 0 TP 14. 0 0 TS 12 . 0 0 TS 11 . 0 0 12.00 S T O P LOBBY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE RESTAURANT LOBBY / CAFE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBY BIKE ROOM FCCEM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR GENERATOR LOADING TRASHTRASH LOADING SWITCHGEAR SUB ELEC. EM ELEC. FCC BIKE ROOM BIKE ROOM R&D / OFFICE LOBBY FOODHALL AMENITIES EM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR FCCLOADING TRASH SA-PA SA-PBSA-PC NB-PCNB-PDNB-PE NB-PBNB-PA IDF HAZARDS STOR. ELEC ELEC IDFNA-PANA-PB NA-PC NA-PDNA-PE CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC S T O P GB G B T101-N CONFERENCE NORTH LOBBY FCC MPOE TRASHEM ELEC LOADING DOCKGENERATOR DCWBOOSTPUMP KITCHEN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 12.93 TC 12.43 FL 13.96 FS 10.52 TC 10.02 FL 11.28 FS 13.50 TC 13.00 FL 13.93 TC13.43 FL 14.11 TC13.61 FL 13.80 FS 13.67 FS 13.60 TC 13.10 FL 13.72 TC 13.22 FL 14.34 TC 13.84 FL 13.60 TC13.10 FL 13.60 TC 13.10 FL 13.50 TC 13.00 FL 14.17 TC13.67 FL 10.98 TC 10.48 FL 8.90 FS 11.80 TC11.30 FL 12.18 RIM 12.58 TC12.08 FL 11.96 FS 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.03 TC12.53 FL 13.50 TC13.00 FL 9.45 TC 8.95 FL 10.00 FS 13.88 TC 13.38 FL 14.34 TC13.84 FL 13.77 TC13.27 FL 11.68 TC11.18 FL 9.85 TC 9.35 FL 8.82 RIM 10.30 TC 9.80 FL 13.68 TC 13.18 FL 13.04 TC12.54 FL 13.95 FS 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 13.65 TC 13.15 FL 13.74 TC13.24 FL 13.33 TC 12.83 FL 12.61 FS 12.59 RIM 12.28 FS (8.07) (7.41) (8.68) 13.41 TC 12.91 FL 9.32 TC 8.82 FL (8.89) (???) (???) (7.45) (7.57) 10.53 TC 10.03 FL 13.00 FS 12.99 FS 13.00 FS 13.00 FS 13.00 FS (10.63) (10.79) (11.09) (10.94) (10.78) (11.29) (10.84) (11.09) 12.65 FS 13.92 FS 8.55 TC8.05 FL 8.65 TC8.15 FL 13.53 TC13.03 FL ??? TC??? FL 13.82 TC 13.32 FL 13.33 TC 12.83 FL 9.50 TC9.00 FL13.53 TC13.03 FL 13.80 TC 13.30 FL 14.09 TC 13.59 FL 13.00 FS 10.78 TC 10.28 FL 9.09 TC8.59 FL 8.70 TC 8.20 FL 9.49 TC 8.99 FL 8.14 TC7.64 FL 10.58 TC10.08 FL 10.53 TC10.03 FL 14.00 TC13.50 FL 13.21 TC 12.71 FL BUILDING FF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 INFINITE 131 PARKING GARAGE FF=13.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 BUILDINGFF=14.00 LOADING / TRASH AREAFF=13.17 LOADING / TRASH AREA FF=13.17 LOADING / TRASH AREA FF=13.17 SILVA CELL BIOTREATMENT SILVA CELLBIOTREATMENT 13.67 TC 13.17 FL 11.00 RIM (???)(???) 13.22 TC12.72 FL 2.0 % 0 . 3 % 0.4% 1.2%3.2% 1.4% 1 . 4 % 0.7 % 0.2 % 1.3 % 1.9 % 1.9 % 1.7 % 1.5% 2.0 % 1.3 % 5.5 % 0.3 % 2.5%0.4% 0.3 % 1.8% 1.3% 1.3 % 1.1 % 1.5 % 3. 7 % 1.5% 1.5 % 0.4% 0.1% 1.6% 1.6% 2.1 % 0.2% 13.26 TC 12.76 FL 13.00 TC12.50 FL 13.54 TC13.04 FL 13.29 TC 12.79 FL 13.00 TC 12.50 FL 13.54 TC 13.04 FL SILVA CELLBIOTREATMENT SILVA CELL BIOTREATMENT SILVA CELLBIOTREATMENT SILVA CELL BIOTREATMENT 13.90 TC 13.40 FL 9.63 FS 1.5% 11.57 RIM (11.36) 13.50 TC 13.00 FL 14.03 TC13.53 FL 1.9 % 6.4 % 6.1 % 12.78 TC 12.28 FL 11.79 TC 11.29 FL 12.00 FS 12.00 FS 5.0 % 12.01 TC11.51 FL 9.65 TC9.15 FL 10.08 TC 9.58 FL 10.26 TC9.76 FL 11.30 FS 77 8 9 10 11 1 2 12 12 1313 89101112 13 13 13 13 13 13 8 9 10 1 1 12 13 13 13 0.9% 1.1% 0.4% GB 0.5% 1.8 % 1.3 % 1.3 % 1.9 % 1.3 % 1.8% 0.0% 1. 6 % 2. 0 % SUNKEN GARDEN FG=11.00 13.70 TC 13.20 FL 13.54 TC13.04 FL C42 L32 C 4 3 L33 C44 C45 L34 C 4 6 L3 5 L3 6 C47 L37 C 4 8 L3 8 C49 C 5 0 L3 9 C51 L40 C 5 2 L4 1 C53 C 5 4 L4 2 C55 L43 C5 6 C 5 7 L 4 4 L 4 5 C58 L46 L47 C59 L48 L49 L 5 0 C6 0 L51 C 6 1 C62 L5 2 C63 C64 L53 C65 L5 4 L55 L56C66 L57 L58 C67 C68 L 5 9 C6 9 C7 0 L6 0 L 6 1 L62 L 6 3 L64 L 6 5 L66 L 6 7 L 6 8 C7 1 C7 2 C 7 3 C74 L69 L7 0 C 7 5 C76 C77 C78 C7 9 L 7 1 C80 C81 C8 2 L 7 2 C 8 3 C 8 4 L 7 3 L74 L75 C 8 5 L 7 6 C 8 6 L 7 7 C87 C8 8 C 8 9 L78 C90 C 9 1 L 7 9 C92 C93 C94 C9 5 C9 6 C97 L80 C98 C9 9 L 8 1 L 8 2 C 1 0 0 L83 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 3 . 0 _ G R A D . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 2 0 A M A J O R D A N 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 15 30 60 30' C3.2 PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 16 1 +18'-00"I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D T131PARKINGGARAGE CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ST O P CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SS SD SD SD SD SD SS SS SS SS SD SD SD SDSS SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SS SS SS SD SS SD SD 5.0 0 ' E A S E M E N T [4 3 3 3 O . R . 5 9 4 ] NON-ACCESS[6127 O.R. 582] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D PARCEL 28.081± ACRES TRACT C EXCEPTION TOPARCEL ONE[6127 O.R. 582] PARCEL 84.210± ACRES 10 . 0 0 ' D R A I N A G E E A S E M E N T [1 3 0 9 O . R . 4 7 6 ] 20 . 0 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T [2 3 7 0 O . R . 2 0 2 ] [D o c N o . 2 0 1 9 - 0 4 4 2 5 6 ] SPUR T R A C K E A S E M E N T [2428 O. R . 2 1 9 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30.00' W.L.E. [4293 O.R. 20 ] PUBLIC STRE E T E A S E M E N T [4778 O.R. 722 ] T E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 10 . 0 0 ' P I P E L I N E EA S E M E N T PARCEL 56.534± ACRES PARCEL 32.074± ACRES 46 . 0 0 ' N O - B U I L D EA S E M E N T NO - B U I L D E A S E M E N T (W I D T H V A R I E S ) PARCEL 61.948± ACRES PARCEL 72.532± ACRES PARCE L 10.579± A C R E S PARCEL 40.352± ACRES 97 L F ~ 8 " W M 63 LF ~ 8 " S D @S=0.00 5 172 LF ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 5 275 LF ~ 1 8 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 5 87 L F ~ 1 2 " S D @S= 0 . 0 0 5 214 LF ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 1 0 2 L F ~ 8 " W M 20 LF ~ 8 " F W 217 LF ~ 8 " W M 365 LF ~ 8 " W M 83 LF ~ 8 " W M 582 LF ~ 8 " W M 384 LF ~ 8 " W M 74 L F ~ 6 " F W 31 L F ~ 6 " F W 89 L F ~ 8 " W M 28 LF ~ 6" F W 1 4 2 L F ~ 8 " W M 1 5 9 L F ~ 8 " W M 166 L F ~ 8 " W M 142 LF~ 1 2 " S S 9 6 L F ~ 1 2 " S S 142 L F ~ 1 2 " S S @ S = 0 . 0 0 5 58 L F ~ 8 " S S 17 7 L F ~ 8 " S S @S = 0 . 0 0 5 90 L F ~ 8 " W M 89 L F ~ 8 " S S @S = 0 . 0 0 5 4" BFP SCM 3 OVERFLOWINLET CONNECT SDCB TO EX 15" SD OUTFALLRIM: 12.7INV: 4.1± CONNECT TO EX 12" SS NEW FH NEW FH NEW FH NEW FH NEW FH CONNECT TO I101 PHASE 1NEW SSMH RIM 13.0INV IN: 4.03 (8") NINV OUT: 4.03 (12") S NEW FDC NEW FDC NEW FH NEW FDC OVERFLOW PIPE FOR SCM 6 SILVA CELLSRIM: 13.9INV: 5.95 OVERFLOW PIPE FOR SCM 5 SILVA CELLSRIM: 13.6INV: 7.60 CONNECT TO SCM 2SILVA CELLSBUBBLE UPRIM: 11.8 INV: 8.50 CONNECT 8" WM TO I1018" PUBLIC WATER MAIN NEW FH 4 7 L F ~ 8 " W M 116 LF ~ 6 " S D 43 LF ~ 6" S D 61 LF ~ 6" SD 60 LF ~ 6" SD 67 L F ~ 6 " S D SSMHRIM: 13.1 INV: 7.38 SSMHRIM: 12.2INV: 6.55 SSMHRIM: 13.1INV: 5.67 SSMH RIM: 12.9INV: 5.22 SSMHRIM: 13.4INV: 4.60 SSMH RIM: 11.3INV -1.06 355 LF~ 18" SS @S=0.003 EX SSMHRIM: 12.3 INV 0.78 (16" THRU) SSMHRIM: 13.1 INV 0.01 256 LF ~ 1 2 " S S @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 305 LF ~ 1 2 " SS @S= 0 . 0 0 5 SSMHRIM: 12.2 INV 3.66 CONNECT TOEX SDCB RIM: 7.69INV: 3.68 (15" OUT) NEW FH EX SSMHINV: 2.62 (8"-16") THRU EX SSMHINV: 1.27 (16") THRU SSMHRIM: 13.0INV: 4.48 28 L F ~ 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 5 28 L F ~ 1 0 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 7 NEW FDC 204 LF ~ 1 2 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 5 202 LF ~ 1 2 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 5 7 4 L F ~ 1 2 " S D @S = 0 . 0 3 3 99 LF ~ 12" SD @ S = 0 . 0 0 6 210 LF ~ 2 0 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 5 12 8 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 125 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 5 92 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @S= 0 . 0 0 5 42 L F ~ 1 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 3 44 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 3 54 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @S= 0 . 0 0 3 172 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 1 7 4 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 640 LF ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 NEW FH NEW FH NEW FDC 4" BFP 4" BFP NEW FH NEW FDC NEW FH NEW FDC 4" BFP4" BFP 4" BFP 35 L F ~ 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 5 55 LF ~ 12" SD @S=0.005 104 L F ~ 1 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 5 169 LF ~ 1 2 " S D @S=0.00 7 45 L F ~ 1 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 3 109 LF ~ 1 2 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 CONNECT TO SCM 7SILVA CELLSSDCB RIM: 11.9INV: 8.47 36" SD PIPE AND OUTFALL TO REMAININV: 3.71 12" SD PIPE ANDOUTFALL TO REMAININV: 3.30 18" SD PIPE ANDOUTFALL TO REMAIN 15" SD PIPE AND OUTFALL TO REMAIN CONNECT 8" WM TO I1018" PUBLIC WATER MAIN CONNECT 8" WM TO EX12" PUBLIC WATER MAIN SDCO SDCO 26LF~12"SD@S=0.011 SDCO 10" SDCONNECTION 10" SDCONNECTION 12" SD CONNECTION 12" SDCONNECTION 12" SDCONNECTION 12" SD CONNECTION 10" SDCONNECTION 1 9 L F ~ 8 " W M 10" SD CONNECTION 10" SDCONNECTION 10" SDCONNECTION 10" SDCONNECTION 10" SDCONNECTION 10" SD CONNECTION CONNECT TOSCM 4 SILVA CELL 89 LF ~ 1 8 " S D 87 L F ~ 1 5 " S D 60 L F ~ 1 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 3 24LF~18" SD 84 LF ~ 2 4 " S D @S=0.00 3 45 L F ~ 1 8 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 3 27 LF ~ 12" SD @S=0.005 48 L F ~ 1 2 " S D @S = 0 . 0 0 5 36 LF ~ 12" SD @ S = 0 . 0 2 56 L F ~ 2 4 " S D @ S = 0 . 0 0 3 10LF~18" SD 83 LF ~ 1 2 " S D 24 L F ~ 3 6 " S D 8" FW CONNECTION 4" DWCONNECTION 4" BFP & WM 4" DW CONNECTION 4" BFP & WM 8" SSCONNECTION 8" FWCONNECTION 6" FWCONNECTION 20 LF ~ 3 " D W 3" DWCONNECTION 8" SSCONNECTION T131N A 8" SS CONNECTION T131N B 8" SSCONNECTION GREASEINTERCEPTOR 4" FWCONNECTION 3" DW CONNECTION 8" FW CONNECTION 4" DWCONNECTION 4" BFP & WM 4" BFP & WM 4" FW CONNECTION 4" DW CONNECTION 4" BFP 4" BFP & WM 4" FWCONNECTION 4" DW CONNECTION 4" BFP & WM 145 LF ~ 8 " S D @S=0.00 3 SDCO SDCORIM: 13.2 SDCORIM: 13.4 SDCORIM: 13.4 SDCORIM: 13.3 SDCO RIM: 13.3 SDCORIM: 13.2 NEW SDMH TO CONNECT TO EX 12" SDRIM: 10.3INV IN: 5.70 (6") N INV OUT: 5.70 (6") E SDCBRIM: 11.2 INV OUT: 8.70 (6") SW SDCBRIM: 11.3INV IN: 7.56 (8") SW INV OUT: 7.56 (8") SE NEW SDMH TO CONNECT TO EX 18" SDRIM: 12.9INV IN: 3.7± (24") SE INV OUT: 3.7± (EX 18") S SDMHRIM: 13.0± INV IN: 5.16 (18") WINV OUT: 5.16 (20") S SDMHRIM: 13.0±INV IN: 7.51 (12") NINV OUT: 7.51 (12") W CONNECT SDCB TO EX 15" SDRIM: 11.8 INV IN: 9.76 (8") NW OVERFLOW PIPE FORSCM 1 BIORETENTIONRIM: 12.5 INV IN: 9.27 (8") NW OVERFLOW PIPE FORSCM 11 SILVA CELLSRIM: 9.3 INV: 6.3 NEW SDMH RIM: 12.9INV THRU: 3.98 (24") NEW SDMHRIM: 13.1INV THRU: 4.37 (24") NEW SDMHRIM: 13.1 INV: 4.53 (24") NEW SDMHRIM: 13.1INV: 4.46 (18") NEW SDMHRIM: 13.3INV: 5.90 OVERFLOW PIPE FOR SCM 2 SILVA CELLSRIM 12.82INV OUT: 8.50 SDCBRIM: 12.6 INV OUT: 9.64 (6") NE SDCBRIM: 11.6INV OUT: 8.62 (12") NE SDCBRIM: 10.7INV OUT: 9.37 (6") NE SDMHRIM: 10.6INV 8.14 SDCORIM: 13.8INV: 11.50 OVERFLOW PIPE FORSCM 9 SILVA CELLSRIM: 13.5 INV OUT: 8.83 (18") NW SDMHRIM: 12.6INV 8.45 SDMHRIM: 13.1INV 7.42 SDMHRIM: 12.6INV 7.26 SDMH RIM: 13.2INV 6.84 SDMHRIM: 13.1INV 6.39 SDMHRIM: 13.5INV 7.55 SDMHRIM: 11.6INV IN: 9.45 (8") SW INV OUT: 9.45 (8") SE SCM 1 BUBBLE UPRIM: 12.0INV: 9.27 OVERFLOW PIPE FORSCM 2 BIORETENTIONRIM: 12.9INV: 7.37 OVERFLOW PIPE FORSCM 4 SILVA CELLSRIM: 13.5 INV: 8.30 CONNECT TO SCM 5SILVA CELLS RIM: 13.7INV: 9.20 OVERFLOW PIPE FOR SCM 10 SILVA CELLSRIM: 11.69 INV: 4.12 SDCB RIM: 8.7INV: 7.00 CONNECT TO SCM 11BUBBLE UPRIM: 9.4INV: 6.3 SDCBRIM: 9.0INV: 7.00 SDCBRIM: 9.8INV: 7.24 CONNECT TO SCM 6SILVA CELLS SDCB RIM: 13.1INV: 10.1 SDCBRIM: 13.0 INV: 11.50 CONNECT TO SCM 9SILVA CELLS RIM: 13.3INV: 9.77 SDCBRIM: 12.4INV: 9.90 TRENCH DRAINRIM: 13.2INV: 12.2 TRENCH DRAINRIM: 13.4 INV: 12.7 OVERFLOW PIPE FORSCM 7 SILVA CELLS INV: 8.47 CONNECT TO SCM 10RIM: 9.7 INV: 6.87INLET CONNECTIONTO SCM4RIM: 13.7 SDCBRIM: 13.9INV: 7.78 OVERFLOW PIPE FOR SCM 8 SILVA CELLSRIM: 13.3INV OUT: 7.94 (18") NW SDMHRIM: 12.7INV 7.81 CONNECT TO SCM 8SILVA CELLSRIM: 13.7 INV: 10.9 CONNECT TO EX 12" SDMHRIM: 12.0INV IN: 7.21 (12") SWINV OUT: 7.21 (12") SE CONNECT TOEX SDMHRIM: 12.2INV IN: 8.75 (8") NE INLET CONNECTIONTO SCM4RIM: 13.6 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 4 . 0 _ U T I L . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 2 1 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C4.0 PRELIMINARY OVERALL UTILITY PLAN NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 16 2 UP TW15.50TP14.00 TW17.00 TW18.50 16.5 0 17. 5 0 13.00 TS13.00TP14.00 TS12.00 TP11.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00 13.50 13.5 0 14.0 0 15.0 0 11.00 14.00 17. 0 0 TS 13. 0 0 TP14. 0 0 TS 12. 0 0 TS 11. 0 0 12.00 ST O P CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD SD N 03°47'44" W 836.44'N 03°42'49" W 300.04'N 05°53'54" W 260.38'N 02°48'57" W 170.27' S 8 0 ° 1 8 ' 4 3 " E 44 8 . 3 1 ' N 50 ° 0 2 ' 4 7 " W 425. 6 6 ' 57.5 8 ' 483 . 2 4 ' N 7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " W 12 0 . 0 0 ' N 75°29' 0 8 " W 13.66' S 14°12'16" E 245.36' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 275.00' N 77°10' 0 8 " W 33.00' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1350.37' R=596.14'D=31°26'47"L=327.19' R=563.14'D=32°31'08"L=319.62' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 249.85' 234.48' CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 1 2 - 1 3 ] LOT 2[55 RSM 1 2 - 1 3 ] LOT 3[55 RSM 1 2 - 1 3 ] LOT 4[55 RSM 1 2 - 1 3 ] LOT 29 [2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32 [2 PM 2] PARCE L A [66 PM 8 2 ] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D POINT O F B E G I N N I N G TRACT A - P A R C E L 1 N 12°49' 5 2 " E 1060.00' (N 7 8 ° 2 1 ' W ) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) (N 11°39' E ) (S 03°53' E) (N 5 1 ° 1 3 ' 3 9 " W ) N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 6 4 7 . 5 2 ' S 02°42'08" E35.00' (N 76°40' W ) 1 2 5 . 0 0 ' (N 11°39' E ) POINT OF BEGINNINGTRACT A - PARCEL 2 N 02°41'04" W30.00' 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' (N 03°51'56" W) N 02°41'04" W30.00' (S 03°51'56 " E ) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) 908.90' 908.90' PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] S 77°10' 0 8 " E 33.00' (S 78°21'00 " E ) (N 78°21'0 0 " W ) (S 11°39' W ) 441.47' 441.47' (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 11°44'00 " W ) (S 8 1 ° 2 9 ' 3 5 " E ) (N 03°59'20" W)(1573.72') 6 7 8 9 9 10 11 12 40 LOT 5[35 RSM 1 0 - 1 1 ] HANNA I N V E S T M E N T S L L C [Doc No. 2 0 1 0 - 0 7 9 8 9 8 ] LANDS O F TE R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAY STATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SH A W R D L L C [Doc No. 2 0 1 9 - 0 9 0 9 2 4 ] LANDS O F GIANNI N I [Doc No. 2 0 0 6 - 1 0 0 0 9 1 ] LANDS O F CITY OF S O U T H S A N F R A N C I S C O SANITA R T Y S E W E R P U M P S T A T I O N N O . 1 1 LANDS O F DEMARI A [Doc No. 2 0 1 5 - 0 6 0 3 8 2 ] LANDS O F PACIFIC P L A T I N U M T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 6 - 1 1 9 6 7 5 ] LANDS O F TWO PL U S S I X L T D [Doc No. 1 9 9 9 - 9 1 1 0 2 3 ] LANDS O F FJPP PA R T N E R S [Doc No. 1 9 9 4 - 1 9 0 2 6 7 ] LANDS O F SEMIEN [Doc No. 2 0 1 2 - 0 1 7 5 6 8 ] LANDS O F ANDRIG H E T T O [Doc No. 2 0 1 3 - 1 0 1 8 0 8 ] LANDS O F PEKING H A N D I C R A F T I N C [Doc No. 1 9 9 5 - 0 7 3 4 0 5 ] LANDS O F IPT SOU T H S A N F R A N C I S C O D C L P [Doc No. 2 0 1 6 - 1 0 9 0 9 1 ] LANDS O F POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCO R P I N C [Doc No. 2 0 0 2 - 0 1 1 5 1 4 ] LANDS O F [Doc No. 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 2 1 0 5 ] N 88°33' 5 2 " E 34.74' (N 87°23'0 0 " E ) DMA 3 SCM 2 DMA 4 DMA 9 DMA 7 SCM 10 DMA 10 SCM 11 DMA 2 SCM 6 DMA 6 DMA 11 DMA 1 SCM 1 SCM 2 SCM 5 SCM 7 SCM 4 DMA 5SCM 3 SCM 8 DMA 8 SCM 9 T101-N T101-S FITNESS R&D / OFFICER&D / OFFICE CONFERENCE NORTH LOBBY MEN'S LOCKER /SHOWER BIKE RM &LOCKERS SWITCHGEAR FCC MPOE TRASHEM ELEC GENERATOR DCW PUMP RM SWITCHGEAR LOADING DOCK TRASH BIKE ROOM HAZSTOR EM ELEC PARKING FIRE WATER TANK LOADING DOCKGENERATORSUB ELEC DCWBOOSTPUMP BIKESTORAGE PG&EELECTRICALROOM KITCHEN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 5 . 0 _ S T R M . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 2 2 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN IMPERVIOUS AND PERVIOUS SURFACE TABLE DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA TABLE 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C5.0 PRELIMINARY STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN STORMWATER LEGEND DMA BOUNDARY STORM DRAIN NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 16 3 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 5 . 0 _ S T R M . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 8 : 4 3 A M A J O R D A N 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN C5.1 STORMWATER CONTROL DETAILS OVERFLOW INLET AT BIORETENTION AREAS · · · MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES · · · · · · · · · · SUGGESTEDFREQUENCY SUGGESTEDFREQUENCY INSPECTION ACTIVITIES DISCHARGES FROM NEW COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AIR CONDITIONING UNITS SHOULD BE DISCHARGED TO LANDSCAPED AREAS, IF THEY CAN ACCOMMODATE THE CONTINUOUS VOLUME, OR TO THE SANITARY SEWER, WITH THE LOCAL SANITARY SEWER AGENCY'S APPROVAL. IF NONE OF THESE OPTIONS ARE FEASIBLE, AIR CONDITIONING CONDENSATE CAN BE DIRECTLY DISCHAI'GED INTO THE STOW DRAIN. IF DESCALING OR ANTI-ALGAL AGENTS AIDE USED TO TREAT THE AIR CONDITIONING UNITS, RESIDUES FROM THESE AGENTS MUST BE PROPERLY DISPOSED OF BIORETENTION SOIL MIX SHALL MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AS OUTLINED IN APPENDIX C OF THE C.3 STORM WATER HANDBOOK AND SHALL BE A MIXTURE OF FINE SAND AND COMPOST MEASURED ON A VOLUME BASIS OF 60-70% SAND AND 30-40% COMPOST. CONTRACTOR TO REFER TO APPENDIX C FOR SAND AND COMPOST MATERIAL SPECIFICATIONS. ·PRIOR TO ORDERING THE BIOTREATMENT SOIL MIX OR DELIVERY TO THE PROJECT SITE, CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE A BIOTREATMENT SOIL MIX SPECIFICATION CHECKLIST, COMPLETED BY THE SOIL MIX SUPPLIER AND CERTIFIED TESTING LAB. 1. CONNECT THE FOLLOWING FEATURES TO SANITARY SEWER: a. COVERED TRASH/ RECYCLING ENCLOSURES. 4. BENEFICIAL LANDSCAPING. 5. USE OF WATER EFFICIENT IRRIGATION SYSTEMS. 6. MAINTENANCE (PAVEMENT SWEEPING, CATCH BASIN CLEANING, GOOD HOUSEKEEPING). 7. STORM DRAIN LABELING. I. PROPERTY INFORMATION: I.A. PROPERTY ADDRESS: 101 TERMINAL COURT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA I.B. PROPERTY OWNER: TBD II. RESPONSIBLE PARTY FOR MAINTENANCE: II.A. CONTACT: TBD II.B. PHONE NUMBER OF CONTACT: TBD II.C. EMAIL: TBD II.D. ADDRESS: TBD 1. PROTECT EXISTING TREES, VEGETATION, AND SOIL. 2. REDUCE EXISTING IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. 3. CREATE NEW PERVIOUS AREAS: a. LANDSCAPING b. PERVIOUS PAVERS 6. DIRECT RUNOFF FROM ROOFS, SIDEWALKS, PATIOS TO LANDSCAPED AREAS. 7. CLUSTER STRUCTURES/PAVEMENT. 8. PLANT TREES ADJACENT TO AND IN PARKING AREAS AND ADJACENT TO OTHER IMPERVIOUS AREAS. 9. PARKING: a. NOT PROVIDED IN EXCESS OF CODE. 1. SOILS TYPE: TYPE D 2. GROUND WATER DEPTH: 18 BGS 3. NAME OF RECEIVING BODY: SAN BRUNO CANAL 4. FLOOD ZONE: X 5. FLOOD ELEVATION (IF APPLICABLE): N/A SOURCE CONTROL MEASURES SITE DESIGN MEASURES PROJECT SITE INFORMATION BIOTREATMENT SOIL REQUIREMENTS BMP NOTES OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE INFORMATION 1. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR BASIN FOOTPRINT AND DESIGN ELEVATIONS. 2. PLACE 3 INCHES OF COMPOSTED, NON-FLOATABLE MULCH IN AREAS BETWEEN STORMWATER PLANTINGS. 3. SEE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR MULCH, PLANT MATERIALS AND IRRIGATION REQUIREMENTS 4. CURB CUTS SHALL BE A MINIMUM 18" WIDE AND SPACED AT 10' O.C. INTERVALS AND SLOPED TO DIRECT STORMWATER TO DRAIN INTO THE BASIN. CURB CUTS SHALL ALSO NOT BE PLACED INLINE WITH OVERFLOW CATCH BASIN. SEE GRADING PLAN FOR MORE DETAIL ON LOCATIONS OF CURB CUTS. 5. A MINIMUM 0.2' DROP BETWEEN STORM WATER ENTRY POINT (I.E. CURB OPENING, FLUSH CURB, ETC.) AND ADJACENT LANDSCAPE FINISHED GRADE. 6. DO NOT COMPACT NATIVE SOIL / SUBGRADE AT BOTTOM OF BASIN. LOOSEN SOIL TO 12" DEPTH. BIORETENTION & FLOW-THROUGH PLANTER NOTES 4" PERF PIPE@0.005 24" 6" MINIMUMVARIES, SEE PLAN 24" RCP GROUT PIPEIN PLACE SEE PLAN FORRIM ELEVATION LIGHT DUTY GRATE INSTALL 12" WIDE APRON OF 6"-8"COBBLES AROUND INLET RIM OUTLET PIPESEE PLANS FOR SIZE AND INV BIOTREATMENT AREA MAINTENANCE SILVA CELLS (PERMEABLE PAVEMENT CONNECTION) STORMWATER NOTESTRASH CAPTURE DEVICE BIORETENTION BASIN W/ LINER SILVA CELLS (TRENCH DRAIN CONNECTION)SILVA CELLS (CATCH BASIN CONNECTION) TYPICAL SILVA CELL DETAIL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 16 4 39 7 20 Aerial Fire TruckOverall Length 39.000ftOverall Width 8.167ftOverall Body Height 7.500ftMin Body Ground Clearance 0.750ftTrack Width 8.167ftLock-to-lock time 5.00sMax Wheel Angle 45.00°30° 6 0 ° 90 ° 120 ° 150° 180°34 . 2 9 1 f t M i n R a d i u s (O u t e r W h e e l ) 19.592ftMin Radius(Inner Wheel) 38.724ftMin Radius(Out e r B o d y ) 19.422f t Max Kickout 1.965ft Vehicle Tracking V20.00.2188(20190304) (c) Autodesk, Inc. www.Autodesk.com Title:Aerial Fire TruckNotes:Turn(s) based upon a design speed of 5.00mph. T101-N T101-S FITNESS R&D / OFFICER&D / OFFICE CONFERENCE NORTH LOBBY MEN'S LOCKER /SHOWER BIKE RM &LOCKERS SWITCHGEAR FCC MPOE TRASHEM ELEC GENERATOR DCW PUMP RM SWITCHGEAR LOADING DOCK TRASH BIKE ROOM HAZSTOR EM ELEC PARKING FIRE WATER TANK LOADING DOCKGENERATORSUB ELEC DCWBOOSTPUMP BIKESTORAGE PG&EELECTRICALROOM KITCHEN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC UP 16.5 0 17.5 0 13.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00 13.50 13.5 0 14.0 0 15.00 11.00 14.00 17. 0 0 12.00 ST O P LOBBY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBYAMENITY LOBBY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE RESTAURANT LOBBY / CAFE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBY BIKE ROOM FCCEM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR GENERATOR LOADING TRASHTRASH LOADING SWITCHGEAR SUB ELEC. EM ELEC. FCC BIKE ROOM BIKE ROOMLOADINGTRASH EM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR FCC LOADING TRASH FCC BIKE ROOM EM ELEC. SWITCHGEAR SUB ELEC. R&D / OFFICE LOBBY CONFERENCE PREFUNCTION LOBBY FOODHALL FITNESS ? AMENITIES EM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR FCCLOADING TRASH SC-PA SC-PC SB-PA SB-PB SB-PC SB-PD SA-PA SA-PBSA-PC NB-PCNB-PDNB-PE NB-PBNB-PA IDF HAZARDS STOR. ELEC ELEC IDFNA-PANA-PB NA-PCNA-PDNA-PE +18'-00"I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D T131PARKINGGARAGE CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ST O P UP 16.5 0 17.5 0 13.00 10.50 11.00 11.50 12.00 12.50 13.00 13.50 13.5 0 14.0 0 15.0 0 11.00 14.00 17. 0 0 12.00 ST O P LOBBY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBYAMENITY LOBBY R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE RESTAURANT LOBBY / CAFE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBY BIKE ROOM FCCEM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR GENERATOR LOADING TRASHTRASH LOADING SWITCHGEAR SUB ELEC. EM ELEC. FCC BIKE ROOM BIKE ROOMLOADINGTRASH EM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR FCC LOADING TRASH FCC BIKE ROOM EM ELEC. SWITCHGEAR SUB ELEC. R&D / OFFICE LOBBY CONFERENCE PREFUNCTION LOBBY FOODHALL FITNESS ? AMENITIES EM ELEC. SUB ELEC. SWITCHGEAR FCCLOADING TRASH SC-PA SC-PC SB-PA SB-PB SB-PC SB-PD SA-PA SA-PBSA-PC NB-PCNB-PDNB-PE NB-PBNB-PA IDF HAZARDS STOR. ELEC ELEC IDFNA-PANA-PB NA-PCNA-PDNA-PE +18'-00"I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D T131PARKINGGARAGE CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ST O P CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 2[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 3[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 4[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 29[2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32[2 PM 2] PARCEL A[66 PM 82] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] LOT 5[35 RSM 10-11] HANNA INVESTMENTS LLC[Doc No. 2010-079898] LANDS OFT E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SHAW RD LLC[Doc No. 2019-090924] LANDS OF GIANNINI [Doc No. 2006-100091] LANDS OF CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SANITARTY SEWER PUMP STATION NO. 11 LANDS OF DEMARIA [Doc No. 2015-060382] LANDS OF PACIFIC PLATINUM TRUST [Doc No. 2016-119675] LANDS OF TWO PLUS SIX LTD [Doc No. 1999-911023] LANDS OF FJPP PARTNERS [Doc No. 1994-190267] LANDS OF SEMIEN [Doc No. 2012-017568] LANDS OF ANDRIGHETTO [Doc No. 2013-101808] LANDS OF PEKING HANDICRAFT INC [Doc No. 1995-073405] LANDS OF IPT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DC LP [Doc No. 2016-109091] LANDS OF POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCORP INC [Doc No. 2002-011514] LANDS OF [Doc No. 2004-202105] 393LF 26.00' E.V.A.E. 22 . 0 0 ' E.V . A . E . 26.00' E.V.A.E. 26.00' E.V.A.E.26.00' E.V.A.E . 26 . 0 0 ' E.V . A . E . 26 . 0 0 ' E.V . A . E . 26.00' E.V.A.E. 26 . 0 0 ' E. V . A . E . R78. 0 0 ' R52.00' R 3 0 . 0 0 ' R30.0 0 ' R7 3 . 0 0 ' R20. 0 0 ' R20.00' R17 4 . 0 0 ' R20.0 0 ' R2 0 . 0 0 ' R4 7 . 0 0 ' 8" W 8" W 8" W 8" W CONNECT TO PUBLIC FIRE MAIN T101 NEW FH T101 NEW FH T101 NEW FH 8" W 8 " W 8" W 8 " W CONNECT TOPUBLIC FIRE MAIN R12 5 . 0 0 ' 4" BFP NEW FH NEW FH NEW FH NEW FH NEW FH NEW FDC NEW FDC NEW FH NEW FDC CONNECT TO T101PUBLIC WATER MAIN NEW FH NEW FH NEW FDC NEW FH NEW FDC NEW FH 4" BFP 4" BFP NEW FH NEW FDC NEW FH NEW FDC 4" BFP4" BFP 4" BFP R20. 0 0 ' 183 LF 353 LF 251 LF 283 LF 343 LF 280 LF 118 LF 399 LF 191 LF 397 LF 396 LF 347 LF 355 LF 182 LF 326 LF 366 LF 150 LF 152 LF © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CON S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 6 . 0 _ F I R E . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 2 6 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C6.0 PRELIMINARY SITE FIRE APPARATUS PLAN FIRE LANE EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT (NO PARKING - FIRE LANE - PAINTED RED PER FIRE DEPARTMENT STANDARDS) FIRE PLAN LEGEND FIRE HOSE LENGTH NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 16 5 0.25 MILE 5 MINUTE WALK 0.50 MILE 10 MINUTE WALK 1.00 MILE 20 MINUTE WALK SAN BRUNO BART STATION SAN BRUNO CALTRAIN STATION AIRPORT LONG-TERM PARKING BAY TRAIL SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CALTRAIN STATION ORANGE MEMORIAL PARK SOUTHLINE OPEN SPACE* COLMA CREEK LINEAR PARK* MIXED USE LINEAR PARK* CENTENNIAL WAY TRAIL BAY T R A I L CEN T E N N I A L W A Y T R A I L S AI R P O R T B L V D HARBOR W A Y COLM A C R E E K SAN MATEO AVE PROPOSED CLASS I BIKE/SHARED USE PATH BY SSF PROPOSED CLASS IV SEPERATED BIKE LANE BY SSF PROPOSED CLASS II BIKE LANE BY SSF S L I N D E N A V E BAYSHORE FREEWAY 1 0 1 A I R P O R T B L U E L I N E I- 3 8 0 T A N F O R A N A V E DOLLER AVE SH A W R D G R A N D A V E AI R P O R T B L V D CH E S T N U T A V E PRODUCE AVE 131S 101 131N GARAGE GA R A G E N C A N A L S T CO C M A C R E E K GR A N O A V E U T A H A V E SAN M A T E O A V E SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT PROPOSED PROJECT SITE SA N B R U N O C R E E K SL O U G H BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 T E R M I N A L C T NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H TO SHAW RD FUTURE OVERPASS +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +18'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +13'-00" I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D ADJACENT PROPERTY T131 PARKING GARAGE VEHICULAR ACCESS ROAD POTENTIAL FUTURE DAYCARE LOCATION 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA DEDICATED PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESS AREARE: ENGINEERING COA 14(d) & 14(e) 10' - 0" © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/18/2025 5:01:18 PM A1.1.0 OVERALL SITE PLAN - GROUND INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" SITE PLAN - LEVEL 01 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL REGIONAL CIRCULATION PLAN L01.01 0 400 800 1600 EXSITING CLASS I BIKE/SHARED USE PATH PROPOSED CLASS I BIKE EXSITING CLASS II BIKE LANE PROPOSED CLASS II BIKE LANE PROPOSED CLASS IV SEPERATED BIKE LANE RAIL LINE FREEWAY WATERWAY BIKE COMMUTE DESTINATIONS * PROPOSED SOURCES: • SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO WALKING AND BIKING MAP • CENTENNIAL WAY BROCHURE • SOUTH SAN FRANCISVO GENERAL PLAN, CHAPTER 4: TRANSPORTATION (NOVEMBER 2019 EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT) • SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO ACTIVE SOUTH CITY (JUNE 2022) • LINDENVILLE SPECIFIC PLAN (OCTOBER 2023) EXSITING CLASS III BIKE ROUTE PROPOSED CLASS III BIKE ROUTE THE BIOPHILIC SANCTUARY: A LINK TO NATURE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: THE LIFE SCIENCE-RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT PROJECT IS LOCATED IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO HIGHWAY 101 AND NEAR THE SAN FRANCISCO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT. THE CURVATURE OF THE SIX-STORY BUILDING CREATES A COURTYARDS WITH SUN EXPOSURE AND NOISE MITIGATION FROM HIGHWAY 101. THE COURTYARDS ARE DESIGNED TO PROVIDE SPACE FOR OUTDOOR WORK, RECREATION AND SOCIALIZING. NATIVE AND WATER-CONSERVING PLANTINGS APPROPRIATE TO SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO PROVIDE CONNECTIONS TO NATURE AND A VARIETY OF LANDSCAPE EXPERIENCES. BUILDING LOBBIES AND OUTDOOR AMENITIES ARE CONNECTED BY PEDESTRIAN PATHS AND THE PROJECT IS CONNECTED TO SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO WITH ROADS, AND PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE CORRIDORS. ESTABLISHING CONTEXT: 1. THE EXISTING TERMINAL COURT AREA IS HIGHLY INDUSTRIAL AND THE PROPOSED PROJECT CREATES A NEW OPPORTUNITY FOR LIFE SCIENCE WORK IN SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO THAT IS CONVENIENT TO HIGHWAY 101, INTERSTATE 280, BART, CALTRAIN AND THE AIRPORT. THE CURVED BUILDING MASS OF SIX STORIES IN HEIGHT CREATES A LANDMARK BUILDING ALONG HIGHWAY 101 AND A LANDSCAPED REFUGE AS A SETTING FOR LIFE SCIENCE-RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT. 2. THE UPPER FLOORS OF THE BUILDINGS WILL PROVIDE DIRECT VIEWS TO THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY, SIGN HILL PARK, SAN BRUNO MOUNTAIN, THE HILLS TO THE WEST OF INTERSTATE 280 AND A VIEW OF THE LANDSCAPED COURTYARDS BELOW. THE COURTYARDS ARE CONNECTED TO GROUND LEVEL LOBBIES AS WELL AS VEHICULAR, BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS. 3. THE PROJECT CONNECTS TO A VARIETY OF MODES OF TRANSPORTATION. REGIONAL CONNECTIONS INCLUDE CONVENIENT ACCESS TO HIGHWAY 101, INTERSTATE 380, BIKEWAYS, SAN BRUNO BART, SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CALTRAIN, SAN BRUNO CALTRAIN, THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY TRAIL AND ORANGE PARK. LEGEND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 166 BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 T E R M I N A L C T NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H TO SHAW RD FUTURE OVERPASS +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +18'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +13'-00" I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D ADJACENT PROPERTY T131 PARKING GARAGE VEHICULAR ACCESS ROAD POTENTIAL FUTURE DAYCARE LOCATION 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA DEDICATED PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESS AREARE: ENGINEERING COA 14(d) & 14(e) 10' - 0" © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/18/2025 5:01:18 PM A1.1.0 OVERALL SITE PLAN - GROUND INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" SITE PLAN - LEVEL 01 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL L01.02 SITE CIRCULATION PLAN 0 50 100 200 SH A W R O A D NA V I G A T A B L E S L O U G H FU T U R E OV E R P A S S T E R M I N A L C O U R T PRODUCE AVENUE ADJACENT PROPERTY SOUTH COURTYARD I131 GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SA N M A T E O A V E N U E I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D INF I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE PEDESTRIAN PATH SHUTTLE ROUTE PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN / CLASS I BIKE ROUTE CLASS II BIKE LANE CLASS III BIKE ROUTE SHORT TERM BIKE PARKING LONG TERM BIKE PARKING SHUTTLE DROPOFF NOTE PROJECT PROVIDES PEDESTRIAN + BIKE CIRCULATION UNLESS NOTED OTHERWISE. SEE ARCH PLANS FOR VEHICULAR CIRCULATION. LEGEND CLASS I BIKE / PEDESTRIAN PATH NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 167 Westerly winds channel between the T131N and T131S buildings to create the Business Walking rating at the Central Dropoff area. 30 Wind DirectionN Street flow patterns around the site –west view * Velocity ratio is the local wind speed divided by the remote approach wind speed at 180'. The local wind speed is the greater of the mean or gust-equivalent mean. See Appendices B and C for details. CONFIGURATION 4 RESULTS Flow Direction Street flow patterns around the site – Southwest view T 101 N Flow Direction T 101 T 131 SDownwash Westerly winds downwash and accelerate along the south façade of T131S building and channel between T101 and the T101 Garage to create the Business Walking rating. Downwash from these winds accelerate along the north façade of T131N building to create Business Walking rating along Produce Ave. Downwash 40 CONFIGURATION 4 RESULTSThe images depict the flow patterns created by westerly winds interacting with the buildings. Wind comfort at the L3 terrace is mostly driven by winds from this direction.West winds reach the façades of T131S & T131N buildings and accelerate along the curved façades, with some downwash contributing to the wind speeds at the terraces. The flow in the passageways is driven primarily by pressure differences between the upwind side (high pressure) and downwind wake (low pressure). The pressure fields are not depicted. . N Downwash Wind Direction Flow acceleration T 101 T 131 S T 131 N © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L01.03 SITE ANALYSIS PLAN 0 50 100 200 SUMME R S O L S T I C E SPR I N G A N D F A L L WI N T E R S O L S T I C E SH A W R O A D NA V I G A T A B L E S L O U G H FU T U R E OV E R P A S S T E R M I N A L C O U R T PRODUCE AVENUE ADJACENT PROPERTY SOUTH COURTYARD I131 GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D INF I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE SUN PATH EAST TO WEST DIRECTION FREEWAY NOISE SLOUGH WIND DIAGRAM FOR AMENITY BUILDING MARCH 21: 7:10 AM - 7:22 PM |SPRING EQUINOX JUNE 21: 5:48 AM - 8:33 PM |SUMMER SOLSTICE SEPTEMBER 21: 6:56 AM - 7:06 PM |FALL EQUINOX DECEMBER 21: 7:20 AM - 4:54 PM |WINTER SOLSTICE LEGEND WIND COMFORT RATING UNCOMFORTABLE BUSINESS WALKING PEDESTRIAN WALKING OUTDOOR DINING PEDESTRIAN STANDING PEDESTRIAN SITTING NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 168 BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 T E R M I N A L C T NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H TO SHAW RD FUTURE OVERPASS +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +18'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +13'-00" I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D ADJACENT PROPERTY T131 PARKING GARAGE VEHICULAR ACCESS ROAD POTENTIAL FUTURE DAYCARE LOCATION 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA DEDICATED PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESS AREARE: ENGINEERING COA 14(d) & 14(e) 10' - 0" © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/18/2025 5:01:18 PM A1.1.0 OVERALL SITE PLAN - GROUND INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" SITE PLAN - LEVEL 01 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL L01.04 ACTIVITY DIAGRAM PLAN 0 50 100 200 SH A W R O A D NA V I G A T A B L E S L O U G H FU T U R E OV E R P A S S T E R M I N A L C O U R T PRODUCE AVENUE ADJACENT PROPERTY SOUTH COURTYARD I131 GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SA N M A T E O A V E N U E I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D INF I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE SOUTH P R O M E N A D E NORTH P R O M E N A D E CONVIENIENCE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE (DURING DAYLIGHT HOURS) COLLABORATION: • LARGE EVENTS • DINING • RECREATION • PICNIC TURF • CAFE DINING • VEHICAL AND SHUTTLE DROP-OFF • TERRACED GARDEN • SUNKEN LAWN • SENSORY FURNITURE: SWINGS & SPIN CHAIRS • RELAXATION LOUNGE • CONTEMPLATIVE GREEN • WORK PAVILION • CAMPFIRE RING INSPIRATION RENEWAL FOCUS LEGEND INFNITE LOOP (.5 MILE) PROMENADE PERIMETER PATH NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 169 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L02.00A CONCEPT IMAGERY THE BIOPHILIC SANCTUARY - A LINK TO NATURE THE LANDsCAPE CONCEPT FOR THE TERMINAL 131 PROJECT FOCUsEs ON sUsTAINABLE CONNECTIONs TO NATURE. UsING A BIOPHILIC DEsIGN APPROACH PROVIDEs FOR THE INNATE HUMAN NEED TO BE CONNECTED TO NATURE FOR PHYsICAL, MENTAL AND sPIRITUAL HEALTH AND WELLNEss. WITH A PLETHORA OF REsEARCH REVEALING THE BENEFITs OF MAINTAINING A CONNECTION TO NATURE AND sPENDING TIME OUTDOORs FOUND TO BE DIRECTLY LINKED TO HEALTH BENEFITs, WE WANT TO sUPPORT THE HEALTH AND ExPERIENCE OF THE UsERs AND THE ENVIRONMENT. IT sTARTs WITH UNDERsTANDING AND CONNECTING TO THE sITE, A COAsTAL RIPARIAN ECOsYsTEM. THAT INsPIRED THE UsE OF NATIVE PLANT COMMUNITIEs OF THE RIPARIAN FOREsT / MEADOW PLANT COMMUNITY sEEKING A CONNECTION TO THE BAY AND THE UPLAND COAsTAL OAK sCRUB / PLANT COMMUNITY sEEKING A CONNECTION TO THE sKY. UsING THE FOREsT TO BRING THE sCALE OF THE BUILDINGs DOWN TO EARTH AND CREATING AN OPPORTUNITY TO ENVELOPE AND IMMERsE UsERs IN A FOREsT THAT OFFERs A sTRONG CONNECTION TO NATURE. THE FOREsT FOLLOWs THE PERIMETER OF THE BUILDINGs WITH sOME DECIDUOUs AND sOME EVERGREEN NATIVE TREEs TO ALLOW THE LIGHT IN WINTER AND TO sHADE THE BUILDINGs IN THE sUMMER. THE NATIVE GRAssEs AND MEADOWs WOULD PROVIDE A RICH GROUND LEVEL PLANTING WITH A VARIETY OF COLORs, TExTUREs AND sCENTs THAT INVITE A CONNECTION TO NATURE. NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 170 131s LANDsCAPE AMENITIEs131N LANDsCAPE AMENITIEs COLLABORATION TRELLIS PAVING/sURFACE LAWN OR TURF FURNITURE/sTRUCTUREs PROMENADE: DIRECTIONAL PERMEABLE PAVERS INFINITE LOOP: GRANITE CRETE BUILDING PERIMETER: VERTICALLY ALIGNED PERMEABLE PAVER MEANDERING WALK: DECOMPOSED GRANITE LOBBIES: PERMEABLE PAVING © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L02.00B MATERIALS IMAGERY PAVILION RECREATIONAL GREEN TERRACED SEATS BRIDGE OVER BIOFILTRATION AREA COLLABORATION AMPLITHEATER NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 171 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L02.01 LANDSCAPE PLAN 0 50 100 200 13 1 N S E C T I O N E L E V A T I O N S O U T H 13 1 S S E C T I O N E L E V A T I O N N O R T H SH A W R O A D NA V I G A T A B L E S L O U G H FU T U R E OV E R P A S S T E R M I N A L C O U R T PRODUCE AVENUE ADJACENT PROPERTY SOUTH COURTYARD I131 GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SA N M A T E O A V E N U E I131S B I131S D INF I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A 9 12 12 3 6 6 20 13 6 5 1 5 5 5 5 3 4 19 19 11 11 13 197 7 7 2 2 2 2 2 13 20 13 17 9 1 6 8 4 4 8 8 8 13 9 914 15 16 18 19 19 19 19 19 20 19 21 10 10 11 6 22 22 22 22 22 22 1 VEHICULAR ENTRANCE 2 ROAD (sEE ARCH FOR FIRE ACCEss) 3 sURFACE PARKING 4 sERVICE YARD 5 sERVICE AREA 6 10’ WIDE PERIMETER PATH (BIKE AND PEDEsTRIAN sHARED) 7 20’ WIDE PROMENADE 8 10’ WIDE INFINITE LOOP (sEE ARCH FOR EGREss) 9 VEHICULAR DROP-OFF 10 sHUTTLE DROP-OFF 11 MECHANICAL BOLLARDs (FOR sHUTTLE + FIRE ACCEss) 12 FIxED BOLLARDs 13 LOBBY ENTRANCE 14 EVENT GREEN 15 COLLABORATION AMPLITHEATER 16 FLExIBLE EVENT OR sECRET GARDEN 17 COLLABORATION TRELLIs OR PAVILION 18 sUNKEN RECREATIONAL GREEN 19 sILVA CELL/BIORETENTION AREA 20 PLANTING (FOR WIND MITIGATION) 21 WIND TURBINEs 22 RAIsED CROssWALK LEGEND TERRACE LEVEL 03 TERRACE LEVEL 05 TERRACE LEVEL 02 LEGEND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 172 23 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L03.01 I131S ENLARGEMENT PLAN 0 20 40 80 ADJACENT PROPERTY I131S B I131S A I131S D SOUTH COURTYARD I131N A IN F I N I T E R O W NAV I G A T A B L E S L O U G H I131S C NORTH P R O M E N A D E 2 1 2 9 9 9 2 2 5 15 17 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 7 8 8 9 11 11 12 12 12 12 11 15 13 14 13 15 15 17 17 622 6 21 10 13 23 14 2 14 23 22 2 22 20 2 10 21 16 19 24 24 24 LEGEND 1 VEHICULAR ENTRANCE 2 FIRE ACCEss ROAD 3 sURFACE PARKING 4 sERVICE YARD 5 sERVICE AREA 6 PERIMETER PATH (10’ WIDE BIKE AND PEDEsTRIAN sHARED) 7 NORTH PROMENADE 8 INFINITE LOOP 9 VEHICULAR DROP-OFF 10 sHUTTLE DROP-OFF 11 MECHANICAL BOLLARDs FOR FIRE & sHUTTLE ACCEss 12 FIxED BOLLARDs 13 LOBBY ENTRANCE 14 EVENT GREEN 15 COLLABORATION AMPHITHEATER/ sPECIAL EVENT sPACE 16 AMENITY LEVEL 2 sPACE: • OPTION 1: sECRET GARDEN WITH BAMBOO/ FERNs AND ROOMs • OPTION 2: FLExIBLE GREEN sPACE OF sYNTHETIC TURF WITH THREE 36” BOx TREEs IN PLANTERs EACH sIDE (6 TOTAL). 