HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 127-2017 (17-965)City of South San Francisco P.O. Box 711 (City Hall,
• 400 Grand Avenue)
South San Francisco, CA
• City Council
' Resolution: RES 127 -2017
File Number: 17 -965 Enactment Number: RES 127 -2017
RESOLUTION MAKING FINDINGS AND APPROVING THE USE
PERMIT MODIFICATION, PARKING REDUCTION REQUEST,
TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN, AND
DESIGN REVIEW AT 249 -279 EAST GRAND AVENUE IN THE
BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY PARK ZONING DISTRICT
SUBJECT TO THE DRAFT CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL.
WHEREAS, Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. ( "Applicant ") sought approval for the construction of
four research & development (R &D) /office buildings, a parking garage, surface parking, and related
improvements on an approximately 15.75 -acre site located at 249 -279 East Grand Avenue ( "Project" or
"249 East Grand Avenue Project "); and
WHEREAS, in approving the Project in 2006, the City of South San Francisco ( "City ") adopted the
following:
Ordinance No. 1372 -2006 approving a development agreement with Alexandria Real Estate Equities,
Inc.,
Resolution No. 53 -2006 approving a use permit, design review, and transportation demand management
(TDM) program, and certifying the 2006 Environmental Impact Report ( "2006 EIR ") (State
Clearinghouse No 2005042121); and
WHEREAS, Applicant now proposes to increase the floor area ratio (FAR) for the Project from 0.75 to
0.85 by increasing the size of the fourth (4th) building by 69,059 square feet (sq. ft.) to a total building
square footage of 202,260, and the height from four (4) to six (6) stories, and requests a parking
reduction to 2.17 parking spaces/ 1,000 sq. ft. for the Project in the Business and Technology Park (BTP)
Zoning District, which requires approval of a third amendment to the development agreement ( "Third
Amendment "), use permit modification, TDM, and design review; ( "Revised Project ") and
WHEREAS, the Design Review Board reviewed the Revised Project at its April 18, 2017 meeting, and
strongly recommended approval of the Revised Project; and
WHEREAS, environmental analysis for the Revised Project was conducted, which concluded that the
environmental effects associated with construction and operation of the Revised Project are fully within
the
City of South San Francisco Page 1
File Number. 17 -965
Enactment Number. RES 127 -2017
scope of the environmental analysis conducted in the 2006 EIR, such that the Revised Project does not
meet the criteria under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines sections 15164 or
15162 justifying preparation of a subsequent EIR and thus, an addendum is the appropriate
environmental document for the Revised Project; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164, an addendum to the 2006 EIR was prepared
for the Revised Project ( "2017 Addendum "); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the Revised Project and recommended approval of the
Third Amendment, use permit modification, parking reduction request, TDM plan, and design review, as
well as the 2017 Addendum at its public hearing on August 17, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a properly noticed public hearing on October 11, 2017, at which time
interested parties had the opportunity to be heard, and to review the Revised Project and the 2017
Addendum, as well as supporting documents, prior to the City Council making its decision on the
Revised Project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council exercised its independent judgment and analysis, and considered all
reports, recommendations and testimony before making a determination on the Revised Project.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, based on the entirety of the record before it, which includes
without limitation, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Public Resources Code §21000,
et seq. and the CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations §15000, et seq.; the South San
Francisco General Plan, and General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR); the South San Francisco
Municipal Code; 2006 EIR, and associated mitigation monitoring and reporting programs (MMRP) and
statement of overriding considerations (SOC); all site plans, and all reports, minutes, and public
testimony submitted as part of the Planning Commission's duly noticed August 17, 2017 meeting; all site
plans, and all reports, minutes, and public testimony submitted as part of the City Council's duly noticed
October 11, 2017 meeting; and any other evidence (within the meaning of Public Resources Code
§21080(e) and §21082.2), the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby finds as follows:
A. General Findings
The foregoing recitals are true and correct and made a part of this resolution.
The Exhibit attached to this resolution as Exhibit A (draft conditions of approval), is incorporated by
reference as if they were each set forth fully herein.
