HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Minutes 2011-03-16 SPECIAL MEETING
, S MINUTES
oa r o A
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
CITY COUNCIL
OF THE
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
P.O. Box 711 (City Hall, 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, California 94083
MUNICIPAL BUILDING
COMMUNITY ROOM
33 ARROYO DRIVE
SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 16, 2011
1. Call to Order: 7:02 p.m.
2. Roll Call. Present: Councilmembers Addiego, Gonzalez
and Matsumoto, Vice Mayor
Garbarino and Mayor Mullin.*
Absent: None.
* For Convenience Purposes, these
minutes apply the convention of
referring to RDA Boardmembers
with their Council titles through the
body of these minutes reflecting
discussion at the joint meeting.
3. Agenda Review.
None.
4. Public Comments - Comments are limited to items on the Special Meeting Agenda.
None.
5. Consideration of Proposal from Peninsula Conflict Resolution Center.
Staff and Council reviewed and discussed a proposal from the Peninsula Conflict Resolution
Center ( "PCRC "). It was noted that PCRC promotes positive collaboration and active
engagement by residents in the community. PCRC trains people to communicate and problem
solve together, facilitates group meetings, builds skills for public participation and, as a neutral
third party, assists people in conflict to develop mutually acceptable agreements.
An outline of the proposal of services for the City of South San Francisco included: coordinating
and facilitating a Strategic Planning Process, supporting existing efforts through partnerships
with the SSF Police Department, and staffing on -going support of Community Coalition for Safe
Neighborhoods.
Council expressed some concerns over the citizen complaint portion of the plan, but overall felt
it was a positive step. Concerns were also expressed about the allocation and use of funding
towards aspects of the program. The item would be discussed and voted on at the next regularly
scheduled council meeting.
6. Public Hearing:
S /SKS Investments /applicant
Oyster Pt Ventures, LLC /owner
379 OYSTER POINT BLVD
P09 -0085: GPA 11 -0001, SP 11 -0001, DR09 -0049, ZA 11 -0001, RZ 11 -0001,
PP 11 -0001, DA 11 -0001, DDA 11 -0001 & EIR09 -0001.
Oyster Point Redevelopment Project, including a General Plan Amendment,
Redevelopment Plan Amendment, Zoning Text Amendment (Specific
Plan), Rezone (Zoning Map Amendment), Specific Plan Appendix, Precise
Plan, Transportation Demand Management Plan, Design Review,
Development Agreement, Disposition and Development Agreement, and
Environmental Impact Report to allow the demolition of various existing
improvements and the construction of a new office and research and
development campus at a 1.25 FAR, road alignment, utilities, park, open
space, marina improvements (i.e. parking areas), Bay Trail improvements and
public restrooms on approximately 82 acres of property located at the eastern
end of Oyster Point Boulevard and adjacent to the Oyster Point Marina, in
accordance with SSFMC Title 19, and Chapters 20.040, 20.110, 20.230,
20.300, 20.310, 20.360, 20.400, 20.450, 20.460, 20.480, 20.530, 20.540, and
20.550.
Public Hearing opened: 7:30 p.m.
Associate Planner Gerry Beaudin presented the staff report. Oyster Point Ventures, LLC
( "OPV "), a joint venture between Shorenstein Properties and SKS Investments LLC, owns
property commonly known as the Oyster Point Business Park, and located at the terminus of
Oyster Point Boulevard; and the City of South San Francisco owns property commonly known as
the Oyster Point Marina Property, adjacent to the Oyster Point Business Park. OPV and the City
SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 16, 2011
MINUTES PAGE 2
desire to redevelop the Oyster Point Business Park and the Oyster Point Marina Property
(collectively, "Project Site ") with an office /R &D life sciences campus, commercial, hotel,
recreational, and public open space uses.