17 sILVA CELL/ BIORETENTION AREA 18 UPFIT OUTDOOR WORK PAVILION 19 OUTDOOR DINING AREA UNDER GINKGO GROVE 20 PLANTING (FOR WIND MITIGATION) 21 WIND TURBINE 22 RAIsED CROssWALK 23 INTIMATE GARDEN NOOK 24 sENsORY FURNITURE TERRACE LEVEL 03 TERRACE LEVEL 05 TERRACE LEVEL 02 LEGEND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 173 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L03.02 I131S MATERIALS ENLARGEMENT PLAN 0 20 40 80 ADJACENT PROPERTY I131S B I131S A I131S D SOUTH COURTYARD I131N A IN F I N I T E R O W NAV I G A T A B L E S L O U G H I131S C 6 5 4 5 7 5 5 5 5 2 2 9 9 9 8 11 3 3 3 7 7 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 18 18 14 3 13 15 6 6 15 15 15 4 4 1 1 5 6 6 12 12 13 10 17 LEGENDLEGEND ASPHALT AT PERIMETER PATH RAISED CONCRETE CROSSWALK AUTOMATIC RETRACTABLE BOLLARDS make: 1-800-bollards PERMEABLE PAVER AT PROMENADE Colors: Granada white & frenCh Grey siZe: 12X24 FIXED BOLLARDS make: 1-800-bollards MANUAL RETARACTABLE BOLLARDS make: 1-800-bollards PERMEABLE PAVER AT LOBBIES Color: frenCh Grey & almond siZe: 6X24 BIKE RACKS make: landsCape forms model: loop bike raCk PERMEABLE PAVER AT BUILDING PERIMETER Color: frenCh Grey siZe: 3X12 WORK PAVILION make: landsCape forms model: Upfit DECOMPOSED GRANITE AT MEANDERING PATH Color: blUe SYNTHETIC TURF OR LAWN with sUbdrainaGe GRANITE CRETE AT INFINITE LOOP Color: natUral Gold LARGE UMBRELLA make: landsCape forms model: tUCCi meGa maX CRUSHED ROCK Color: varies siZe: 1/8” RAISED TURF WITH CONCRETE SEATWALL CONCRETE SEAT WALL CONCRETE SEAT WALL WITH RECYCLED WOOD CAP 1 13 3 2 14 4 16 15 5 17 6 18 7 8 9 10 11 12 NOTE ALL PERmEABLE PAVINg AND SyNTHETIC TURF REqUIRES SUBDRAINAgE CONNECTED TO STORm DRAINAgE SySTEm (SEE CIVIL PLANS) NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 174 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L03.03 I131S SECTION ELEVATION NORTH 0 20 40 80 I131S DI131S B ROAD (SEE ARCH FOR FIRE ACCESS) EVENT GREEN WITH RAISED TURF BEHIND PROMENADE ADJACENT PROPERTYCOLLABORATION TERRACELOBBY PLAZA COASTAL MEADOW (BEHIND) RIPARIAN FOREST (BEHIND) FITNESS GARDEN LOADING AREA WITH PEDESTRAIN CROSSING PERIMETER PATH INFINITE LOOP TRAIL REDWOOD GROVE BOTANICAL GARDEN I131S DI131S B I131S A I131N B PR O P E R I T Y L I N E I131S A I131S B ADJACENT PROPERTY I131S D I131N B NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 175 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L04.01 I131N ENLARGEMENT PLAN 0 20 40 80 I131 GARAGE ADJACENT PROPERTY I131N B NORTH COURTYARD I131S C I131N A IN F I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE NORTH P R O M E N A D E SOUTH P R O M E N A D E 1 2 1 3 2 2 2 5 5 4 6 6 7 8 89 9 9 12 17 12 12 12 12 12 12 10 12 11 15 13 13 19 16 18 20 17 20 17 25 11 12 18 23 23 22 22 24 21 22 14 26 26 26 LEGEND 1 VEHICULAR ENTRANCE 2 FIRE ACCEss ROAD 3 sURFACE PARKING 4 sERVICE YARD 5 sERVICE AREA 6 PERIMETER PATH (10’ WIDE BIKE AND PEDEsTRIAN sHARED) 7 NORTH PROMENADE 8 INFINITE LOOP 9 VEHICULAR DROP-OFF 10 sHUTTLE DROP-OFF 11 MECHANICAL BOLLARDs FOR FIRE & sHUTTLE ACCEss 12 FIxED BOLLARDs 13 LOBBY ENTRANCE 14 EVENT GREEN 15 LARGE EVENT/RECREATIONAL sPACE (sUNKEN) 16 TERRACED sEATs AND sLOPED TURF 17 sILVA CELL/BIORETENTION AREA 18 UPFIT OUTDOOR WORK PAVILION 19 EVENT PAVILION OR TRELLIs 20 PLANTING (FOR WIND MITIGATION) 21 EVENT OBsERVATION sTEPs 22 RAIsED CROssWALK 23 INTIMATE GARDEN NOOKs 24 BRIDGE OVER BIOFILTRATION PLANTING 25 ACCEssIBLE PATH TO sUNKEN GREEN 26 sENsORY FURNITURE TERRACE LEVEL 03 TERRACE LEVEL 05 TERRACE LEVEL 02 LEGEND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 176 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L04.02 I131N MATERIALS ENLARGEMENT PLAN 0 20 40 80 I131 GARAGE ADJACENT PROPERTY I131N B NORTH COURTYARD 131S C I131N A IN F I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE 11 12 15 14 14 14 13 11 11 8 17 4 4 5 15 3 6 6 6 5 2 1 7 7 9 9 1 2 3 9 17 4 18 5 5 5 7 13 15 14 15 6 11 LEGENDLEGEND ASPHALT AT PERIMETER PATH RAISED CONCRETE CROSSWALK AUTOMATIC RETRACTABLE BOLLARDS make: 1-800-bollards PERMEABLE PAVER AT PROMENADE Colors: Granada white & frenCh Grey siZe: 12X24 FIXED BOLLARDS make: 1-800-bollards MANUAL RETARACTABLE BOLLARDS make: 1-800-bollards PERMEABLE PAVER AT LOBBIES Color: frenCh Grey & almond siZe: 6X24 BIKE RACKS make: landsCape forms model: loop bike raCk PERMEABLE PAVER AT BUILDING PERIMETER Color: frenCh Grey siZe: 3X12 WORK PAVILION make: landsCape forms model: Upfit DECOMPOSED GRANITE AT MEANDERING PATH Color: blUe SYNTHETIC TURF OR LAWN with sUbdrainaGe GRANITE CRETE AT INFINITE LOOP Color: natUral Gold WOOD BRIDGE CRUSHED ROCK Color: varies siZe: 1/8” RAISED TURF WITH CONCRETE SEATWALL CONCRETE SEAT WALL CONCRETE SEAT WALL WITH RECYCLED WOOD CAP 1 13 3 2 14 4 16 15 5 17 6 18 7 8 9 10 11 12 NOTE ALL PERmEABLE PAVINg AND SyNTHETIC TURF REqUIRES SUBDRAINAgE CONNECTED TO STORm DRAINAgE SySTEm (SEE CIVIL PLANS) NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 177 PAVILLION © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 100% SD L04.03 I131N SECTION ELEVATION SOUTH 0 20 40 80 I131N B I131N B I131 GARAGE PR O P E R I T Y L I N E MEANDERING PATH WITH WORKING PAVILION BEHIND TERRACED STEPS TERRACED SEATING WITH MOUNDED LAWN SUNKEN GREEN PAVILION AND GATHERING AREA BRIDGE AND BIORETENTION AREA RAISED CROSSWALK I131 GARAGE ROAD PERIMETER PATHI131N B REDWOOD GROVE REDWOOD GROVECOASTAL MEADOW RIPARIAN FOREST INFINITE LOOP TRAIL INFINITE LOOP TRAIL 131 GARAGE ENTRANCE/ EXIT WITH PLANTING BUFFER BEHIND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 178 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L05.00 PLANTING COMMUNITY IMAGERY COASTAL MEADOW/BIORETENTION RIPARIAN FOREST REDWOOD GROVE COASTAL CHAPPARAL OAK WOODLAND BOTANICAL GARDEN SUN TERRACES PART SHADE TERRACES SHADE TERRACES SNOWY RIVER WATTLE BEARDTONGUE SQUID AGAVE DOUGLAS IRIS FOOTHILL SEDGEGIANT CHAIN FERNAUSTRALIAN TREE FERN DEER GRASS LOMANDRA HUMMINGBIRD SAGE YARROW LAMBS’ EAR JERUSALEM SAGE MONKEYFLOWER PACIFIC REEDGRASS BIG LEAF MAPLE CALIFORNIA SYCAMORE REDWOOD WOOD SORRELSTARRY CORAL BELLS GIANT CHAIN FERNRED TWIG DOGWOOD PACIFIC COAST IRIS WAX MYRTLEMANZANITA CEANOTHUS COASTAL BUCKWHEAT WHITE SAGE BIORETENTION FOOTHILL SEDGE BUTTERFLY ROSE CREAM BUSH COYOTE MINT DEER GRASS, GOLDENROD, SAGE MEADOW YARROW MEADOW WITH CANYON PRINCE BLUE EYED GRASS BLUE GRAMA BLEEDING HEARTSPICE BUSH WESTERN SWORD FERN GIANT HYSSOP SAGE NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 179 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L05.01 PLANTING COMMUNITY LEGEND BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aQUileGia formosa western ColUmbine 1 GAL 1 x 1 155 ED L x CalyCanthUs oCCidentalis spiCebUsh 15 GAL 3 x 4 52 D M x CareX tUmUliCola berkley sedGe 1 GAL 1 x 1 515 E L x CeanothUs thyrsiflorUs blUeblossUm 5 GAL 3 x 6 52 E L x DICENTRA FORMOsA bleedinG heart 1 GAL 1 x 1 155 E L x franGUla CaliforniCa Coffeeberry 5 GAL 5 x 5 52 E L x GalUtheria shallon salal 5 GAL 3 x 3 129 E M x heUChUra miCrantha CreviCe alUmroot 1 GAL 2 x 2 309 E M x holodisCUs disColor Cream bUsh 5 GAL 8 x 10 52 D L x maianthemUm stellatUm starry false lily of the valley 1 GAL 1 x 1 155 E M x monardella villosa Coyote mint 1 GAL 2 x 3 77 ED VL x oXalis oreGana redwood sorrel 1 GAL .5 x 3 386 E M x polystiChUm mUnitUm western sword fern 1 GAL 3 x 3 258 E M x vaCCiniUm ovatUm hUCkleberry 5 GAL 3 x 3 77 E M x woodwordia fimbriata Giant Chain fern 5 GAL 4 x 4 155 E M x BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aQUileGia formosa western ColUmbine 1 GAL 1 x 1 88 ED L x CareX tUmUliCola foothill sedGe 1 GAL 1 x 1 881 E L x ClinopodiUm doUGlasii yerba bUena 4” POT 3 x 3 220 E L x CornUs seriCea red twiG doGwood 5 GAL 6 x 6 88 D H x desChampsia Caespitosa tUfted hairGrass 1 GAL 3 x 3 440 ED L x fraGeria Chloensis beaCh strawberry 4” POT 1 x 2 220 E M x franGUla CaliforniCa Coffeeberry 5 GAL 5 x 5 88 E L x heUChera maXima Coral bells 1 GAL 2 x 2 88 E M x holodisCUs disColor Cream bUsh 5 GAL 4 x 4 88 D L x iris doUGlasiana doUGlas iris 1 GAL 1 x 1 440 E L x JUnCUs patens Common rUsh 1 GAL 1 x 1 440 E L x mUhlenberGia riGens deer Grass 5 GAL 4 x 4 220 ED L x polystiChUm mUnitUm western sword fern 1 GAL 3 x 3 440 E M x ribes speCies Gooseberry 5 GAL 6 x 3 88 D L x rosa 'mUtabilis'bUtterfly rose 5 GAL 4 x 4 88 E L salvia spathaCea hUmminGbird saGe 4” POT 2 x 2 220 E L x symphoriCarpos mollis CreepinG snowberry 1 GAL 2 x 6 88 E L x woodwordia fimbriata Giant Chain fern 5 GAL 4 x 4 176 E M x BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E SI Z E HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aChillea speCies yarrow 1 GAL 1 x 1 102 E L x aCmispon Glaber deerweed 1 GAL 3 x 3 77 E VL x aGave speCies aGave 1 GAL 4 x 4 77 E L aloe speCies aloe 1 GAL 2 x 2 77 E L arCtostaphylos speCies manZanita 15 GAL 3 x 6 128 E L x armeria maritima sea thrift 1 GAL 1 x 1 77 E L x artemisia speCies saGewort 1 GAL 2 x 3 460 E L x CalamaGrostis nUtkaensis paCifiC reed Grass 1GAL 3 x 3 128 E M x CareX pansa foothill sedGe 1 GAL 1 x 1 179 E M x CeanothUs speCies blUeblossom 5 GAL 5 x 5 77 E L x dUdleya speCies live forever 1 GAL 2 x 2 77 E L x eriGeron GlaUCUs seaside daisy 1 GAL 1 x 3 77 E L x erioGonUm parvifoliUm seaCliff bUCkwheat 1 GAL 3 x 3 256 E L x eriophylUm staeChadifoliUm liZard tail 1 GAL 2 x 4 256 E L x fraGaria Chiloensis beaCh strawberry 4” POT 1 x 2 128 E M x Grindelia CamporUm GUmplant 1 GAL 2 x 2 77 E L x leymUs 'Canyon prinCe'Canyon prinCe wild rye 1 GAL 4 x 4 128 E L x lUpinUs arboreUs yellow bUsh lUpine 1 GAL 3 x 3 77 D L x romneya CoUlterii matiliJa poppy 1 GAL 6 x 6 26 E VL x salvia speCies saGe 5 GAL 4 x 4 77 E L x * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS COAsTAL MEADOW / BIORETENTION RIPARIAN FOREsT REDWOOD GROVE sUN TERRACE sHADE TERRACE TREES criteria • LOW-WATER UsE, • COMPATIBLE WITH LOCAL sOIL CONDITIONs AND sOUTH sAN FRANCIsCO’s DRY, WINDY AND URBAN LANDsCAPE. • TREEs ARE sELECTED FROM THE sOUTH sAN FRANCIsCO CURRENT APPROVED TREE PLAN AND THE sAN MATEO COUNTY C3 REGULATED PROJECTs GUIDE. Planting concePt INsPIRED BY THE ECOLOGICAL HIsTORY OF THE sAN FRANCIsCO BAY AREA, THE NATIVE, PLANT COMMUNITY BAsED PALETTE PROPOsED FOR TERMINAL 131 Is ADAPTED TO THE CHALLENGING COAsTAL CONDITIONs WHILE CREATING LUsH, DIVERsE sPACEs FOR PEOPLE AND WILDLIFE ALIKE. RIPARIAN FOREsTs, COAsTAL CHAPARRAL, OAK WOODLAND, COAsTAL MEADOWs, GREEN WALLs AND sCREENs sOFTEN THE BUILDING EDGEs, ENCLOsE PATHWAYs AND GATHERING sPACEs AND PROVIDE VIEWs OF NATURE THROUGHOUT. NATURALIsTIC WET MEADOWs OR BIOFILTRATION AREAs CLEAN WATER FROM THE sITE. riParian Forest: CHOsEN FROM THE ECOTONE BETWEEN OAK WOODLAND, RIPARIAN WOODLAND AND REDWOOD FOREsT, THIs DYNAMIC MIx OF EVERGREEN AND DECIDUOUs TREEs COMBINEs LEAFY YELLOWs AND GREENs WITH TALL REDWOODs AND DEEP GREEN OAKs OF NATIVE RIPARIAN TREEs. THE sHADY, OPEN UNDERsTORY OF WOODLAND FERNs, sEDGEs, GRAssEs AND FLOWERING PERENNIALs PROVIDEs INTEREsT YEAR ROUND WITH A DIVERsE RANGE OF sPECIEs. coastal meaDow: THE COAsTAL MEADOW PLANTING INCLUDEs A WIDE RANGE OF NATIVE GRAssEs, PERENNIALs, WILDFLOWERs AND FLOWERING sHRUBs TO PROVIDE YEAR ROUND INTEREsT AND HABITAT FOR BENEFICIAL INsECTs AND BIRDs. GATHERING AREAs OF PAVING, DECKING OR CRUsHED sTONE ARE IMMERsED IN THIs DIVERsE sENsORY ExPERIENCE OF WAVING GRAssEs, FRAGRANT FOLIAGE AND FLOWERs, AND LUsH GREENERY YEAR ROUND. coastal chaParral: GRACING THE EDGEs OF PATHWAYs, THIs MIx OF DIVERsE COAsTAL sHRUBs AND PERENNIALs PROVIDEs CONTRAsTs OF COLOR AND TExTURE. sWATHs OF NATIVE PERENNIAL WILDFLOWERs LIKE BUCKWHEATs AND sAGEs PROVIDE ExCELLENT POLLINATOR HABITAT AND sTRUCTURAL sUCCULENTs PUNCTUATE THE MIx. oaK wooDlanD: THE OAK WOODLAND PLANTING INCLUDEs DROUGHT-TOLERANT FERNs, GRAssEs, AND PERENNIALs THAT PROVIDE HABITAT AND INTEREsT. THE PLANTING Is DEsIGNED TO COMPLEMENT THE CANOPY OF OAKs OVERHEAD AND THRIVE IN THE LOW WATER AND PART sHADE ENVIRONMENT UNDER OAKs. reDwooD groVe THE REDWOOD GROVE PROVIDEs A PROTECTED AND CONTEMPLATIVE GLEN OF DENsE REDWOODs AND LUsH REDWOOD UNDERsTORY PLANTINGs. TOWERING AGAINsT THE FACADE, THEsE TREEs WILL HELP NEsTLE THE BUILDING AND VIsITORs ALIKE INTO THE LANDsCAPE. Perimeter heDgerow screening: THE LIMITED PLANTING AREA ALONG THE PERMIETER OF THE sITE Is PACKED DENsELY WITH TALL NATIVE sHRUBs AND EVERGREEN TREEs WHEREVER POssIBLE. THE sHRUB UNDERsTORY INCLUDEs NATIVE COAsTAL MEADOW sPECIEs FOR ADDED sEAsONAL INTEREsT AND sCREENING. bioretention: DENsE GROVEs OF NATIVE WILLOWs DOTTED THROUGHOUT THE BIOFILTRATION BAsIN FILTER sTORMWATER BEFORE BEING DIsCHARGED TO THE ADJACENT sLOUGH. NATIVE sEDGEs, RUsHEs, GRAssEs, sHRUBs AND FLOWERING PERENNIALs ADAPTED TO WET AND DRY PERIODs CREATE A NATURALIsTIC, MEADOW LIKE BIOFILTRATION AREA THAT BLENDs INTO THE ADJACENT sLOUGH LANDsCAPE Fire access trees TREEs UNDER 15’ IN HEIGHT ARE PLANTED ON THE sIDEs OF THE BUILDINGs THAT ARE DEsIGNATED FOR AERIAL FIRE APPARATUs ACCEss. stormwater treatment BIORETENTION AREAs CLEAN sTORMWATER WITH C3 APPROVED PLANTINGs THAT BLEND WITH THE ADJACENT PLANTING AREAs. sOME TREEs ARE PLANTED IN sILVA CELLs TO TREAT sTORMWATER AND sUPPORT TREE GROWTH. irrigation concePt THE IRRIGATION CONCEPT sHALL COMPLY WITH CITY OF sOUTH sAN FRANCIsCO WATER EFFICIENT LANDsCAPING REGULATIONs AND THE sTATE OF CALIFORNIA WATER EFFICIENT LANDsCAPE ORDINANCE REqUIREMENTs AND UTILIzE AN EFFICIENT AUTOMATED DRIP sYsTEM THAT WILL INCLUDE FLOW sENsING, MAsTER VALVE CONTROL WITH AUTO sHUT-OFF AND WEATHER/CLIMATE sENsING. THIs sYsTEM(s) sHALL CONNECT TO A sINGLE DEDICATED WATER METER AND BACKFLOW PREVENTION DEVICE. THIs sITE Is NOT PART OF ANY LOCAL RECYCLED WATER sYsTEM AND Is INTENDED TO UTILIzE POTABLE WATER FOR DRIP IRRIGATION OF THE PREDOMINANTLY LOW WATER UsE PLANT PALETTE. schematic Design narratiVe sEE sCHEMATIC DEsIGN NARRATIVE FOR sOIL REqUIREMENTs, sUBsURFACE DRAINAGE, sILVA CELLs, BIOFILTRATION, IRRIGATION AND OTHER MATERIALs TO sUPPORT PLANTING. PLANTING CONCEPT COAsTAL CHAPARRAL BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aeoniUm CUltivars aeoniUms 1 GAL 4 x 4 18 E M arCtostaphylos speCies manZanita 15 GAL 3 x 6 7 E L x CeanothUs speCies blUeblossUm 5 GAL 3 x 6 7 E L x desChampsia Caespitosa tUfted hairGrass 1 GAL 3 x 3 39 ED L x diplaCUs aUrantiaCUs bUsh monkey flower 1 GAL 2 x 2 14 E M x festUCa rUbra red fesCUe 1 GAL 1 x 1 39 E L x franGUla CaliforniCa Coffeeberry 15 GAL 6 x 6 7 E L x heUChera maXima Coral bells 1 GAL 2 x 2 35 E M x iris doUGlasiana doUGlas iris 1 GAL 2 x 2 32 E L x lomandra speCies dwarf mat rUsh 1 GAL 3 x 3 14 E L morella CaliforniCa paCifiC waX myrtle 15 GAL 15 x 15 7 E M x mUhlenberGia riGens deer Grass 5 GAL 4 x 4 39 ED L x polystiChUm mUnitUm western sword fern 5 GAL 3 x 3 43 E M x salvia speCies saGe 5 GAL 4 x 4 11 E L x staChys bUllata hedGenettle 1 GAL 2 x 2 43 H L x OAK WOODLAND * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aCaCia boormanii snowy river wattle 1 GAL 10 x 6 11 E L aChillea paprika yarrow 1 GAL 1 x 1 57 E L x aeoniUm CUltivars aeoniUm 1 GAL 2 x 2 57 E L aGave speCies CentUry plant 1 GAL 4 x 6 29 E L aristida pUrpUrea pUrple three awn 1 GAL 2 x 2 57 E VL x asClepias speCiosa showy milkweed 1 GAL 2 x 4 29 E M x CalamaGrostis nUtkaensis paCifiC reed Grass 5 GAL 3 x 3 29 ED M x CistUs ladanifer roCk rose 1 GAL 4 x 4 11 E L erioGonUm arboresCens santa CrUZ island bUCkwheat 1 GAL 3 x 3 17 E L x festUCa mairei atlas fesCUe 1 GAL 2 x 2 86 ED L knifophia ‘Christmas Cheer’red hot poker 1 GAL 3 x 2 57 E L x misCanthUs ‘morninG liGht’ maiden Grass 1 GAL 3 x 4 29 ED L penstemon speCies beardtonGUe 1 GAL 2 x 2 23 E VL x salvia speCies saGe 5 GAL 4 x 4 57 E L x taGetes lemmonii moUntain mariGold 1 GAL 4 x 6 11 E L yUCCa rostrata 'saffire skys'beaked blUe yUCCa 5 GAL 5 x 3 11 E VL BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aCanthUs mollis bears breaCh 1 GAL 4 x 4 103 E M aGave braCteosa sQUid aGave 1 GAL 1 x 2 83 E L bUlbine frUtesCens oranGe bUlbine 1 GAL 1 x 1 103 E M CareX tUmUliCola foothill sedGe 1 GAL 1 x 1 103 E L x diCksonia antarCtiCa aUstralian tree fern 5 GAL 10 x 10 41 E H franGUla ‘moUnd san brUno’ moUnd san brUno California Coffeeberry 5 GAL 4 x 5 41 E L x GeraniUm ‘biokovo’ hardy GeraniUm 1 GAL 1 x 1 206 E M heUChera speCies Coral bells 1 GAL 1 x 1 206 E L x iris doUGlasiana ‘pCh’doUGlas iris 1 GAL 1 x 1 124 E L x lomandra hystriX CUltivars mat rUsh 1 GAL 3 x 4 351 E L monardella villosa Coyote mint 1 GAL 2 x 3 62 E VL x pleChtranthUs neoChilUs lobster flower 1 GAL 1 x 3 103 E VL polystiChUm mUnitUm western sword fern 5 GAL 3 x 3 206 E M x rUbUs pentalobUs CreepinG rasberry 1 GAL 1 x 4 124 E M salvia spathaCea hUmminGbird saGe 1 GAL 1 x 3 103 E L woodwordia fimbriata Giant Chain fern 1 GAL 4 x 4 103 E M x BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E SI Z E HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 C3 NA TI V E aCmispon Glaber deerweed 1 GAL 3 x 3 271 VL x alliUm UnifoliUm one leaf onion 1 GAL 1 x .5 406 L x aQUileGia formosa western ColUmbine 1 GAL 1 x 1 271 L x arCtostaphylos hookeri hookers manZanita 5 GAL 2 x 6 271 L x x artemisia CaliforniCa saGebrUsh 5 GAL 2 x 4 271 L x atripleX lentiformis biG saltbUsh 5 GAL 5 x 5 271 VL x CalamaGrostis nUtkaensis paCifiC reed Grass 5 GAL 3 x 3 677 M x x CareX tUmUliCola split awn sedGe 1 GAL 1 x 1 1624 L x x CeanothUs GlorioUsUs 'anChor bay'CeanothUs anChor bay 5 GAL 3 x 6 271 L x desChampsia Caespitosa tUfted hairGrass 1 GAL 3 x 3 1624 L x eriGeron GlaUCUs seaside daisy 1 GAL 1 x 2 271 L x x erioGonUm latifoliUm Coast bUCkwheat 1 GAL 3 x 3 271 L x x eriophylUm staeChadifoliUm yellow yarrow 1 GAL 3 x 3 271 NA x esChsCholZia CaliforniCa ssp maritima Coast poppy 4” POT 1 x 1 271 VL x x Grindelia CamporUm GUmplant 1 GAL 2 x 2 271 NA x x iris doUGlasiana doUGlas iris 1 GAL 1 x 1 406 L x x JUnCUs pattens Commmon rUsh 1 GAL 1 x 1 1083 L x x leymUs 'Canyon prinCe'Canyon prinCe wild rye 1 GAL 4 x 4 1083 L x mUhlenberGia riGens deer Grass 5 GAL 4 x 4 677 L x x plantaGo sUbnUda naked plantain 4” POT 1 x 1 271 L x salvia Clevelandii California blUe saGe 5 GAL 4 x 6 271 L x salvia spathaCea hUmminGbird saGe 4” POT 4 x 4 271 L x sidalCea malviflora CheCkerbloom 4” POT 2 x 2 271 M x x solidaGo CaliforniCa California Goldenrod 1 GAL 2 x 2 271 M x staphys bUllata hedGenettle 1 GAL 2 x 2 271 H x stipa lepida small flowered needleGrass 1 GAL 2 x 2 1353 VL x x BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aChillea ‘moonshine’yarrow 1 GAL 1 x 1 207 E L anemone ‘honorine Jobert’ honorine Jobert Japanese anemone 1 GAL 2 x 2 207 E M desChampsia Caespitosa tUfted hairGrass 1 GAL 3 x 3 415 ED L x eriophylUm staeChadifoliUm seaside woolly sUnflower 1 GAL 2 x 4 207 E x iris ‘snow Canyon’ Canyon snow iris 1 GAL 1 x 1 415 E L x lomandra platinUm beaUty dwarf mat rUsh 1 GAL 3 x 3 829 E L mimUlUs ‘Jelly bean’monkeyflower 1 GAL 3 x 3 207 E L x mUhlenberGia riGens deerGrass 1 GAL 3 x 3 622 E L x phlomis rUsseliana JerUsalem saGe 1 GAL 3 x 2 207 E L ribes speCies Gooseberry 5 GAL 6 x 3 207 D L x salvia spathaCea hUmminGbird saGe 1 GAL 1 x 3 207 E L x staChys byZantina lambs’ ears 1 GAL 1 x 1 207 E L westrinGia varieties Coast rosemary 1 GAL 2 x 4 207 E L * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS PART sHADE TERRACE KE Y BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T A N D WI D T H Q U A N T I T Y WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 ST O R M W A T E R TR E A T M E N T FI R E A C C E S S TR E E DE C I D U O U S NA T I V E ac aCer CirCinatUm vine maple 24” BOx 15 x 15 13 M x x am aCer maCrophyllUm biGleaf maple 24” BOx 50 x 30 12 M x x as arbUtUs ‘marina’strawberry tree 24” BOx 20 x 20 16 L x x aU arbUtUs Unedo strawberry tree (mUlti-trUnk)24” BOx 15 x 15 34 L x x ct CeanothUs ‘snow flUrry’ California lilaC 5 GAL 10 x 12 47 L x x co CerCis oCCidentalis western redbUd 48” BOx 15 x 15 67 VL x x cc CorylUs CornUta beaked haZelnUt 24” BOx 10 x 10 11 M x g GinkGo biloba ‘aUtUmn Gold’aUtUmn Gold GinkGo 48” BOx 45 x 45 23 M ha heteromeles arbUtifolia toyon 24” BOx 10 x 8 40 L x x lF lyonothamnUs floribUndUs Catalina ironwood 15 GAL 25 x 15 39 L x x os olea eUropaea ‘swan hill’ frUitless olive 24” boX 25 x 20 9 VL Pr platanUs raCemosa California syCamore 24” BOx 50 x 30 35 M x x PF popUlUs fremontii western Cottonwood 24” BOx 50 x 30 81 M x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 120” BOx 40 x 40 11 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 24” BOx 40 x 40 1 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 72” AB 40 x 40 30 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 60” AB 40 x 40 35 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 48” AB 40 x 40 18 VL x x Qs QUerCUs sUber Cork oak 72” AB 50 x 30 1 L x sl saliX lasiolepis arroyo willow 15 GAL 15 x 10 70 M*x x x ss seQUoia sempervirens ‘soQUel’Coast redwood 24” BOx 80 x 20 66 H x x KE Y BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T A N D WI D T H Q U A N T I T Y WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 ST O R M W A T E R TR E A T M E N T FI R E A C C E S S TR E E DE C I D U O U S NA T I V E BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E SI Z E HE I G H T X WI D T H QU A N T I T Y E, D , E D WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 NA T I V E aChillea ‘Casssis’ Cassis yarrow 27 x aGastaChe ‘apriCot sUnshine’ hUmminGbird mint 27 alliUm sphaeroCephalon roUnd headed GarliC 11 boUteloUa GraCilis ‘blonde ambition’ blUe Grama Grass 27 x CalamaGrostis nUtkaensis paCifiC reedGrass 27 x Clarkia amoena ‘aUrora’ farewell to sprinG 16 x desChampsia Caespitosa tUfted hairGrass 53 x erioGonUm Grande rUbesCens red bUCkwheat 27 x lepeChinia hastata baJa pitCher saGe 16 nepeta tUberosa Catmint 27 penstemon heterophylUs ‘blUe sprinGs’foothill penstemon 27 x romneya CoUlteri matiliJa poppy 5 x salvia ‘dara’s ChoiCe’dara’s ChoiCe CreepinG saGe 27 x salvia ‘Celestial blUe’Celestial blUe saGe 5 x sesleria aUtUmnalis aUtUmn moor Grass 53 sysyrinChiUm striatUm pale yelow-eyed Grass 27 staChys byZantina lamb’s ear 27 symphyotriChUm oblonGifoliUm ‘raydon’s favorite aromatiC aster 27 BOTANICAL GARDEN * E = EVERGREEN, D = DECIDUOUS AND ED = EVERGREEN/DECIDUOUS * TOTAL TREE QUANTITY: 659 NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 180 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN L05.02 PLANTING COMMUNITY TREE PLAN 0 50 100 200 SH A W R O A D NA V I G A T A B L E S L O U G H FU T U R E OV E R P A S S T E R M I N A L C O U R T PRODUCE AVENUE ADJACENT PROPERTY SOUTH COURTYARD I131 GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SA N M A T E O A V E N U E I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D INF I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE SECRET GARDEN PF PF PF PF QaQaQa co co ss cc cc ss as as as lF lF lF aU co os os PF Pr sl sl sl sl sl sl sl PF cs co co co co ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Qa PF PF sl Qa Qa ss ss Pr Pr Pr ac ac ac Pr Pr PF co co co aU aU ss Qa Qa Qa am am co co co co PF PF PF am Pr PF PF PF PFPF sl sl sl sl sl Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa sl sl ga sscc cc cc cc cc ac ss ss ss sl sl sl Qa Qa Qa sl Qa Qa Qa Pr Pr Pr Pr am am am am am am ac ac ac am sl sl Pr PrPr Pr Pr Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa ga Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa Qa as co co sl sl cs Qa cs cs cs PF ss Qs KE Y BO T A N I C A L NA M E CO M M O N NA M E CO N T A I N E R SI Z E ( M I N ) HE I G H T A N D WI D T H Q U A N T I T Y WA T E R U S E WU C O L S 1 ST O R M W A T E R TR E A T M E N T FI R E A C C E S S TR E E DE C I D U O U S NA T I V E ac aCer CirCinatUm vine maple 24” BOx 15 x 15 13 M x x am aCer maCrophyllUm biGleaf maple 24” BOx 50 x 30 12 M x x as arbUtUs ‘marina’strawberry tree 24” BOx 20 x 20 16 L x x aU arbUtUs Unedo strawberry tree (mUlti-trUnk)24” BOx 15 x 15 34 L x x ct CeanothUs ‘snow flUrry’ California lilaC 5 GAL 10 x 12 47 L x x co CerCis oCCidentalis western redbUd 48” BOx 15 x 15 67 VL x x cc CorylUs CornUta beaked haZelnUt 24” BOx 10 x 10 11 M x g GinkGo biloba ‘aUtUmn Gold’aUtUmn Gold GinkGo 48” BOx 45 x 45 17 M ha heteromeles arbUtifolia toyon 24” BOx 10 x 8 40 L x x lF lyonothamnUs floribUndUs Catalina ironwood 15 GAL 25 x 15 39 L x x os olea eUropaea ‘swan hill’ frUitless olive 24” boX 25 x 20 9 VL Pr platanUs raCemosa California syCamore 24” BOx 50 x 30 35 M x x PF popUlUs fremontii western Cottonwood 24” BOx 50 x 30 81 M x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 120” BOx 40 x 40 11 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 24” BOx 40 x 40 1 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 72” AB 40 x 40 30 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 60” AB 40 x 40 35 VL x x Qa QUerCUs aGrifolia Coast live oak 48” AB 40 x 40 18 VL x x Qs QUerCUs sUber Cork oak 72” AB 50 x 30 1 L x sl saliX lasiolepis arroyo willow 15 GAL 15 x 10 70 M*x x x ss seQUoia sempervirens ‘soQUel’Coast redwood 24” BOx 80 x 20 66 H x x LEGEND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 181 SECRET GARDEN © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 100% SD L05.03 PLANTING COMMUNITY UNDERSTORY PLAN 0 50 100 200 SH A W R O A D NA V I G A T A B L E S L O U G H FU T U R E OV E R P A S S T E R M I N A L C O U R T PRODUCE AVENUE ADJACENT PROPERTY SOUTH COURTYARD I131 GARAGE NORTH COURTYARD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SA N M A T E O A V E N U E I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D INF I N I T E R O W PROPOSED DAYCARE LEGEND REDWOOD GROVE COASTAL MEADOW/ BIORETENTION/ GREEN ROOF RIPARIAN FOREST COASTAL CHAPARRAL BOTANICAL GARDEN SHADE TERRACE SUN TERRACE PART SHADE TERRACE OAK WOODLAND NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 182 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 Y XN 25.00 10.0 0 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 25.00 10.00 GENER A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X2 5 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 90°GATE 90°GATE 25.00 10.00 GENE R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X25' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 25.00 10.00 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 90°GATE 90°GATE C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 _LAND ARCHUCS TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TC 7 . 7 6 TC 7 . 5 5 TC 7 . 2 5 TC 6 . 9 4 TC 7 . 7 8 TC 7 . 6 9 TC 1 1 . 5 4 TC 1 1 . 1 4 TC 9 . 3 4 TC 9 . 1 2 TC 1 1 . 6 1 TC 7 . 3 4 FG10.42 FG10.26 FG11.30 FG9.51 FG9.82 FG10.04 FG10.23 FG9.77 FG 9 . 3 0 FG 9 . 6 5 FG 9 . 8 1 F G 9 . 1 2 FG 9 . 4 9 TC 7 . 3 4 TC 8 . 7 9 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TP 1 0 . 3 4 TP 1 1 . 0 8910 11 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14. 0 14.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 STAGE AT 3.5 4.1 6 3.30 13.5 0 14. 0 0 STOPSTOP 26.0 0 UPUP BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 T E R M I N A L C T NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H TO SHAW RD FUTURE OVERPASS +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +18'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +14'-00" +13'-00" I131S C I131S B I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S D ADJACENT PROPERTY T131 PARKING GARAGE VEHICULAR ACCESS ROAD POTENTIAL FUTURE DAYCARE LOCATION 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131N PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA 131S PUBLIC OPEN SPACE5% OF PARCEL AREA DEDICATED PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN/BICYCLE ACCESS AREARE: ENGINEERING COA 14(d) & 14(e) 10' - 0" ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/25/2025 1:00:41 PM A1.1.0 OVERALL SITE PLAN - GROUND INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" SITE PLAN - LEVEL 01 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 183 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 Y XN 25.00 10.0 0 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 25.00 10.00 GENER A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X2 5 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 90°GATE 90°GATE 25.00 10.00 GENE R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X25' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 25.00 10.00 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 90°GATE 90°GATE C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 _LAND ARCHUCS TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TC 7 . 7 6 TC 7 . 5 5 TC 7 . 2 5 TC 6 . 9 4 TC 7 . 7 8 TC 7 . 6 9 TC 1 1 . 5 4 TC 1 1 . 1 4 TC 9 . 3 4 TC 9 . 1 2 TC 1 1 . 6 1 TC 7 . 3 4 FG10.42 FG10.26 FG11.30 FG9.51 FG9.82 FG10.04 FG10.23 FG9.77 FG 9 . 3 0 FG 9 . 6 5 FG 9 . 8 1 F G 9 . 1 2 FG 9 . 4 9 TC 7 . 3 4 TC 8 . 7 9 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TP 1 0 . 3 4 TP 1 1 . 0 8910 11 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14. 0 14.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 STAGE AT 3.5 4.1 6 3.30 13.5 0 14. 0 0 STOPSTOP 26.0 0 BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 TO SHAW RD BAYSHORE FREEWAY 101 SL O U G H ADJACENT PROPERTY T E R M I N A L C T ( R I G H T O F W A Y ) T131S C T131S B T131S A T131N B T131N A T131S D T131N PARKING GARAGE VEHICULAR ACCESS ROAD ADJACENT PROPERTYADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/25/2025 1:02:46 PM A1.1.1 OVERALL SITE PLAN - ROOF INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 50'-0" T131 -SITE PLAN - ROOF 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 184 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 P-A P-1 P-2 P-3 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z D-B D-ED-F D-F'D-E' D-8 D-13 D-14 D-16 D-17 D-19 D-21 D-23 D-25 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-B N-C D-2 S-B D-7 D-6 D-5 D-4 D-3 N-E D-18 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G D-9 D-10 D-11 D-12 D-15 D-20 D-22 D-24 D-1 D-26 D-D D-C D-A D-D' D-C.2 D-D.2 D-B.2 D-B.3 200,221.34 SF PARKING RAMP LOCATION 1172 PARKING STALLS TO BE ACCOMMODATED ON 2 BASEMENT LEVELS 430 PARKING STALLS TO BE ACCOMMODATED ON 3 BASEMENT LEVELS © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/22/2025 7:25:07 PM A2.0.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - TYPICAL BASEMENT LEVEL INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" TYPICAL BASEMENT PLAN 01 185 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 Y XN 25.00 10. 0 0 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 25.0 0 10.00 GENER A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X2 5 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.0 0 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 R4.00 3.00 90° GAT E 90°GATE 25.0 0 10.00 GEN E R A T O R : A T 1 0 1 10'X2 5 ' W 5 ' C L E A R A N C E 5.00 25.00 10.0 0 GENERATOR: AT 10110'X25' W 5' CLEARANCE 5.00 90°GATE 90°GATE C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 C COMPACT: 8X16 6.00 6.00 _LAND ARCHUCS TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 2 . 3 7 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TC 7 . 7 6 TC 7 . 5 5 TC 7 . 2 5 TC 6 . 9 4 TC 7 . 7 8 TC 7 . 6 9 TC 1 1 . 5 4 TC 1 1 . 1 4 TC 9 . 3 4 TC 9 . 1 2 TC 1 1 . 6 1 TC 7 . 3 4 FG10.42 FG10.26 FG11.30 FG9.51 FG9.82 FG10.04 FG10.23 FG9.77 F G 9 . 3 0 F G 9 . 6 5 F G 9 . 8 1 F G 9 . 1 2 FG 9 . 4 9 TC 7 . 3 4 TC 8 . 7 9 TC 1 1 . 3 4 TP 1 0 . 3 4 TP 1 1 . 0 8910 11 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15. 0 14 . 5 14. 0 14. 0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 STAGE AT 3.5 4.1 6 3.30 13. 5 0 14. 0 0 STOPSTOP 26. 0 0 UPUP 01 A5.N2.1 L O B B Y 01 A5.S2.1 ADJACENT PROPERTY A5.S1. 1 02 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 02A5.N1 . 2 0 1 A 5 . N 1 . 2 0 3 A 5 . N 1 . 2 01 A5.N 1 . 1 03A5.N 1 . 1 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 LOBBY FUTURE OVERPASS P-A P-1 P-2 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z 18'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 12 2 ' - 0 " 02 A5.N1.1 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 3 R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE D-B D-E D-F D-F'D-E' D-8 D-13 D-14 D-16 D-17 D-19 D-21 D-23 D-25 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-C LOBBY AMENITIES LOBBYR&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE LOBBY BIKE ROOM FCC EM ELEC. ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION SWITCHGEAR GENERATOR LOADING TRASH D-2 TRASH LOADING SWITCHGEAR ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION EM ELEC. FCC BIKE ROOM BIKE ROOMLOADINGTRASH EM ELEC. ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION SWITCHGEAR FCC LOADING TRASH FCC BIKE ROOM EM ELEC. SWITCHGEAR ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION 131S C 131N B 131N A 131S B 131S A 131N GARAGE R&D / OFFICE LOBBY S-B D-7 D-6 D-5 D-4 D-3 N-E 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 131S D D-18 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G AMENITIES EM ELEC. ELECTRICAL SUBSTATION SWITCHGEAR FCCLOADING TRASH A5.S1.202 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44°31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 36'-0" 4 3 ' - 4 " 43'-4" 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 27 . 2 5 ° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 43'-4" SB-PA SB-PB SB-PC SB-PD SA-PA SA-PBSA-PC ELEC IDF NA-PANA-PB NA-PCNA-PDNA-PE FIRE WATER TANK FIRE WATER TANK FIRE WATER TANKFIRE WATER TANK FIRE WATER TANK D-9 D-10 D-11 D-12 D-15 D-20 D-22 D-24S-36 D-1 D-26 D-D D-C D-A D-D' D-C.2 D-D.2 D-B.2 D-B.3 AMENITIES CONFERENCE CONFERENCE POTENTIAL FUTURE DAYCARE ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:41:35 PM A2.1.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 1 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)01 NOTE: GENERATOR LOCATION TBD 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 186 UP UP DN 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 ADJACENT PROPERTY P-A P-1 P-2 P-3 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z 18'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " A 5 . 0 . 0 3 01 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 03A5.0. 0 1 0 3 A 5 . 0 . 0 2 0 2 A 5 . 0 . 0 1 01 A5.0.0 1 02A5.0 . 0 2 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 01 A5.0.02 A 5 . 0 . 0 5 0 2 D-B D-E D-F D-F'D-E' D-8 D-13 D-14 D-16 D-17 D-19 D-21 D-23 D-25 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-C 131N B 131N A 131S B 131S C 131S A 131N GARAGE D-2 S-B D-7 D-6 D-5 D-4 D-3 R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE SA-PA SA-PCSA-PB SA-2SSA-1S R&D / OFFICESC-PB SC-PA SC-1S SC-2S 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44°31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 36'-0" 4 3 ' - 4 " 43'-4" 43'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" N-E 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° 131S D D-18 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G A5.S1.202 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 27 . 2 5 ° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 43'-4"D-9 D-10 D-11 D-12 D-15 D-20 D-22 D-24S-36 D-1 D-26 D-D D-C D-A D-D' D-C.2 D-D.2 D-B.2 D-B.3 ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:41:51 PM A2.2.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 2 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" LEVEL 02 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 187 ∅24" ∅48" ∅24" ∅48" PLANTER 96" 24" PLANTER 96" 24" PLA N T E R 48. 0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLA N T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 96" 24" PLAN T E R 96" 24" PLA N T E R 48.00 PLA N T E R 36.0 0 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 ∅24" ∅48" ∅36"∅24" PLAN T E R 48.00 ∅36" ∅24" ∅36" ∅24" ∅36" ∅24" ∅24" ∅24" ∅24" ∅24" ∅24" UP 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 P-A P-1 P-2 P-3 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z 18'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " A5.S1. 1 02 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 02A5.N1 . 2 0 1 A 5 . N 1 . 2 0 3 A 5 . N 1 . 2 01 A5.N 1 . 1 03A5.N 1 . 1 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 02 A5.N1.1 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 3 D-B D-E D-F D-F'D-E' D-8 D-13 D-14 D-16 D-17 D-19 D-21 D-23 D-25 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-C 131N GARAGE D-2 S-B D-7 D-6 D-5 D-4 D-3 AMENITIES BOH 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44° 5'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 13. 6 3 ° 13 . 6 3 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" N-E 43'-4" 131N B 131S B 131S C 131S A R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE 13.1 6 ° 131N AR&D / OFFICE TERRACE TERRACE TERRACE 131S D D-18 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G A5.S1.202 RESTROOMS D-9 D-10 D-11 D-12 D-15 D-20 D-22 D-24S-36 D-1 D-26 D-D D-C D-A D-D' D-C.2 D-D.2 D-B.2 D-B.3 ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:42:06 PM A2.3.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 3 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" LEVEL 03 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 188 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 P-A P-1 P-2 P-3 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z 18'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " A5.0.0303 S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 131N GARAGE A5.S1. 1 02 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 02A5.N1 . 2 0 1 A 5 . N 1 . 2 0 3 A 5 . N 1 . 2 01 A5.N 1 . 1 03A5.N 1 . 1 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 02 A5.N1.1 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 3 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 131S A R&D / OFFICE 131N A R&D / OFFICE S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G A5.S1.202 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44° 5'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 13. 6 3 ° 13 . 6 3 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° 131S B 131S C R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 4:05:41 PM A2.4.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 4 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" LEVEL 04 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 189 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 36. 0 0 PLA N T E R 24. 0 0 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLAN T E R 24.0 0 ∅24" ∅48" PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 36. 0 0 PLA N T E R 36. 0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLA N T E R 24.00 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 36. 0 0 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLA N T E R 24.00 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLA N T E R 36. 0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLAN T E R 24.0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLA N T E R 24.00 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLAN T E R 24. 0 0 PLAN T E R 36. 0 0 PLA N T E R 36. 0 0 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLAN T E R 36. 0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLAN T E R 24.0 0 PLA N T E R 36.00 PLAN T E R 36.0 0 PLAN T E R 24.0 0 PLA N T E R 36.0 0 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 P-A P-1 P-2 P-3 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z 18'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 0 2 A 5 . 0 . 0 1 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-C 131N GARAGE S-B 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44° 5'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 13. 6 3 ° 13 . 6 3 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° 131S B 131S A R&D / OFFICE R&D / OFFICE 131S C R&D / OFFICE 131N A R&D / OFFICE 131N B R&D / OFFICE TERRACE TERRACE TERRACE TERRACE TERRACEA5.S1. 1 02 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 02A5.N1 . 2 0 1 A 5 . N 1 . 2 0 3 A 5 . N 1 . 2 01 A5.N 1 . 1 03A5.N 1 . 1 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 02 A5.N1.1 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 3 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G A5.S1.202 ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:42:38 PM A2.5.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 5 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" LEVEL 05 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 190 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 P-A P-1 P-2 P-3 P-BP-CP-DP-EP-FP-GP-HP-IP-JP-KP-LP-MP-NP-OP-PP-QP-RP-SP-TP-UP-VP-WP-XP-YP-Z 18'-0" 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 9 ' - 6 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 1 8 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 61 ' - 0 " 435'-0" 2A5.0.06 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-C 131N GARAGE S-B 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44° 5'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 13. 6 3 ° 13 . 6 3 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° 131S C R&D / OFFICE 131S B R&D / OFFICE 131S A R&D / OFFICE 131N B R&D / OFFICE 131N AR&D / OFFICE A5.S1. 1 02 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 02A5.N1 . 2 0 1 A 5 . N 1 . 2 0 3 A 5 . N 1 . 2 01 A5.N 1 . 1 03A5.N 1 . 1 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 02 A5.N1.1 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 3 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G A5.S1.202 ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:42:52 PM A2.6.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - LEVEL 6 INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" LEVEL 06 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 191 01 A5.N2.1 01 A5.S2.1 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-CSUB ELEC CHILLER PLANT ROOM TENANT ? HRU TENANT OUTDOOR AREA AHU COOLING TOWER HEAT PUMPS AHU HRU AHU EM ELEC SUB ELEC CHILLER PLANT ROOM TENANT COOLING TOWER TENANT OUTDOOR AREA 131N B 131N A 131S B 131S C 131S A 131N GARAGESA-2S SUB ELEC CHILLER PLANT ROOM EM ELEC TENANT SUB ELEC CHILLER PLANT ROOM EM ELEC COOLING TOWER COOLING TOWER COOLING TOWER S-B 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44° 5'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 13. 6 3 ° 13 . 6 3 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° A5.S1. 1 02 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 A5.S1.201 A5 . S 1 . 3 03 A5.S1.3 02 A5.S 1 . 3 01 A5. S D 1 . 1 04 A 5 . S D 1 . 1 0 2 A5.SD1.101 03A5.SD1.1 02A5.N1 . 2 0 1 A 5 . N 1 . 2 0 3 A 5 . N 1 . 2 01 A5.N 1 . 1 03A5.N 1 . 1 4 A5.0.06 3A5 . 0 . 0 6 2A5.0.06 1 A5 . 0 . 0 6 02 A5.N1.1 A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 3 S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G A5.S1.202 HRU TENANT HRU HEAT PUMPS AHU TENANT HRU AHU HEAT PUMPS TENANT HRU AHU AHUHRU HRU AHU HRU HEAT PUMPS HEAT PUMPS AHU TENANT TENANT CHILLER PLANT ROOM TENANT SUB ELEC EM ELEC TENANT TENANT TENANT EM ELEC ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:43:02 PM A2.7.0 131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - PH INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" MECH PENTHOUSE 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 192 01 A5.N2.1 I131S TITLE 24 SOLAR ACCESS ROOF AREAESTIMATED ACTIVE PV AREA: 50,374 SF 01 A5.S2.1 I131N TITLE 24 SOLAR ACCESS ROOF AREAESTIMATED ACTIVE PV AREA: 57,376 SF A 5 . S 1 . 1 0 1 02A5.0 . 0 2 S-D S-A N-A N-D S-36 S-8 S-7 S-6 S-5 S-4 S-3 S-19 S-18 S-17 S-13 S-12 S-25 S-24 S-23 N-6 N-5 N-4 N-3 N-2 N-10 N-11N-28 N-29 N-30 N-31 N-32 N-33 N-34 S-1 S-2 N-1 S-10S-11 S-26 N-18N-19N-20N-21 N-15 N-23 N-24 N-16 S-27 N-9 N-7 N-12 N-14N-25 N-27 S-14 S-16 S-15 N-8 S-31 S-30 S-29 S-28 S-32 S-33 S-34 S-35 N-26 N-17N-22 N-13 S-9 S-20 S-22 S-21 S-C N-BN-C S-B 31' - 6 " 31' - 6 " 5.0 1 ° 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 12. 6 2 ° 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 31'-6 " 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'-6"31'-6"31'-6"31'-6" 20.44° 20.44° 5'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 31'- 6 " 20.44° 20.44° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 13. 6 3 ° 13 . 6 3 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 31'- 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 20. 8 3 ° 20 . 8 3 ° 31'-6" 3 1 ' - 6 " 15.04 ° 15.0 4 ° 31'-6" 5 ' - 4 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 31'-6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 16.21° 16.21° 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 3 1 ' - 6 " 1 5 . 0 4 ° 15. 0 4 ° 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 43'-4" 13.1 6 ° 131N GARAGE 131N B 131N A 131S B 131S C 131S A S-9A S-9B S-E S-F N-F S-G PV AREA28,701 SF PV AREA28,675 SF PV AREA12,291 SF PV AREA22,081 SF PV AREA16,002 SF ADJACENT PROPERTY © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:43:08 PM A2.8.0 I131 - OVERALL FLOOR PLAN - PH ROOF INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1" = 40'-0" PH ROOF 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 193 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANEL RAINSCREENSYSTEM WITH VERTICL FINS GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASEMBLYWITH DOUBLE FINS GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH DOUBLE FINS ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLYWITH DOUBLE FINS ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATINGCONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 4:08:50 PM A5.N1.1 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131N INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131N A NORTH ELEVATION 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131N A WEST ELEVATION 02 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131N A SOUTH ELEVATION 03 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO SHEET A5.1.10 FOR TYPICAL MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS2. FINISHES AND ASSEMBLIES ARE SIMILAR TO 101. 194 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANELRAINSCREEN SYSTEM WITHVERTICAL FINSCLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL PRECAST PAVER STAIR TREADS AND LANDING EXTERIOR EXIT STAIR ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW ELOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL EXTERIOR EXIT STAIR ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 4:09:50 PM A5.N1.2 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131N INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131N B WEST ELEVATION 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131N B EAST ELEVATION 03 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131N B SOUTH ELEVATION 02 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO SHEET A5.1.10 FOR TYPICAL MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS2. FINISHES AND ASSEMBLIES ARE SIMILAR TO 101. 