The documents and other material constituting the record for these proceedings are located at the
City of South San Francisco Page 2
File Number: 17 -965 Enactment Number: RES 127 -2017
ming Division for the City of South San Francisco, 315 Maple Avenue, South San Francisco, CA 94080,
and in the custody of the Planning Manager.
B. Conditional Use Permit Findings
The Revised Project is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all applicable
standards of the Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code, including those in Chapter 20.110
( "Employment Districts ") as well as the implementing policies and guidelines found in the Business &
Technology Park Zoning District because as proposed for revision, the Revised Project remains a
campus -style development that provides on -site amenities, such as a fitness center and cafeteria, which
are consistent with the General Plan policies for the East of 101 area.
The Revised Project is consistent with the City's General Plan because the building enhancements and
associated amenities and landscaping are consistent with the policies and design direction provided in
the South San Francisco General Plan for the Business & Technology Park land use designation.
The proposed use will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community,
nor be detrimental to the surrounding properties or improvements because the Revised Project is located
in the Business & Technology Park area of the community and will be transforming a parking lot into
uses that are consistent with the General Plan designation and zoning regulations for the area; and
because the Revised Project continues a campus -style environment and remains consistent with the
maximum FAR of 1.0 with implementation of a TDM program.
The Revised Project complies with the City's design guidelines which were used to evaluate the Revised
Project by staff and the City's Design Review Board at their meeting on April 18, 2017.
The design, location, size and operating characteristics of the proposed activity would be compatible
with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity because the project is
campus- oriented and provides similar amenities to surrounding office/R &D sites.
The site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of use being proposed, including access,
utilities, and the absence of physical constraints because the project site is located directly adjacent to
other office /R &D sites with similar connections and physical and topographical characteristics.
An environmental determination has been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental
Quality Act in that the 2017 Addendum was prepared, which concluded that the Revised Project is fully
within the analysis of the 2006 certified EIR and no further environmental review is necessary because
the Revised Project will not result in any new or substantially more severe significant environmental
effects than identified in the EIR.
City of South San Francisco Page 3
File Number: 17 -965
Enactment Number: RES 127 -2017
Findings Required for Parking Reduction Request in addition to the Conditional Use Permit Findings
(SSFMC 20.330.006
Based on the nature of the proposed operation; proximity to frequent transit service; transportation
characteristics of persons residing, working, or visiting the site; and because the applicant has
undertaken a TDM program, parking demand for the proposed use will be reduced and parking demand
should not exceed the provided parking on -site.
Based on the analysis contained in the TDM plan and transportation memo prepared for the Revised
Project, the use will adequately be served by the proposed on -site parking since the site will be more
than adequately served by the proposed surface parking and four -story parking garage.
Parking demand generated by the Revised Project will not exceed the capacity of or have a detrimental
impact on the supply of on- street parking in the surrounding area since the TDM outlines programs and
strategies that substantially support a request for a parking reduction from 2.5 parking spaces/ 1,000 sq.
ft. to 2.17 parking spaces/ 1,000 sq. ft.
C. Design Review Findings
The Revised Project is consistent with the applicable standards and requirements of the Zoning
Ordinance because as submitted and modified through the design review process, the Revised Project
meets or complies with the applicable standards included in the Employment Districts (Chapter 20.110).
The General Plan Land Use Designation for the site is Business & Technology Park (BTP) and the
Revised Project is consistent with the General Plan because the proposed R &D/ Office building use is
consistent with the policies and design direction provided in the South San Francisco General Plan for
the Business & Technology Park land use designation.
The Revised Project is consistent with the design guidelines adopted by the City Council in that the
proposed use is consistent with projects in the East of 101 area and remains a campus -style development
that provides on -site amenities.
The Revised Project is subject to use permit approval and those findings have been adequately made
above in support of the Revised Project.
The Revised Project is consistent with the applicable design review criteria in Section 20.480.006
( "Design Review Criteria ") because the Revised Project has been evaluated against, and found to be
City of South San Francisco Page 4
File Number: 17 -965
Enactment Number: RES 127 -2017
sistent with, each of the eight design review criteria included in the "Design Review Criteria" section of
the Zoning Ordinance.
D. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan Findings
The proposed trip reduction measures are feasible and appropriate for the Revised Project, considering
the proposed use or mix of uses and the Revised Project's location, size, and hours of operation.
The proposed performance guarantees and conditions of approval will ensure that the target alternative
mode use established for the Revised Project by the Zoning Ordinance will be achieved and maintained
since the conditions of approval require continuing ongoing developer support at the site of the Revised
Project.
E. Development Agreement Findings
The Third Amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs
specified in the general plan and any applicable specific plan because the Revised Project is an office/
R &D facility that meets the Business and Technology Park general plan land use provisions and
programs.
The Third Amendment is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for the
land use district in which the real property is located because the Revised Project provides an office/
R &D facility with a campus -style environment.
The Third Amendment is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use
practice because the Third Amendment enhances the site plan and further improves the pedestrian
environment from the public right -of -way.
The Third Amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare because the
amendment preserves a campus -like environment and creates a rails -to- trails connection for employees
and visitors.
The Third Amendment will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation
of property valued because the Third Amendment improves the property's campus -like environment and
is consistent with surrounding R &D and office uses.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED subject to the conditions of approval, attached as Exhibit A to this
resolution, the City Council of the City of South San Francisco hereby makes the findings contained in
this resolution and approves use permit modification (UPM17- 0004), parking reduction request, TDM
plan
City of South San Francisco Page 5
File Number: 17 -965
(TDM17- 0003), and design review (DR17 -0024) for the Revised Project.
Enactment Number: RES 127 -2017
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution shall become effective immediately upon its passage
and adoption.
At a meeting of the City Council on 10/11/2017, a motion was made by Richard Garbarino, seconded by
Mark Addiego, that this Resolution be adopted. The motion passed.
Yes: 5 Vice Mayor Normandy, Councilmember Garbarino, Councilmember
Matsumoto, Mayor Gupta, and Councilmember Addiego
Attest by
i a 'ell'
City of South San Francisco Page 6
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
UPM17-0004: DAA17-0003, TDM17-0003, DR17-0024
249-279 East Grand Avenue
(As approved by the City Council on October 11, 2017)
A) Planning Division requirements shall be as follows:
1. The applicant shall comply with the City's Standard Conditions of Approval for Commercial,
Industrial, Mixed-Use and Multi-Family Residential Projects and with all the requirements of
all affected City Divisions and Departments as contained in the attached conditions, except as
otherwise amended by the following Conditions of Approval.
2. The project drawings, comprised of the proposed R&D/ office building, parking garage, and
landscape improvements, shall substantially comply with the approved plans prepared by
DGA dated July 2017, as approved by the Planning Commission in association with UPM17-
0004 and DR17-0024, as amended by the Conditions of Approval. The final plans shall be
subject to the review and approval of the Chief Planner.
3. 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.
4. The project is required to comply with applicable mitigation measures identified in the 2005
EIR, as addressed as part of the 2017 Addendum.
5. All existing and proposed landscaping shall be maintained in a sufficient manner to the Chief
Planner’s satisfaction. A final landscaping plan shall be submitted and approved by the
Chief Planner as part of the Building Division permit submittal.
6. All landscaping installed within the public right-of-way shall be maintained by the property
owner.
7. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit proof to the Planning
Division of Federal Aviation Authority (FAA) clearance/authorization for the height of the
proposed structure.
8. All equipment (either roof or ground-mounted) shall be screened from view of public streets
and neighboring properties through the use of integral architectural elements, such as
enclosures or roof screens, and potentially landscape screening. Equipment enclosures
and/or roof screens shall be painted and/or finished to match the building. Prior to the
issuance of building permits, the applicant shall review the proposed location, size and
screening of all mechanical equipment and utilities infrastructure and obtain Chief Planner
approval.
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 and Chief Planner.
10. 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.
11. At no time shall any trash or operation materials be stored outside of the existing or new
commercial buildings. Such action could be subject to Code Enforcement Division action.
