HomeMy WebLinkAboutPC e-packet 11-16-2006
Planning Commission
Staff Report
DATE:
November 16, 2006
TO:
Planning Commission
SUBJECT:
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant - Use Permit Modification application to
allow an increase in seating capacity and stage size, karaoke with hired
performers, catering and hall services, live musical entertainment, and a
sushi bar at an existing restaurant at 2234A & 2236 Westborough
Boulevard in the Retail Commercial (C-l) Zone District in accordance
with SSFMC Chapters 20.22 and 20.81
Owner: Westborough Square Shopping Center
Applicant: Ben Ramos
Case Nos.: P02-0001: UPM05-0005
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning
Commission approve Use Permit
Modification application UPM05-0005
based on the attached draft Findings
and subject to the attached proposed
Conditions of Approval.
JSMi#').
~--
--
'""""
BACKGROUNDfDISCUSSION:
----p
~ ~
I
--....-....,
'40""',"Rf",
Edna's
Ichiban
..
'OfHTa.1J1
Location
Edna's Ichiban Library Restaurant is
located in the Westborough Shopping
Center at the northeast comer of
Westborough Boulevard and Gellert
Boulevard. The restaurant occupies two
tenant spaces that were combined
through the previous Use Permit
application and is located between a
Radio Shack electronics store and a
Walgreens drug store.
i
L.._ __.___..,
WESTBOROUGH SQUARE
SHOPPING CENTER
--
.....,....
&
-- ....
-..--- -~-.._--
_==-:-:~:::====-_.___====--==-==:=-;J
GEl.LEHT r; LV::'>
~
:r:
C)
I
~
Location Map
Staff Report
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Edna's Ichiban Restaurant - Use Permit Modification #3
November 16,2006
Page 2 of 5
Project Overview
As part of a previously approved Use Permit (1995) and two modifications (1996 and 2002),
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant is currently approved to:
. Operate a 5,000 square foot restaurant within 200 feet of a residential zone;
· Operate a restaurant after midnight within 200 feet of a residential zone (1 AM);
. Serve alcohol with food; and
. Operate a karaoke venue - defined as audience participation sing-along.
The most recent Use Permit Modification was done in 2002 and involved the expansion of the
restaurant from one tenant space into two. Since 2002 the entertainment aspects of the business
have been very fluid - karaoke seems to have moved away from audience participation sing
along toward more entertainment based performers, with somewhat limited audience
participation.
The current Use Permit Modification application includes the following:
. An increased seating capacity and stage size;
. Karaoke/comedy entertainment (with hired performers);
. Catering and rental hall services;
. Friday and Saturday - Live Musical Entertainment Shows with Karaoke;
. Sushi Bar.
Seating Capacity and Stage Size
The current Use Permit Modification application is to reconfigure the floor plan to allow for a
maximum dining and assembly seating capacity of 168. This is a 10 occupant increase, up from
158 that was previously approved. The plans state "seating capacity", however the Draft
Condition of Approval #7 from the Building Division is for "Maximum Occupancy" for dining
(106) and for assembly seating (62).
The enlarged stage size has been reviewed by the Police Department and it has been deemed
acceptable for the uses that are described below.
Karaoke/Comedy Entertainment (with hired performers)
The Police Department has been very clear in its definition of karaoke: karaoke is "audience
participation sing-along". The Police Department has drafted a Conditions of Approval
(Condition #3 a, b, c, & d) that clearly outline the parameters for karaoke to occur. The hours of
the karaoke must be clearly stated by the applicant and included in the Use Permit Modification
approval; paid performers can be used, but an Entertainment Permit must be obtained if the paid
Staff Report
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Edna's Ichiban Restaurant- Use Permit Modification #3
November 16, 2006
Page 3 of 5
performers are going to perform more than 50% of the of the singing on-site; no private rooms
can be used for karaoke; and performers must be separate from the audience.
Catering and Hall Services
The application includes a request to use the restaurant as a catering hall or special event venue.