195 16 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " LEVEL 01+0' - 0" (+14') LEVEL 02+16' - 0" (+30') LEVEL 03+32' - 0" (+46') LEVEL 04+48' - 0" (+62') LEVEL 05+64' - 0" (+78') LEVEL 06+80' - 0" (+96') ROOF LEVEL+96' - 0" (+110') PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" (+126') T.O. PV PANELS+113' - 6" (+127.5')T131N A 11 2 ' - 0 " R&D OFFICE T131N A BEYOND 11 ' - 4 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 7 ' - 1 1 " 10 0 ' - 5 " T131N GARAGE GARAGE LEVEL 01-1' - 0" (+13') GARAGE LEVEL 02+10' - 4" (+23'-4") GARAGE LEVEL 03+20' - 6" (+33' - 6") GARAGE LEVEL 04+30' - 8" (+43'-8") GARAGE LEVEL 05+40' - 10" (+53'-10") GARAGE LEVEL 06+51' - 0" (+64') GARAGE LEVEL 07+61' - 2" (+74'-2") GARAGE LEVEL 08+71' - 4" (+84'-4") GARAGE PENTHOUSE+99' - 5" (+112'-5") COURTYARD GARAGE ROOF+81' - 6" (+94'-6") P-1 P-2 P-3 PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING LOT LINE LOT LINE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE MECHANICALPENTHOUSE PARKING PROPERTY LINE PV PANELS N-C N-B N-AN-D N-1 GARAGE LEVEL 01-1' - 0" (+13') GARAGE LEVEL 01-1' - 0" (+13') GARAGE LEVEL 01-1' - 0" (+13') 10 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 1 0 ' - 2 " 30 ' - 6 " PARKING PARKING PARKING © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:43:34 PM A5.N2.1 OVERALL BUILDING SECTIONS - I131N INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" OVERALL BUILDING SECTION - T131N 01 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 196 © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:43:40 PM A5.NG1.1 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131N GARAGE INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" T131 PARKING GARAGE - OVERALL NORTH ELEVATION 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" T131 PARKING GARAGE - OVERALL EAST ELEVATION 02 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" T131 PARKING GARAGE - SOUTH OVERALL ELEVATION 03 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" T131 PARKING GARAGE - OVERALL WEST ELEVATION 04 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 197 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANELRAINSCREEN SYTEM WITH VERTICAL FINS ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANELRAINSCREEN SYTEM WITH VERTICAL FINSGLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLYWITH DOUBLE VERTICAL FINS GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLYWITH SINGLE VERTICAL FINS © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 4:10:43 PM A5.S1.1 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131S INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S A EAST ELEVATION 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S A NORTH ELEVATION 02 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S A WEST ELEVATION 03 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO SHEET A5.1.10 FOR TYPICAL MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS2. FINISHES AND ASSEMBLIES ARE SIMILAR TO 101. 198 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANEL RAINSCREEN SYSTEM WITH VERTICAL FINS GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSMEMBLYWITH DOUBLE VERTICAL FINS ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLYWITH DOUBLE VERTICAL FINS BIRD SAFE GLAZING EXTENT © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 4:11:32 PM A5.S1.2 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131S INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S B EAST ELEVATION 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S B WEST ELEVATION 02 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO SHEET A5.1.10 FOR TYPICAL MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS2. FINISHES AND ASSEMBLIES ARE SIMILAR TO 101. 199 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANEL RAINSCREEN SYSTEM WITH VERTICAL FINS GLASS CURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLYWITH DOUBLE VERTICAL FINS HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANEL RAINSCREEN SYSTEM WITH VERTICAL FINS BIRD SAFE GLAZING EXTENT LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " CLEAR GLAZED IGU VISIONGLASS WITH LOW E AT SHADOWBOX CLEAR GLASZED IGU VISION GLASS WITH LOW E LOW IRON LAMINATEDGLASS GUARDRAIL HANDSET ALUMINIUM PANELRAINSCREEN SYSTEM VERTICAL FIN ALUMINIUM LOUVER MECHANICAL SCREENWITH HIGH PERFORMANCE METALLIC COATING LOBBY FRAME WITH NATURAL WOODSLAT RAINSCREEN SYSTEM ON CONTINUOUS 48" TALL GLVANIZED STEELPAINTED GUARDRAIL ALUMINIUM PANEL CURTAIN WALLSTARTER UNIT ASSEMBLY OVERSIZED DOUBLE HEIGHT SLIDING GLASSPANELS AND BLANCED DOORS(REFER TO PLAN) SERRATED ALUMINIUM AND GLASS CUSTOMCURTAIN WALL ASSEMBLY WITH SHADOWBOXES © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 4:12:01 PM A5.S1.3 OVERALL EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS - I131S INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S C NORTH LEVATION 03 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S C SOUTH ELEVATION 01 SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" I131S C EAST ELEVATION 02 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL GENERAL NOTES: 1. REFER TO SHEET A5.1.10 FOR TYPICAL MATERIAL DESCRIPTIONS2. FINISHES AND ASSEMBLIES ARE SIMILAR TO 101. 200 LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" LEVEL 02+16' - 0" LEVEL 03+32' - 0" LEVEL 04+48' - 0" LEVEL 05+64' - 0" LEVEL 06+80' - 0" MECH PENTHOUSE+96' - 0" LEVEL PENTHOUSE ROOF+112' - 0" T.O. PV CANOPY+113' - 6" LEVEL B1-12' - 0" LEVEL B2-22' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " PV PANELS MECHANICALPENTHOUSE T131S B R&D OFFICE T131S C BEYOND INF AMENITY BUILDING R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE R&D OFFICE LOBBY FITNESS FITNESSLOBBY 16 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 0 " 11 2 ' - 0 " BOH S-B S-C S-D D-D.2 D-C.2 D-B.2D-E AMENITY LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL 02+16' - 0" AMENITY - ROOF+32' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 1 6 ' - 0 " 32 ' - 0 " S-A BOH AMENITY BUILDING BEYOND LOT LINE AMENITY MULTIPURPOSE TERRACE+22' - 0" AMENITY - T.O.P+35' - 0" D-F PARKING PARKING PARKING PARKING 12 ' - 0 " 10 ' - 0 " © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:44:13 PM A5.S2.1 OVERALL BUILDING SECTIONS - I131S INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0" OVERALL BUILDING SECTION - I131S 01 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 201 AMENITY LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL 02+16' - 0" AMENITY - ROOF+32' - 0" AMENITY MULTIPURPOSE TERRACE+22' - 0" AMENITY - T.O.P+35' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 6' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 3 ' - 0 " TIMBER EDGE BEAMALUMINUM SIGNAGE ALUMINUM PARAPET EXTERIOR CANOPY ALUMINUM REVEAL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANELALUMINUM TRIM ALUMINUM REVEALCONTINUOUSGLASS GUARDRAIL WOOD PANEL STORE FRONT ENTRY EXTERIOR CANOPY EXTERIOR CANOPY WOOD PANEL SERVING WINDOWEXTERIOR CANOPY EXTERIOR CANOPY EXTERIOR CANOPY CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL FOLDING OPERABLE ALUMINUM FRAMED GLASS WALL SLIDING OPERABLE ALUMINUM FRAMED GLASS WALL SLIDING OPERABLE ALUMINUM FRAMED GLASS WALL CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL TIMBER GLULAM COLUMN TIMBER EDGE BEAM INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E METAL TRIM CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E AMENITY LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL 02+16' - 0" AMENITY - ROOF+32' - 0" AMENITY MULTIPURPOSE TERRACE+22' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 6' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 3 ' - 0 " AMENITY - T.O.P+35' - 0" TIMBER EDGE BEAMALUMINUM PARAPET ALUMINUM REVEALINSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E WOOD SCREEN WALL ALUMINUM TRIMCONTINUOUSGLASS GUARDRAIL LANDSCAPED TERRACE STAIR FOLDING OPERABLE ALUMINNUM FRAMED GLASS WALL SLIDING OPERABLE ALUMINUM FRAMED GLASS WALL SLIDING OPERABLE ALUMINUM FRAMED GLASS WALL TEXTURED CONCRETE WALL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E ALUMINUM TRIM CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E WOOD SCREEN WALLWOOD MECHANICAL SCREEN WALL TEXTURED CONCRETE WALL TIMBER GLULAM COLUMN TIMBER EDGE BEAM AMENITY LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL 02+16' - 0" AMENITY - ROOF+32' - 0" AMENITY MULTIPURPOSE TERRACE+22' - 0" AMENITY - T.O.P+35' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 6' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 3 ' - 0 " TIMBER EDGE BEAMALUMINUM PARAPETALUMINUM REVEAL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANELALUMINUM TRIM EXTERIOR CANOPY CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E ALUMINUM TRIM WOOD MECHANICAL SCREEN WALL ALUMINUM REVEALTIMBER EDGE BEAM AMENITY LEVEL 01 (14' ABV SEA LEVEL)+0' - 0" AMENITY LEVEL 02+16' - 0" AMENITY - ROOF+32' - 0" AMENITY MULTIPURPOSE TERRACE+22' - 0" AMENITY - T.O.P+35' - 0" 16 ' - 0 " 6' - 0 " 1 0 ' - 0 " 3 ' - 0 " TIMBER EDGE BEAMALUMINUM SIGNAGE ALUMINUM PARAPETALUMINUM REVEAL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E CORRUGATED METAL PANELALUMINUM TRIM ALUMINUM REVEALCONTINUOUSGLASS GUARDRAIL EXTERIOR CANOPYCORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E CORRUGATED ALUMINUM PANEL WOOD MECHANICAL SCREEN WALL INSULATED LOW IRON GLASS WITH LOW E ALUMINUM REVEAL © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER NO T F O R CO N S T R U C T I O N DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4, San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300, Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890, Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502, San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 8/21/2025 2:44:19 PM A5.SD1.1 OVERALL BUILDING ELEVATIONS - I131S AMENITY INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CTSOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 Author Checker INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" AB ELEVATION NORTH 02 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" AB ELEVATION EAST 03 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" AB ELEVATION SOUTH 04 SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" AB ELEVATION WEST 01 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 202 13.50 14.00 STAGE AT 3.5 4.16 3.30 891011 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 14.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 _LAN D A RCHUCS STOPSTOP CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC Y XN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 13.50 14.00 STAGE AT 3.5 4.16 3.30 891011 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 14.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 _LAN D A RCHUCS STOPSTOP CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC Y XN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 13.50 14.00 STAGE AT 3.5 4.16 3.30 891011 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 14.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 _LAN D A RCHUCS STOPSTOP CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC Y XN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 13.50 14.00 STAGE AT 3.5 4.16 3.30 891011 12 13 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 15.5 15.0 14.5 14.0 14.0 15.0 15.0 15.5 15.5 14.0 _LAN D A RCHUCS STOPSTOP CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC Y XN CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC EAST ELEVATION (FACING COURTYARD) T131S C T131S B T131S A WEST ELEVATION T131S CT131S BT131S A NORTH ELEVATION T131S AT131S C EAST ELEVATION I131S - FACADE LIGHTING PROGRAM AL0.0.05 1 5 2 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE2023.05.04 INFINITE 131S FACADE LIGHTING 3 1 ENTRY CANOPY LIGHTING Concealed linear LED light outlines canopy frame and recessed downlight at entry canopy. 5 TERRACE LIGHTING Linear LED light concealed in planter wall detail. Landscape Uplighting. Mullion mounted downlight at entry. 4 FACADE LIGHTING Linear LED ingrade uplight and round ceiling recessed downlight illuminate vertical mullions. One uplight and one downlight at every mullion bay. PERIMETER DOWNLIGHT2 Canopy recessed downlight illuminate covered egress path around building perimeter. 6 ROOF LIGHTING Linear LED light for roof parapet wall. 5 1 2 6 2 1 5 6 5 5 1 1 PERIMETER DOWNLIGHT3 Mullion mounted cylinder downlight illuminate non-covered egress path around building perimeter. 5 3 4 4 6 5 1 4 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL2025.08.235 207 WEST ELEVATION (FACING COURTYARD) T131N A T131N B EAST ELEVATION T131N AT131N B SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION T131N B T131A I131N - FACADE LIGHTING PROGRAM AL0.0.06 1 6 2 5 4 5 5 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE2023.05.04 2 6 5 7 3 INFINITE 131N FACADE LIGHTING 3 1 ENTRY CANOPY LIGHTING Concealed linear LED light outlines canopy frame and recessed downlight at entry canopy. 5 TERRACE LIGHTING Linear LED light concealed in planter wall detail. Landscape Uplighting. Mullion mounted downlight at entry. 4 FACADE LIGHTING Linear LED ingrade uplight and round ceiling recessed downlight illuminate vertical mullions. One uplight and one downlight at every mullion bay. PERIMETER DOWNLIGHT2 Canopy recessed downlight illuminate covered egress path around building perimeter. 6 ROOF LIGHTING Linear LED light for roof parapet wall. 5 1 2 6 PERIMETER DOWNLIGHT3 Mullion mounted cylinder downlight illuminate non-covered egress path around building perimeter. 7 STAIR LIGHTING Linear LED light at handrail. 4 7 3 6 2 4 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL2025.08.235 208 i131 PARKING FACADE LIGHTING PROGRAM AL0.0.07 INFINITE 131 PARKING GARAGE LIGHTING COVERD PARKING LIGHTING2 Surface mounted linear LED downlight for general and egress lighting. Interior light can be seen through facade screen. 4 PARKING ENTRY LIGHTING Surface mounted linear LED downlight for general and egress lighting. NORTH ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION 1 STAIR LIGHTING Linear LED light integrated in stair balustrade base detail. 2 ROOF PARKING LIGHTING3 Recessed step light at perimeter posts. Pole mounted light at center of parking spaces. 3 2 3 3 EAST ELEVATION 4 2 3 21 3241 4 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL2025.08.235 209 5.0 0 ' E A S E M E N T [4 3 3 3 O . R . 5 9 4 ] N 03°47'44" W 836.44'N 03°42'49" W 300.04'N 05°53'54" W 260.38'N 02°48'57" W 170.27' S 8 0 ° 1 8 ' 4 3 " E 44 8 . 3 1 ' N 50 ° 0 2 ' 4 7 " W 425. 6 6 ' 57.5 8 ' 483. 2 4 ' NON-ACCESS[6127 O.R. 582] N 7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " W 12 0 . 0 0 ' N 75°29' 0 8 " W 13.66' S 14°12'16" E 245.36' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 275.00' N 77°10' 0 8 " W 33.00' S 12°49' 5 2 " W 1350.37' R=596.14'D=31°26'47"L=327.19' R=563.14'D=32°31'08"L=319.62' N 12°49' 5 2 " E 249.85' 234.48' CR 0750 LOT 1[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 2[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 3[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 4[55 RSM 12-13] LOT 29[2 PM 2] SAN M A T E O A V E N U E LOT 32[2 PM 2] PARCEL A[66 PM 82] NAV I G A B L E S L O U G H SH A W R O A D POINT O F B E G I N N I N G TRACT A - P A R C E L 1 N 12°49' 5 2 " E 1060.00' (N 7 8 ° 2 1 ' W ) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) (N 11°39' E ) (S 03°53' E) (N 5 1 ° 1 3 ' 3 9 " W ) N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 6 4 7 . 5 2 ' S 02°42'08" E35.00' (N 76°40' W ) PARCEL 28.081± ACRES 1 2 5 . 0 0 ' (N 11°39' E ) POINT OF BEGINNINGTRACT A - PARCEL 2 N 02°41'04" W30.00' 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' N 7 5 ° 5 9 ' 0 3 " E 3 6 0 . 0 0 ' (N 03°51'56" W) N 02°41'04" W30.00' (S 03°51'56" E) ( N 7 4 ° 4 8 ' 1 1 " E ) 908.90'908.90' PARCEL A LOT LIN E A D J U S T M E N T N O . 2 4 [Doc No. 2 0 0 3 - 2 9 5 8 0 3 ] S 77°10' 0 8 " E 33.00' (S 78°21'00 " E ) (N 78°21'00 " W ) (S 11°39' W ) TRACT C 441.47' 441.47' (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 11°44'0 0 " W ) (S 8 1 ° 2 9 ' 3 5 " E ) (N 03°59'20" W)(1573.72') EXCEPTION TOPARCEL ONE[6127 O.R. 582] PARCEL 84.210± ACRES 10 . 0 0 ' D R A I N A G E E A S E M E N T [1 3 0 9 O . R . 4 7 6 ] 6 20 . 0 0 ' A C C E S S E A S E M E N T [2 3 7 0 O . R . 2 0 2 ] [D o c N o . 2 0 1 9 - 0 4 4 2 5 6 ] 7 SPUR T R A C K E A S E M E N T [2428 O. R . 2 1 9 ] 8 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 30 . 0 0 ' I N G R E S S / E G R E S S & R O A D W A Y E A S E M E N T [4 1 7 9 O . R . 2 3 6 ] 9 9 30.00' W.L.E. [4293 O.R. 20 ]10 11 PUBLIC STRE E T E A S E M E N T [4778 O.R. 722 ] 12 40 LOT 5[35 RSM 10-11] HANNA INVESTMENTS LLC[Doc No. 2010-079898] LANDS OFT E R M I N A L C O U R T BAYSHORE FREEWAYSTATE HIGHWAY 101 PRODUCE AVENUE 219 SHAW RD LLC[Doc No. 2019-090924] LANDS OF GIANNINI [Doc No. 2006-100091] LANDS OF CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO SANITARTY SEWER PUMP STATION NO. 11 LANDS OF DEMARIA [Doc No. 2015-060382] LANDS OF PACIFIC PLATINUM TRUST [Doc No. 2016-119675] LANDS OF TWO PLUS SIX LTD [Doc No. 1999-911023] LANDS OF FJPP PARTNERS [Doc No. 1994-190267] LANDS OF SEMIEN [Doc No. 2012-017568] LANDS OF ANDRIGHETTO [Doc No. 2013-101808] LANDS OF PEKING HANDICRAFT INC [Doc No. 1995-073405] LANDS OF IPT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO DC LP [Doc No. 2016-109091] LANDS OF POLETT I G R A N D C H I L D R E N S T R U S T [Doc No. 2 0 1 8 - 0 5 9 1 2 6 ] LANDS O F ITALCORP INC [Doc No. 2002-011514] LANDS OF [Doc No. 2004-202105] N 88°33' 5 2 " E 34.74' (N 87°23'0 0 " E ) 10 . 0 0 ' P I P E L I N E EA S E M E N T PARCEL 56.534± ACRES PARCEL 32.074± ACRES 46 . 0 0 ' N O - B U I L D EA S E M E N T NO - B U I L D E A S E M E N T (W I D T H V A R I E S ) PARCEL 61.948± ACRES PARCEL 72.532± ACRES PARCE L 10.579± A C R E S PARCEL 40.352± ACRES PROPOSED PROPERTYLINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT PROPOSED PROPERTY LINE ADJUSTMENT 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20.00 ' CALW A T E R EASE M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20.00'CALWAT E R EASEME N T 7.5 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00'SANITAR Y SEWEREASEME N T 10 . 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEM E N T 10.00' STORM D R A I N EASEM E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEM E N T 7.5 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 7. 5 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 20. 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEM E N T 10 . 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&E EASEMENT 10.00' PG&EEASEME N T 10.00' PG&E EASEMENT 10 . 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT STORM DRAINAGEEASEMENT 8.10'STORMDR A I N EASEMENT 10. 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' S T O R M D R A I N E A S E M E N T 10. 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 10.00' PG&EEASEME N T 10 . 0 0 ' PG & E EA S E M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' CA L W A T E R EA S E M E N T 20 . 0 0 ' TE M P O R A R Y E V A E EA S E M E N T 20.00'TEMPO R A R Y EVAEEASEME N T 25 . 0 0 ' TE M P O R A R Y EV A E EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y S E W E R EA S E M E N T 10.00'SANITA R Y SEWEREASEM E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y SE W E R EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y SE W E R EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' SA N I T A R Y SE W E R EA S E M E N T 15 . 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T 10.0 0 ' STO R M D R A I N EAS E M E N T 6. 5 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' ST O R M D R A I N EA S E M E N T N8 0 ° 1 8 ' 5 6 " W 44 6 . 3 0 ' N8 7 ° 5 4 ' 3 9 " E 36 7 . 2 7 ' S7 7 ° 1 0 ' 0 8 " E 23 6 . 6 0 ' ∆=32°19'04"R=93.00'L=52.46' S44° 5 1 ' 0 4 " E 124. 0 9 ' ∆=72°30'47"R=60.00'L=75.94' N 6 2 ° 3 8 ' 0 9 " E 1 0 9 . 3 5 ' N12°49'5 2 " E 521.80' S02°48'57"E142.13' S38°58'44"W 57.53' ∆=10°03'57" R=300.35' L=52.77'∆=21°40'28" R=150.00' L=56.74'∆=10°21'47" R=500.00' L=90.44' ∆=12°39'38" R=288.00' L=63.64' ∆=4°51'39"R=500.00'L=42.42' S06°16'21"W 122.25' ∆=52°30'16" R=50.00'L=45.82' S 5 8 ° 4 6 ' 3 7 " W 1 2 4 . 9 2 ' ∆ = 2 ° 4 7 ' 0 6 " R = 8 7 4 . 8 0 ' L = 4 2 . 5 2 ' S12°49'5 2 " W 810.54' 100.00' ( F U T U R E ) UTAH A V E N U E OVERC R O S S I N G 10 . 0 0 ' P U B L I C PE D E S T R I A N AC C E S S EA S E M E N T 10 . 0 0 ' P U B L I C PE D E S T R I A N AC C E S S EA S E M E N T 10.00' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT 10 . 0 0 ' P U B L I C PE D E S T R I A N AC C E S S EA S E M E N T 10.00' PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT © Copyright Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 OWNER ARCHITECT Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP One Maritime Plaza, San Francisco, CA 94111 CONSULTANTS / ENGINEERS NO.DATE DESCRIPTION DRAWING TITLE DRAWING NUMBER DRAWN BY CHECKED BY A B C D E F G H I J STEELWAVE101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 800SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111 4683 Chabot Drive #300,Pleasanton, CA 94588 Civil: 555 Beach St floor 4,San Francisco, CA 94133 Landscaping: Lighting: 304 S Broadway #300,Los Angeles, CA 90013 560 14th St #300,Oakland, CA 94612 Parking: 1900 Powell St #890,Emeryville, CA 94608 Trash Management: 1617 Clay Street,Oakland, CA 94612 Traffic: KEYPLAN N SEAL I131S C I131S A I131N B I131N A I131S B NOT PART OF PROJECT I131S D I131 G MEP: 98 Battery Street, Suite 502,San Francisco, CA 94111 Vertical Transportation: 102 East Blithedale Avenue, Suite 1Mill Valley, CA 94941 Sustainability: 25 Kearny Street, Suite 500,San Francisco, CA 94108 Code: 1220 Concord Ave., Suite 400,Concord CA 94520 11/20/2023 9:02:21 AM INFINITE 131 131 TERMINAL CT SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CA94080 RA/RM JL INFINITE 131 | 221549-T131N-A 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING / PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 N+S 50% SCHEMATIC DESIGN P: \ S N R \ 2 2 \ 4 0 0 6 \ 0 0 \ C i v i l \ C A D \ S h e e t s \ P l a n n i n g \ T e r m i n a l 1 3 1 \ S N R 2 2 - 4 0 0 6 - T 1 3 1 _ C 1 . 1 _ T M A P - S B M T . d w g 8 / 2 0 / 2 0 2 5 7 : 1 2 A M J L O R E N Z O 1 : 1 2023.12.21 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN R E G I S T E R E D P R O F E S S I O N A L E N G I N E E R C I V I LS T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A No. 43696M I C H A E L G. M U R P H Y 08/20/2025 2025.08.25 I131 N+S 100% SCHEMATIC DESIGN PROPOSED LOT LINE LEGEND CENTERLINE PROPOSED EASEMENT OWNER INFO ENGINEER INFO WARE MALCOMB 4683 CHABOT DR #300 PLEASANTON, CA 94588 CONTACT: MICHAEL MURPHY, P.E. #43496 (950)480-6083 UTILITY PURVEYOR INFO PROPOSED EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT WATER CALWATER ELECTRIC PG&E GAS PG&E FIRE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO FIRE DEPARTMENT SEWER CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 0 SCALE: 1" = 30 60 120 60' C-1.1 VESTING TENTATIVE MAP (SUBDIVISION MAP FOR UP TO 17 COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUMS) PROPOSED PG&E EASEMENT PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PROPOSED STORM DRAINAGE EASEMENT PROPOSED CALWATER EASEMENT ZONING INFORMATION 101 TERMINAL COURT - BTP-H 131 TERMINAL COURT - MIH (CURRENT PLANNING APPLICATIONS WOULD AMEND TO BTP-H) TEMPORARY EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS EASEMENT NO-BUILD EASEMENT EASEMENT DISPOSITION TABLE US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and GOLDEN GATE PRODUCE TERMINAL, LTD., a California limited partnership NAME: BRIDGET METZ ADDRESS: 999 BAKER WAY, SUITE 200 SAN MATEO, CA 94404 PHONE NUMBER: 925-364-0898 NOTES 1. ALL DISTANCES SHOWN HEREON ARE IN U.S. SURVEY FEET AND DECIMALS THEREOF. 2. THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FROM INFORMATION FURNISHED IN A PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT, PREPARED BY FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, DATED APRIL 22, 2022, ORDER NO. NCS-1111976-SC. NO LIABILITY ISASSUMED FOR MATTERS OF RECORD NOT STATED IN SAID PRELIMINARY TITLE REPORT THAT MAY AFFECT THE BOUNDARY LINES, EXCEPTIONS, OR EASEMENTS AFFECTING THE PROPERTY. 3. THE TYPES, LOCATIONS, SIZES AND/OR DEPTHS OF EXISTING UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AS SHOWN ON THIS TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY WERE OBTAINED FROM SOURCES OF VARYING RELIABILITY. THE CONTRACTOR IS CAUTIONED THATONLY ACTUAL EXCAVATION WILL REVEAL THE TYPES, EXTENT, SIZES, LOCATIONS AND DEPTHS OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES. (A REASONABLE EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO LOCATE AND DELINEATE ALL UNKNOWN UNDERGROUND UTILITIES.) HOWEVER, THE SURVEYOR CAN ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE COMPLETENESS OR ACCURACY OF ITS DELINEATION OF SUCH UNDERGROUND UTILITIES WHICH MAY BE ENCOUNTERED, BUT WHICH ARE NOT SHOWN ON THESE DRAWINGS. 4. A.P.N.: 015-113-210, 015-113-240, 015-113-420, 015-113-440 AND 015-113-450 5. BASIS OF BEARINGS: THE BEARINGS SHOWN HEREON ARE BASES UPON THE CALIFORNIA COORDINATE SYSTEM OF 1983, ZONE 3, EPOCH DATE OF 2010.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTIONS 8801-8819; SAID BEARINGS ARE BASED LOCALLY UPON GPS FIELD-OBSERVED TIES TO TO THE FOLLOWING CALIFORNIA SPATIAL REFERENCE NETWORK, OR EQUIVALENT STATIONS: CORS ID: PID:NORTHING: EASTING:CAPO DP2481 2,087,091.26 6,063,572.64P176DN7542 1,999,593.78 6,022,762.07TIBBDO2389 2,152,696.66 5,999,690.58 6. BENCHMARK: NGS MONUMENT "HPGN D CA 04 FG": NGS BRASS DISK LOCATED ON THE WEST SHOULDER OF HIGHWAY 101. ELEVATION: 8.0 FEET (GPS OBSERVED) (DATUM) NAVD 1988 7. FLOOD ZONE NOTE:THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SHOWN ON THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP, COMMUNITY PANEL NUMBER 065062 0043 F, DATED APRIL 5, 2019, AS BEING LOCATED IN FLOOD ZONES "AE (EL10)" AND "X"; ZONE "AE (EL 10)": AREAS OF THE 1% ANNUAL FLOOD (100-YEAR FLOOD), ALSO KNOW AS THE BASE FLOOD, IS THE FLOOD THAT HAS A 1% CHANCE OF BEING EQUALED OR EXCEEDED IN ANY GIVEN YEAR; BASE FLOOD ELEVATIONSDETERMINED. ZONE "X":AREAS OF 0.2% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD; AREAS OF 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD WITH AVERAGE DEPTHS OF LESS THAN 1 FOOT OR WITH DRAINAGE AREAS LESS THAN 1 SQUARE MILE; AND AREAS OF PROTECTED LEVEES FROM 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD. INFORMATION WAS OBTAINED FROM THE FEMA WEBSITE (WWW.FEMA.GOV) ON SEPTEMBER 12, 2022. PROPOSED PUBLIC PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ACCESS EASEMENT NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.05.23 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL NO.DATE DESCRIPTION 2023.01.06 PLANNING APPLICATION 2023.05.04 I131 REPOSITIONING  PLANNING APPLICATION PACKAGE 2023.11.03 I131 NS 50 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2023.12.21 I131 NS 100 SCHEMATIC DESIGN 2025.08.25 I131 PLANNING APPLICATION RESUBMITTAL 21 0 1 Infinite 131 Transportation Demand Management Plan Prepared for: City of South San Francisco June 2024 211 2 Table of Contents Introduction ................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Description............................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Project Setting ............................................................................................................................... 6 Transit Connections ............................................................................................................................................................................. 6 First/Last Mile Shuttle Connections .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections ............................................................................................................................................. 8 San Mateo County TDM Resources .............................................................................................................................................. 8 Proposed Transportation Demand Management Program .................................................... 10 Proposed TDM Program ..................................................................................................................................................................10 Participation in Commute.org Programs ..................................................................................................................................11 Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Parking ..................................................................................................................................11 Bicycle Storage, Showers, and Lockers ......................................................................................................................................11 Designated TDM Coordinator .......................................................................................................................................................11 Bicycle and Pedestrian-Oriented Site Access ..........................................................................................................................11 Encourage Telecommuting & Flexible Work Schedules .....................................................................................................12 Enhanced Shuttle Commitment ....................................................................................................................................................12 Fully Subsidized Transit Passes .....................................................................................................................................................12 Active Transportation Gap Closure & Transit Capital Improvements ...........................................................................13 On-Site Pedestrian-Oriented Amenities ....................................................................................................................................14 Bicycle Repair Station .......................................................................................................................................................................14 TDM Checklist & Quantification of TDM Effectiveness .......................................................................................................14 Proposed Trip Cap .............................................................................................................................................................................17 Monitoring and Enforcement .................................................................................................... 19 Monitoring Methods .........................................................................................................................................................................19 Survey Approach ................................................................................................................................................................................19 Trip Cap Monitoring ..........................................................................................................................................................................20 Reporting ...............................................................................................................................................................................................20 Triennial Midday Parking Occupancy Survey ..........................................................................................................................20 Enforcement & Fines .........................................................................................................................................................................20 Appendix: Sample Survey Questions ..........................................................................................................................................21 212 3 Introduction This report presents a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan, per City of South San Francisco Zoning Code Chapter 20.400, for the proposed research & development buildings known as the Infinite 131 Project, herein referred to as the “Project.” A description of the proposed project is included on the following pages. The City of South San Francisco TDM Ordinance strives to accomplish the following goals: • Reduce the amount of traffic generated by new nonresidential development. • Ensure that expected increases in traffic resulting from growth in employment opportunities in the City of South San Francisco will be adequately mitigated. • Reduce drive-alone commute trips during peak traffic periods by using a combination of services, incentives, and facilities. • Promote the more efficient utilization of existing transportation facilities and ensure that new developments are designed in ways to maximize the potential for alternative transportation usage. • Establish an ongoing monitoring and enforcement program to ensure that the desired alternative mode use percentages are achieved. The City requires the Project to enact a TDM program to achieve a maximum drive alone commute mode share of 50 percent pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code Chapter 20.400. Additionally, the Project must implement annual monitoring of a site-specific trip cap. These requirements are consistent with a Tier 4 classification (large office/R&D project) under the TDM Ordinance and also meet the TDM requirements established by the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG). This TDM Plan identifies a set of strategies, measures, and incentives to encourage future tenant employees at the Project to walk, bicycle, ride transit, or carpool when commuting to and from work. In order to accomplish this goal, this plan presents a range of proven strategies and measures. Project Description The Project would construct 1,632,000 square feet of research & development space, 21,000 square feet of conference space, a 20,000 square foot fitness center, 27,000 square feet of restaurant space, and 4,050 square feet of daycare space, for a total of 1.704 million square feet across seven campus buildings. The Project includes 2,976 proposed stalls, including 50 accessible spaces and 1,339 electric vehicle capable spaces. The Project is located adjacent to the Infinite 101 development, a recently entitled 696,000 square foot R&D. campus that would function as a separate phase to the Project. Upon completion of both the Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 developments, the two sites would function as a single campus. Figure 1 illustrates the Project location, while Figure 2 depicts site circulation. 213 DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN LINDENVILLE BAYHILL Sa n M a t e o A v Sa n M a t e o A v e n u e Sa n M a t e o A v 21 4 21 5 6 Project Setting Transit Connections The following transit services operate within South San Francisco near the Project site. Existing transit services are shown in Figure 3. Descriptions provided in this section reflect transit operations in Fall 2023. BART BART provides regional rail service between the East Bay, San Francisco, and San Mateo County, with connections to San Francisco International Airport and Millbrae Intermodal Station to the south, San Francisco to the north, and Oakland, Richmond, Pittsburgh/Bay Point, Dublin/Pleasanton and Fremont in the East Bay. Two BART lines serve South San Francisco Station: the Yellow Line connecting Antioch with San Francisco International Airport, and the Red Line connecting Richmond and Millbrae. Each BART line operates every 15-minutes throughout the day. The closest station is San Bruno BART Station, located approximately one mile southwest of the Project site in neighboring San Bruno. Caltrain Caltrain provides passenger rail service on the Peninsula between San Francisco and San José, and limited service to Morgan Hill and Gilroy during weekday commute periods. The South San Francisco Caltrain Station is located approximately one mile north of the Project site and San Bruno Caltrain Station is located approximately one mile south of the Project site in neighboring San Bruno. Both stations are served by local and limited trains from around 5:00 A.M. to 12:30 A.M., with approximately 30-minute headways during peak periods and 60-minute headways during off-peak periods. In early 2022, Caltrain relocated the South San Francisco Caltrain station several hundred feet to the south to provide a more direct connection to downtown South San Francisco. By late 2024, Caltrain plans to complete its electrification project to support the operation of faster and more frequent rail service on the Peninsula, and expects to modify its schedules accordingly. WETA (San Francisco Bay Ferry) The Water Emergency Transportation Authority (WETA) provides weekday commuter ferry service between the Oakland/Alameda ferry terminals and the South San Francisco Ferry Terminal at Oyster Point (known as the San Francisco Bay Ferry). There are three morning departures from Oakland/Alameda to South San Francisco, and three evening departures from South San Francisco to Oakland/Alameda. The South San Francisco Ferry Terminal is located approximately 3 miles to the northeast of the Project site. SamTrans SamTrans provides bus service in San Mateo County. There are no existing SamTrans bus stops within a reasonable walking distance of the Project site. 216 Existing Transit Service Figure 3 SamTrans Peak Period Frequency Other Transit Service Every 15 minutes or less Every 20 - 30 minutes Greater than 30 minutes BART Caltrain Free South City Shuttle Bayhill Shuttle Project Site 101 82 380 South South South San FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan FranciscoSan Francisco DOWNTOWN LINDENVILLE TanforanShopping Center OrangeMemorial Park San Bruno BH 292 141 398 ECR SSF South San FranciscoSouth San Francisco BART CALTRAIN City Boundary N 217 8 First/Last Mile Shuttle Connections There are currently no existing shuttles serving the Project site. Bicycle and Pedestrian Connections The Project site is located adjacent to US 101, a navigable slough, and existing industrial and parking facilities, which heavily constrain bicycle and pedestrian connectivity. Produce Avenue has a continuous sidewalk along the west side of the street that connects to the intersection with San Mateo Avenue and Airport Boulevard. People walking or biking to or from the site currently must use this route. At buildout, the Project has proposed a new trail connection with Shaw Road. Shaw Road has a sidewalk on the north side of the street to the west of the right-of-way and on the south side of street in both directions; there is no existing street crossing of Shaw Road at the right-of-way. While the City continues to expand its bicycle and pedestrian network, the area surrounding the Project has historically experienced low volumes of pedestrians and bicyclists due to commute lengths, lack of continuous low stress facilities, and lack of network connectivity to residences and transit stations. To address the gap in the bicycle and pedestrian network near the Project site, the City has proposed a bicycle and pedestrian bridge and trail in the vicinity of the Project site in its Active South City Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The trail would connect the Bay Trail and Centennial Way Trail via the Navigable Slough, Shaw Road, and an eventual grade separation of Caltrain at Tanforan Avenue. Figure 5 illustrates existing and planned bikeway facilities as well as sidewalk infrastructure gaps in South San Francisco. San Mateo County TDM Resources The Project would have access to trip reduction services offered by Commute.org. Commute.org is a public agency whose mission is to reduce the number of drive-alone vehicles traveling to, from or through San Mateo County. The agency’s goal is to help residents and commuters find alternatives to driving alone that are less stressful, less costly, and better the environment. The agency provides information and commute planning assistance to employees, employer programs, and city transportation demand management partnerships. Commute.org also provides first/last mile shuttle services in the East of 101 Area. Figure 4 illustrates some current promotions and services offered by Commute.org that are open to all employees in San Mateo County. Figure 4: Commute.org TDM Promotional Programs 218 CrestmoorCanyon 3101 W est O range Avenue C h estnutA v S o u t h Air p o r t B o ul e v a r d Wes tb or o u g h Bl El C a m in o R e al S a n B r u n o A v e n u e W e st yW robraH South Linden Avenue El C a m i n o R e al OrangeAvenue Grand Avenue H u nti n g t o n A v North Mc donnel l Ro a d C o u ntry ClubDr ive DubuqueAv U t a h A v e n u e Gate wayBl S n e ath La n e Linden Av San Bruno Avenue East SouthSpruceAvenue ProduceAv EastGr a ndAv eunevA oetaM naS C h e r r y A v D o ra d o W y Cr estwo od D rive Spruce Avenue Avalon Drive MitchellAvenue ·82 %&280 %&38017 24 31 20 26 25 27 18 19 11 16 28 13 10 87 2 3 1 4 30 6 Bicycle FacilitiesFigure 5 Project Site Class II Bicycle Lane Class I Shared Path Class I Shared Path Class II Bicycle Lane Class III Bicycle Route Class III Bicycle Route Class IV Separated Bikeway City Boundary Existing Bikeways Planned Bikeways San Bruno South San Francisco DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN LINDENVILLE BAYHILL TanforanShopping Center OrangeMemorial Park Sou th Mapl e Aven u e H u n n g t o n A v e n u e S e a S co St Miller Av Baden Av Bis c uit Av Air p o r t B l San Mateo Av 3101 ra nge Avenue S o u t h A i r p o r t B o u l e v a r d yW robraH South Linden Avenue OrangeAvenue Grand Avenue DubuqueAv U t a h A v e n u e Gate wayBl S n e a t h L a n e Linden Av SouthSpruceAvenue Produce Av EastG r a ndAv Spruce Avenue MitchellAvenue ·82 %&380 87 1 South San Francisco DOWNTOWN L INDENVILLE TanforanShopping Center OrangeMemorial Park Sou th Maple Ave n u e H u n t i n g t o n A v e n u e S c o tt S t Miller Av Baden Av H u n t i n g t o n A v Ai r p o r t B l San Mateo Av N Bay T r a i l Ce n t e n n i a l W a y T r a i l 219 10 Proposed Transportation Demand Management Program This section summarizes the Project’s proposed TDM program as presently envisioned in the planning process. When applying for a Certificate of Occupancy, the applicant shall submit a compliance form and appropriate attachments finalizing the TDM program and documenting how the program will be implemented before the site reaches 50% occupancy. Proposed TDM Program The City’s TDM Ordinance has two components: a points-based planning checklist and annual performance monitoring thresholds. As a Tier 4 project, the Project is required to submit a completed TDM checklist that achieves a minimum threshold of 50 points, consistent with achieving a 50 percent drive alone mode share target (via survey) and compliance with an onsite trip cap (via counts). As illustrated in Table 1, the Project would implement all required measures per the City’s TDM Ordinance, including the following: ▪ 50% Transit Pass Subsidies and Pre-Tax Transit Benefits ▪ Participation in Commute.org Programs ▪ Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Parking ▪ Bicycle Storage, Showers, and Lockers ▪ Designated TDM Coordinator ▪ Bicycle and Pedestrian-Oriented Site Access ▪ Encourage Telecommuting & Flexible Work Schedules The Project would also implement the following optional measures: ▪ Enhanced Shuttle Commitment ▪ Fully Subsidized Transit Passes ▪ Active Transportation Gap Closure ▪ Transit Capital Improvements ▪ On-Site Pedestrian-Oriented Amenities ▪ Bicycle Repair Station Each measure is described in detail below. 