12. The applicant is responsible for maintaining site security prior to, and throughout the
construction process. This includes installation of appropriate fencing, lighting, remote
monitors, or on-site security personnel as needed.
13. Prior to approval of the building permit, the developer shall submit a building signage and
monument package, consistent with the approved Master Sign Program for the 249-279 East
Grand Avenue Project, for approval by the City’s Chief Planner.
14. 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. A site inspection by Planning Division staff
will be required prior to proceeding with exterior construction.
15. In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.400 (Transportation
Demand Management), prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit a
Final TDM Plan and ongoing monitoring program for review and approval by the Chief
Planner. The TDM Plan shall be designed to achieve a minimum 32% alternative mode use
target.
16. Any future use modification from R&D to another use that may increase the total number of
vehicle trips, would need to be adequately analyzed through CEQA and may require a Use
Permit Modification.
17. After the building permits are approved, but before beginning construction, the
owner/applicant shall hold a preconstruction conference with City Planning, Building, and
Engineering staff and other interested parties. The developer shall arrange for the attendance
of the construction manager, contractor, and all relevant subcontractors.
18. Per the adopted Climate Action Plan (http://www.ssf.net/DocumentCenter/View/6186), the
following mandatory requirements shall be included in the Building Division permit
submittal for review and approval by the Chief Planner:
Solar Wiring Installation - Measure 4.1, Action 3:
Require all new development to install conduit to accommodate wiring for solar.
Planning Division contact: Ryan Wassum at (650) 877-8535
B) Fire Department requirements shall be as follows:
1. Install fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13/SSFFD requirements under separate fire plan check
and permit for overhead and underground.
2. Exterior canopies and overhangs require fire sprinkler protection.
3. Fire sprinkler system shall be central station monitored per California Fire Code section
1003.3.
4. Install a standpipe system per NFPA 14/SSFFD requirements under separate fire plan check
and permit.
5. Install exterior listed horn/strobe alarm device, not a bell.
6. Elevator if provided shall not contain shunt-trips.
7. At least one elevator shall be sized for a gurney the minimum size shall be in accordance with
the CFC.
8. Buildings 4 stories or more will require a modified smoke control system. A rational analysis
is required before building plans are approved.
9. Fire alarm plans shall be provided per NFPA 72 and the City of South San Francisco Municipal
Code.
10. Provide fire extinguishers throughout the building.
11. All Non parking space curbs to be painted red to local Fire Code Specifications
12. Access road shall have all weather driving capabilities and support the imposed load of 75,000
pounds.
13. Road gradient and vehicle turning widths shall not exceed maximum allowed by engineering
department.
14. Provide fire flow in accordance with California Fire Code Appendix III-A.
15. Provide fire hydrants; location and number to be determined.
16. All buildings shall provide premise identification in accordance with SSF municipal code
section 15.24.100.
17. Provide Knox key box for each building with access keys to entry doors, electrical/mechanical
rooms, elevators, and others to be determined.
18. The minimum road width is 20 feet per the California Fire Code.
19. Local Fire Code and vehicle specifications and templates available at
http://www.ssf.net/depts/fire/prevention/fire_permits.asp
20. Provide HMBP including what chemicals are present and to what quantities.
21. Provide on the plan the control areas, list of hazardous material and quantities that will be
present in the laboratories, include all flammable and combustible materials.
22. All buildings shall have Emergency Responder Radio Coverage throughout in compliance
with Section 510 of the California Fire Code.
23. This new commercial construction will be assessed an adopted Public Safety Impact Fee. The
amount for Office/R & D is $0.13 per square foot for the Police Department and $0.31 per
square foot for the Fire Department.
Fire Department contact: Luis Da Silva, Fire Marshal at (650) 829-6645
C) Water Quality Division requirements shall be as follows:
1. Site is subject to C.3 requirements of the Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit
2. Sign and have engineer wet stamp forms for Low Impact Development.
3. Completed attached forms for Low Impact Development. 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 attached forms for completing documents, as old forms are
no longer sufficient A completed copy must also be emailed to [email protected]
4. Complete attached Operation and Maintenance (O&M) agreements. Use attached forms for
completing documents, as old forms are no longer sufficient. A finished copy must also be
emailed to [email protected] Do not sign agreement, as the city will need to
review prior to signature, prepare packet and submit with an address to send for
signature.