The Police Department has also drafted Conditions of Approval to address this request,
including:
a) When the restaurant is rented for special events such as (but not limited to) birthday parties,
christenings or dances, a Dance Hall Permit must be secured from the Police Department
for security needs assessment; and
b) Special Event application forms should be obtained at the Police Department, and
submitted by the applicant and the applicant's client no less than 10 business days before
the event. Special event permits are subject to immediate revocation in the event of anti-
social or criminal behavior.
Live Musical Entertainment with Karaoke
The applicant has stated that on Friday and Saturday nights they would like to have live musical
entertainment. In addition to the karaoke Conditions of Approval noted above, the Police
Department has also addressed this component of the application with conditions related to
sound attenuation and on-site security personnel.
Sushi Bar
The Sushi Bar is a relatively small part of the restaurant (the sushi bar is 11 feet long). This part
of the application is considered by staff to be a supplement to the existing restaurant use.
General Plan Consistency & Zonin~
The General Plan designation for the subject site is Community Commercial. The Community
Commercial designation category includes shopping centers and specifically lists eating and
drinking establishments as uses that are to be encouraged. At this time, the applicant is
attempting to expand and enhance the eating and drinking establishment that currently exists in
the Westborough Shopping Center. The use and the proposed expansion are consistent with the
intent of the General Plan.
The subject site is zoned C-l, Retail Commercial District and is within 200 feet of a residential
area. A Use Permit Modification is required to allow the proposed changes being proposed for the
business.
Staff Report
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Edna's Ichiban Restaurant - Use Permit Modification #3
November 16, 2006
Page 4 of 5
Parking
The net change in the parking requirement for the Use Permit Modification application is 4
spaces based on the expanded dining area and the reduction in the non-customer area of the
restaurant per section 20.74.060 (k) (1). The total number of spaces required for the restaurant is
62 - 10 spaces for the non-customer floor area and 52 for the customer floor area.
Although the expanded customer area results in an increased parking requirement, the
Westborough Shopping Center greatly exceeds the City's requirements (356 spaces required vs.
490 provided). The parking standard for a shopping center provides for restaurant uses in the
overall requirement.
One final note is that the City is requiring the applicant to install a trash enclosure on the
backside of the building. The enclosure will consume two additional parking spaces on the
portion of the site behind the building. Staff observed that parking on the backside of the
building is underused overall. Therefore it is unlikely that the net change in parking based on the
expanded customer dining area and the required trash enclosure will have a noticeable impact on
the parking availability within the Shopping Center.
Code Enforcement
During the month of August, 2006, the City's Fire Prevention Division (Code Enforcement)
conducted an investigation of the subject business. The following violations were identified:
· Occupancy - 186 chairs were found, where 158 are permitted by Code.
. Un-permitted Structure and drapes - a larger untreated wooden stage had been
constructed and attached to the wall and drapery had been added to the walls.
· Seating and Table Storage - 36 additional chairs and 4 additional tables were stored on
the premises.
. Electrical - permanent electrical wiring had been installed without permits.
· Illuminated Exit Signs - had to be installed at the west rear exit sign to replace the
laminated sign.
. General Clean-up - combustible debris had to be removed from the rear of the restaurant.
These items have been addressed by the applicant and the Code Enforcement file has been closed
for these items. The stage, the occupancy, and the seating and table storage are all addressed in
the Conditions of Approval section of this report. Furthermore, to discourage the use of
additional chairs and tables, a seatinglfloor plan has been provided by the applicant as a typical
floor plan for the project. Staff recommend that the bar height table attached to the west wall and
surrounding the DJ booth be removed to discourage occupants from using it as a standing/leaning
areas during performances. A condition of approval has also been drafted to address this
concern.
Staff Report
To: Planning Commission
Subject: Edna's Ichiban Restaurant - Use Permit Modification #3
November 16,2006
Page 5 of 5
CEQA:
The proposed development has been determined to be categorically exempt under the provisions
of Section 15301 - Class 1 - (a): Minor alteration to existing facilities.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve Use Permit Modification application
number UPM05-0005 based on the attached draft Findings and subject to the attached proposed
Conditions of Approval. The proposed modifications to the existing business meet the intent of
the General Plan and the development standards outlined in the Municipal Code.