220 11 Participation in Commute.org Programs The Project will partner with Commute.org to provide TDM marketing services and promotions via its Certified Development Program (https://commute.org/resources/developers/). Commute.org offers a wide array of programs and marketing support to all eligible employers, property managers, and cities within San Mateo County. Key services that the Project will participate in include the Commute.org ride- matching program (designed to aid in carpool and vanpool formation); Guaranteed Ride Home services; and general educational and promotional programs and materials. The Project’s designated TDM coordinator will obtain a certificate of participation from Commute.org each year as part of the annual monitoring and reporting process. Carpool/Vanpool Programs and Parking The Project will ensure that employer tenants offer carpool and vanpool programs that include subsidies or other monetary incentives (e.g., gas card after carpooling for a given amount of time, or parking subsidies for carpools), dedicated carpool and vanpool parking, as well as ride-matching services to help facilitate these shared trips. Elements of the carpool program (such as use of the regional ride-matching program) will be provided in partnership with Commute.org. Bicycle Storage, Showers, and Lockers The Project will provide safe and convenient bicycle parking per City code requirements, as well as showers, changing rooms, and lockers. The Project is proposing to provide short-term bicycle parking spaces and long-term bicycle parking spaces in excess of code requirements. Short-term bicycle parking will be located near main building entrances and will be easily accessible. Designated TDM Coordinator The Project will designate a TDM coordinator. This individual may either be an employee of the Project’s property management or contracted through a third-party provider. The TDM coordinator shall provide oversight and management of the program’s implementation. In addition, the TDM coordinator will provide lists of mandatory and optional measures to all individual businesses. Tenants will be obligated (via lease language) to provide a point of contact for the Designated TDM Coordinator. The TDM Coordinator, in turn, will verify that tenants are implementing all required measures as part of the annual monitoring and reporting process. Bicycle and Pedestrian-Oriented Site Access The Project will enhance bicycle and pedestrian access by providing new connections and onsite circulation paths. The Project will provide pedestrian walkways between all core buildings and bicycle routes through the site. Bicycle access will primarily be provided via a new trail along the Navigable Slough connecting to Shaw Road. 221 12 Encourage Telecommuting & Flexible Work Schedules The Project shall encourage employers to allow telecommuting at least one day per week to reduce overall vehicle trips, unless an employee’s job functions cannot be performed from a remote location. When employees commute to work, employers shall encourage flexible work schedules that help shift travel outside of peak hours. Uptake of remote work, telecommuting, and flexible work schedules will be monitored via survey. Enhanced Shuttle Commitment The Project will provide first/last mile shuttles to the San Bruno BART Station and South San Francisco Caltrain Station. Since no shuttle routes are present near the Project site, the Project sponsor will establish new routes. A minimum of one vehicle would be dedicated to each route (two vehicles total) with service at least every 15 minutes during the AM and PM peak periods (totaling a minimum of six hours per day). The proposed shuttle routes are shown in Figure 6, though actual circulation patterns around the campus may vary. New shuttle services should adhere to the City’s suggested practices identified in its Transportation Analysis Guidelines: • The Project sponsor is encouraged to work with Commute.org as a shuttle manager and participate in the San Mateo County Transportation Authority’s Shuttle Call for Projects grant program. • Shuttle services should be free and open to the public. • Stops should be located “on the way” to enable more linear routes with minimal route diversions. • Stops should be located along streets within the Project site. Stops in parking lots should be avoided to avoid adverse effects on travel times. • Stops should be spaced at least 800 feet apart. Fewer stops consolidated around major ridership generators are generally preferable to ensure efficient operations. • Stops should connect to accessible sidewalks and crosswalks with convenient paths of travel to nearby land uses. Fully Subsidized Transit Passes The Project will offer public transit passes or subsidies up to the IRS transit benefit maximum (currently $280 per person per month). This may be implemented through either a direct voucher program provided by the property manager, or through lease terms obligating employers to provide said subsidies. Should the measure be implemented through lease obligations, the designated TDM coordinator will be responsible for confirming that all employers are offering said benefits as part of the annual monitoring and reporting process. 222 13 Active Transportation Gap Closure & Transit Capital Improvements The Project’s Transportation Impact Analysis identifies several improvements to active transportation and transit conditions via Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Mitigation Measure TRANS-1: Advanced Implementation of Transportation Improvements Identified in General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan The project shall implement and/or fund, as indicated below, the following improvements identified in the General Plan, Lindenville Specific Plan, and Active South City Plan: 1. Signalization of the U.S. 101 Off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 On-ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court Intersections. The project shall implement two new traffic signals along Produce Avenue to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle and pedestrian access to the project site. The traffic signals shall be located at the intersections of the U.S. 101 off-ramp/Produce Avenue and U.S. 101 on- ramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court. The traffic signals shall be accompanied by changes to lane configurations, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bicycle facilities identified by the City to achieve consistency with adopted plans and policies. 2. Redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection The project shall implement a redesign of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access to the project site. A partial redesign of this intersection is already funded by the 100 Produce, 124 Airport, and 40 Airport projects, which will include removal of slip lanes on the northeast, northwest, and southwest corners. The project’s redesign shall include the reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292, as identified by the City. 3. Construction of a Class IV Separated Bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue The project shall implement a Class IV separated bikeway on Produce Avenue and Airport Boulevard from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court, connecting the Caltrain Station to the project site. This bikeway would close existing gaps between the project site, Caltrain Station, and downtown South San Francisco, enabling continuous bicycle travel separated from auto and truck traffic. Improvements would include construction of a two-way facility along the west side of Produce Avenue from Terminal Court to Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue, transitioning to a pair of one-way facilities through the Caltrain crossing to Baden Avenue. 4. Signalization of the San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue Intersection: The project shall implement a new traffic signal at the intersection of San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue. This traffic signal would facilitate access to the project site via Shaw Road while reducing potential for multimodal conflicts. The traffic signal shall be accompanied by accessible sidewalk and curb ramp upgrades at the intersection, as well as associated signal and intersection/sidewalk modifications at the adjacent San Mateo Avenue/South Linden Avenue intersection. 223 14 5. Engineering Study of a New Southbound U.S. 101 Off-ramp Connecting to the Utah Avenue Overpass The project shall fund an engineering study of a new southbound U.S. 101 off-ramp connecting to the proposed Utah Avenue overpass as envisioned in the General Plan and Lindenville Specific Plan. The engineering study shall be led by the city. As currently envisioned, the overpass would not include a southbound off-ramp. A second off-ramp would facilitate more direct access to the overpass and address long-term queueing concerns. The off-ramp would be accompanied by a new street connection between Utah Avenue and Produce Avenue north of the project site. 6. Engineering Study and Fair-Share Contribution toward a New Trail Crossing of U.S. 101 South of the Project Site The project shall fund an engineering study for a new Class I shared-use path crossing of U.S. 101 to connect the Bay Trail with Shaw Road. The engineering study shall be led by the city. An engineering study of the planned U.S. 101 crossing has not yet occurred, and a preferred alternative alignment has not been determined. The engineering study will consider potential trail crossing alignments, incorporate the preferred alternative alignment into its site plan, and quantify a fair share contribution toward construction of the crossing. These mitigations shall be completed by the applicant prior to the project receiving a certificate of occupancy. If the City implements these improvements in advance of the project’s construction, the project shall reimburse the City for the cost of construction. If another development implements these improvements and/or engineering studies prior to the project’s construction, the project shall be responsible for a fair-share reimbursement of construction costs to the developer leading these improvements. This funding will ensure that transportation facilities serving the project site are appropriately sized to handle multimodal travel demand associated with the project as envisioned in each plan. In addition, the Project will incorporate an on-site shuttle stop with shelters. The shuttle stop will be centrally located and convenient for people to access main building entrances. On-Site Pedestrian-Oriented Amenities The Project will include a restaurant, fitness center, and conference center onsite to help reduce offsite trips. Bicycle Repair Station The Project will include at least one bicycle repair station that will include a toolkit and air pump within a designated secure area of a building to encourage bicycling and support employees and residents. TDM Checklist & Quantification of TDM Effectiveness Quantification of TDM reductions is based on the Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity by the California Air 224 15 Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) published in 2021. The Project would implement the following measures consistent with CAPCOA guidance: Measure T-6 (Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program - Mandatory Implementation and Monitoring) defines a commute trip reduction program with mandatory implementation and monitoring, which is consistent with several Project TDM measures defined in the City’s ordinance along with City requirements for annual monitoring and reporting to ensure compliance. Project TDM measures that would be included in the mandatory trip reduction program include participation in Commute.org programs, carpool/vanpool programs and parking, bicycle storage, showers, and lockers, designation of a TDM coordinator, and fully subsidized transit passes. The Project would be subject to annual surveys and trip cap monitoring as described in the following section. Measure T-20 (Expand Bikeway Network) covers bikeway network expansion, which is consistent with the proposed active transportation gap closure measure covering both onsite and offsite bicycle improvements. Measure T-25 (Extend Transit Network Coverage) covers transit network expansion consistent with the proposed shuttle to connect the Project site with the existing BART station and Caltrain station to provide first/last-mile connectivity for employees and the public. This will add seven additional hours per day of transit service to the area. Prior to the expansion, there was no service within a half-mile radius surrounding the site. The free shuttles will connect the site with existing SamTrans, Caltrain, and BART service. As illustrated in Table 1, the Project’s TDM program would meet the required 50-point threshold for Tier 4 projects and would reduce VMT by 29.5 percent. 225 16 Table 1: TDM Program Elements – City, C/CAG, and CEQA Requirements South San Francisco TDM Ordinance Requirements CAPCOA Quantification of VMT Reductions1 TDM Measure Description Potential Points Project Points Measure Title Project Reduction Fully Subsidized Transit Passes 15 15 T-6 Implement Commute Trip Reduction Program (Mandatory Implementation and Monitoring) 26.0% Participation in Commute.org Programs 5 5 Designated TDM Coordinator 1 1 Carpool/ Vanpool Programs and Parking 3 3 Bicycle Storage, Showers, and Lockers 2 2 Bicycle Repair Station 1 1 Active Transportation Gap Closure Up to 6 6 T-20 Expand Bikeway Network 0.2% Enhanced Shuttle Commitment 10 10 T-25 Extend Transit Network Coverage 4.6% Transit Capital Improvements Up to 6 2 Bicycle and Pedestrian- Oriented Site Access 1 1 N/A N/A N/A On-Site Pedestrian- Oriented Amenities 3 3 Encourage Telecommuting & Flexible Work Schedules 1 1 Total Project Points 50 Total Project Reduction 29.5% Required Points 50 Required Project Reduction 28% 226 17 Proposed Trip Cap Tier 4 projects are subject to site-specific trip caps that limit the number of peak-direction vehicle trips that a site generates during peak periods. Trip caps should reinforce mode share and parking requirements for the site while allowing some flexibility to accommodate fluctuations in employee density, daily variations in travel patterns, and anticipated levels of guest/visitor travel activity. The proposed trip cap is 3,579 peak period, peak direction vehicle trips, based on the calculations below: Topic Total Assumptions A Maximum Occupancy 4,250 1,700,000 square feet, 1 employee per 400sf B Drive Alone Trips 2,125 50% drive alone for maximum occupancy C Carpool/Vanpool Trips 170 12% carpool/vanpool with average of 3 persons per vehicle D Visitors/Freight Trips 425 10% allowance for visitors and freight Proposed Trip Cap 2,720 B+C+D 227 Project ShuttlesFigure 6 Project Site City Boundary ! ! San Bruno South San Francisco DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN LINDENVILLE BAYHILL TanforanShopping Center OrangeMemorial Park Sou t h M a p l e Aven u e H u n � n g t o n A v e n u e S e a Sco� St Baden Av Bis c uit Av Air p o r t B l San Mateo Av 3101 ·82 %&380 24 25 27 18 19 8 2 3 1 4 San Bruno South San Francisco DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN LINDENVILLE BAYHILL TanforanShopping Center OrangeMemorial Park Sou t h M a p l e Aven u e H u n � n g t o n A v e n u e S e a Miller Av Baden Av Bi s c u it Av A i r p o r t B l San Mateo Ave n u e Shaw Road San Mateo Ave n u e Tanforan A v e n u e Mitchell Avenue S o u t h A i r p o r t B l v d 3101 ·82 %&380 24 25 27 18 19 8 2 3 1 4 San Bruno South San Francisco DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN LINDENVILLE BAYHILL TanforanShopping Center OrangeMemorial Park Sou t h M a p l e Av H u n � n g t o n A v S e a Miller Av Baden Av Bi s c u it Av San Mateo Av Shaw Rd San Mateo Av Tanforan A v Mitchell Av S o u t h A i r p o r t B l v d South San FranciscoCALTRAIN San Bruno BART South San FranciscoCALTRAIN San Bruno BART BART Caltrain P r o duce Av N SouthLindenAvenue Caltrain Shuttle and Stop BART Shuttle and Stop 228 19 Monitoring and Enforcement The TDM program will be monitored based on the requirements in the South San Francisco TDM Ordinance. The Project would comply with any future changes to the City’s monitoring and enforcement practices as described in its TDM Ordinance. Upon completion of both the Infinite 101 and Infinite 131 developments, monitoring would be coordinated between the two sites as a single campus. Monitoring Methods Survey monitoring would apply to commute trips only. Participants are expected to provide a good faith effort in reducing non-commute trips, but these trips would only be monitored via vehicle trip counts. Survey Approach Mode share will be monitored via an annual survey to all employees to ensure the Project is meeting its target goal. Each year, the survey will achieve a response rate equal to either 51 percent of employees or large enough to identify the current drive alone mode share +/- 5 percentage points, at 95% confidence. An example of a typical commute survey is included in the appendix; the City of South San Francisco (or a designated agent) shall ultimately prepare the final surveys and work with the designated TDM Coordinator to distribute surveys and coordinate with employer tenants. The site’s TDM coordinator may expand upon this survey language to seek additional information as needed. In order to calculate drive alone mode share, the TDM coordinator and City staff would sum the total number of trips completed via the following modes: • Drove a car or motorcycle alone • Dropped off by a friend/family member • Dropped off by Uber, Lyft, taxi, etc. • Non-responses if greater than 25 percent of the site’s employee population Trip counts would be included with the annual survey results and summarize total trips, AM peak period trips into the site (6:00 AM to 10:00 AM), and PM peak period trips out of the site (3:00 PM to 7:00 PM). In all instances, participants in the program must provide raw data to the City as part of their compliance package, including: 1. Respondent-level survey response data (deletion of columns containing emails or non-required fields is acceptable) 2. Count data as delivered by the contractor providing the counts for each location, with data separated into 15-minute increments or smaller. 3. Current employee population 229 20 Trip Cap Monitoring Trip cap compliance would be monitored via annual vehicle counts at all Project access points. Counts would be conducted by an independent vendor over a period of one week during which school is in session. Reporting As a Tier 4 project, the Project will be required to prepare and submit to the City an annual compliance form documenting the continued implementation of TDM measures, for the lifespan of the Project. In addition to the compliance form, counts and survey results would be provided to the City in a standardized format as specified by staff. Formatted reports would be optional but not required. Triennial Midday Parking Occupancy Survey In addition to annual surveys and trip counts, the Project shall prepare a midday parking occupancy count every three years per City Ordinance requirements. The parking occupancy survey shall be for informational purposes and is not associated with a performance target. Enforcement & Fines The TDM Coordinator may use information from the employee surveys to adjust existing or implement new TDM program measures. If the alternative mode use goals are not achieved, the TDM Coordinator will provide an explanation of how and why the goal has not been reached and a detailed description of additional measures (or intensified marketing or implementation of existing measures) that will be adopted to reach the required mode use. Following three consecutive years of failure to meet the performance target, the Project shall pay any non-compliance fees and fines assessed by the City, as well as continue to make changes to the TDM program in an effort to reach compliance. If the Project does not meet the required performance targets, the following penalties shall apply per the TDM Ordinance: ▪ First Violation: The City will direct the Project to modify its TDM program to achieve compliance. Modifications are likely to include adding or modifying TDM measures to increase mode shift. ▪ Second Violation: The City will direct the participant to coordinate with Commute.org or retain an independent consultant to identify additional program modifications to achieve compliance. Modifications are likely to include adding or modifying TDM measures to increase mode shift. ▪ Third Violation (and any subsequent violations): The City may assess a penalty per the City’s fee schedule. Penalties shall be assessed for each additional violation in subsequent years. The Project may appeal the decision to administer a penalty if special circumstances prevented meeting the required performance targets. 230 21 Appendix: Sample Survey Questions 1. Which of the following best represents your employment at [location]? (check one) o Full-time Employee o Part-time Employee o Contract Employee 2. In what ZIP code is your home located? (enter 5-digit ZIP code; for example, 94901) ___[Fill in the blank]_______ o Prefer Not to Answer o If prefer not to answer: Approximately how many miles is it from your home to your office in South San Francisco? 3. In the past week, what time did you usually arrive to work (check one)? ____[Drop down in increments of 30 minutes, from 6 AM – 10AM, before 6AM, or after 10AM]_____ 4. In the past week, what time did you usually leave work (check one)? ____[Drop down in increments of 30 minutes, from 3 PM – 7PM, before 3PM, or after 7PM]_______ 5. In the past week, on which days did you use each of the following transportation modes to travel to work? If you used more than one mode, (e.g. you take Caltrain and then bicycle), identify the mode that was the longest part of your trip. Transportation Mode Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Drove a car or motorcycle alone Rode as a carpool passenger Drove a carpool with one or more other adults Vanpooled or Carpooled with 6 or more people Rode a bus, train, ferry, or other public transit Rode a Bicycle or Scooter Walked all the way Dropped off by a friend/family member 231 22 Dropped off by Uber, Lyft, taxi, etc. Worked from home / telecommuted / worked offsite Did not work this day Other (please specify) 6. [Only ask if respondent answered transit] Which of the following services did you use last week? (Check all that apply) □ Caltrain □ BART □ SamTrans □ Ferry □ Public shuttle (such as to/from BART, Caltrain, or ferry) □ Private shuttle/bus (i.e., Genenbus or other employer shuttle) 7. [Only ask if respondent answered carpool] If you travel by carpool, how many total people traveled with you to work (not including yourself)? o 1 other person o 2 other people o 3 other people o 4+ other people 8. [Only ask if respondent answered drive alone] What is the primary reason you choose to drive alone? ___[Fill in the blank]_______ Note: In addition to required survey questions, individual site surveys may add their own questions tailored to their respective TDM programs regarding awareness of services and reason for mode choice, but these questions are not required. 232 Draft as of 8/29/2025 – This draft reflects the substance of the parties’ agreement, but some language reflected herein is still under negotiation by the parties #526139986_v1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City Clerk City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 South San Francisco, CA 94083 (Space Above This Line Reserved For Recorder’s Use) This instrument is exempt from recording fees pursuant to Government Code section 27383. Documentary Transfer Tax is $0.00 (exempt per Revenue & Taxation Code section 11922, Transfer to Municipality). DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC (101 INFINITE PROJECT) AND US 131 TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC (131 INFINITE PROJECT) SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA ADOPTED BY ORDINANCE NO. ______________ OF THE CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO CITY COUNCIL Effective Date: __________________ 233 i #526139986_v1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS ............................................................................................................4 ARTICLE 2 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM ..............................................................................8 ARTICLE 3 OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPER ...........................................................................8 ARTICLE 4 OBLIGATIONS OF CITY .......................................................................................15 ARTICLE 5 COOPERATION – IMPLEMENTATION ...............................................................16 ARTICLE 6 STANDARDS, LAWS AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE PROJECT ...........................................................................................................................17 ARTICLE 7 AMENDMENT .........................................................................................................23 ARTICLE 8 ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER ..........................................................................24 ARTICLE 9 COOPERATION IN THE EVENT OF LEGAL CHALLENGE .............................25 ARTICLE 10 DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION ..........................................................26 ARTICLE 11 MISCELLANEOUS ...............................................................................................30 Exhibit A.1 – Description and Diagram of 101 Property Exhibit A.2 - Description and Diagram of 131 Property Exhibit B.1- List of 101 Project Approvals as of Effective Date Exhibit B.2 – List of 131 Project Approvals as of Effective Date Exhibit C.1 – City Fees, Exactions, and Payments for 101 Project Exhibit C.2 – City Fees, Exactions, and Payments for 131 Project Exhibit D.1 – Sustainability Features for 101 Project Exhibit D.2 – Sustainability Features for 131 Project Exhibit E – Applicable Laws Exhibit F – Form of [Partial] Assignment and Assumption Agreement Exhibit G – Form of DA Annual Review Report [to be added] 234 1 #526139986_v1 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) is entered into as of the Effective Date by and between US Terminal Court Owner, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“101 Developer”), US 131 Terminal Court Owner, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“131 Developer”), and the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation (“City”), pursuant to California Government Code (“Government Code”) sections 65864 et seq. 101 Developer and 131 Developer are individually “Developer” and collectively “Developers.” Developers and City are sometimes collectively referred to herein as, individually “Party” and, collectively, “Parties.” RECITALS A. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted California Government Code sections 65864 et seq., which authorizes City to enter into an agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property. B. Pursuant to Government Code section 65865, City has adopted procedures and requirements for the consideration of development agreements (South San Francisco Municipal Code (“SSFMC”) Chapter 19.60). This Agreement has been processed, considered, and executed in accordance with such procedures and requirements. C. The 101 Developer owns fee title to and proposes to redevelop the approximately 8.69-acre real property depicted and legally described on Exhibit A.1 (“101 Property”) with the Infinite 101 Project, which would include demolition of approximately a small vehicle garage and pay booth, totaling approximately 6,000 gross square feet (“gsf”) to allow construction of approximately 697,000 gsf of research-and-development (“R&D”) uses and amenities within two new buildings, parking garage, surface parking and related infrastructure and landscaping all as further defined in the 101 Project Approvals (defined in Recital K, below) (the “101 Project”). D. The 131 Developer proposes to redevelop the 17.67-acre real property depicted and legally described on Exhibit A.2 (“131 Property”) with the Infinite 131 Project, which would include demolition of approximately 126,750 gsf of industrial and operational uses that are currently occupied by the Golden Gate Produce Terminal, along with approximately 116,572 gsf of open-air structures (e.g., loading docks, trash compactor areas) to allow construction of approximately 1.7 million gsf of R&D uses and amenities within new buildings, parking garages surface parking and related infrastructure and landscaping all as further defined in the 131 Project Approvals (defined in Recital N, below) (the “131 Project”). The 131 Property is owned by Golden Gate Produce Terminal Ltd., a California limited partnership (“131 Property Owner”) subject to that certain Agreement to Enter Ground Lease dated May 04, 2022, by and between the Property Owner and Developer and as disclosed by a Memorandum of Agreement to Enter into Ground Lease recorded May 05, 2022 as Instrument No. 2022-037779 of Official Records (“131 Ground Lease Option”). In this Agreement, the 101 Property and 131 Property are, collectively, “Properties,” the 101 Project and 131 Project are, collectively, “Projects,” and the 101 Project Approvals and 131 Project Approvals are, collectively, “Project Approvals.” 235 2 #526139986_v1 E. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone extensive review by Developers and City and have been found to be fair, just, and reasonable. F. The City believes that the best interests of the citizens of the City of South San Francisco and the public health, safety, and welfare will be served by entering into this Agreement. G. This Agreement and the Projects are consistent with the Shape SSF 2040 General Plan Update, as amended as described in Recital N for the 131 Project (“General Plan”), the Lindenville Specific Plan adopted September 2023 by Resolution No. 149-2023, as amended as described in Recital N for the 131 Project (“Specific Plan”) and the South San Francisco Municipal Code (“SSFMC”). H. Development (as defined in Article 1 of this Agreement) of the Properties with the Projects in accordance with the terms of this Agreement will provide substantial benefits to and will further important policies and goals of City. This Agreement will, among other things, benefit the City by (1) advancing the City’s economic development goals of enhancing the competitiveness of the local economy and maintaining a strong and diverse revenue and job base, (2) creating state-of-the art commercial campus developments to advance General Plan objectives for the area, (3) supporting the City’s achievement of goals related to its climate action plan (“Climate Action Plan”) through incorporation of environmentally sensitive design and equipment, energy conservation features, water conservation measures, and other sustainability features, (5) generating construction-related benefits, including employment, economic and fiscal benefits related to new construction, (6) providing substantial community benefits, and (7) generating fiscal benefits and substantial infrastructure improvements to the City and San Mateo County due to community benefits, taxes and other revenue sources from operations. I. In exchange for the benefits to City described in the preceding Recital, together with the other public benefits that will result from the Development of the Projects, Developers will receive by this Agreement assurance that each may proceed with their respective Project in accordance with Applicable Law (as defined in Article 1 of this Agreement), and therefore each desires to enter into this Agreement. J. This Agreement will eliminate uncertainty in planning and budgeting and provide for the orderly Development of the Projects to allow construction over time in response to market cycles, facilitate progressive installation of necessary improvements, provide for public services appropriate to the Development of the Projects, and generally serve the purposes for which development agreements under section 65864, et seq. of the California Government Code are intended. K. On September 21, 2023, following a duly noticed public hearing, the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission (“Planning Commission”) approved the following entitlements for the 101 Project (File No. P22-0124), subject to applicable conditions of approval for the 101 Project (“101 COAs”): • CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 Consistency Checklist (“101 15183 Consistency Checklist”) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 101 Project (“101 MMRP”). 236 3 #526139986_v1 • Design Review (DR22-0038) (“101 Design Review”), and • Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM22-0008) (“101 TDM Plan”) The entitlements for the 101 Project described in this Recital J, and listed on Exhibit B.1, are collectively referred to herein as the “101 Project Approvals.” L. On [DATE], following a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve this Agreement and adopt the Resolutions and Ordinances described in Recitals M through O for the Projects. M. On [DATE], after a duly noticed public hearing, by Resolution ____, the City Council certified the Project Environmental Impact Report (SCH# 2023110023) for the 131 Project (“131 EIR”) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code §§ 2100 et seq. (“CEQA”) and the CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, §§ 15000 et seq.). The 131 EIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts of development of the 131 Project. Concurrent with its certification of the 131 EIR, and by the same resolution, the City Council duly adopted CEQA findings of fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the 131 Project (“131 MMRP”). The Statement of Overriding Considerations carefully considered each of the 131 Project’s significant and unavoidable impacts identified in the 131 EIR and determined that each such impact is acceptable in light of the 131 Project’s economic, legal, social, technological and other benefits. The 131 MMRP identifies all mitigation measures identified in the 131 EIR a program for monitoring or reporting on the implementation of such mitigation measures for the 131 Project. N. On [DATE], after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council duly adopted the following resolution and introduced the following ordinances granting certain land use entitlements for Development of the 131 Project, subject to applicable conditions of approval (“131 COAs”): • General Plan Amendment, Resolution No. _____ (“131 GPA”) • Specific Plan Amendment, Resolution No. _____ (“131 SPA”) • Rezoning to Planned Development, Ordinance No. _____(“131 Rezoning”) • Site Plan and Architectural Review, Resolution No. ____ (“131 Arch Review”) • Transportation Demand Management (“TDM”) Plan, Resolution No. ___ (“131 TDM Plan”). The entitlements described in this Recital N, and listed on Exhibit B.2, are collectively referred to herein as the “131 Project Approvals.” O. In addition, on [DATE], after a duly noticed public hearing, the City Council duly adopted the following resolution and introduced the following ordinance granting certain land use entitlements for Development of the Projects: 237 4 #526139986_v1 • Vesting Tentative Map Resolution No. _____ for the Properties (“VTM”), and • Ordinance No. [___] introducing, approving and authorizing the execution of this Agreement. P. The Projects have been designed to fulfill the Development vision of the Project Approvals consistent with the City’s land use policies and regulations, and to secure Developers ability to achieve the Development potential of the Properties at an appropriate level of growth. Q. In thereafter adopting Ordinance No. [____] (the “Enabling Ordinance”) on [DATE], the City Council found that this Agreement is consistent with the General Plan, Specific Plan and Title 20 of the SSFMC and has followed all necessary proceedings in accordance with the City’s rules and regulations for the approval of this Agreement. The Enabling Ordinance was effective thirty (30) days later on [DATE]. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, pursuant to the authority contained in Government Code sections 65864 through 65869.5 and Chapter 19.60 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code in effect on the Effective Date and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS “Administrative Agreement Amendment” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 7.2 of this Agreement. “Administrative Project Amendment” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 7.1 of this Agreement. “Affiliate” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. “Agreement” shall mean this Development Agreement. “Applicable Law” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 6.3 of this Agreement. “CEQA” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. “Childcare Space” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.3(a)(1) of this Agreement. “City” shall mean the City of South San Francisco. “City Council” shall mean the City of South San Francisco City Council. “City Law” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 6.5 of this Agreement. 238 5 #526139986_v1 “Control,” “controlled,” and “controlling” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 8.1 of this Agreement. “Direct Community Benefits” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.3 of this Agreement. “Default” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.1 of this Agreement. “Deficiencies” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 9.2 of this Agreement. “Developer” and/or “Developers” shall have the meanings in the introductory paragraph. “Development” or “Develop” shall mean the division or subdivision of land into one or more parcels; the construction, reconstruction, conversion, structural alteration, relocation, improvement, maintenance, or enlargement of any structure; any excavation, fill, grading, landfill, or land disturbance; the construction of specified road, path, trail, transportation, water, sewer, electric, communications, and wastewater infrastructure directly related to the Project whether located within or outside the Project Site; the installation of landscaping and other facilities and improvements necessary or appropriate for the Project; and any use or extension of the use of land. “Development Fees” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.2 of this Agreement. “Effective Date” shall have that meaning set forth in the Section 2.1 of this Agreement. “Enabling Ordinance” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital Q of this Agreement. “Force Majeure Delay” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. “GDP” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. “General Plan” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital G of this Agreement. “Government Code” shall have the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph. “gsf” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital C of this Agreement. “Initial Leasing Period” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.3(a)(2) of this Agreement. “Judgment” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 9.2 of this Agreement. “Legal Challenge” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 9.1 of this Agreement. “Marketing and Leasing Efforts” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.3(a)(2) of this Agreement. 239 6 #526139986_v1 “Monetary Contribution” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.4(a). “Mortgage” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 11.10 of this Agreement. “Mortgagee” shall mean the beneficiary of any Mortgage. “Notice of Force Majeure Delay” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. “Party” and/or Parties” shall have the meaning set forth in the introductory paragraph. “Periodic Review” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.5 of this Agreement. “Planning Commission” shall mean the Planning Commission of the City of South San Francisco. “Processing Fees” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 3.2 of this Agreement. “Project” or “Projects” are defined in Recital D and shall mean, as applicable, the Development on a Property as contemplated by the Project Approvals and, as, when, and if they are issued, the Subsequent Approvals, including, without limitation, the permitted uses, density and intensity of uses, and maximum size and height of buildings specified in the Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals may be further defined or modified pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement. “Project Approvals” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital D of this Agreement. “Property” or “Properties” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital D of this Agreement. “R&D” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital C of this Agreement. “Severe Economic Recession” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 10.3 of this Agreement. “Specific Plan” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital G of this Agreement. “SSFMC” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital B of this Agreement. “Subsequent Approvals” shall mean those certain other land use approvals, entitlements, and permits other than the Project Approvals that are necessary or desirable for the Project, as applicable. In particular, for example and without limitation, the Parties contemplate that a Developer may, at its election, seek approvals for the following: amendments of the Project Approvals; improvement agreements; grading permits; demolition permits; building permits; lot line adjustments; sewer, water, and utility connection permits; certificates of occupancy; further subdivision map approvals; parcel map approvals; resubdivisions; zoning and rezoning approvals; conditional use permits; minor use permits; sign permits; any subsequent approvals required by other state or federal entities for Development and implementation of their Project that are sought 240 7 #526139986_v1 or agreed to in writing by a Developer; and any amendments to, or repealing of, any of the foregoing. “Term” shall have that meaning set forth in Section 2.2 of this Agreement. “VTM” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital O of this Agreement. “101 15183 Consistency Checklist” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital K of this Agreement. “101 Design Review” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital K of this Agreement. “101 Developer” shall mean US Terminal Court Owner, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. “101 MMRP” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital K of this Agreement. “101 Project” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C of this Agreement. “101 Project Approvals” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital K of this Agreement. “101 Property” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital C of this Agreement. “101 TDM Plan” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital K of this Agreement. “131 Arch Review” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. “131 COAs” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. “131 Developer” shall mean US 131 Terminal Court Owner, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company. “131 Developer Bikeway Contribution” shall have the meeting set forth in Section 3.4(b) of this Agreement. “131 EIR” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. “131 GPA” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. “131 Ground Lease Option” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital D of this Agreement. “131 Project” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital D of this Agreement. “131 Project Approvals.” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. “131 Property” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital D of this Agreement. “131 Property Owner” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital D of this Agreement. 241 8 #526139986_v1 “131 MMRP” shall have that meaning set forth in Recital M of this Agreement. “131 Rezoning” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. “131 SPA” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. “131 TDM Plan” shall have the meaning set forth in Recital N of this Agreement. To the extent that any defined terms contained in this Agreement are not defined above, then such terms shall have the meaning otherwise ascribed to them elsewhere in this Agreement, or if not in this Agreement, then by controlling law, including the SSFMC. ARTICLE 2 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM 2.1 Effective Date. This Agreement is effective as of the date of the Enabling Ordinance defined in Recital Q is effective (“Effective Date”) and the Effective Date shall be inserted on the cover page prior to recordation. 2.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall commence upon the Effective Date and continue (unless this Agreement is otherwise terminated or extended as provided in this Agreement) until twelve (12) years plus one (1) day after the Effective Date (“Term”), as such Term may be extended by Force Majeure Delay pursuant to Section 10.3, or mutual, written agreement of the Parties pursuant to Section 7.2(b). At Developers’ discretion and upon written notice to the City, the Developers may extend the Term of this Agreement for five (5) additional years (“Extension Term”) if Developers have obtained a temporary certificate of occupancy for a minimum of seven hundred thousand (700,000) gsf of the proposed buildings approved in connection with the 101 Project or 131 Project within seven years of the Effective Date. ARTICLE 3 OBLIGATIONS OF DEVELOPER 3.1 Obligations of Developers Generally; No Joint and Several Liability. The Parties acknowledge and agree that City’s agreement to perform and abide by the covenants and obligations of City set forth in this Agreement is a material consideration for each Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by its long-term covenants and obligations, as set forth herein. The Parties acknowledge that many of each Developer’s long-term obligations set forth in this Agreement are in addition to each Developer’s agreement to perform all the applicable mitigation measures required by CEQA. Failure by a Developer to make any of the payments or provide the community benefits called for in this Article 3 applicable to such Developer’s Project at the times and in the amounts specified shall constitute a default by such Developer subject to the provisions of Article 10 of this Agreement. Each Developer is responsible only for that Developer’s Project and Property, and therefore, the Developers are not jointly and severally liable for the obligations of the other Developer and there shall be no cross defaults under this Agreement. 3.2 City Processing and Development Fees. 242 9 #526139986_v1 (a) Processing Fees. Developer shall pay those processing, building permit, inspection and plan checking fees and charges required by City for processing applications and requests for Subsequent Approvals for such Developer’s Project (“Processing Fees”) under the applicable regulations in effect at the time such applications and requests are submitted to City. (b) Development Fees. Consistent with the terms of the Agreement, City shall have the right to impose only such categories of development fees (“Development Fees”) as had been adopted by City and in effect as of the date the VTM application was determined to be complete (August 28, 2025, as set forth in Exhibit C.1 and Exhibit C.2. No new development impact fees beyond those listed in Exhibit C.1 and Exhibit C.2 shall apply to the Project for the Term of this Agreement. The Development Fees shall be paid at the rates in effect at the time of payment. Development Fees shall be paid at the time set forth in Exhibit C.1 and Exhibit C.2 except as otherwise provided in Article 3 of this Agreement. This Section 3.2(b) shall not prohibit City from imposing on a Developer any fee or obligation that is imposed by a regional agency or the State of California in accordance with state or federal obligations and required to be implemented by City, unless and to the extent that such obligation permits the City to not apply such fee or obligation to projects that are subject to vesting pursuant to a VTM or development agreement. 3.3 Community Benefits. In connection with the construction of the Projects, the Developer shall do the following, as applicable to each Developer’s Project and all as set forth in this Section 3.3. The obligations contained in this Section 3.3 and subsequent Section 3.4 establish a monetary value for several direct Project commitments that are consistent with the City’s priorities for the Community Benefits Program (the “Direct Community Benefits”) and apply these toward the total value due to the City pursuant to the Community Benefits Program and Childcare Impact Fee. The Direct Community Benefits specified in this Section 3.3 satisfy such Developer’s obligations pursuant to SSFMC Section 20.395.003.A.2(c)(2) requiring that developers enter into Community Benefits Agreements in exchange for FAR increases between 1.0 and 2.5. For purposes of this Agreement, if the specified conditions set forth in this Agreement are met, the City shall apply the value of the following Direct Community Benefits as credits against the estimated Community Benefits Fee and Childcare Impact Fee that would otherwise be due pursuant to SSFMC Section 20.395.003 , with a total credit value of Twenty-Three Million Dollars ($23,000,000). The Parties agree that to assist with administration and tracking of the Direct Community Benefits that apply as a credit against otherwise applicable Community Benefit Fees, the Community Benefit Fee calculation and rate shall occur and be fixed at the rate in effect at issuance of building permit but be owed (if any amount is owing based on Direct Community Benefits satisfied at the time) at final certificate of occupancy for each building and only applicable after each Project as exceeded a Floor Area Ratio of 1.0. The intent of the Parties is to reduce the administrative burden on the City to track credits or issue refunds and to minimize the obligation of the Developers to pay Community Benefit Fees that would otherwise be satisfied by compliance with this Agreement. As part of the DA Annual Review process the Parties will meet and confer to assess this process and make reasonable adjustments. (a) Childcare Space. The 131 Developer shall do the following with respect to the provision of childcare facilities within the 131 Project: 243 10 #526139986_v1 (1) Child Care Provider and Childcare Space Design and Construction. 131 Developer shall comply with the Marketing and Leasing Efforts (defined in (2) below) to endeavor to secure a childcare provider to occupy and operate the Childcare Space (defined below) in accordance with the requirements of this Section. Any agreement with a childcare provider shall include the terms and conditions outlined in this Section as applicable. If the 131 Developer is successful in securing a childcare provider, then the 131 Developer will design and construct an approximately four thousand fifty (4,050) to ten thousand (10,000) leasable gsf of leasable space suitable for the operation of a childcare facility to serve both the on-site employer(s) and the public with commercially typical tenant improvements (“Childcare Space”) in the location identified in the 131 Project Approvals prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the fourth (4th) building within the Project. The Childcare Space shall have the capacity to provide care for a minimum of fifty-five (55) children. The Childcare Space will prioritize at least twenty-five percent (25%) of total enrollment annually to residents of the City. If 131 Developer complies with the terms of this Section, the City will consider approximately Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000) of the cost of such Day Care Center and resident enrollment priority as a credit against the otherwise applicable Childcare Impact Fee. Any remaining credit after the satisfaction of the otherwise applicable Childcare Impact Fee shall be considered a Direct Community Benefit and a credit against the otherwise applicable Community Benefits Fee. If the 131 Project is built in phases that do not include the fourth (4th) building and does not include the Childcare Space, such buildings will pay the Childcare Impact Fee when due and such amount will be credited against the total amount owed between the applicable Childcare Impact Fee, first, and the Community Benefit Fee for the fourth (4th) building (or the Childcare Space Payment if elected). Alternatively, prior to when the Childcare Space is required pursuant to this Section 3.3(a)(1), Developer may elect to instead make a payment of $4,000,000 (“Childcare Space Payment”) adjusted by the percentage increase in the CPI calculated from the month of the Effective Date through the month prior to the day the Childcare Space Payment is paid. If paid, the Developer shall receive a credit in the amount of actual payment (as adjust by CPI) as a Direct Community Benefit and a credit against the otherwise applicable Community Benefits Fee. (2) Childcare Space Marketing Efforts. The City and 131 Developer acknowledge and agree that the intent is that the Childcare Space will be used for a childcare purposes. The 131 Developer will make good faith efforts to market and lease the Childcare Space to a qualified childcare operator (“Marketing and Leasing Efforts”) 244 11 #526139986_v1 and will provide the City regular updates (not less than quarterly) on these Marketing and Leasing Efforts until a lease is entered into with a tenant. 131 Developer shall offer the Childcare Space for a minimum twelve (12) year term at an initial triple net rent rate that does not exceed a fair market rent rate consistent with this Agreement. 131 Developer will promptly notify City when a tenant providing childcare services has executed a lease of the Childcare Space. If the 131 Developer does not elect to pay the Childcare Space Payment as provided in Section 3.3(a)(1), above, this Section 3.3(a)(2) shall survive termination of this Agreement through the Initial Leasing Period. If the 131 Developer elects to pay the Childcare Space Payment, this Section 3.3(a)(2) shall have no further force or effect. (b) Point of Sale for Project Construction. Pursuant to the authority granted by the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration (CDTFA) allowing construction contractors with contracts valued at $5 million or more to obtain a sub-permit enabling contractors to designate the jurisdiction of the jobsite as the point of sale for sales tax allocation, each Developer agrees, to the extent allowed by law, to, prior to issuance of building permit on such Developer’s Property, require all persons and entities providing materials to be used in connection with the construction and development of, or incorporated into, the applicable Project, including by way of illustration but not limitation, bulk lumber, concrete, structural steel, roof trusses and other pre- fabricated building components, to obtain such a sub-permit and allocate sales tax directly to the City ensuring that the City will collect a larger share of local sales/use tax for the Project than it would otherwise receive without this designation. Each Developer shall instruct its general contractor(s) to, and shall cause such general contractor(s) to instruct its/their subcontractors to, cooperate with City or City’s consultant to ensure the local sales/use tax derived from construction of the Developer’s Project is allocated to City to the fullest extent possible and to the extent allowed by law. This Section 3.3 shall not apply to tenants who perform their own tenant improvement work. To assist City or City’s consultant in its efforts to ensure that such local sales/use tax is so allocated to City, each Developer shall on an annual basis, or as frequently as quarterly upon City’s or City’s consultant request, provide City or City’s consultant with such information as shall be reasonably requested by City or City’s consultant regarding subcontractors working on the Developer’s Project with contracts in excess of the amount set forth above, including a description of all applicable work and materials and the dollar value of such subcontracts, and, if applicable, evidence of their designation, such as approvals or applications for the direct payment permit, of City as the place of use of such work and materials. City or City’s consultant may use such information to contact each subcontractor who may qualify for local allocation of use taxes to City. The City’s sole and exclusive remedy for any failure of any general contractor(s) or subcontractor(s) to allocate sales and use tax revenues as provided herein or to comply with this Section 3.3(b) will be specific performance. The City estimates a credit a of Six Million Dollar ($6,000,000) of sales tax revenue generated for full buildout of both the 101 Project and the 131 Projects as a Direct Community Benefit in accordance with this Section 3.3(b). After a total of Six Million Dollars ($6,000,000) has been generated to the benefit of the City, the Developer(s) and City will continue to track and record the amounts generated and any amount over Six Million Dollars ($6,000,000) and such additional amounts shall be creditable against the Community Benefit Fee that would otherwise be due under: (i) the Childcare Space Payment in 245 12 #526139986_v1 Section 3.3(a)(1), (ii) any amounts due under Section 3.3(c) (if any) related to the all- electric buildings, and/or (iii) any increase in amount of the Community Benefit Fee over $20 per square foot for any Floor Area Ratio over 1.0 on either Project. The Parties will meet and confer to determine the most efficient and effective method to document and track this sales tax revenue generated and make reasonable and good faith modifications if necessary over time to allow for accurate tracking and reduce the administrative burden on the City. If within six (6) months of the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy for either the 101 Project or the 131 Project, it is determined that, the sales tax allocation to the City resulting from the point of sale designation pursuant to this Section from construction derived less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000) for the 101 Project at full build out or Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000) for the 131 Project at full build out, then each Developer shall immediately pay their respective difference between the amount of the allocation and the amount used for the Direct Community Benefit under this Section for their respective Project. To the extent the actual proceeds under this Section exceed the City’s estimate for either Project, such excess shall inure to the benefit of the other Project. . (c) All Electric Buildings. Each Developer has committed to constructing one hundred percent (100%) electric buildings, furthering the City’s Climate Action Plan goals by avoiding use of natural gas. The City will consider approximately fifty percent (50%) of the added upfront cost of this commitment for all square footage proposed in the Project Approvals, or Twelve Million Dollars ($12,000,000) total, allocated in the amount of Three Million Four Hundred and Eighty Thousand Dollars ($3,480,000) to the 101 Project and Eight Millon Five Hundred and Twenty Thousand Dollars ($8,520,000) to the 131 Project, as a Direct Community Benefit toward mitigating the impacts of sea level rise. If during the Term, electric building construction becomes a statutory or regulatory requirement under the California Building Code or other equivalent building code applicable to the Project, then Developers shall not receive any credit for electric construction for any future buildings and shall pay five dollars ($5) per square foot Community Benefits Fee for any new square footage proposed for development under the Project Approvals, which shall be adjusted by the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for the San Francisco-Oakland-Hayward (“CPI”) calculated from the month of the Effective Date through the month prior to the day of payment. Such Community Benefits Fee shall be paid at issuance of certificate of occupancy for any buildings that are constructed under the Project Approvals after the effective date of the applicable legal requirement mandating all electric construction. 3.4 Other Developer Commitments. (a) Monetary Contribution. In exchange for the City’s commitments, Project Approvals, and concessions provided for in this Agreement, each Developer shall pay the City an additional monetary contribution for each respective project in the total amount of Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) (“Monetary Contribution”), which shall be paid in the amounts and at the times listed below (“Monetary Contribution Payments”). The City, in its sole discretion, may allocate and spend the Monetary Contribution for any authorized governmental purpose. (i) Upon the first (1st) anniversary of the Effective Date, the 101 Developer shall make a payment of One Hundred and Fifty Thousand ($350,000) for the 101 Project and the 131 Developer shall make a payment of Three Hundred and Fifty for the 131 Project 246 13 #526139986_v1 ($650,000) towards the total Monetary Contribution (the “Initial Monetary Contribution Payment ”); and (ii) Upon the third (3rd) anniversary of the Effective Date, the 101 Developer shall make a payment of One Hundred and Fifty Thousand ($350,000) for the 101 Project and the 131 Developer shall make a payment of Three Hundred and Fifty for the 131 Project ($650,000) towards the total Monetary Contribution (the “Second Monetary Contribution Payment”); and (iii) Upon the fifth (5th) anniversary of the Effective Date, the 101 Developer shall make an additional payment of One Hundred and Fifty Thousand ($350,000) for the 101 Project and the 131 Developer shall make an additional payment of Three Hundred and Fifty ($650,000) for the 131 Project towards the total Monetary Contribution (the “Third Monetary Contribution Payment”). (iv) In lieu of paying the Third Monetary Contribution Payment as of the fifth (5th) anniversary date, each Developer may elect to provide written notice to the City of its desire to terminate this Agreement as to each Developer’s respective project. (v) For any Monetary Contribution Payment made by each Developer, each Developer shall provide written confirmation of payment to the City which identifies the obligation and the portion of the Monetary Contribution that is being paid. (vi) The obligation to satisfy the Monetary Contribution, or the right to receive credit for prior completion of the Monetary Contribution, or any portion thereof, may be assigned in connection with any assignment and assumption of rights under Article 8 of this Agreement. (vii) If a Developer does not provide any Monetary Contribution Payment when due for such Developer’s respective project, City will provide notice to such Developer of their failure to pay and afford an opportunity for such Developer to cure by submitting payment within ten (10) business days from receipt of such notice. Failure by the City to provide such notice shall not be deemed as a waiver of the requirement to make any Monetary Contribution Payment. (viii) Once paid, no Monetary Contribution Payment is refundable in the event either Developer do not pursue development of their respective project or elects to terminate this Agreement as of the 247 14 #526139986_v1 fifth (5th) anniversary of the Effective Date as to their respective property or as to the 131 Developer pursuant to Section 11.13. (b) Transportation and Circulation Improvements. Within the earlier of (i) construction of one million two hundred fifty thousand (1.25) gsf of the development within either or both the 101 Project and/or 131 Project or (ii) ten (10) years of the Effective Date if any amount of development has occurred on 131 Project, the 131 Developer shall improve public access and connectivity around the 131 Property by constructing, at its sole cost and expense, a Class IV Bikeway as described in Mitigation Measure TRANS-1 subsection (3) of the 131 EIR (“Bikeway”). The City will consider a maximum of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) of the cost of such Bikeway as a Direct Community Benefit for the 131 Project. If, during the Term of this Agreement, City elects, in its sole and absolute discretion, to construct the Bikeway prior to Developer’s commencement of construction of the Bikeway, then Developer shall contribute One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) towards the cost of City’s construction of the Bikeway (“131 Developer Bikeway Contribution”). Developer shall make the 131 Developer Bikeway Contribution with the later of: (i) thirty (30) days of the City’s filing of a notice of completion for the Bikeway project or (ii) or ten (10) years from the Effective Date of this Agreement and any amount of development has occurred on the 131 Project. For the purposes of clarity, if the 131 Developer does not develop any part of the 131 Project by the time this Agreement terminates, the 131 Developer has no affirmative obligation to either build or fund the Bikeway. (c) Transportation Demand Management Plan. Each Developer shall implement the TDM Plan approved by the City applicable to such Developer’s Project to reduce the Project-related single occupancy vehicle trips and to encourage the use of public transit and alternate modes of transportation. Each TDM Plan is designed to ensure that a minimum of fifty percent (50%) of mode shift from single occupancy vehicle trips shall be achieved and maintained, and shall be implemented through one or more individual TDM plans. Each Developer shall comply with all annual reporting obligations associated with the TDM Plan as outlined in SSFMC § 20.400.006. (d) Public Open Space. 131 Developer and 101 Developer shall each provide publicly accessible open space as part of the 131 Project and 101 Project, respectively, substantially in the size and in the locations provided in the 131 Project Approvals and 101 Project Approvals, and improved with active and passive recreation amenities, as provided in the 131 Project Approvals and 101 Project Approvals, respectively. Nothing in this Agreement shall prohibit the 101 Developer and the 131 Developer from each enacting reasonable rules and regulations for the usage of such open space on the 101 Project and 131 Project, respectively, including regulations related to hours of operation, security, and conduct within such open space. The City and each Developer will meet and confer in good faith to review requests to accommodate specific security needs, specialized employee amenities and/or exclusive tenant use areas or times that are requested for the tenant’s commercially reasonable business needs while ensuring appropriate public access with respect to such Developer’s project. (e) Sustainability Commitments. Each Developer shall implement the sustainability features identified in the applicable Project Approvals. For ease of reference only, a 248 15 #526139986_v1 list of these sustainability features for the 101 Project and 131 Project are attached as Exhibit D.1 and Exhibit D.2, respectively. (f) Mitigation Measures. Each Developer shall comply with the mitigation measures identified and approved in accordance with CEQA or other law as identified and as set forth in the appliable MMRP for each Developer’s Project. (g) Utility Relocation and Replacement. Each Developer, each at its sole cost, shall be responsible for all on-site work to relocate and upgrade required utilities and infrastructure required by such Developer’s Project Approvals. As each phase of utilities infrastructure is built, it is anticipated that the constructed public infrastructure will be dedicated to and accepted by the City, as set forth in the Project Approvals. ARTICLE 4 OBLIGATIONS OF CITY 4.1 Obligations of City Generally The Parties acknowledge and agree that each Developer’s agreement to perform and abide by its covenants and obligations set forth in this Agreement, including each Developer’s decision to site their Project in the City, is a material consideration for City’s agreement to perform and abide by the long-term covenants and obligations of City, as set forth herein. 4.2 Protection of Vested Rights City acknowledges that the vested rights provided to each Developer by this Agreement might prevent some City Law from applying to the Projects or prevailing over all or any part of this Agreement. City further acknowledges that each Developer’s vested rights to Development of each Developer’s Property include the rights provided by the Project Approvals or the Subsequent Approvals, as applicable, which may not be diminished by the enactment or adoption of City Law, except as provided in this Agreement. City shall cooperate with each Developer and shall consider undertaking actions mutually agreed by the applicable Parties as necessary to ensure that this Agreement remains in full force and effect. 4.3 Availability of Public Services To the maximum extent permitted by law and consistent with its authority, City shall reasonably assist each Developer in reserving such capacity for sewer and water services as may be necessary to serve such Developer’s Project. 4.4 Developer’s Right to Temporary Uses and Right to Rebuild City agrees that, during the Term of this Agreement, each Developer may use their respective property for temporary uses prior to full build-out, including but not limited to commercial parking uses, approved by the Planning Director, which approval shall not be unreasonably delayed, withheld or conditioned, and shall have the right to renovate or rebuild all or any part of such Developer’s Project should it become necessary due to damage or destruction, or if any buildings become functionally outdated, within Developer’s sole discretion. Any such renovation or rebuilding shall be subject to the square footage and height limitations vested by this Agreement, and shall comply with the Project Approvals, the building codes existing at the time of such rebuilding or reconstruction, and the requirements of CEQA. 4.5 Project Coordination and Expedited Processing City shall perform those obligations of City set forth in this Agreement, which the City acknowledges are essential for each 249 16 #526139986_v1 Developer to perform its obligations in Article 3, as applicable. City and each Developer shall use good faith and diligent efforts to communicate, cooperate and coordinate during Development of each Project. In addition, upon Developers’ payment of applicable expedited processing costs and/or fees, the City agrees to provide an expedited plan check process for the approval of each Project’s improvement and building plans consistent with its existing practices for expedited plan checks. City will use reasonable efforts to provide such plan checks within three (3) weeks of a Developer’s submittal that meets the requirements of Section 5.2. City acknowledges that the City’s timely processing of Subsequent Approvals and plan checks is essential to the successful and complete Development of each Project. 4.6 Estoppel Certificates Each Developer may at any time, and from time to time, deliver to City notice requesting that City certify to such Developer, a potential transferee pursuant to Article 8, a potential lender to Developer, or a Mortgagee in writing: (i) that this Agreement is in full force and effect and creates binding obligations on the City and requesting Developer; (ii) that this Agreement has not been amended or modified, or if so amended or modified, identifying such amendments or modifications; (iii) that the requesting Developer is not in Default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in Default, identifying the nature, extent and status of any such Default; and (iv) the findings of the City with respect to the most recent Periodic Review performed pursuant to Section 10.5 of this Agreement as to the requesting Developer. The City Manager or his or her designee, acting on behalf of City, shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) calendar days after receipt of the request. ARTICLE 5 COOPERATION – IMPLEMENTATION 5.1 Processing Application for Subsequent Approvals By approving the Project Approvals, City has made a final policy decision that each Project is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare of the City. Accordingly, in considering any application for a Subsequent Approval, to the maximum extent permitted by law, City shall not use its discretionary authority to revisit, frustrate, or change the policy decisions or material terms reflected by the Project Approvals, or otherwise to prevent or delay Development of either Project. Instead, the Subsequent Approvals shall be deemed to be tools to implement those final policy decisions. 5.2 Submittals By Developer Developers each acknowledges that City cannot process Subsequent Approvals until each Developer submits applications and processes them in a complete and timely manner. Each Developer, as it submits applications for Subsequent Approvals, shall use its best efforts to (i) provide to City any and all documents, applications, plans, and other information necessary for City to carry out its obligations hereunder; and (ii) cause Developer’s planners, engineers, and all other consultants to provide responses to City requests for necessary documents, applications, plans and other necessary required materials as set forth in the Applicable Law in a timely and good faith manner appropriate to the context. 5.3 Timely Processing By City Upon submission by a Developer of all appropriate applications and processing fees for any Subsequent Approval, City shall, to the maximum extent permitted by law, promptly and diligently commence and complete all steps necessary to act on the Subsequent Approval application including, without limitation: (i) providing at the submitting 250 17 #526139986_v1 Developer’s expense and subject to the submitting Developer’s request and prior approval, reasonable overtime staff assistance and/or staff consultants for planning and processing of each Subsequent Approval application; (ii) if legally required, providing notice and holding public hearings; and (iii) acting on any such Subsequent Approval application. City shall ensure that adequate staff is available, and shall authorize overtime staff assistance as may be necessary, to timely process any such Subsequent Approval application. 5.4 Other Government Permits At each Developer’s sole discretion and in accordance with each Developer’s construction schedule, each Developer shall apply for such other permits and approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasi-governmental entities in connection with the Development of, or the provision of services to, such applying Developer’s Project. City, at the applying Developer’s expense, shall cooperate with the applying Developer in its efforts to obtain such permits and approvals and shall, from time to time, at the request of the applying Developer, use its reasonable efforts to assist the applying Developer to ensure the timely availability of such permits and approvals. 5.5 Assessment Districts or Other Funding Mechanisms (a) Existing Fees. As set forth in Section 3.2, above, the Parties understand and agree that as of the Effective Date the fees, exactions, and payments listed in Exhibit C.1 and Exhibit C.2 are the only City fees and exactions that apply to each Project, as applicable. (b) Application of Fees Imposed by Outside Agencies. City agrees to exempt each Developer from any and all fees, including but not limited to, development impact fees, which other public agencies request City to impose at City’s discretion on each Project and/or Property after the Effective Date through the expiration of the Term. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, in the event that another public agency requests that City impose a fee, including a development impact fee on all new development and land use projects on a citywide (applicable Plan Area-wide) basis, then any such fee duly adopted by City shall apply to the Projects, unless such request permits the City to exempt projects that are subject to vesting pursuant to a VTM or development agreement. This Section 5.5(b) shall not prohibit City from imposing on Developer any fee or obligation that is imposed by a regional agency in accordance with state or federal obligations implemented by City in cooperation with such regional agency, or that is imposed by the State of California, unless such fee or obligation permits the City to exempt projects that are subject to vesting pursuant to a VTM or development agreement. ARTICLE 6 STANDARDS, LAWS AND PROCEDURES GOVERNING THE PROJECT 6.1 Vested Right to Develop Each Developer shall have a vested right to Development of their Project on their Property, as applicable, in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals, the Subsequent Approvals (as, when, and if they are issued), and Applicable Law, provided, however, that this Agreement shall not supersede, diminish, or impinge upon vested rights secured pursuant to other Applicable Laws, including without limitation, vested rights secured in connection with a vesting tentative subdivision map pursuant to the California Subdivision Map Act (Gov’t. Code §§ 66410 et seq.). Nothing in this section shall be deemed to eliminate or diminish the requirement of each Developer to obtain any 251 18 #526139986_v1 required Subsequent Approvals, or to eliminate or diminish each Developer’s right to have its applications for any Subsequent Approval timely processed by City in accordance with this Agreement and Applicable Law. 6.2 Permitted Uses Vested by This Agreement The vested permitted uses of each Project Site; the vested density and intensity of use of Property; the vested maximum height, bulk, and size of proposed buildings; vested provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes and the location of public improvements; the general location of public utilities; and other vested terms and conditions of Development applicable to each Project, shall be as set forth in the vested applicable Project Approvals and, as and when they are issued (but not in limitation of any right to Development as set forth in the Project Approvals) the vested Subsequent Approvals. The vested permitted uses for each Project shall include those uses listed as “permitted” in the applicable Project Approvals, as they may be amended from time to time in accordance with this Agreement. 6.3 Applicable Law The rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications applicable to each Project (the “Applicable Law”) shall be those set forth in this Agreement and the applicable Project Approvals, and, with respect to matters not addressed by this Agreement or the applicable Project Approvals, those rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications (including City ordinances and resolutions) governing permitted uses, building locations, timing of construction, densities, design, heights, and fees in force and effect on the Effective Date of this Agreement. A list of Applicable Law is provided in Exhibit F. 6.4 Uniform Codes City may apply to the Project Site, at any time during the Term, then current Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical, and Fire Code and other uniform construction codes, and City’s then current design and construction standards for road and storm drain facilities, provided any such uniform code or standard has been adopted and uniformly applied by City on a citywide basis and provided that no such code or standard is adopted for the purpose of preventing or otherwise limiting Development of all or any part of the Project. 6.5 No Conflicting Enactments Each Developer’s vested right to Development of such Developer’s Project, as applicable, shall not be diminished by City approval (whether by action of the City Council or by initiative, referendum or other means) of any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, or standard, that has legal force and affect (each individually, a “City Law”) that is in conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or that reduces the rights or assurances provided by this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, any City Law shall be deemed to conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or reduce the Development rights provided hereby if it would accomplish any of the following results, either by specific reference to each Project or as part of a general enactment which applies to or affects each Project: (a) Change any land use designation or permitted use of either Project or Property, as applicable; (b) Prevent the availability of public utilities, services, or facilities, or any privileges or rights to public utilities, services, or facilities (for example, water rights, water connections or sewage capacity rights, sewer connections, etc.) for either Project, as applicable, 252 19 #526139986_v1 provided that such Developer has complied with all applicable requirements for receiving or using public utilities, services, or facilities; (c) Prevent the location of buildings, structures, grading, or other improvements of either Project, as applicable, in a manner that is materially inconsistent with or materially more restrictive than the limitations included in the Project Approvals or the Subsequent Approvals (as and when they are issued); (d) Limit or control the rate, timing, phasing, or sequencing of the Development of all or any part of either Project, as applicable, in any manner; (e) Result in a Developer having to substantially delay Development of their Project or require the issuance of additional permits or approvals by City other than those required by Applicable Law; (f) Establish, enact, or impose against either Project or Property any fees, liens or other similar monetary obligations (including generating demolition permit fees, encroachment permit and grading permit fees) other than those specifically permitted by this Agreement or other connection fees imposed by third party utilities; (g) Impose against either Project any condition, dedication or other exaction not specifically authorized by Applicable Law; or (h) Limit the processing or procuring of applications and approvals of Subsequent Approvals for either Project. 6.6 Initiatives and Referenda; Other City Actions Related to Project (a) If any City Law is enacted or imposed by initiative or referendum, or by the City Council directly or indirectly in connection with any proposed initiative or referendum, which City Law would conflict with Applicable Law or this Agreement or reduce the Development rights provided by this Agreement, such Law shall only apply to either Project to the extent it would not diminish Developer’s vested rights to Development of either Project. (b) Except as authorized in Section 6.10, without limiting the generality of any of the foregoing, no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of Development) affecting subdivision maps, building permits or other entitlements to use that are approved or to be approved, issued or granted by the City shall diminish either Developer’s vested rights to Development of such Developer’s Project. (c) To the maximum extent permitted by law, City shall cooperate with each Developer and shall undertake such actions as may be necessary to ensure this Agreement remains in full force and effect. (d) Each Developer reserves the right to challenge in court any City Law that would reduce the Development rights provided by this Agreement as to its Project or Property, as applicable. 253 20 #526139986_v1 6.7 New Taxes. Any subsequently enacted City-wide taxes shall apply to each Project provided that the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective. Other than agreeing that neither Developer has a vested right against such new taxes, Developer does not waive its right to challenge the legality of any such taxes under the controlling law then in place. 6.8 Assessments. Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve either Property from assessments levied against it by City pursuant to any statutory procedure for the assessment of property to pay for infrastructure and/or services which benefit the Property. This Section 6.8 does not does not waive either Developer’s right to challenge the legality of any such assessments, except as provided herein. 6.9 Vote on Future Taxes, Assessments, and Fees. In the event that any assessment, fee or charge which is applicable to either Property is subject to Article XIIIC or XIIID of the California Constitution and Developer does not return its ballot, Developer agrees, on behalf of itself and its successors, that City may count Developer’s ballot as affirmatively voting in favor of such tax, assessment, fee or charge. 6.10 Environmental Review and Mitigation The City and the 131 Developer acknowledge and agree that the 131 EIR and 131 MMRP were intended to be used in connection with each of the 131 Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals needed for the 131 Project. Consistent with the CEQA policies and requirements, City agrees to use the 131 EIR and 131 MMRP in connection with the processing of any Subsequent Approval to the maximum extent allowed by law and not to impose on the 131 Project any mitigation measures other than those specifically imposed by the 131 EIR and 131 MMRP, or specifically required by CEQA or other Applicable Law, except as provided for in this Section 6.10. The City and 101 Developer acknowledge and agree that the 101 15183 Consistency Checklist and 101 MMRP were intended to be used in connection with each of the 101 Project Approvals and Subsequent Approvals needed for the 101 Project. Consistent with the CEQA policies and requirements, City agrees to use the 101 EIR and 101 MMRP in connection with the processing of any Subsequent Approval to the maximum extent allowed by law and not to impose on the 101 Project any mitigation measures other than those specifically imposed by the 101 15183 Consistency Checklist and 101 MMRP, or specifically required by CEQA or other Applicable Law, except as provided for in this Section 6.10. Without limitation of the foregoing, the Parties acknowledge that Subsequent Approvals may be eligible for one or more statutory or categorical exemptions under CEQA. The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not limit or expand the operation or scope of CEQA, including Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162, with respect to City’s consideration of any Subsequent Approval. Consistent with CEQA, a future, additional CEQA document may be prepared for any Subsequent Approval only to the extent required by Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162, unless otherwise requested in writing by a Developer. Each Developer specifically acknowledges and agrees that, under Public Resources Code section 21166 and California Code of Regulations, title 14, section 15162, City as lead agency is responsible and retains sole discretion to determine whether an additional CEQA document must be prepared, which discretion City agrees it shall not exercise unreasonably or delay. 