The proposed Project is consistent and compatible with all elements in the City of South San
Francisco General Plan (as proposed for amendment). The 1999 General Plan includes policies
and programs that are designed to encourage the development of high technology campuses in
the East of 101 Area, allow for employee - serving services, preparation of a Traffic Demand
Management Plan to reduce congestion impacts. Consistent with these policies, the Oyster Point
Specific Plan and Phase I Project provides for the phased removal and replacement of existing
buildings on the Project Site and phased construction of an office /R &D development at an FAR
of 1.25 on the western portion of the Project Site, including a "Phase I" development consisting
of grading and refuse relocation for the initial three buildings and a parking structure, as well as
employee - serving amenities pursuant to a preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan,
and additional public amenities including creation of waterfront open space, a promenade along
the realigned Oyster Point and Marina Boulevards, construction of a flexible -use recreation area,
grading and site preparation of the future hotel parcel, as well as realignment, reconfiguration,
replacement, and improvement to existing roadways and infrastructure to facilitate the
development, subject to the terms of the Project entitlements including the proposed
Development Agreement. Approval of the Project, including the proposed Development
Agreement, will not impede achievement of General Plan policies.
The Project will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare
of the City, because the Project proposes redevelopment of an underutilized Project Site, which
will result in an office and research and development campus -like facility, with substantial public
amenities, including enhanced and improved access to the bay front and public open space. The
Project will also facilitate repair of the landfill clay cap and upgrades to utilities and
infrastructure at the Project Site.
The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the land use being proposed.
The General Plan specifically contemplates the proposed type of project, and the suitability of the
site for the proposed development was analyzed thoroughly in the Environmental Impact Report
prepared for the Project.
The Development Agreement would clarify and obligate several project features and mitigation
measures including payment of fees for traffic impacts, childcare impacts, public art, and other
infrastructure improvements, payment of certain future fees, including a Parks and Recreation
Fee and Fire Department Fee should the City adopt such fees before December 31, 2012, as well
as a $1.1 million cash payment. The Director of Economic and Community Development
reviewed the application for the Agreement and found the proposed Agreement to be in the
proper form, determined that the application was complete, and referred the application and
Agreement to the Planning Commission who approved both the project plan and development
agreement.
Councilwoman Matsumoto requested further information regarding the following items: specific
sizes of the designated boxes for landscaping, public art features, the TDM plan relative to
projected population and employment growth, and the presence of bike lanes.
SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 16, 2011
MINUTES PAGE 3
Councilman Addiego asked about the 40% target outlined in the TDM plan and a penalty that
would be assessed for non compliance. Planner Gerry Beaudin gave specific sizes for the
designated boxes, explained the public art options, and clarified the penalty fees for non TDM
compliance as $27,000 plus, with the fees going back into the TDM plan. He also verified the
presence of designated bike lanes throughout the plan as well as other bike improvements.
Director Van Duyn stated irrespective of numbers, the TDM plan had to be aggressive in order to
meet the projected growth. Vice Mayor Garbarino added perhaps a collaborative effort by
future /potential residents in the plan area could create an agreement with transportation providers
similar to that done by Genentech regarding shuttle service. Councilman Gonzalez mentioned
Genentech used to compensate employees for using public transportation.
Councilman Gonzalez asked if there would be any locations for people to congregate for resting
or having lunch, etc. He also had questions regarding parking, whether or not the number of
spaces was greater than necessary considering the public transportation options. As for job
opportunities, he wondered if it was possible to give hiring preference to the residents of South
San Francisco, not that he would deny other people from coming to the City for work. Lastly,
during the construction phase, he wanted to have Union employment.
Attorney Mattas noted in the development agreement, a prevailing wage was stipulated and
would be an obligation for the project.
Councilman Addiego expressed excitement over Phase I and was impressed with the design of
the buildings and how they complimented the water.
Vice Mayor Garbarino appreciated the inclusion of a childcare center in the area. He wanted to
use the Genentech childcare center as a model, as he found that to be a top notch facility. He
wanted to make sure the fuel efficient vehicle parking would include hybrid cars as well as
electric vehicles. The secured bicycling facility talked about may be the perfect opportunity for
an entrepreneur to open a bike shop. Lastly, he seconded Councilman Gonzalez' comments on
the hope that Union labor would be used, as it was important to the City. The developer agreed
with all of the Vice Mayor's sentiments. In response to the Union request, he noted Shorenstein
and SKS had a long history and positive relationship with the labor unions. He would be happy
to put council in touch with the Trade Unions and noted the intention to use Union labor just as
they do with their San Francisco projects.