5. Submit flow calculations and related math for LID.
6. Do not use gravel bags for erosion control in the street. Drains in street must have inlet and
throat protection of a material that is not susceptible to brakeage from vehicular traffic.
7. No discharge from demolition (knock down water) shall be discharged into the storm drain
system.
8. The onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide
Stormwater Logo (No Dumping! Flows to Bay).
9. 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.
10. No floatable bark shall be used in landscaping. Only fibrous mulch or pea gravel is allowed.
11. A SWPPP must be submitted. Drawings must note that erosion control shall be in effect all year
long.
12. A copy of the state approved NOI must be submitted.
13. Sprinkler test drain must discharge to the sanitary sewer.
14. Areas of parking garage exposed to rain shall be connected to the stormwater bio retention area.
15. If a kitchen/ prep area is to be installed, it shall connect to a grease interceptor at least 1500
gallons (liquid capacity) in size.
16. Grease interceptor shall be connected to all non-domestic wastewater sources in the kitchen.
Water Quality Control contact: Andrew Wemmer at (650) 829-3840
D) Building Division requirements shall be as follows:
1. Compliance will be determined with Building Division permit application.
Building Division contact: Phil Perry, Senior Building Inspector at (650) 829-6670
E) Engineering Division requirements shall be as follows:
The following items must be included in the plans or are requirements of the Engineering Division
and must be completed prior to the issuance of a permit:
1. STANDARD CONDITIONS
The developer shall comply with the applicable conditions of approval for commercial
projects, as detailed in the Engineering Division’s “Standard Conditions for Commercial
and Industrial Developments”, contained in our “Standard Development Conditions”
booklet, dated January 1998. This booklet is available at no cost to the applicant from the
Engineering Division.
2. SPECIAL CONDITIONS
a. A grading permit shall be obtained from the Engineering Division. The developer will
be responsible for paying for all fees, bonds, plan checking and all associated fees for
the grading permit. The developer will also place a cash deposit of $30,000 to pay for
all onsite, SWPPP compliance, grading compliance and dust control inspections.
b. The developer shall remove and replace all sidewalk fronting the project. The new
sidewalk shall comply with the City standard detail and shall provide the minimum
ADA width around the existing power poles. All work shall be done at no cost to the
City.
c. The developer shall obtain an encroachment permit for any work performed in the
City’s right-of-way and pay all associated fees, deposit and/or bonds. The developer
shall submit an Engineer’s estimate for all work performed in the City’s right-of-way
and place a bond or cash deposit for said work.
d. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project, the applicant shall pay the
Oyster Point Interchange Impact Fee, the East of 101 Sewer Impact Fee, and the East
of 101 Traffic Impact Fee. The fees are based on the CCI for June 2017; however, the
applicant shall pay the updated fee based on the current CCI when the building permit
is issued. These are the following East of 101 Impact Fees:
Project: 249 East Grand Avenue (Bldg #4)
Land Use: R&D
Area (sf): 202,260
Oyster Point Interchange Impact Fee (OPIIF)
12.30 ADT Trip Rate per 1,000 GSF per Land Use
2488 New Trips Generated
11722.15 ENR CCI (June 2017)
OPIIF = (New Trips Generated) * $154 (ENR's Latest CCI/6552.16)
Oyster Point Interchange Impact Fee= $ 685,422.91
East of 101 Sewer Impact Fee
All Land Use = 400 gallons per day
80904 Gallons generated
East of 101 Sewer Impact Fee = Gallons Generated * $4.79
East of 101 Sewer Impact Fee= $ 387,530.16
East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee
$ 5.89 Fee for Land Use
East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee = Fee for Land Use * Area (or Unit)
East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee = $ 1,191,311.40
TOTAL IMPACT FEES= $ 2,264,264.47