6.11 Future Legislative Actions 254 21 #526139986_v1 (a) In the event that, following the Effective Date, City revises, modifies, updates, or amends the land use designation(s) of the General Plan, that are applicable to either Property, or the zoning designation(s) applicable to either Property and in effect on the Effective Date, such updates or amendments shall not diminish either Developer’s vested rights to Development of their Project on their Property, but no provision of this Agreement shall limit either Developer’s right to apply for any land use entitlement(s) for their Property, as applicable, that are consistent with, or authorized by, such update(s) or amendment(s). Each Developer acknowledges, however, that the amended or updated policies identified in the immediately preceding sentence might include requirements for permitted development that would be in addition to any obligations of such Developer under this Agreement, and that those additional requirements would apply to each Developer if such Developer applies for any land use entitlement(s) for their Property that are consistent with, or authorized by, any revision, modification, update, or amendment contemplated by this Section 6.11. No provision of this Agreement shall limit or restrain in any way either Developer’s full participation in any and all public processes undertaken by City that are in any way related to revisions, modifications, amendments, or updates to the General Plan or the City of South San Francisco Municipal Code. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that future legislative actions increase the allowable density or development capacities on either Property, any future development application seeking to utilize such increased density or capacity shall not be allowed to utilize any increased parking ratio authorized by this Agreement by-right. (b) Each Developer also acknowledges that, if it applies for any land use entitlement(s) for their Property that are consistent with, or authorized by, any revision, modification, update, or amendment contemplated by this Agreement, and that would allow development of the subject Property in a manner that is inconsistent with, or not authorized by, the applicable Project Approvals, then City may be required to conduct additional CEQA review with respect to such application in accordance with Section 6.10 of this Agreement, and, if such application is finally approved by City and becomes effective, such approval shall automatically be vested under this Agreement only to the extent such approval is consistent with, or authorized by, the applicable Project Approvals. (c) City agrees that, if either Developer applies for any land use entitlement(s) for their Property that are inconsistent with, or not authorized by, the applicable Project Approvals, then: (i) such event shall not be a basis for amending or revisiting the terms of the Agreement, unless such Developer also applies for an amendment of this Agreement pursuant to subsection (b) of Section 7.2(b) of this Agreement (i.e., a non-Administrative Agreement Amendment), and shall not be a basis for imposing new exactions, mitigation requirements, conditions of approval, or any other requirement of, or precondition to, such Developer’s exercise of its Development rights vested under this Agreement for such Developer’s Project; and (d) the only exactions, mitigation requirements, or conditions of approval City may impose on such land use entitlement shall be limited to those exactions, mitigation 255 22 #526139986_v1 requirements, or conditions of approval authorized under federal, state, or local laws in effect at the time such application is deemed complete, and shall only be imposed with respect to those uses, densities, intensities, and other Development standards applicable to the subject parcel(s) that are inconsistent with, or not authorized by, the Project Approvals, as applicable. 6.12 Life of Subdivision Maps, Development Approvals, and Permits The term of any subdivision map or any other map, permit, rezoning, or other land use entitlement approved as a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval shall automatically be extended for the longer of the Term (including any extensions) or the term otherwise applicable to such Project Approval or Subsequent Approval if this Agreement is no longer in effect. The Term of this Agreement and the term of any subdivision map or other Project Approval or Subsequent Approval shall not include any period of time during which a Development moratorium (including, but not limited to, a water or sewer moratorium or water and sewer moratorium) or the actions of other public agencies that regulate land use, Development or the provision of services to the land, prevents, prohibits or delays the construction of the Project or a lawsuit involving any such Development approvals or permits is pending. 6.13 State and Federal Law As provided in Government Code section 65869.5, this Agreement shall not preclude the application to either Project of changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies, to the extent that such changes are specifically mandated and required by changes in state or federal laws or regulations. Not in limitation of the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude City from imposing on either Developer any fee specifically mandated and required by state or federal laws and regulations (except as provided in Section 5.5(b)). In the event of any changes required by state or federal laws or regulations, the affected Developer and City shall meet and confer in good faith to determine what, if any, modifications to this Agreement and/or the Project Approvals would allow the affected Project and City to comply with such state or federal law or regulation while preserving to the maximum extent feasible the spirit and intent of the Parties in this Agreement and the affected Project Approvals. 6.14 Timing and Review of Project Construction and Completion Except as expressly provided in the Project Approvals, each Developer shall have the vested right to Development of their Project in such order, at such rate and at such times as such Developer deems appropriate in the exercise of their sole business judgment. In particular, and not in any limitation of any of the foregoing, since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to consider, and expressly provide for, the timing of Development resulted in a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of Development to prevail over such Parties’ agreement, it is the desire of the Parties hereto to avoid that result. The Parties acknowledge that, except as otherwise provided for in the Project Approvals, each Developer shall have the vested right to Development of their Project on their Property in such order and at such rate and at such times as each Developer deems appropriate in the exercise of their business judgment. Nothing in this Agreement shall create any obligation for either Developer to complete development of their Project, or any portion thereof, but if and when either Developer commenced construction such Developer much comply with any requirements of the Project Approvals, including Subsequent Project Approvals. 256 23 #526139986_v1 ARTICLE 7 AMENDMENT 7.1 Project Amendments To the extent permitted by state and federal law, any Project Approval or Subsequent Approval may, from time to time, be amended or modified in the following manner: (a) Administrative Project Amendments. Upon the written request of either Developer for an amendment or modification to such Developer’s Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals, City’s Chief Planner or his/her designee shall determine: (i) whether the requested amendment or modification is minor when considered in light of the Developer’s Project as a whole; and (ii) whether the requested amendment or modification is consistent with this Agreement and Applicable Law. If the Chief Planner or his/her designee finds that the proposed amendment or modification is minor, consistent with this Agreement and Applicable Law, and will result in no new significant impacts not addressed and mitigated pursuant to Section 6.10, the amendment shall be determined to be an “Administrative Project Amendment” and the Chief Planner or his/her designee may, except to the extent otherwise required by law, approve the Administrative Project Amendment without notice and public hearing. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, lot line adjustments, minor alterations in vehicle circulation patterns or vehicle access points, location of parking stalls on the site, number of required parking stalls if City development standards allow, substitutions of comparable landscaping for any landscaping shown on any final development plan or landscape plan, variations in the location of structures that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, location or installation of utilities and other infrastructure connections or facilities that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, and minor adjustments to the Property diagram or legal description shall be treated as Administrative Project Amendments. Any requested amendment seeking modification of or deviation from the performance or development standards contained in the Municipal Code and which would otherwise require a discretionary approval by the City Council, Planning Commission, or other formal approval body shall not be treated as an Administrative Project Amendment. (b) Non-Administrative Project Amendments. Any request by a Developer for an amendment or modification to their Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals which is determined not to be an Administrative Project Amendment as set forth above shall be subject to review, consideration and action pursuant to the Applicable Law and this Agreement. (c) Project Amendment Exemptions. Except as may be required by Section 7.2 (b), no amendment of a Project Approval or Subsequent Approval, or a Subsequent Approval shall require an amendment to this Agreement. Instead, any such matter automatically shall be deemed to be incorporated into the Project and vested under this Agreement. 7.2 Amendment of this Agreement This Agreement may be amended from time to time, in whole or in part, by mutual written consent of the City and requesting Developer hereto or their successors in interest as to such requesting Developer’s respective project only, as follows: (a) Administrative Agreement Amendments. Any amendment to this Development Agreement which does not substantially affect (i) the Term of this Agreement, (ii) 257 24 #526139986_v1 permitted uses of a Property, (iii) provisions for the reservation or dedication of land, (iv) conditions, terms, restrictions, or requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, (v) the density or intensity of use of the affected Property or the maximum height or size of proposed buildings, (vi) monetary contributions by the requesting Developer, (vii) rights or benefits to Assignee(s), or obligations of the requesting Developer that directly affect any Assignee interests, without written consent of Assignee(s), or (viii) cancellation, in whole or part of this Agreement, shall be considered an “Administrative Agreement Amendment” and shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before the City and requesting Developer may execute an amendment hereto. Administrative Agreement Amendments may be approved by the City Manager or, in the reasonable discretion of the City Manager, the City Manager may refer any proposed Administrative Agreement Amendment to the City Council for consideration and approval or denial. (b) Other Agreement Amendments. Any amendment to this Agreement other than an Administrative Agreement Amendment shall be subject to mutual voluntary agreement by the requesting and/or affected Developer and recommendation by the Planning Commission (by advisory resolution) and approval by the City Council (by ordinance) following a duly noticed public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council, consistent with Government Code sections 65867 and 65867.5. (c) City Costs and Expenses for Processing Amendments to Separate Projects. In the event that either Developer seeks an amendment to this Agreement to separate the rights and obligations applicable to the 131 Project or the 101 Project under this Agreement into two or more agreements, the Developer requesting such amendment shall reimburse the City for all City costs and expenses associated with such amendment to this Agreement, including the cost of staff and City Attorney time. ARTICLE 8 ASSIGNMENT AND TRANSFER 8.1 Assignment and Transfer (a) Either Developer may separately transfer or assign all or any portion of its interests, rights, or obligations under the Agreement and related Project Approvals to third parties acquiring an interest or estate in the transferred Property or any portions thereof including, without limitation, purchasers or lessees of lots, parcels, or facilities. Prior to any such transfer or assignment, the transferring Developer will seek City’s prior written consent thereof, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. City may refuse to give consent only if, in light of the proposed transferee’s reputation and financial resources, such transferee would not, in City’s reasonable opinion, be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such transferee. To assist the City Manager in determining whether to provide consent to a transfer or assignment, the City Manager may request from the transferee (directly or through the requesting Developer) reasonable documentation of transferee’s understanding of, ability to, and financial capacity, and plan to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by transferee, including without limitation obligations specifically identified in this Agreement, including all applicable Project Approvals. Such determination will be made by the City Manager and will be appealable by the transferring Developer to the City Council. For any transfer of all or any portion of their 258 25 #526139986_v1 Property, the transferring Developer and assignee shall enter into an assignment and assumption agreement in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit F. Such assignment and assumption agreement shall clearly allocate the rights and obligations of the transferring Developer and the non-transferring Developer, as applicable. In the event that either Developer seeks to transfer or assign the 131 Project or the 101 Project separately and such transfer or assignment requires the separation of the rights and obligations under this Agreement, the transferring Developer shall reimburse the City for all City costs and expenses associated with such separate transfer and any associated amendments to this Agreement, including the cost of staff and City Attorney time. (b) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, each of following Transfers are permitted and shall not require City consent under this Section 8.1: (i) Any transfer for financing purposes to secure the funds necessary for construction and/or permanent financing of a Project, including but not limited to any foreclosure, deed of trust, deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, or other similar conveyance or transfer in connection therewith; (ii) An assignment of this Agreement to an Affiliate of the transferring Developer; (iii) Transfers of common area to a property owners association; (iv) Dedications and grants of easements and rights of way required in accordance with the Project Approvals; or (v) Any leasing activity. For the purposes of this Section 8.1, “Affiliate” means an entity or person that is directly or indirectly controlling, controlled by, or under common control or management of or with the transferring Developer. For the purposes of this definition, “control” means the possession, direct or indirect, of the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of an entity or a person, whether through the ownership of voting securities, by contract, or otherwise, and the terms “controlling” and “controlled” have the meanings correlative to the foregoing. ARTICLE 9 COOPERATION IN THE EVENT OF LEGAL CHALLENGE 9.1 Cooperation In the event of any administrative, legal, or equitable action or other proceeding instituted by any person not a party to the Agreement challenging the validity of any provision of the Agreement, or any Project Approval or Subsequent Approval (“Legal Challenge”), the Parties will cooperate in defending such action or proceeding. City shall promptly (within five business days) notify Developer of any such Legal Challenge against City. If City fails promptly to notify Developer of any Legal Challenge against City or if City fails to cooperate in the defense, Developer will not thereafter be responsible for City’s defense. The Parties will use best efforts to select mutually agreeable legal counsel to defend such Legal Challenge, and Developer will pay compensation for such legal counsel (including City Attorney time and overhead for the defense of such action), but will exclude other City staff overhead costs and 259 26 #526139986_v1 normal day-to-day business expenses incurred by City. Developer’s obligation to pay for legal counsel will extend to attorneys’ fees incurred on appeal. In the event City and Developer are unable to select mutually agreeable legal counsel to defend such Legal Challenge, each party may select its own legal counsel and Developer will pay its and City’s attorneys’ fees and costs. Developer shall reimburse City for all reasonable court costs and attorneys’ fees expended by City in defense of any such Legal Challenge or payable to any prevailing plaintiff/petitioner. 9.2 Reapproval (a) If, as a result of any Legal Challenge, all or any portion of the Agreement or the Project Approvals are set aside or otherwise made ineffective by any judgment in such action or proceeding (“Judgment”), based on procedural, substantive or other deficiencies (“Deficiencies”), the City and affected Developer will use their respective best efforts to sustain and reenact or readopt the Agreement, and/or the Project Approvals, that the Deficiencies related to, as follows, unless the City and affected Developer mutually agree in writing to act otherwise: (i) If any Judgment requires reconsideration or consideration by City of the Agreement or any Project Approval, then City will consider or reconsider that matter in a manner consistent with the intent of the Agreement and with Applicable Law. If any such Judgment invalidates or otherwise makes ineffective all or any portion of the Agreement or Project Approval, then the City and affected Developer will cooperate and will cure any Deficiencies identified in the Judgment or upon which the Judgment is based in a manner consistent with the intent of the Agreement and with Applicable Law. City will then consider readopting or reenacting the Agreement, or the Project Approval, or any portion thereof, to which the Deficiencies related. (ii) Acting in a manner consistent with the intent of the Agreement includes, but is not limited to, recognizing that the Parties intend that each Developer may undertake and complete Development of their Project as described in the Agreement, and adopting such ordinances, resolutions, and other enactments as are necessary to readopt or reenact all or any portion of the Agreement or Project Approvals without contravening the Judgment. (iii) The Parties agree that this Section 9.2 shall constitute a separate agreement entered into concurrently, and that if any other provision of this Agreement, or the Agreement as a whole, is invalidated, rendered null, or set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction, the Parties agree to be bound by the terms of this Section 9.2, which shall survive invalidation, nullification, or setting aside. ARTICLE 10 DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION 260 27 #526139986_v1 10.1 Defaults Any failure by any Party to perform any provision of the Agreement, which failure continues uncured for a period of thirty (30) days following written notice of such failure from the other Party (unless such period is extended by mutual written consent), will constitute a default (“Default”) under the Agreement. Any notice given will specify the nature of the alleged failure and, where appropriate, the manner in which said failure satisfactorily may be cured. If the nature of the alleged failure is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such 30-day period, then the commencement of the cure within such time period, and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure thereafter, will be deemed to be a cure within such 30-day period. Upon the occurrence of a Default under the Agreement, the non-defaulting party may institute legal proceedings to enforce the terms of the Agreement or, in the event of a material Default, terminate the Agreement but only as to the Property that is the subject of Default. If the Default is cured, then no Default will exist and the noticing party shall take no further action. 10.2 Termination If City elects to consider terminating the Agreement due to a material Default of a Developer, then City will give a notice of intent to terminate the Agreement as to the defaulting Developer’s Property only and the matter will be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council at a duly noticed and conducted public hearing. Developer will have the right to offer written and oral evidence prior to or at the time of said public hearings. If the City Council determines that a material Default has occurred and is continuing, and elects to terminate the Agreement as to the defaulting Developer’s Property, City will give written notice of termination of the Agreement to the defaulting Developer by certified mail and the Agreement will thereby be terminated sixty (60) days thereafter. Such termination shall not affect any non-defaulting Developer. 10.3 Enforced Delay; Extension of Time of Performance Subject to the limitations set forth below, performance by any Party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default, and all performance and other dates specified in this Agreement (including but not limited to the Term) shall be extended, where delays are due to: war; insurrection; strikes and labor disputes; lockouts; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties; acts of God; acts of the public enemy; terrorism; epidemics or pandemics; quarantine or shelter-in-place restrictions; freight embargoes; governmental restrictions or priority; litigation and arbitration, including court delays; legal challenges to this Agreement, the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, or any other approval required for an affected Project or any initiatives or referenda regarding the same; environmental conditions that have not been previously disclosed or discovered or that could not have been discovered with reasonable diligence that delays the construction or Development of the affected Property or any portion thereof; unusually severe weather but only to the extent that such weather or its effects (including, without limitation, dry out time) result in delays that cumulatively exceed thirty (30) days for every winter season occurring after commencement of construction of the affected Project; acts or omissions of the other party; or acts or failures to act of any public or governmental agency or entity (except that acts or failures to act of City shall not excuse performance by City); moratorium; or a Severe Economic Recession (each a “Force Majeure Delay”). An extension of time for any such cause shall be for the period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause, if a written notice by the Party claiming such extension (“Notice of Force Majeure Delay”) is sent to the other Parties within sixty (60) days of the commencement of the cause. If a Notice of Force Majeure Delay is sent after such sixty (60) day period, then the extension shall commence to run no sooner than sixty (60) days prior to the giving of such Notice of Force Majeure Delay. Times of performance 261 28 #526139986_v1 under this Agreement may also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of City and affected Developer. A Developer’s inability or failure to obtain financing or otherwise timely satisfy shall not be deemed to be a cause outside the reasonable control of such Developer and shall not be the basis for an excused delay unless such inability, failure or delay is a direct result of a Severe Economic Recession. “Severe Economic Recession” means a decline in the monetary value of all finished goods and services produced in the United States, as measured by initial quarterly estimates of United States Gross Domestic Product (“GDP”) published by the United States Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis (and not subsequent monthly revisions), lasting more than four (4) consecutive calendar quarters. Any quarter of flat or positive GDP growth shall end the period of such Severe Economic Recession. 10.4 Legal Action Any Party may institute legal action to cure, correct, or remedy any default, enforce any covenant or agreement in the Agreement, enjoin any threatened or attempted violation thereof, and enforce by specific performance or declaratory relief the obligations and rights of the Parties thereto. Except as provided in Section 10.1, the sole and exclusive remedies for any Default of the Agreement will be specific performance or declaratory relief. In any proceeding brought to enforce the Agreement, the prevailing Party will be entitled to recover from the unsuccessful Party all costs, expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred by the prevailing party in the enforcement proceeding. 10.5 Periodic Review (a) Conducting the Periodic Review. Throughout the Term, at least once every twelve (12) months following the Effective Date of this Agreement, City shall review the extent of good-faith compliance by each Developer with the terms of this Agreement. This review (“Periodic Review”) shall be conducted by the Chief Planner or his/her designee and shall be limited in scope to compliance with the terms of this Agreement pursuant to Government Code section 65865.1. At least ten (10) days prior to the Periodic Review, and in the manner prescribed in Section 11.9 of this Agreement, City shall deposit in the mail or transmit electronically to each Developer a copy of any staff report and documents to be relied upon in conducting the Periodic Review and, to the extent practical, related exhibits concerning such Developer’s performance hereunder. (b) Developer Submission of Periodic Review Report. Annually commencing one year from the Effective Date and continuing through termination of this Agreement, Developer shall submit a report to the Chief Planner stating the Developer’s good faith compliance with terms of the Agreement. (c) Good Faith Compliance Review. During the Periodic Review, the Chief Planner shall set a meeting to consider each Developer’s good-faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement, as applicable. Each Developer shall be permitted an opportunity to respond to City’s evaluation of such Developer’s performance, either orally at the meeting or in a supplemental written statement, at such Developer’s election. Such response shall be made to the Chief Planner. At the conclusion of the Periodic Review, the Chief Planner shall make written findings and determinations, on the basis of substantial evidence, as to whether or not each Developer has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The decision of the Chief Planner shall be appealable to the City Council. If the Chief Planner finds 262 29 #526139986_v1 and determines that a Developer has not complied with such terms and conditions, the Chief Planner may recommend to the City Council that it terminate or modify this Agreement, as to such Developer only, by giving notice of its intention to do so, in the manner set forth in Government Code sections 65867 and 65868. The costs incurred by City in connection with the Periodic Review process described herein for each Developer shall be borne by each Developer, as applicable. (d) Failure to Properly Conduct Periodic Review. If City fails, during any calendar year, to either: (i) conduct the Periodic Review or (ii) notify a Developer in writing of City’s determination, pursuant to a Periodic Review, as to such Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement and such failure remains uncured as of December 31 of any year during the Term, such failure shall be conclusively deemed an approval by City of such Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement for the period of time since the last Periodic Review. (e) Written Notice of Compliance. With respect to any year for which a Developer has been determined or deemed to have complied with this Agreement, City shall, within thirty (30) days following request by Developer, execute and deliver to such requesting Developer (or to any party requested by Developer) a written “Notice of Compliance,” in recordable form, duly executed and acknowledged by City, that certifies: (i) The Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been modifications hereto, that this Agreement is in full force and effect as modified and stating the date and nature of such modifications; (ii) That there are no current uncured defaults under this Agreement or specifying the dates and nature of any such default; (iii) Any other information reasonably requested by the requesting Developer. City’s failure to deliver to requesting Developer such a Notice of Compliance within such time shall constitute a conclusive presumption against City that this Agreement is in full force and effect without modification, except as may be represented by the requesting Developer, and that there are no uncured defaults in the performance of the requesting Developer, except as may be represented by requesting Developer. A Developer shall have the right, in such Developer’s sole discretion, to record such Notice of Compliance. 10.6 California Law This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action to enforce or interpret this Agreement shall be filed and heard in the Superior Court of San Mateo County, California. 10.7 Resolution of Disputes With regard to any dispute involving Development of the Project, the resolution of which is not provided for by this Agreement or Applicable Law, such affected Developer shall, at City’s request, meet with City and such Developer and the City representatives shall attempt in good faith to resolve any such disputes. Nothing in this Section 10.7 shall in any way be interpreted as requiring that a Developer and City and/or City’s designee 263 30 #526139986_v1 reach agreement with regard to those matters being addressed, nor shall the outcome of these meetings be binding in any way on City or a Developer unless expressly agreed to by the authorized parties to such meetings. 10.8 Attorneys’ Fees In any legal action or other proceeding brought by s Party to enforce or interpret a provision of this Agreement, the prevailing party is entitled to reasonable attorneys’ fees and any other costs incurred in that proceeding in addition to any other relief to which it is entitled. 10.9 Hold Harmless Each Developer shall separately (not jointly) hold, to the fullest extent permitted by law, City and its elected and appointed officers, agents, employees, and representatives harmless from claims, costs, and liabilities for any personal injury, death, or property damage which is a result of, or alleged to be the result of, the construction of the Developer’s Project, or of obligations or of operations performed under this Agreement by the Developer or by the Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees, whether such operations were performed by the Developer or any of the Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees. Nothing in this Section 10.9 shall be construed to mean that a Developer shall hold City harmless from any claims of personal injury, death or property damage arising from, or alleged to arise from, any gross negligence or willful misconduct on the part of City, its elected and appointed representatives, offices, agents and employees. ARTICLE 11 MISCELLANEOUS 11.1 Incorporation of Recitals and Introductory Paragraph The Recitals contained in this Agreement, and the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein. 11.2 No Agency It is specifically understood and agreed to by and between the Parties hereto that: (i) each subject Project is a private development; (ii) City has no interest or responsibilities for, or duty to, third parties concerning any improvements until such time, and only until such time, that City accepts the same pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement or in connection with the various Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals; (iii) each Developer shall have full power over and exclusive control of their Project herein described, subject only to the limitations and obligations of each Developer under this Agreement, the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals, and Applicable Law, as applicable; and (iv) City and each Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of agency relationship, joint venture or partnership between City and either Developer (or between the Developers) and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as creating any such relationship between City and each Developer (or between the Developers). 11.3 Enforceability City and each Developer agree that unless this Agreement is amended or terminated pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement, this Agreement shall be enforceable by any party hereto notwithstanding any change hereafter enacted or adopted (whether by ordinance, resolution, initiative, or any other means) in any General Plan, Specific Plan, zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, or any other land use ordinance or building ordinance, resolution or other rule, regulation or policy adopted by City that changes, alters or amends the rules, 264 31 #526139986_v1 regulations, and policies applicable to the Development of each Property as of the Effective Date as provided by Government Code section 65866. 11.4 Severability If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement, or the application of this Agreement to other situations, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the affected Parties. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if any material provision of this Agreement, or the application of such provision to a particular situation, is held to be invalid, void or unenforceable, either City or affected Developer may (in their sole and absolute discretion) terminate this Agreement by providing written notice of such termination to the other affected Parties (but each Developer may only terminate as to their own Property and the City may only terminate as to an affected Property). 11.5 Other Necessary Acts and City Approvals Each party shall execute and deliver to the other all such other further instruments and documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out the Project Approvals, Subsequent Approvals and this Agreement, as applicable, and to provide and secure to the other Parties the full and complete enjoyment of their rights and privileges hereunder. Whenever a reference is made herein to an action or approval to be undertaken by City, the City Manager or his or her designee is authorized to act on behalf of City, unless specifically provided otherwise by this Agreement or Applicable Law. 11.6 Construction Each reference in this Agreement or any of the Project Approvals or Subsequent Approvals shall be deemed to refer to the Agreement, Project Approval, or Subsequent Approval as it may be amended from time to time, whether or not the particular reference refers to such possible amendment. This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for both City and each Developer, and no presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against the drafting party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. 11.7 Other Miscellaneous Terms The singular shall include the plural; the masculine gender shall include the feminine; “shall” is mandatory; “may” is permissive. If there is more than one signer of this Agreement, the signer obligations are joint and several. 11.8 Covenants Running with the Land All of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective heirs, successors and assigns, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring all or a portion of the Properties, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions contained in this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitudes and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to California law including, without limitation, Civil Code section 1468. Each covenant herein to act or refrain from acting is for the benefit of or a burden upon the Projects, as appropriate, runs with the applicable Property, and is binding upon the owner of all or a portion of the applicable Property and each successive owner during its ownership of such Property. 11.9 Notices Any notice or communication required hereunder between City or either Developer must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by email (with original forwarded by regular U.S. Mail), by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by 265 32 #526139986_v1 Federal Express or other similar courier promising overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the Party to whom it is addressed. If delivered by email, a notice shall be deemed given upon verification of receipt if received before 5:00 p.m. on a regular business day, or else on the next business day. If given by registered or certified mail, such notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of: (i) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the Party to whom notices are to be sent, or (ii) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below: If to City, to: City of South San Francisco Attn: City Manager 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Phone: (650) 877-8500 Email: sharon.ranals@ssf.net With a Copy to: Redwood Public Law, LLP Attn: Sky Woodruff 409 13th Street, Suite 600 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone: (510) 282-6001 Email: sky@redwoodpubliclaw.com If to 101 Developer, to: US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC Attn: Steve Dunn 999 Baker Way, Suite 200 San Mateo, CA 94404 Phone (650) 235-2833 Email: sdunn@steelwavellc.com With a Copy to: Holland & Knight LLP Attn: Tamsen Plume 560 Mission St. Suite 1900 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 743-6941 Email: tamsen.plume@hklaw.com If to 131 Developer, to: US 131 TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC Attn: Steve Dunn 999 Baker Way, Suite 200 San Mateo, CA 94404 Phone (650) 235-2833 Email: sdunn@steelwavellc.com 266 33 #526139986_v1 With a Copy to: Holland & Knight LLP Attn: Tamsen Plume 560 Mission St. Suite 1900 San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 743-6941 Email: tamsen.plume@hklaw.com Any Party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to another Party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. 11.10 Mortgagee Protection The Parties agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit a Developer, in any manner, at such Developer’s sole discretion, from encumbering their Property or any portion thereof or any improvement thereon by any lien of mortgage, deed of trust, or other security device securing financing with respect to their Project or Property (“Mortgage”). City acknowledges that the lenders providing such financing may require, in addition to estoppel certificates as set forth in Section 4.7, certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and agrees upon request, from time to time, to meet with such requesting Developer and representatives of such lenders to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification provided such interpretation or modification is consistent with the intent and purpose of this Agreement. Any Mortgagee of a Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage on a Property made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of Default given to a Developer under this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of Default to such Developer or within ten (10) days of receiving a request, if a Mortgagee has not provided a request prior to the City sending a notice of Default to such Developer. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the Default during the remaining cure period allowed such Party under this Agreement. (c) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of Property, or any portion thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the Mortgage or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take such Property, or portion thereof, subject to the terms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of the applicable Developer’s obligations or other affirmative covenants of the applicable Developer hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; provided, however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by the applicable Developer is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be condition precedent to City’s performance hereunder as to that Property, and further provided that any sales, transfer, or assignment by any Mortgagee in possession shall be subject to the provisions of Section 8.1 of this Agreement. 267 34 #526139986_v1 11.11 Entire Agreement, Counterparts And Exhibits This Agreement is executed in two (2) duplicate counterparts, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement consists of ____ (___) [insert in execution version] pages, exclusive of signature pages, and ten (10) exhibits which constitute in full, the final and exclusive understanding and agreement of the Parties and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements of the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof. All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of City and applicable Developer. The following exhibits are attached to this Agreement and incorporated herein for all purposes: Exhibit A.1 – Description and Diagram of 101 Property Exhibit A.2 - Description and Diagram of 131 Property Exhibit B.1 - List of 101 Project Approvals as of Effective Date Exhibit B.2 – List of 131 Project Approvals as of Effective Date Exhibit C.1 – City Fees, Exactions, and Payments for 101 Project Exhibit C.2 – City Fees, Exactions, and Payments for 131 Project Exhibit D.1 – Sustainability Features for 101 Project Exhibit D.2 – Sustainability Features for 131 Project Exhibit E – Applicable Laws Exhibit F – Form of [Partial] Assignment and Assumption Agreement Exhibit G – Form of DA Annual Review Report [to be added] 11.12 No Third Party Beneficiaries This Agreement is intended for the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective permitted successors and assigns, and is not for the benefit of, nor may any express or implied provision hereof be enforced by, any other person, except as otherwise set forth in Section 11.10. 