L::
Ge
TMS/ghb
Attachments:
Draft Findings of Approval
Proposed Conditions of Approval
Plans
Revised October, 2006
DRAFT FINDINGS OF APPROVAL
P02-0001: UPM05-0005
EDNA'S ICHIBAN RESTAURANT
2234A & 2236 WESTBOROUGH BOULEVARD
(As recommended by City Staff November 16, 2006)
As required by the "Use Permit Procedures" (SSFMC Chapter 20.81) the following findings are
made in support of allowing modifications to a restaurant and karaoke use at 2234A and 2236
Westborough Boulevard in the C-l Retail Commercial District in accordance with SSFMC
Chapters 20.22 & 20.81 subject to making the findings of approval and, based on public
testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission
which include, but are not limited to the: Site Plan, Floor Plan, and Elevations prepared by Angie
Aylesworth with a revision date of October, 2006; Planning Commission staff report, dated
November 16,2006; and Planning Commission meeting of November 16,2006:
I. The modified restaurant and karaoke use in a 5,000 square foot tenant space within a
multi-tenant shopping center building at 2234A and 2236 Westborough Boulevard
will not be adverse to the public health, safety or general welfare of the community, or
detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements. The applicant has addressed
the outstanding Code Enforcement issues discussed in the Staff Report and
Conditions of Approval have been drafted to enhance public health and safety at this
location.
2. The proposed project complies with the General Plan Land Use Element designation
of "Community Commercial" by modifying and enhancing, with a Use Permit
Modification, an existing eating and drinking establishment within the W estborough
Shopping Center.
3. The proposed project complies with the standards and requirements of the C-l Zone
District. The applicant is working within the City's Use Permit Modification process
to ensure that the changing business plan is approved by the City. Specific zoning
regulations such as parking are viewed within the larger Shopping Center and the
more than adequate when compared to City standards.
*
*
*
PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P02-0001: UPM05-0005
EDNA'S ICHIBAN RESTAURANT
2234A & 2236 WESTBOROUGH BOULEVARD
(As recommended by City Staff November 16, 2006)
A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follows:
1. The applicant shall comply with the Planning Division's standard Conditions and
Limitations for Commercial Industrial and Multi-family Residential Projects.
2. The project shall be completed and operated substantially as indicated in the plans
prepared by Angie Aylesworth, revision date October, 2006.
3. Prior to implementing the changes proposed in the subject application, the applicant shall
construct and maintain a trash enclosure that meets or exceeds City standards.
4. Prior to implementing the changes proposed in the subject application, the applicant shall
remove the standing bar that is attached to the west wall and surrounding the DJ booth of
the tenant space. Plans shall be subject to review and approval of the Chief Planner.
5. The applicant shall not store more than four additional chairs or two additional tables on
the premises in excess of the number seats allowed by the Building Division's maximum
occupant number (168), and in excess of the table configuration shown on the plans with
a revision date of October, 2006.
6. The applicant shall not store any restaurant furniture, equipment, or other materials
outside of the building tenant space on the subject property.
7. The hours of operation shall be limited to 11 :00 AM to 1 :00 AM.
Planning Division contact Gerry Beaudin, Associate Planner, (650) 877-8353
B. Police Department conditions of approval are as follows:
1. Municipal Code Compliance
a) The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter 15.48 of the
Municipal Code; "Minimum Building Security Standards" Ordinance revised
May 1995.
b) Hours of operation must comply with the Municipal Code.
Conditions of Approval
P02-000 1: UPM05-0005
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant
Page 2 of 8
c) The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and
safety conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans.
2. Sound Reduction
a) This use must comply with Chapter 8.32 of the Municipal Code, "Noise
Regulations. "
b) Carpeting or other sound reduction material must be placed beneath speakers
for all amplified sound to mitigate noise escape.
c) Both front and rear doors, and all windows must be closed during any music
performance for reduced sound and noise pollution to the surrounding
neighborhood.