Mayor Mullin shared the excitement expressed by the rest of Council and thanked staff for all
their efforts. He questioned the potential number of construction jobs created by Phase I. Exact
figures were not available at the time. The Mayor mentioned the City's Caltrain station was in
danger and advised the developer to watch the deliberations closely and advocate for keeping it
open, as it was a vital component of the development. He queried the status of the childcare fund
from the in lieu fees. Director Van Duyn did not have exact numbers at the moment but could
come back with the information.
Mayor Mullin further queried the impact of potential changes to RDA. City Attorney Mattas
stated there were resolutions being drafted allowing the project to continue under ownership of
the City rather than RDA. Mayor Mullin noted he had contacted other local officials, Senator
Yee and Assembly Member Hill, to schedule a meeting regarding the future of RDA. In terms of
sea level rise, he asked for an explanation of the grading referred to in the documents. Planner
SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 16, 2011
MINUTES PAGE 4
Beaudin explained the design perspective allowing a "gentle sloping," and trash relocation in a
manner that would raise up the development sight.
Councilwoman Matsumoto had further questions about sidewalks. Planner Beaudin stated the
Palm Promenade was designed to be the primary, path systems and sidewalks available. The
Councilwoman expressed concern about seniors' mobility on pathways. Planner Beaudin asked
if it was the material or some other aspect. He noted paths would be ADA accessible and
drainage would be an ongoing maintenance issue, but maintaining ADA compliance was
paramount. Lastly, she wanted there to be a bike share program.
Public Hearing Closed: 9:15 p.m.
Motion — Councilman Addiego /Second — Vice Mayor Garbarino: to waive reading and introduce
an ordinance amending Chapter 20.230 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code to repeal
Oyster Point Marina Specific Plan District regulations, and adopt the Oyster Point Specific Plan
to facilitate the public - private redevelopment of an office /research & development campus and
substantial public amenities at the Oyster Point Business Park and Oyster Point Marina property.
Unanimously approved by voice vote.
Motion — Councilman Gonzalez /Second — Vice Mayor Garbarino: to waive reading and
introduce an ordinance adopting a development agreement with the Oyster Point Ventures, LLC
for the public - private redevelopment of an office /research & development campus and
substantial public amenities at the Oyster Point Business Park and Oyster Point Marina
properties. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
Motion — Vice Mayor Garbarino /Second — Councilman Gonzalez: to continue the public hearing to
March 23, 2011. Unanimously approved by voice vote.
7. Closed Session: Conference with Real Property Negotiators
(Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8)
Properties: APN 015- 010 -600, 015 -190 -190, 015- 010 -260, 015- 010 -060
(Commonly known as the King Leases at Oyster Point Marina)
Agency Negotiator: Marty Van Duyn
Parties: South San Francisco, S /SKS, San Mateo County Harbor District
Under Negotiation: Terms for acquisition of property and leases.
Recess: 9:20 p.m.
Meeting Resumed: 9:28 p.m.
Closed Session began: 9:28 p.m.
Open Session resumed: 9:40 p.m.
Report out of Closed Session: Direction given, no reportable action taken.
SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 16, 2011
MINUTES PAGE 5
8. Adjournment.
Being no further business Mayor Mullin adjourned the meeting at 9:40 p.m.
Submitted: Approved:
i 1 1 , \\
.. s • Martinelli ' o Kevin Mullin
City Cler • . • Ag: cy lerk, Mayor and Chairperson
City of South San Fr. cisco and City of South San Francisco and
South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency South San Francisco Redevelopment Agency
SPECIAL REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL MEETING MARCH 16, 2011
MINUTES PAGE 6