11.13 Recordation Of Development Agreement; Termination in the Event Ground Lease Option Terminates; Property Owner Consent Pursuant to Government Code section 65868.5, no later than ten (10) days after City enters into this Agreement, the City Clerk shall record an executed copy of this Agreement in the Official Records of the County of San Mateo (“Official Records”). In the event the 131 Ground Lease Option terminates without 131 Developer entering for formal ground lease of the 131 Property, this Agreement shall terminate concurrently as to the 131 Property and 131 Developer only. If the 131 Developer exercises its right to terminate this Agreement as to the 131 Property prior to the first anniversary of this Agreement, 131 Developer shall be required to pay the City $650,000, which represents its share of the Initial Monetary Contribution Payment, prior to the effective date of any such termination. At the request of the 131 Developer and/or 131 Property Owner, the City will execute and record a notice of termination with the Official Records. The 131 Property Owner is not a Party to this Agreement and is signing below for the sole purpose of acknowledging and consenting the recordation of this Agreement on the 131 Property. Any termination under this Section 11.13 as to the 131 Property shall not affect the independent rights of the 101 Developer and 101 Property. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and between each Developer and City as of the day and year first above written. [Signatures to follow on subsequent pages.] 268 35 #526139986_v1 269 #526139986_v1 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND US 131 TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC CITY: CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a California municipal corporation By: Date: Name: Sharon Ranals Its: City Manager ATTEST: By: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney [Insert Notary Acknowledgment] 270 #526139986_v1 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND US TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC 101 DEVELOPER: US Terminal Court OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: US Terminal Court Venture, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as sole member By: US Terminal Court Manager, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as Administrative Manager By: SW Terminal GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as Administrative Manager By: SW Terminal Investments, LLC a Delaware limited liability company, its managing member By: SW Terminal Associates, LLC a Delaware limited liability company, its managing member By: SteelWave, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its managing member By: Name: Title: [Insert Notary Acknowledgment] 271 #526139986_v1 SIGNATURE PAGE FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO AND US 131 TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC DEVELOPER: US 131 TERMINAL COURT OWNER, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: US Terminal Court Venture, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as sole member By: US Terminal Court Manager, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as Administrative Manager By: SW Terminal GP, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, as Administrative Manager By: SW Terminal Investments, LLC a Delaware limited liability company, its managing member By: SW Terminal Associates, LLC a Delaware limited liability company, its managing member By: SteelWave, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, its managing member By:___________________________ Name: ________________________ Title: _________________________ [Insert Notary Acknowledgment] 272 #526139986_v1 Exhibit A.1 Description and Diagram of 101 Property (Starts on Next Page) [Insert] 273 #526139986_v1 Exhibit A.2 Description and Diagram of 131 Property (Starts on Next Page) [Insert] 274 #526139986_v1 Exhibit B.1 List of 101 Project Approvals as of Effective Date [Insert] 275 #526139986_v1 Exhibit B.2 List of 131 Project Approvals as of Effective Date [Insert] 276 #526139986_v1 Exhibit C.1 City Fees, Exactions, and Payments for 101 Project [Insert] 277 #526139986_v1 Exhibit C.2 City Fees, Exactions, and Payments for 131 Project [Insert] 278 #526139986_v1 Exhibit D.1 Sustainability Features for 101 Project The 101 Project includes the following sustainability measures, as detailed in the 101 Project Approvals: • Design Features o Primarily glass façades, thereby bringing an abundance of natural light into each building; and o Management of stormwater runoff using low-impact development (LID) methods, where feasible. This approach implements engineered controls to allow stormwater filtering, storage, and flood control. Bioretention basins, flow-through planters, Silva Cell units, and other site design features to manage stormwater runoff flows and reduce stormwater pollution would be located throughout the project site. • Transportation o Pedestrian circulation improvements; o Bicycle parking; and o TDM Plan to encourage alternative forms of transportation. • Energy / Greenhouse Gas Emissions o All electric building design; o On-site renewable energy in the form of rooftop photovoltaic (PV) panels; o a high-performance building envelope and heating, ventilation, and air- conditioning (HVAC) systems; and o EV charging infrastructure. • Waste Reduction o On-site recycling and composting facilities; and o Construction and demolition; 100 percent of all inert solids (i.e., building materials) and 65 percent of non-inert solids (i.e., all other materials) would be recycled as required by the City under Chapter 15.60 of the City’s Municipal Code. • Water Conservation o Ultra-efficient WaterSense-labeled flush and flow fixtures; and o Low-water demand native and/or adapted vegetation with efficient irrigation systems. 279 #526139986_v1 Exhibit D.2 Sustainability Features for 131 Project The 131 Project includes the following sustainability measures, as detailed in the 131 Project Approvals: • Design Features o Primarily glass façades, thereby bringing an abundance of natural light into each building; and o Management of stormwater runoff using low-impact development (LID) methods, where feasible. This approach implements engineered controls to allow stormwater filtering, storage, and flood control. Bioretention basins, flow-through planters, Silva Cell units, and other site design features to manage stormwater runoff flows and reduce stormwater pollution would be located throughout the project site. • Transportation o Pedestrian circulation improvements; o Bicycle parking; and o TDM Plan to encourage alternative forms of transportation. • Energy / Greenhouse Gas Emissions o All electric building design; o On-site renewable energy in the form of rooftop photovoltaic (PV) panels; o a high-performance building envelope and heating, ventilation, and air- conditioning (HVAC) systems; and o EV charging infrastructure. • Waste Reduction o On-site recycling and composting facilities; and o Construction and demolition; 100 percent of all inert solids (i.e., building materials) and 65 percent of non-inert solids (i.e., all other materials) would be recycled as required by the City under Chapter 15.60 of the City’s Municipal Code. • Water Conservation o Ultra-efficient WaterSense-labeled flush and flow fixtures; and o Low-water demand native and/or adapted vegetation with efficient irrigation systems. 280 #526139986_v1 Exhibit E Applicable Laws Each Developer shall comply with the following City regulations and provisions applicable to the Property as of the Effective Date of this Agreement (except as modified by this Agreement and the Project Approvals). [Insert] 281 #526139986_v1 Exhibit F Form of [Partial] Assignment and Assumption Agreement (Starts on Next Page) 282 #526139986_v1 WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of South San Francisco Attn: City Clerk 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 Space Above for Recorder’s Use Exempt from Recording Fees per Cal. Gov. Code § 6103 [Partial] ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT This [Partial] Assignment and Assumption Agreement (“Assignment Agreement”) is entered into to be effective on ______, 202_, by and between US 131 Terminal Court Owner, LLC [and/or US Terminal Court Owner, LLC] (“Assignor”), and ___________________, a _______________ (“Assignee”), and the City of South San Francisco, a municipal corporation (“City”). Assignor and Assignee are sometimes referred to herein as a “Party” and collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS A. Assignor and City have previously entered into that certain Development Agreement between City and Assignor dated ________, 2025, approved by the City of South San Francisco City Council by Ordinance No. ________ on _________, 2025 and recorded on ______________, 2025 as Document No. ______________, San Mateo County Official Records (“Development Agreement”) to facilitate the development and redevelopment of that certain real property within the City of South San Francisco, California, which is legally described in Exhibit A.__ of the Development Agreement (“Property”). B. Assignor is the fee owner of the Property, and Assignor desires to convey its interest in the developable, approximately [_] acre portion of the Property and more particularly described on Exhibit 1 attached hereto (“Assigned Property”) to Assignee concurrently with execution of this Assignment Agreement; and Assignee desires to so acquire such interest in the Assigned Property from the Assignor. C. The Parties desire to enter into this Assignment Agreement in order to satisfy and fulfill their respective obligations under Section 8.1 of the Development Agreement. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals and the mutual covenants hereinafter contained and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Assignment by Assignor. Assignor hereby assigns, transfers and grants to Assignee, and its successors and assigns, all of Assignor’s rights, title and interest and obligations, duties, responsibilities, conditions and restrictions under the Development Agreement with respect 283 2 #526139986_v1 to the Assigned Property and only to the extent accruing or arising on and after the Effective Date (collectively, the “Assigned Rights and Obligations”). 2. Acknowledgement and Assumption of Obligations by Assignee. Assignee, for itself and its successor and assigns, hereby acknowledges that it has reviewed, is aware of and intends to honor its Assigned Rights and Obligations with respect to its Development of the Assigned Property pursuant to the terms of the Development Agreement, and additionally expressly and unconditionally assumes all of the Assigned Rights and Obligations. Assignee agrees, expressly for the benefit of Assignor and City, to comply with, perform, and execute all of the Assigned Rights and Obligations. 3. Release of Assignor. Assignee and City hereby fully release Assignor from all Assigned Rights and Obligations. Both Assignor and Assignee acknowledge that this Assignment Agreement is intended to fully assign all of the Assigned Rights and Obligations to Assignee, and it is expressly understood that Assignor shall continue to be obligated under the Development Agreement only with respect to those portions of the Project Site retained by Assignor. 4. Substitution of Assignor. Assignee hereinafter shall be substituted for and replace Assignor in the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Property. Whenever the term “Developer” appears in the Development Agreement, it shall hereinafter include Assignee with respect to the Assigned Property. 5. Development Agreement in Full Force and Effect. Except as specifically provided herein with respect to the assignment and assumption, all the terms, covenants, conditions and provisions of the Development Agreement are hereby ratified and shall remain in full force and effect. 6. Recording. Assignor shall cause this Assignment Agreement to be recorded in the Official Records of San Mateo County, California, and shall promptly provide conformed copies of the recorded Assignment Agreement to Assignee and City. 7. Successors and Assigns. All of the terms, covenants, conditions and provisions of this Assignment Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 8. Applicable Law/Venue. This Assignment Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to choice of law provisions. Any legal actions under this Assignment Agreement shall be brought only in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo, State of California. 9. Applicable Law/Venue. This Assignment Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to choice of law provisions. Any legal actions under this Assignment Agreement shall be brought only in the Superior Court of the County of San Mateo, State of California. 10. Interpretation. All parties have been represented by counsel in the preparation and negotiation of this Assignment Agreement, and this Assignment Agreement shall be construed according to the fair meaning of its language. The rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities 284 3 #526139986_v1 are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Assignment Agreement. Unless the context clearly requires otherwise: (a) the plural and singular numbers shall each be deemed to include the other; (b) the masculine, feminine, and neuter genders shall each be deemed to include the others; (c) “shall,” “will,” or “agrees” are mandatory, and “may” is permissive; (d) “or” is not exclusive; and (e) “includes” and “including” are not limiting. 11. Severability. Except as otherwise provided herein, if any provision(s) of this Assignment Agreement is (are) held invalid, the remainder of this Assignment Agreement shall not be affected, except as necessarily required by the invalid provisions, and shall remain in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the parties. 12. Counterparts. This Assignment Agreement may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to constitute an original, but all of which, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same instrument, with the same effect as if all of the parties to this Assignment Agreement had executed the same counterpart. 13. City Consent. City is executing this Assignment Agreement for the limited purpose of consenting to the assignment and assumption and clarifying that there is privity of contract between City and Assignee with respect to the Development Agreement. 14. Effective Date. The Effective Date of this Assignment Agreement shall be the date upon which Assignee obtains fee title to the Assigned Property by duly recorded deed (“Effective Date”). IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Assignor, Assignee and City have entered into this Assignment Agreement as of the date first written above. ASSIGNOR: [Insert] By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of Assignor Name: Title: 285 4 #526139986_v1 ASSIGNEE: [INSERT NAME OF ASSIGNEE] By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of Assignee Name: Title: CITY: CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a Municipal Corporation By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of City Name: Title: City Manager Approved as to form by: By: Signature of Person executing the Agreement on behalf of City Name: Title: City Attorney 286 DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 131 TERMINAL COURT R&D PROJECT P23-0003: DR23-0002, GPA25-0002, SPA25-0001 MP23-0001, PM23-0001, ZA23-0001, TDM23-0002, EIR23-0001, SA24-0002 and DA23-0002 (As recommended by City Staff on September 4, 2025) The term “applicant”, “developer”, “project owner” or “project sponsor” used hereinafter shall have the same meaning- the applicant for the 131 Terminal Court project or the property/project owner if different from applicant. A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follows: General 1. The project shall be constructed and operated substantially as indicated on the plan set prepared by SOM, dated August 25, 2025 and approved by Planning Commission in association with P23-0003 as amended by the conditions of approval. The final plans shall be subject to the review and approval of the City’s Chief Planner. 2. The construction drawings shall comply with the Planning Commission approved plans, as amended by the conditions of approval, including the plans prepared by SOM, dated August 25, 2025. 3. The permit shall be subject to revocation if the project is not operated in compliance with the conditions of approval. 4. Neither the granting of this permit nor any conditions attached thereto shall authorize, require or permit anything contrary to, or in conflict with any ordinances specifically named therein. 5. Prior to construction, all required building permits shall be obtained from the City’s Building Division. 6. Demolition of any existing structures on site will require demolition permits. 7. All conditions of the permit shall be completely fulfilled to the satisfaction of the affected City Departments and Planning and Building Divisions prior to occupancy of any building. 8. Applicant shall submit a checklist showing compliance with Conditions of Approval and Mitigation Measures with building permit plans. 9. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for the construction of public improvements, the final design for all public improvements shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer, Fire Marshal and Chief Planner. 10. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for grading improvements, the applicant shall submit final grading plans for review and approval by the City Engineer, Fire Marshal and Chief Planner. 11. Applicant shall comply with all permitting requirements of other reviewing agencies / 287 permitting bodies related to the project, including OneShoreline, the Bay Conservation and Development Commission, and the Federal Aviation Administration, and provide proof of permits and/or approval prior to building permit issuance for these project elements. 12. The Final Parcel Map shall comply with all applicable requirements of SSFMC Title 19 (Subdivisions) and Title 20 (Zoning Ordinance), to be reviewed and filed by the Engineering Division. 13. The permit shall not be effective for any purpose until the property owner or a duly authorized representative files a signed acceptance form, prior to the issuance of a building permit, stating that the property owner is aware of, and accepts, all of the conditions of the permit. 14. The project shall incorporate requirements and criteria related to the Flood Plain / Sea Level Rise Overlay District, per SSFMC Section 20.180.005. 15. The project shall incorporate requirements and criteria related to the Comprehensive Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP), per SSFMC Section 20.300.003. 16. The applicant shall comply with all terms and conditions specified in the Development Agreement (DA23-0002). 17. Any modification to the approved plans shall be subject to SSFMC Section 20.450.012 (“Modification”), whereby the Chief Planner may approve minor changes. All exterior design modifications, including any and all utilities, shall be presented to the Chief Planner for a determination. 18. All conditions of the permit shall be completely fulfilled to the satisfaction of the affected City Departments and Planning and Building Divisions prior to occupancy of any building. Any request for temporary power for testing equipment will be issued only upon substantial completion of the development. 19. Prior to scheduling a Final Inspection with the Planning Division, the applicant must submit a Planning Final Inspection Request form, which states that the project has been built according to approved plans, and any revisions have been approved by the Planning Division. Construction 20. The applicant is responsible for maintaining site security prior to, and throughout the construction process. This may include the installation of appropriate fencing, lighting, remote monitors, or on-site security personnel, or other measures as needed. 21. The applicant shall include in all building permit plans and post onsite the name and telephone number of an individual empowered to manage construction-related complaints generated from the project. The individual’s name, telephone number, and responsibility for the project shall be posted at the project site for the duration of the project in a location easily visible to the public. The individual shall record all complaints received and actions taken in response, and submit written reports of such complaints and actions to the City’s construction coordination representative on a weekly basis. 288 22. During construction, the applicant shall provide parking for construction workers within the project parking structure when the Chief Building Official and Fire Marshal provide written approval. 23. Prior to proceeding with exterior construction, the applicant shall provide a full-scale mockup of a section of exterior wall that shows the cladding materials and finishes, windows, trim, and any other architectural features of the building to fully illustrate building fenestration, subject to site inspection and approval by Planning Division staff. 24. After the building permits are approved, but before beginning construction, the owner/applicant shall hold a preconstruction conference with City Planning, Building, Fire and Engineering staff and other interested parties. The developer shall arrange for the attendance of the construction manager, contractor, and all relevant subcontractors. Design Review / Site Planning 25. All equipment (either roof, building, or ground-mounted) shall be screened from view through the use of integral architectural elements, such as enclosures or roof screens, and landscape screening or shall be incorporated inside the exterior building wall. Equipment enclosures and/or roof screens shall be painted to match the building. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit plans showing utility locations, stand-pipes, equipment enclosures, landscape screens, and/or roof screens for review and approval by the Chief Planner or designee. 26. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits for landscaping improvements, the applicant shall submit final landscaping and irrigation plans for review and approval by the City’s Chief Planner. The plans shall include documentation of compliance with SSFMC Section 20.300.008, Landscaping. 27. Plant materials shall be replaced when necessary with the same species originally specified unless otherwise approved by the Chief Planner. 28. All landscape areas shall be watered via an automatic irrigation system which shall be maintained in fully operable condition at all times, and which complies with SSFMC Chapter 20.300 (Lot and Development Standards). 29. All planting areas shall be maintained by a qualified professional; the landscape shall be kept on a regular fertilization and maintenance program and shall be maintained weed free. 30. Plant materials shall be selectively pruned by a qualified arborist; no topping or excessive cutting-back shall be permitted. Tree pruning shall allow the natural branching structure to develop. 31. All landscaping installed within the public right-of-way by the property owner shall be maintained by the property owner. 32. Prior to issuance of certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall submit final landscaping and irrigation plans demonstrating compliance with the State’s Model Water Efficiency 289 Landscaping Ordinance (MWELO). Projects with a new aggregate landscape of 2,500 sq. ft. or greater must comply with the performance measures required by the MWELO. The applicant shall submit a Certificate of Completion to the City, upon completion of the installation of the landscaping and irrigation system. 33. Prior to issuance of any building or construction permits, the applicant shall submit interim and final phasing plans and minor modifications to interim and final phasing plans for review and approval by the Chief Planner, City Engineer and Chief Building Official. 34. The applicant shall contact the South San Francisco Scavenger Company to properly size any required trash enclosures and work with staff to locate and design the trash enclosure in accordance with the SSFMC Section 20.300.014, Trash and Refuse Collection Areas. Applicant shall submit an approval letter from South San Francisco Scavenger to the Chief Planner prior to the issuance of building permits. 35. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the Design Review Board from their meetings of July, 2023. 36. Landscaped areas in the project area may contain trees defined as protected by the South San Francisco Tree Preservation Ordinance, Title 13, Chapter 13.30. Any removal or pruning of protected trees shall comply with the Tree Preservation Ordinance, and applicant shall obtain a permit for any tree removals or alterations of protected trees, and avoid tree roots during trenching for utilities. 37. The applicant shall install three-inch diameter, PVC conduit along the project frontage on Terminal Court, in the right-of-way, if any trenching is to take place, for the purpose of future fiber installation. Conduit shall have a pull rope or tape. A #8 stranded trace wire will be installed in the conduit or other trace wire system approved by the City. 38. Prior to receiving certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall install street furniture, trash receptacles, and bicycle racks along the project sidewalk frontages. The Planning Division shall review and approve all street furniture, trash receptacles and bicycle rack options during the Building Permit process. 39. Tenant Improvement (T.I.) permits that are not solely for the purpose of barrier removal, HVAC upgrades, reroofing and electrical that do not involve switches and receptacles will require a percentage of the total cost of construction (time and material) to be dedicated to accessibility upgrades. Please contact the Building Division at (650) 829-6670 for more information on accessibility requirements. 40. Permanent project signage is not included in project entitlements. Prior to installation of any project signage, the applicant shall submit an appropriate sign application per Chapter 20.360 of the Zoning Ordinance for review and approval. Transportation / Parking 41. A Parking and Traffic Control Plan for the construction of the project shall be submitted with 290 the application for Building Permit, for review and approval by the Chief Planner and City Engineer. 42. The applicant has submitted a draft TDM Plan, prepared by Fehr & Peers. In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 20.400, Transportation Demand Management, prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit a Final TDM Plan for review and approval by the Chief Planner. a. The Final TDM Plan shall include all mandatory elements included in the Ordinance and shall substantially reflect the Preliminary TDM Plan prepared by Fehr & Peers. The Final TDM Plan shall be designed to ultimately achieve the requirements of a Tier 4 project, which includes office and research & development uses with at least 400,000 square feet of gross floor area. b. The Final TDM Plan shall outline the required process for on-going monitoring, which shall begin one year after the project receives a certificate of occupancy. including annual surveys. Surveys shall either: (1) state that the applicable property has achieved a maximum of 50% of employees commuting via driving alone, providing supporting statistics and analysis to establish attainment of the goal; or (2) state that the applicable property has not achieved the maximum of 50% employees commuting via driving alone, providing an explanation of how and why the goal has not been reached, and a description of additional measures that will be adopted in the coming year to attain the TDM goal. c. The applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program costs associated with monitoring and enforcing the TDM Program on an annual basis. The annual monitoring fee is $3,825.00 and is updated by the City Council on an annual basis. The monitoring fee for the Project’s first year of operation is due to the City prior to the project receiving a Certificate of Occupancy. d. Prior to approval of a permit for tenant improvements or a business license, tenants shall submit a letter demonstrating concurrence with the Final TDM Plan. The letter shall acknowledge how applicable TDM requirements are identified in their lease and summarize how the tenant is implementing applicable TDM measures. 43. The property owner shall ensure compliance with the San Mateo County Congestion Management Program Land Use Implementation Policy (C/CAG TDM Policy). Specifically, the property owner shall ensure that the measures identified in the approved C/CAG TDM Checklist appended to this application are implemented over the life of the project, and that the property owner and tenants acknowledge the requirement to participate in the periodic monitoring and reporting requirements identified in the C/CAG TDM Policy. Accordingly, it is recommended that the property owner and/or developer clearly identify these TDM provisions and responsibilities in any sales and/or lease or sublease transactions. 44. All Tier 4 project shall prepare a midday parking occupancy survey every three years, for informational purposes. The first midday parking occupancy survey shall be completed and 291 submitted during the first year following project occupancy, with the required Annual Mode Share Compliance Survey. 45. All parking areas are to be maintained free and clear of litter and storage and shall remain clear for parking at all times. No outdoor storage of materials is allowed. 46. Short-term and long-term bicycle parking shall be provided, located and designed in accordance with the requirements of SSFMC Section 20.330.007, and as described in the 101 Terminal TDM Plan. 47. The applicant will work with the City to determine a site-specific trip cap, which shall be included in the Final TDM Plan. 48. The applicant has submitted a draft Parking Management Plan, prepared by Fehr & Peers. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy the applicant shall submit a Final Parking Management Plan for review and approval by the Chief Planner. If the Final Parking Management Plan identifies non-office/research and development building square footage that is no longer accessible to the general public, the total amount of parking provided on the site will be reduced proportionally and replaced with open space and/or landscaping in keeping with adjacent areas. Environmental Mitigation Measures / CEQA 49. The applicant shall comply with all applicable mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Infinite 131 Project EIR, including as referenced and incorporated into the project’s environmental checklist and its appendices. Impact / Development Fees **Fees are subject to annual adjustment and will be calculated based on the fee in effect at the time that the payment of the fee is due. The fees included in these Conditions of Approval are estimates, based on the fees in place at the time of project approval. Estimates are subject to change, based on final plans submitted for building permits. Credits for existing uses will be calculated and applied to applicable fees. ** 50. Childcare Fee. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for non- residential uses in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.77. This fee is subject to annual adjustment. Based on the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2025, the childcare impact fee estimate for the project is: Office/R&D: $1.52/sf x 1,632,000sf = $2,480,640 Commercial: $0.82/sf x 47,000sf = $38,540 51. Park Fees. Prior to issuance of a building permit for non-residential uses, the applicant shall pay the Parkland Acquisition Fee and Parkland Construction Fee in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.67. The fee is subject to annual adjustment. Based on the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2025 the park fee estimate for the project is: 292 Office/R&D: $3.56sf x 1,632,000sf = $5,809,920 Commercial: $1.52/sf x 47,000sf = $71,440 Administration Fee: $700 52. Citywide Transportation Fee. Prior to issuance of a building permit for non-residential uses, the applicant shall pay applicable transportation impact fees in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.73. The fee is subject to annual adjustment. Based on the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2025 the citywide transportation impact fee estimate for the project is: Office/R&D: $35.06/sf x 1,632,000sf = $57,217,920 Commercial: $30.57/sf x 47,000sf = $1,436,790 53. Commercial Linkage Fee. Prior to issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall pay the applicable commercial linkage fee in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.69, based on the current fee for each applicable land use category. The fee shall be calculated based on the fee schedule in effect at the time the building permit is issued. Based on the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2025 the commercial linkage fee estimate for the project is: Office/R&D: $17.38/sf x 1,632,000sf = $28,364,160 Commercial: $2.90/sf x 47,000sf = $136,300 54. Public Safety Impact Fee. Prior to issuance of a building permit for non-residential uses, the applicant shall pay applicable Public Safety Impact Fees in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.75. Based on the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2025 the public safety impact fee estimate for the project is: Office/R&D: $1.32/sf x 1,632,000sf= $2,154,240 Commercial: $0.53/sf x 47,000sf = $24,910 55. Library Impact Fee. Prior to issuance of the certificate of occupancy for non-residential uses, the applicant shall pay applicable Library Impact Fee in accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.74. Based on the plans reviewed by the Planning Commission on September 4, 2025, the library impact fee estimate for the project is: Office/R&D: $0.14/sf x 1,632,000sf = $228,480 Commercial: $0.08/sf x 47,000sf = $3,760 56. Public Art Requirement. All non-residential development is subject to the Public Art Requirement, per South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.76. The public art requirement for this project shall be satisfied by providing qualifying public art, as defined in South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.76 and reviewed and approved by the Cultural Arts Commission or designee, with a value equal to not less than 1% of construction costs for 293 acquisition and installation of public art on the project site; or electing to make a public art contribution payment in an amount not less than 0.5% of construction costs into the public art fund. The in-lieu contribution payment shall be made prior to the issuance of a building permit. Planning Division contact: Billy Gross, Principal Planner, billy.gross@ssf.net 294 B. Fire Department requirements shall be as follows: After review of application and plans provided for this project, the Fire Department has found the project to show general compliance with adopted codes and standards. This plan is being returned APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOTED BELOW. 1. Projects shall be designed and constructed in compliance with established regulations as adopted by the City of South San Francisco affecting or related to structures, processes, premises, and safeguards in effect at time of building permit application. 2. Fire service features for buildings, structures and premises shall comply with all City adopted building standards in effect at the time of building permit application. 3. Permit(s) shall be required as set forth in adopted California Building Code (CBC) Section 105 and California Fire Code (CFC) Sections 105.5 and 105.6. Submittal documents consisting of construction documents, statement of special inspection, geotechnical report, referenced documents, and other data shall be submitted electronically with each permit application. The construction documents shall be prepared by a registered design professional. Where special conditions exist, the code official is authorized to require additional construction documents to be prepared by a registered design professional. 4. Construction documents shall be to scale (graphic scale required on all plan sheets), dimensioned and drawn on suitable electronic media. Construction documents shall be of sufficient clarity to indicate the location, nature and extent of the work proposed and show in detail that it will conform to the provisions of adopted codes and relevant laws, ordinances, rules, and regulations, as determined by the fire code official. 5. Shop drawings for the fire protection system(s) and other hazardous operations regulated by the fire department shall be submitted to the Fire Department to indicate conformance with adopted codes and standards. The construction documents shall be approved prior to the start of system installation. 6. The construction documents submitted with the application for permit shall be accompanied by a site plan showing to scale the size and location of new construction and existing structures on the site, distances from lot lines, the established street grades and the proposed finished grades and it shall be drawn in accordance with an accurate boundary line survey. In the case of demolition, the site plan shall show construction to be demolished and the location and size of existing structure and construction that are to remain on the site or plot. 7. Prior to submittal of building permits, design documents for proposed fire service features, such as fire apparatus access road(s), access to building opening(s) and roof(s), premise identification, key boxes, fire protection water supplies, fire department connection location(s), and fire command center location(s) shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval. a. Where fire apparatus access roads or a water supply for fire protection are required to be installed, such protection shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction except where approved alternative methods of protection are provided. 295 Temporary street signs shall be installed at each street intersection where construction of new roadways allows passage by vehicles. b. Construction documents for proposed fire apparatus access, location of fire lanes, security gates across fire apparatus access roads and construction documents, hydraulic calculations and material specifications for fire hydrant, fire protection or detection systems shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to construction. 8. Prior to issuance of building permits, the owner or owner’s authorized agent shall be responsible for the development, implementation, and maintenance of an approved written site safety plan approved by the fire code official in accordance with Section 3303. 9. Prior to issuance of building permits, the fire code official shall have the authority to require construction documents and calculations for all fire protection and life safety systems and to require permits be issued for the installation, rehabilitation or modification of any fire protection and life safety systems. Construction documents for fire protection and life safety systems shall be submitted for review and approval prior to system installation. 10. Fire apparatus access roads shall be approved by the fire code official, installed and maintained in accordance with CFC Section 503 and Appendix D. a. Approved fire apparatus access roads shall be provided for every facility, building or portion of a building hereafter constructed or moved into or within the jurisdiction in accordance with adopted codes and standards at time of building permit application. i. Traffic calming measures (bollards, speed cushions, humps, undulations, etc.) are required to be approved by the fire code official prior to installation. ii. Should a security gate(s) be planned to serve the facility, they shall be approved by the fire code official prior to installation. b. Commercial and industrial developments with buildings or facilities exceeding 30 feet or three stories in height or 62,000 square feet shall have not fewer than two means of fire apparatus access for each structure. Where two fire apparatus access roads are required, they shall be placed a distance apart equal to not less than one half of the length of the maximum overall diagonal dimension of the lot or area to be served, measured in a straight line between accesses. c. Where the vertical distance between the grade plane and the highest roof surface exceeds 30 feet, approved aerial fire apparatus access roads shall be provided in accordance with CFC D105. For purposes of this requirement, the highest roof surface shall be determined by measurement to the eave of a pitched roof, the intersection of the roof to the exterior wall, or the top of parapet walls, whichever is greater. Aerial fire apparatus access roads shall have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet, exclusive of shoulders, in the immediate vicinity of the building or portion thereof. One or more of the required access routes meeting this condition shall be located not less than 15 feet and not greater than 30 feet from the building and shall be positioned parallel to one entire long side of the building or as approved by the 296 fire code official. The side of the building on which the aerial fire apparatus access road is positioned shall be approved by the fire code official. Overhead utility and power lines shall not be located over the aerial fire apparatus access road or between the aerial fire apparatus road and the building. There shall be no architectural features, projections or obstructions that would limit the articulation of the aerial apparatus. d. Required Fire Department access roads shall be signed “No Parking – Fire Lane” per current Fire Department standards and California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section 22500. 11. The following are a list of submittal items that are required by the Fire Department prior to submittal of building permits and shall be submitted to the Fire Department, additional items may be called out based on subsequent reviews. a. Fire apparatus access site plan. For any questions, please contact Ian Hardage, Battalion Chief Fire Marshal South San Francisco Fire Department (650) 829-6645. 