3. Only Karaoke Permitted
a) Only karaoke, defined as "audience participation sing-along," is permitted.
Hours of operations must be defined by the applicant and approved by the
Planning Commission.
b) Paid performers may be used to encourage audience participation, but should
paid performers conduct more than 50% of all singing on site, a separate
Entertainment Permit must be obtained before further activities may be
pursued.
c) Paid performers must be separated from the audience, with the use of a cordon
or some other demarcation device.
d) Private rooms for karaoke are strictly prohibited.
4. Alcoholic Beverages
a) The applicant must possess a valid Type 47 or Type 49 ABC license from
the State of California Alcoholic Beverage Control pursuant to this "Full
Service Restaurant" use.
b) All alcoholic beverages must be served in conjunction with meal service.
Bar service is not permitted.
Conditions of Approval
P02-0001: UPM05-0005
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant
Page 3 of 8
c) Hours of alcoholic beverage service must comply with ABC Regulations.
d) Foodservice sales must represent at least 60% of all sales on the premises,
to ensure this application is for "Full Service Restaurant" use only.
e) Open containers are not permitted outside the restaurant. Violators are
subject to prosecution.
5. Security Officers
a) One licensed, unarmed and uniformed Security Officer must be at the front
door to provide security, and enforce maximum occupancy concerns. The
Security Officer must be present at any time karaoke is performed.
b) The Community Relations Section of the Police Department must approve the
Security Company providing such security officers.
Please contact the Community Relations Sergeant at (650) 877-8922 for
additional details.
6. Special Events
c) When the restaurant is rented for special events such as (but not limited to)
birthday parties, christenings or dances, a Dance Hall Permit must be secured
from the Police Department for security needs assessment.
d) Special Event application forms should be obtained at the Police Department,
and submitted by the applicant and the applicant's client no less than 10
business days before the event. Special event permits are subject to immediate
revocation in the event of anti-social or criminal behavior.
Please contact the Community Relations Sergeant at (650) 877-8922 for
additional details.
Conditions of Approval
P02-0001: UPM05-0005
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant
Page 4 of 8
7. Site Maintenance and Cleaning
a) Business sidewalk, parking areas and shopping mall common areas adjacent to
the business must be swept clean of refuse, e.g. cigarette butts, etc. prior to
departure at close of business.
b) Exterior ashtrays for tobacco refuse are required. Ashtrays must be located no
less than 15 feet from any doorway pursuant to County Ordinance.
8. Closed Circuit Television Cameras
a) The applicant must install an operational closed circuit television camera
system, which may be monitored on the World Wide Web.
b) The system must be of adequate resolution, lighting and color rendition to
readily identify any individual committing a crime on the premises. Areas to
be monitored include the cashier's area, the manager's office and safe
location. Restrooms and performer dressing areas are not to be monitored.
c) Recorded data must be maintained for no less than 30 days.
9. Signage
a) The Design Review Board must approve all signage at the site. No more than
30% of the windows may be blocked at any time pursuant to Chapter 15.48 of
the Municipal Code.
10. 6, 12 and 18-month Review
a) This Use Permit is subject to 6, 12 and 18-month review by the Planning
Commission. The Planning Commission reserves the right to modify this Use
Permit at any time during this period.
Conditions of Approval
P02-000 1: UPM05-0005
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant
Page 5 of 8
11. Alarm System
a) The business shall be equipped with at least a central station silent intrusion
alarm system.
b) The alarm system must be installed prior to the approval of this Use Permit.
12. Suspension of Permit
a) The Chief of Police may request the Chief Planner to immediately suspend
this Use Permit upon any singular major incident at this site, or for any
violations of the Use Permit.
b) Once requested, all activities pursuant to this license will be suspended
immediately, pending a formal revocation at a Planning Commission Public
Hearing.
13. Miscellaneous Security Requirements
a) Establishments having one hundred dollars or more in cash on the premises
after closing hours shall lock such money in an approved type money safe with
a minimum rating of TL-15.