297 C. Engineering Division requirements shall be as follows: Below are the conditions that apply to the subject permit, which may overlap with any standard development conditions – these conditions are subject to change. Permits 1. At the time of each permit submittal, the Applicant shall submit a deposit for each of the following permit reviews and processing: a. Building Permit plan check and civil review. Provide an engineer’s estimate or opinion of probable cost of on-site improvements for deposit amount calculation. b. Hauling/Grading plan check and permit processing. Provide Cubic Yards for deposit amount calculation. c. Public Improvement plan check and permit processing. Provide an engineer’s estimate or opinion of probable cost of ROW improvements for deposit amount calculation. 2. A Grading Permit is required for grading over 50 cubic yards and if 50 cubic yards or more of soil is exported and/or imported. The Applicant shall pay all permit and inspection fees, as well as any deposits and/or bonds required to obtain said permits. The Grading Permit requires several documents to be submitted for the City’s review and approval. The Grading Permit Application, Checklist and Requirements may be found on the City website at http://www.ssf.net/departments/public-works/engineering-division. 3. A Hauling Permit shall be required for excavations and off-haul or on-haul, per Engineering requirements; should hauling of earth occur prior to grading. Otherwise, hauling conditions would be included with the grading permit. Hauling Permit may be found on the City website at: http://www.ssf.net/departments/public-works/engineering-division. 4. The City of South San Francisco is mandated by the State of California to divert sixty-five percent (65%) of all solid waste from landfills either by reusing or recycling. To help meet this goal, a city ordinance requires completion of a Waste Management Plan (“WMP”) for covered building projects identifying how at least sixty-five percent (65%) of non-inert project waste materials and one hundred percent (100%) of inert materials (“65/100”) will be diverted from the landfill through recycling and salvage. The Contractor shall submit a WMP application and fee payment prior to the issuance of a building or grading permit. 5. An Encroachment Permit is required for any work proposed within the public right-of-way. The Applicant shall pay all permit, plan check, and inspection fees, as well as, any deposits and/or bonds required to obtain said permits. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit written evidence from the County or State Regulators in charge, indicating that the site is cleared of hazardous materials and hazardous groundwater to a level that poses no impacts to human health. The Applicant shall also confirm that any existing groundwater monitoring wells on the project site have been properly closed and/or relocated as necessary as approved by the County or State Regulators in 298 charge. Plan Submittal 7. The Applicant shall submit detailed plans printed to PDF and combined into a single electronic file, with each being stamped and digitally signed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of California. Incorporated within the construction plans shall be applicable franchise utility installation plans, stamped and signed and prepared by the proper authority. Plans shall include the following sheets; Cover, Separate Note Sheet, Existing Conditions, Demolition Plan, Grading Plan, Horizontal Plan, Striping and Signage Plan, Utility Plan(s), Detail Sheet(s), Erosion Control Plan, and Landscape Plans, (grading, storm drain, erosion control, and landscape plans are for reference only and shall not be reviewed during this submittal). 8. Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall obtain a grading permit with the Engineering Division and shall submit an application, all documentation, fees, deposits, bonds and all necessary paperwork needed for the grading permit. The Applicant shall submit a grading plan that clearly states the amount of cut and fill required to grade the project. The Grading Plans shall include the following plans: Cover, Notes, Existing Conditions, Grading Plans, Storm Drain Plans, Stormwater Control Plan, and Erosion Control Plan. 9. Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit for all proposed work within the City ROW that alters the existing improvements and shall submit an application, all documentation, fees, deposits, bonds and all necessary paperwork needed for the Encroachment Permit. Applicant shall prepare and submit a separate Public Improvement Plan set that shall include only the scope of work within the City ROW (with reference to the on-site plans) consisting of the following plans: Civil Plans, Landscape Plans, and Joint Trench Plans. An engineer’s cost estimate for the scope of work shown on the approved Public Improvement Plans is required to determine the performance and payment bond amount. The submittal of the bonds is required prior to the execution of the Subdivision Improvement Agreement. 10. The Applicant shall submit a copy of their General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit Notice of Intent and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), where required by State or Federal regulations, to the Engineering Division for our information. These documents shall be submitted prior to receiving a grading or building permit for the subject project. 11. All improvements shall be designed by a registered civil engineer and approved by the Engineering Division. Mapping and Agreements 12. The Applicant shall prepare a Final Map to create the various parcels shown on the Vesting Tentative Map (VTM) included with the Entitlement Plans. Said Final Map shall be approved 299 by the City and recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. The Final Map shall include the following as shown on the VTM: a. Private Access and Utility Easements between the various parcels as necessary to provide private access and utility services to each Lot. b. Public Utility Easements as necessary to serve the proposed development. c. The dedication to the City of an Emergency Vehicle Access Easement over the various Parcels to connect to the Public right-of-way on Terminal Court and to Shaw Road to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall. d. The dedication to the City of a 10’ wide Public Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Easement through the project site from Terminal Court to Shaw Road as shown on the VTM. e. The dedication to the City of a 10’ wide Public Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Easement along the southern boundary of Parcel 2 and a 5’ wide Public Pedestrian and Bicycle Access Easement along the southern boundary of Parcel 6, both adjacent to the Navigable Slough. Note: said public easements are not shown on the VTM. f. The Applicant shall obtain approvals from the adjacent property owner for the proposed improvements encroaching into the adjacent property. 13. The Applicant shall enter into an Agreement with the City that obligates the property owner, in the future, to make an irrevocable offer to dedicate to the City, a Roadway Easement and a Temporary Construction Easement as needed on the northern portion of the property near Terminal Court, to accommodate the Utah Avenue Overcrossing to be constructed by the City in the future. The exact alignment of the easements shall be determined in the future by the City as part of the design of the Overcrossing. The Agreement shall be executed and recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office prior to the issuance of a building permit. 14. Applicant shall submit all documents required for review of any mapping application as a separate application from the improvement plans. 15. Prior to the approval of any Permits, the Applicant shall enter into an Improvement Agreement and Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement with the City. These agreements shall be approved by City Council prior to execution. a. The Improvement Agreement shall require the Applicant to ensure the faithful performance of the design, construction, installation and inspection of all public improvements as reviewed and approved by the Engineering Division at no cost to the City and shall be secured by good and sufficient payment, performance, and one (1) year warranty bonds or cash deposit adequate to cover all of the costs, inspections and administrative expenses of completing such improvements in the event of a default. The value of the bonds or cash deposit shall include 110% of the cost of construction based on prevailing wage rates. The value of the warranty bond or cash deposit shall be equivalent to 10% of the value of the performance security. 300 b. The Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement shall require the Applicant to maintain any street furniture that serves the property and all landscape within the project frontage at no cost to the City. The Encroachment and Maintenance Agreement shall be recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder and may be transferred to the property owner. 16. Applicant shall pay for all Engineering Division deposits and fees required for any mapping application prior to review. Right-of-Way 17. Prior to building permit issuance and prior to any work within the City Right-of-Way, the Applicant shall obtain an Encroachment Permit from the Engineering Division. All new public improvements required to accommodate the development shall be installed at no cost to the City and shall be approved by the City Engineer and constructed to City Standards. All new public improvements shall be completed prior to Final Occupancy of the project or prior any Temporary Occupancy as approved by the City Engineer. 18. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit a video survey of the adjacent streets (perimeter of proposed property location) to determine the pre-construction condition of the streets at no cost to the City. The Applicant will be responsible to ensure that the condition of the streets and striping is in at least existing condition or better after construction is completed. 19. The Applicant shall be responsible for implementing the following Traffic Mitigations (TRANS- 1) identified in the Traffic Impact Analysis dated March 2024: a. Installation of a traffic signal at the US-101 Offramp/Produce Avenue intersection and at the US-101 Onramp/Produce Avenue/Terminal Court intersection. The Applicant shall be responsible for coordinating with the City and Caltrans to complete all necessary Caltrans studies, reports, plans, and permits needed for the implementation of said traffic signals. b. Redesign and construction of the Produce Avenue/San Mateo Avenue/Airport Boulevard Intersection to improve traffic operations, safety, and bicycle, pedestrian, and transit access to the Project site. The redesign shall include the reconfiguration of turning lanes, improvements to pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and the addition of bus stops and shelters for SamTrans Route 292 as identified in the City’s master plan for said intersection. c. Design and construction of a Class IV separated bikeway from Baden Avenue to Terminal Court via Airport Boulevard and Produce Avenue. d. Redesign and construction of the San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue/South Linden Avenue intersection to incorporate traffic signalization at San Mateo Avenue/Shaw Road/Tanforan Avenue. The conceptual design shall be approved by the City and may require the realignment of the curbs as necessary to close the porkchop/free right-turn lane for northbound San Mateo Avenue north of Shaw Road. The design shall include ADA accessible curb ramps and crosswalks to accommodate pedestrian path of travel for crossing all legs of the intersection. 301 e. Fund a City led Engineering study to create a new southbound US-101 offramp connecting to the proposed Utah Avenue overpass. This funding shall be in addition to the City Wide Transportation Impact Fee required of this development. f. Fund a City led Engineering study to create a new Class I shared-use path crossing of US- 101 to connect the SF Bay Trail to Shaw Road. This funding shall be in addition to the City Wide Transportation Impact Fee required of this development. 20. The Applicant shall reconstruct the curb, gutter, and sidewalk on the south side of Terminal Court from the end of the cul-de-sac to the intersection with the I—101 on-ramp. The proposed vehicular entry/exist serving the project site shall incorporate the City Standard Commercial Driveway with detectable warnings at each approach to the pedestrian path of travel on the sidewalk. 21. The Applicant shall perform base repairs and provide a 2-inch grind and overlay (edge of pavement to edge of pavement) of the asphalt concrete pavement on Terminal Court from the cul-de-sac to the intersection on Produce Avenue. 22. The Applicant shall install a new pedestrian crosswalk crossing Terminal Court at the intersection with Produce Avenue. The new crosswalk shall include ADA compliant curb ramps on each side of the intersection. 23. The Applicant shall reconstruct the curb, gutter and sidewalk along Shaw Road in the vicinity of the proposed Emergency Vehicle Access Easement (EVAE) and incorporate a new commercial driveway for the proposed EVAE and including the existing driveways that access the neighboring properties to the east and west side of the EVAE. 24. The Applicant shall reconstruct the asphalt concrete pavement on Shaw Road adjacent to the new curb and gutter to allow for a new standard crowned street section. 25. The Applicant shall install detectable warnings at frontage driveways per the City Standards. 26. The Applicant shall install street lighting along the project frontage on Terminal Court. The light poles and fixtures shall be ornamental streetlights to match City Standards. 27. The Applicant shall install streetlights along the project street frontages on Terminal Court and Shaw Road. The light poles and fixtures shall be ornamental streetlights to match City Standards. 28. Upon completion of construction and landscape work at the site, the Applicant shall clean, repair or reconstruct, at their expense, as required to conform to City Standards, all public improvements including driveways, curbs, gutters, sidewalks and street pavements along the street frontages of the subdivision to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Damage to adjacent property caused by the Applicant, or their contractors or subcontractors, shall be repaired to the satisfaction of the affected property owner and the City Engineer, at no cost to the City or to the property owner. 29. The Applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all street trees and landscaped irrigation systems installed within the Public right-of-way. 302 30. Prior to the issuance of an Encroachment Permit, the Applicant shall provide an engineer’s estimate for all work performed with in the public right-of-way and submit a bond equal to 110% of the estimate. 31. Prior to the issuance of an Encroachment Permit, the Applicant shall submit Traffic and Pedestrian Control Plans for proposed work on Terminal Court, Shaw Road, and/or any area of work that will obstruct the existing pedestrian walkways. 32. No private foundation or private retaining wall support shall extend into the City Right-of-Way without express approval from the Engineering Department. Applicant shall design any bioretention area or flow-through planters adjacent to the property line such that the facility and all foundations do not encroach within the City Right-of-Way or into an adjacent parcel. 33. Applicant shall ensure that any pavement markings impacted during construction are restored and upgraded to meet City standards current to the time of Encroachment Permit approval. 34. The project shall not include any permanent structural supports (retaining walls, tiebacks, etc.) within the ROW. City Engineer approval is required for any temporary structural supports within the ROW. Any temporary structural supports shall be removed after construction. 35. Any work within the public sidewalk and/or obstructing pedestrian routes shall require pedestrian routing plans along with traffic control plans. Temporary lane or sidewalk closures shall be approved by the City Engineer and by the Construction Coordination Committee (if within the CCC influence area). For any work affecting the sidewalks or pedestrian routes greater than 2 days in duration, the adjacent parking lane or adjacent travel lane shall be closed and temporary vehicle barriers placed to provide a protected pedestrian corridor. Temporary ramps shall be constructed to connect the pedestrian route from the sidewalk to the street if no ramp or driveway is available to serve that purpose. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall coordinate with Scavenger and submit all garbage related plans. Stormwater 37. The Applicant shall submit to the City Engineer a storm drainage and hydraulic study for the fully improved development analyzing existing conditions and post-development conditions. The study shall confirm that the proposed development will meet the goal of reducing peak runoff by 15% based on a 25-year, 5-minute design storm for each drainage basin or subwatershed within the project site. Methods for reducing stormwater flow shall include stormwater storage on-site if necessary. The study shall also evaluate the capacity of each new storm drain installed as part of the development. Precipitation shall be based on NOAA Atlas 14 data for the site. The study shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval. 38. On-site storm drainage conveyance systems shall be designed to accommodate the 10-year design storm. Precipitation used for the hydraulic analysis shall be based on NOAA Atlas 14 data for the project site. Storm duration shall be equal to the time of concentration with an initial minimum of 10 minutes. 303 39. Hydraulic Grade lines shall not be less than 1 foot from the ground surface. 40. Runoff Coefficients used for hydraulic calculations shall be as follows: a. Pervious areas—0.35 b. Impervious areas—0.95 41. Drainage runoff shall not be allowed to flow across lot lines or across subdivision boundaries onto adjacent private property without an appropriate recorded easement being provided for this purpose. 42. All off-site drainage facilities required by the City Engineer to accommodate the runoff from the subdivision shall be provided by the Applicant at no cost to the City. 43. All building downspouts shall be connected to rigid pipe roof leaders which shall discharge into an approved drainage device or facility that meets the C3 stormwater treatment requirements of Municipal Regional Permit. 44. All storm drainage runoff shall be discharged into a pipe system or concrete gutter. Runoff shall not be surface drained into surrounding private property or public streets. 45. Existing on-site drains that are not adequately sized to accommodate run-off from the fully developed property and upstream drainage basin shall be improved as required by the Applicant’s civil engineering consultant’s plans and specifications as approved by the City Engineer. These on-site improvements shall be installed at no cost to the City. 46. The on-site storm drainage system shall not be dedicated to the City for ownership or maintenance. The storm drainage system and any storm water pollutions control devices within the subdivision shall be owned, repaired, and maintained by the property owner or association if a property owner’s association is formed. Sanitary Sewer 47. The Applicant shall abandon all existing private sewer laterals from the project site connected to the public sanitary sewer system. The number of sewer laterals to be abandoned shall be shown on the plans and shall be confirmed by the review of a video inspection of the private sanitary sewer main. 48. The Applicant shall submit a sewer capacity study to determine the required sizes of the new private sanitary sewer mains serving the entire subdivision including the sewer pipe beneath the navigable slough connecting to the public sanitary sewer Pump Station 11 south of the navigable slough. The study shall account for flows from all parcels connected to the sewer mains and any future flows based on the max density of the zoning. Sanitary sewer mains shall not flow more than 2/3 full at peak wet weather flow. 49. The Applicant shall construct new private sanitary sewer mains and laterals to serve the development including the segment of sanitary sewer main beneath the navigable slough. 50. The Applicant shall install new private sewer mains and laterals to City Standards. 304 51. Sanitary Sewer plan shall show all existing and proposed utilities. Be sure to provide minimum horizontal and vertical clearances for all existing and proposed utilities. Also include all existing and proposed manhole, catch basin and pipe invert elevations. 52. All utility crossings shall be potholed, verified and shown on the plans prior to the building permit submittal. 53. The on-site sanitary sewer system/plumbing shall be designed and installed in accordance with the Uniform Plumbing Code, as amended and adopted by the City, and in accordance with the requirements of the South San Francisco Building Division. 54. Each on-site sanitary sewer manhole and cleanout shall be accessible to maintenance personnel and equipment via pathway or driveways as appropriate. Each maintenance structure shall be surrounded by a level pad of sufficient size to provide a safe work area. 55. The on-site sanitary sewer system up to the public sanitary sewer manhole connection shall not be dedicated to the City for maintenance. The sanitary sewer facilities within the subdivision shall be repaired and maintained by the property owner Homeowner’s Association. Dry Utilities 56. The Applicant shall underground the overhead utilities on Terminal Court from the existing utility pole on the west side of the I-101 on-ramp, along the project frontage, and to the existing utility pole in front of Tract A Parcel 1, just east of the cul-de-sac. 57. The Applicant shall underground all existing overhead utilities within the development site. 58. All new electrical and communication lines serving the property shall be placed underground within the property being developed and to the nearest overhead facility or underground utility vault. Pull boxes, junction structures, vaults, valves, and similar devices shall not be installed within pedestrian walkway areas. 59. The Applicant shall install a 3-inch diameter spare conduit with pull boxes and pull rope for future fiber optic cable installation in the joint trench on Terminal Court. Domestic Water 60. The Applicant shall be responsible to coordinate with California Water Service (Calwater) do determine if their existing public water distribution system has the capacity to serve the development. Any off-site water system improvements that may be needed, as determined by Calwater, will be the responsibility of the Applicant at the Applicant’s expense. 61. The Applicant shall coordinate with the California Water Service (Calwater) for all water-related issues. All on-site private water mains and services shall be installed to the standards of Calwater at the expense of the applicant. 62. The Applicant shall install fire hydrants at the locations specified by the Fire Marshal. Installation shall be in accordance with City Standards as administered by the Fire Marshal. 305 63. All proposed fire hydrants shall be Public Fire Hydrants on a Public water system unless otherwise approved by the Fire Marshal. On-site Improvements 64. The Applicant shall design all building and site improvements to accommodate the requirements of Chapter 20.180 Flood Plain/Sea Level Rise Overlay of the City’s Municipal Code. All proposed subterranean parking areas shall be equipped with flood gates or other means needed to prevent flooding below the design flood elevation. 65. All internal driveways must comply with City of South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.330.010. One-way travel lanes must be clearly marked and signed accordingly. Internal driveways that also function as Emergency Vehicle Access (EVA) routes must be at least 20 feet wide. 66. Staging or storing of trash bins shall not be permitted on Public right-of-way or on-site within the Emergency Vehicle Access Easement. 67. The Applicant shall submit a construction access plan that clearly identifies all areas of proposed access during the proposed development. 68. Prior to receiving a Certificate of Occupancy from the Building Division, the Applicant shall require its Civil Engineer to inspect the finished grading surrounding the building and to certify that it conforms to the approved site plan and that there is positive drainage away from the exterior of the building. The Applicant shall make any modifications to the grading, drainage, or other improvements required by the project engineer to conform to intent of his plans. 69. The Applicant shall submit a proposed workplan and intended methodologies to ensure any existing structures on or along the development’s property line are protected during proposed activities. 70. All common areas which are to be landscaped and irrigated shall meet the requirements of the City’s Water Efficiency Landscape Ordinance (WELO). Submit landscape, drainage and grading plans for review and approval by the Engineering Division. 71. Any monument signs to be installed for the project shall be located completely on private property and shall not encroach into the City’s right-of-way. The Developer shall ensure that placement of the monument signs do not obstruct clear lines of sight for vehicles entering or exiting the site. Grading 72. The recommendations contained within the geotechnical report shall be included in the Site Grading and Drainage Plan. The Site Grading and Drainage Plan shall be prepared by the developer’s civil engineer and approved by the project geotechnical engineer. 73. During grading operations, the entire project site shall be adequately sprinkled with water to prevent dust or sprayed with an effect dust palliative to prevent dust from being blown into the air and carried onto adjacent private and public property. Dust control shall be for seven days a 306 week and 24 hours a day. Should any problems arise from dust, the developer shall hire an environmental inspector at his/her expense to ensure compliance with the grading permit. 74. Haul roads within the City of South San Francisco shall be cleaned daily, or more often, as required by the City Engineer, of all dirt and debris spilled or tracked onto City streets or private driveways. 75. The Applicant shall submit a winterization plan for all undeveloped areas within the site to control silt and stormwater runoff from entering adjacent public or private property. This plan shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval prior to September 1 of each year. The approved plan shall be implemented prior to November 1 of each year. 76. Prior to placing any foundation concrete, the Applicant shall hire a licensed land surveyor or civil engineer authorized to practice land surveying to certify that the new foundation forms conform with all setbacks from confirmed property lines as shown on the Plans. A letter certifying the foundation forms shall be submitted to the Engineering Division for approval. 77. The applicant is required by ordinance to provide for public safety and the protection of public and private property in the vicinity of the land to be graded from the impacts of the proposed grading work. 78. All hauling and grading operations are restricted to between the hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. for residential areas and 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. for industrial/commercial areas, Monday through Friday, excluding holidays. 79. Unless approved in writing by the City Engineer, no grading in excess of 200 cubic yards shall be accomplished between November 1 and May 1 of each year. Engineering Impact Fees 80. The Applicant shall pay the following Fees prior to receiving a Building Permit for the subject project: a) The Citywide Transportation Impact Fee per the formula established by Resolution 120- 2020. For any questions concerning Engineering COAs, please contact Anthony Schaffer at anthony.schaffer@ssf.net or (650) 829-6652. 307 D. Police Department requirements shall be as follows: All construction must conform to South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 15.48.070 Minimum security standards for non-residential buildings, (Ord. 1477 § 1C, 2013; Ord. 1166 § 1, 1995) 15.48.085 Additional Security Measures May Be Required Per South San Francisco Municipal Code 15.48.085 -Additional Security Measures, the following conditions will also be required: 1. The applicant shall install and maintain a system allowing first responders to enter the building(s) by means of a code to be entered into a keypad or similar input device. A permanent code shall be issued to the Police Department. Physical keys or electronic access cards will not satisfy this requirement. Please note this is separate from the Fire Department’s “Knoxbox” requirement. This access must be provided at two entry points, each on a different side of the building to allow first responders a tactical advantage when entering. 2. Any exterior double door entrances shall only have one exterior handle, which should be on the right door (from a person's perspective from the outside). This is to prevent the malicious locking/chaining of the doors from the outside. This requirement shall also apply to interior double doors to shared common areas. 3. The hardware design of any double doorways shall prevent any doors from being secured in a closed position to either another door or a fixed object within four feet of any door by means of a rope, cable, chain, or similar item. This is to prevent malicious prevention of egress and/or ingress by building occupants or first responders. Pay particular attention to all glass doorways. See possible samples below. Acceptable: Unacceptable: 308 4. All exterior doorways shall be illuminated during darkness by a white light source that has full cut-off and is of pedestrian scale. 5. All interior common and service areas, such as the garage, bicycle storage area, fire escapes, etc., shall be always illuminated with a white light source that is controlled by a tamperproof switch, or a switch located in an inaccessible location to passers-by. 6. The landing at the lowest level of service staircases, such as those in the garage area or fire escapes, shall have some mechanism, such as fencing and/or a gate, to prevent access to those areas where a person could conceal themselves and/or loiter in said area. The fencing and/or gate shall be at least six feet tall and constructed in a manner that makes it difficult to climb. The fencing and/or gate shall be roughly flush with the lowest step to provide maximum access restriction to the area to the side or of underneath the stairs. Please see below examples. 7. Any exterior bicycle racks installed shall be of an inverted “U” design, or other design that allows two different locking points on each bicycle. 8. Any publicly accessible benches shall be of a design that prevents persons from lying on them, such as a center railing. 9. Any publicly accessible power outlets shall be of a design that prevents their access or use during those hours the business is normally closed. If physical locking covers are used, they must be made of metal, not plastic, and locks must be installed prior to inspection. 10. Any publicly accessible raised edge surfaces, such as retaining walls, concrete benches, handrails, or railings, shall be of a design that prevents or discourages skateboard use on those surfaces. 309 11. The mature height of all shrubbery shall be no higher than three feet, if so, it shall be maintained at a maximum height of three feet, and tree canopies shall be no lower than six feet above grade. 12. The applicant shall install and maintain a camera surveillance system that conforms to the minimum technical specifications of South San Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 8.66.050 Minimum technological standards, (Ord. 1515, 2016). The video surveillance cameras will be used as a crime deterrent and assist with the identification and apprehension of criminals if a crime is committed on the property. Enough cameras shall be installed to provide adequate coverage for the intended space. Cameras shall be placed minimally in the following locations: • All exterior entrances/exits • Garage area (providing coverage to entire parking area) • Bicycle storage area • Main lobby of building • Lobby of sales/leasing office • Loading docks 13. Any leasing of sales offices within the building shall be alarmed with a central station monitored silent intruder alarm system. 14. The Police Department requires acknowledgement of these comments to include specific locations in the plans where the applicable change requests have been made. 15. The Police Department reserves the right to review and comment upon the submission of revised and updated plans. For questions concerning this project, please contact the Planning Sergeant at (650) 877-8927 or at planningsergeant@ssf.net. Police Department contact: Sergeant Sean Curmi (650) 877-8927 310 E. Water Quality Control Plant requirements shall be as follows: 1. Storm drains must be protected during construction. Discharge of any demolition/construction debris or water to the storm drain system is prohibited. 2. Do not use gravel bags for erosion control in the street or drive aisles. Drains in street must have inlet and throat protection of a material that is not susceptible to breakage from vehicular traffic. 3. No floatable bark shall be used in landscaping. Only fibrous mulch or pea gravel is allowed. 4. After 7/1/19, Demolition Projects must complete a PCBs Screening Assessment Form (attached and available in Building Division). If screening determines the building is an applicable structure, the Protocol for Evaluating PCBs-Containing Materials before Building Demolition shall be followed. Submit a PCB screening package for each address/building containing: 1.) PCBs Screening Form 2.) QAQC checklist 3.) Contractor’s Report 4.) Analytical Results (if applicable) 5. As site falls in a Moderate Trash Generation area per South San Francisco’s Trash Generation Map (http://www.flowstobay.org/content/municipal-trash-generation-maps), determined by the Water Quality Control Division: - Regional Water Quality Control Board-approved full trash capture devices must be installed to treat the stormwater drainage from the site. - At a minimum, a device must be installed before the onsite drainage enters the City’s public stormwater system (i.e. trash capture must take place no farther downstream than the last private stormwater drainage structure on the site). - An Operation & Maintenance Agreement will be required to be recorded with San Mateo County, ensuring the device(s) will be properly maintained. - A full trash capture system is any single device or series of devices that traps all particles retained by a 5 mm mesh screen and has a design treatment capacity of not less than the peak flow rate resulting from a one-year, one-hour storm in the sub-drainage area or designed to carry at least the same flow as the storm drain connected to the inlet. 6. Roof leaders/gutters must NOT be plumbed directly to storm drains; they shall discharge to stormwater treatment devices or landscaping first. 7. Fire sprinkler test drainage must be plumbed to sanitary sewer and be clearly shown on plans. 8. Trash enclosure shall be covered (roof, canopy) and contained (wall/fence). Floor shall slope to a central drain that discharges to the sanitary sewer system. If food prep to be involved, the central 311 drain shall first discharge to a grease trap/interceptor and then connect to the sanitary sewer. Details of trash enclosure shall be clearly provided on plans. 9. Install a condensate drain line connected to the sanitary sewer for rooftop equipment and clearly show on plans. 10. If laboratories will be installed, a segregated non-pressurized lab waste line must collect all laboratory waste. Install a sample port on the lab waste line outside the building, which will be accessible at all times. 11. Submit specs on the sample port. 12. If a food service kitchen/ prep area is to be installed, it shall connect to a gravity grease interceptor at least 1000 gallons (liquid capacity) in size. Sizing of the grease removal device must be in accordance with the uniform plumbing code. 13. Grease interceptor shall be connected to all non-domestic wastewater sources in the kitchen (wash sinks, mop sinks, floor drains) and shown on plans. 14. A cut sheet of the Grease Interceptor/Trap must be shown on plans. 15. Garbage Disposals in Industrial/Commercial facilities are prohibited by City of South San Francisco Municipal Code. Do not include Garbage Disposal(s) in plans. 16. Applicant will be required to pay a Sewer Capacity Fee (connection fee) based on SSF City Council-approved EDU calculation (involving anticipated flow, BOD and TSS calculations and including credits for previous site use). Based on the information received thus far, the estimated Sewer Capacity Fee will be $1,842,081.00, payable with the Building Permit. 17. Elevator sump drainage (if applicable) shall be connected to an oil/water separator prior to connection to the sanitary sewer. 18. Drains in parking garage (if applicable) must be plumbed through an oil/water separator and then into the sanitary sewer system and clearly shown on plans. 19. Wherever feasible, install landscaping that minimizes irrigation runoff, promotes surface infiltration, minimizes use of pesticides and fertilizers and incorporates appropriate sustainable landscaping programs (such as Bay-Friendly Landscaping). 20. Site is subject to C.3 requirements of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit (please see SMCWPPP C.3 Regulated Projects Guide at https://www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment for guidance). C.3 Compliance will be reviewed and determined by the City’s consultant, WC- 3. The following items will be required: 21. Applicant shall provide 100% Low-Impact Development for C.3 stormwater treatment for all of the project’s impervious areas per MRP Section C.3.b. In-lieu of feasible on-site treatment, qualifying applicants may apply for the Special Project Status exemption per Provision C.3.e.ii to Low Impact Development for C.3 treatment. However, the applicant must provide 312 a complete Infeasibility Narrative establishing all of the following (while still treating as much of the runoff via LID onsite as possible): a. Infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures onsite; b. Infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the project’s drainage area with LID treatment measures offsite within South San Francisco, providing LID treatment of an equivalent amount of runoff either at a: i. Available Regional Stormwater Project in same watershed ; ii. Property owned by the project proponent in the same watershed; or iii. Planned South San Francisco Green Infrastructure (GI) Stormwater Project. 1. Project options to be made available by City Engineering staff upon request c. Infeasibility of treating 100% of the amount of runoff identified in Provision C.3.d for the project’s drainage area with some combination of LID treatment measures onsite, offsite or at a Regional Project in the same watershed; d. Infeasibility of installing LID treatment within the Right-of-Way. If Applicant chooses to treat any of their Project’s impervious areas within the ROW, Applicant shall size the treatment measures to treat both the Project’s impervious areas and the ROW. The ROW area to be treated shall be from the property line to the street centerline or crown whichever is a greater distance along the entire project frontage. Sizing and design shall conform to the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program design templates and technical guidance and be approved by the Water Quality Control Plant and the Engineering Division. Applicant shall maintain all treatment measures required by the project and enter into a Stormwater Treatment Measure Maintenance Agreement with the City. 22. Completed attached forms for Low Impact Development (C3-C6 Project Checklist). Forms must be on 8.5in X 11in paper and signed and wet stamped by a professional engineer. Calculations must be submitted with this package. Use required forms for completing documents, as old forms are no longer sufficient Forms can also be found at http://www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment A completed copy must also be emailed to andrew.wemmer @ssf.net 23. Sign and have engineer wet stamp forms for Low Impact Development. 24. Submit flow calculations and related math for LID. 25. Complete attached Operation and Maintenance (O&M) agreements. Use attached forms for completing documents, as old forms are no longer sufficient. Do not sign agreement, as the city will need to review prior to signature. Prepare packet and submit including a preferred return address for owner signature. Packet should also be mailed or emailed to: 313 Andrew Wemmer City of SSF WQCP 195 Belle Air Road South San Francisco, CA 94080 Andrew.wemmer@ssf.net Exhibit Templates can also be found within Chapter 6 the C.3 Technical Guidance at http://www.flowstobay.org/newdevelopment. 26. The onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay). 27. Landscaping shall meet the following conditions related to reduction of pesticide use on the project site: a. Where feasible, landscaping shall be designed and operated to treat stormwater runoff by incorporating elements that collect, detain, and infiltrate runoff. In areas that provide detention of water, plants that are tolerant of saturated soil conditions and prolonged exposure to water shall be specified. b. Plant materials selected shall be appropriate to site specific characteristics such as soil type, topography, climate, amount and timing of sunlight, prevailing winds, rainfall, air movement, patterns of land use, ecological consistency and plant interactions to ensure successful establishment. c. Existing native trees, shrubs, and ground cover shall be retained and incorporated into the landscape plan to the maximum extent practicable. d. Proper maintenance of landscaping, with minimal pesticide use, shall be the responsibility of the property owner. e. Integrated pest management (IPM) principles and techniques shall be encouraged as part of the landscaping design to the maximum extent practicable. Examples of IPM principles and techniques include: i. Select plants that are well adapted to soil conditions at the site. ii. Select plants that are well adapted to sun and shade conditions at the site. In making these selections, consider future conditions when plants reach maturity, as well as seasonal changes. iii. Provide irrigation appropriate to the water requirements of the selected plants. iv. Select pest-resistant and disease-resistant plants. v. Plant a diversity of species to prevent a potential pest infestation from affecting the entire landscaping plan. vi. Use “insectary” plants in the landscaping to attract and keep beneficial insects. 314 28. A SWPPP must be submitted (if > 1 acre). Drawings must note that erosion control shall be in effect all year long. 29. A copy of the state approved NOI must be submitted (if > 1 acre). Please have applicant contact Andrew Wemmer at Water Quality Control with any questions at (650) 829-3840 or Andrew.wemmer@ssf.net. 315