Police Department contact, Sergeant E. Alan Normandy (650) 877-8927
c. Building Division conditions of approval are as follows:
1. 1 hour rated corridors are required for the tenant space.
2. Rated self closing doors must be installed in the corridors.
3. Emergency lighting must be installed and functioning throughout and powered by a
separate power source.
4. Exit signs must be illuminated along the path to exit.
5. Ventilation rate must be a minimum of 15cf/min/person.
Conditions of Approval
P02-000 1: UPM05-0005
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant
Page 6 of 8
6. Handicap accessibility must be addressed (door hardware, doors, bar counter, stage,
make-up room, restrooms).
7. Occupant Load - Dining area = 106; and
Assembly area (adjacent to stage without tables) = 62
8. Restroom Requirements
Women (69 Occupants)
2 water closets
2 lavys
Men (69 Occupants)
2 water closets
2 lavys
D. Fire Department conditions of approval are as follows:
Maintain clearance requirements of combustible materials from electrical panels, fire sprinkler
controls and the rear, exterior wall of this establishment as per requirements of the California
Fire Code.
1. Maintain certification that all draperies and wall decorations in restaurant area are fire
retardant or have been treated with approved fire retardant materials by a licensed
applicator as per requirements of the California Fire Code.
2. Maintain that all electrical wiring is permanent and that electrical extension cords are
not used as per requirements of the California Fire Code and National Electric Code.
3. Maintain that the fire suppression system for the kitchen hood and duct and fire
extinguishers are serviced as per requirements of the California Fire Code.
4. Maintain that the kitchen hood and duct system is cleaned as per requirements of the
California Fire Code.
5. Maintain clear, lighted exit paths and exit signage as per requirements of the
California Building and Fire Codes.
6. Maintain the maximum occupancy rating as determined by the Building Department
and that additional chairs and tables are not stored on site.
Fire Prevention contact, Bryan Niswonger, 650/829-6645
Conditions of Approval
P02-0001: UPM05-0005
Edna's Ichiban Restaurant
Page 7 of 8
E. Water Quality Control conditions of approval are as follows:
1. Fire sprinkler system test/drainage valve should be plumbed or drain into the sanitary
sewer system. This must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit.
2. The applicant must install a grease interceptor. The interceptor must be connected to
all wash sinks, mop sinks, and floor sinks and must be upstream of the domestic
waste stream. Sizing of the interceptor must be in accordance with the uniform
plumbing code. This must be shown on the plans prior to the issuance of a permit.
3. A signed maintenance agreement for the grease interceptor must be submitted prior to
occupancy.
4. Applicant may be required to pay an additional sewer connection fee at a later time
based on anticipated flow, BOD and TSS calculations.
5. The applicant shall cover the trash enclosure and must install a drain to the sanitary
sewer. A grease removal device must be installed to catch grease before it goes into
the sanitary sewer drain.
Water Quality Control contact, Cassie Prudhel, 650/829-3840
Cl..
4:
2~
...
>-u
1-'"
_ 0
Z....
Ub
_z
>
ci
>0
...J<Xl
roO
-t
I'"
<.:>-<
6U
'"
150
in~
wU
~~
<0'"
t<)"-
"'Z
~-<
-<CIl
';'i:!:
~5 '(
NCIl U
...J
-<
U
'"
w
;I;
;I;
o
U
o
w
'"
W
...J
'"
<.:>
z
52
"-
CIl
I
z
I
'"
I
.-<
I-
Z
-<
'"
::>
-<
I-
CIl
W
'"
"-
::>
o
'"
<.:>
z
o
~
:!:
a::
o
u...
~
l-
t)
W
...,
~
0..,
>-
I-
U~
-<0
,,-U
-<CIl
UU
Z~
0'"
CIl"-
'"
wZ
"--<
CIl
<.:>
Z .
_0
';(CIl
W"-
CIlO
<.:>>-
ZI-
~U
Xw
WI
I-
~ >-
~ ~
-<
I 0-
(I) -<
~~U
o~~
,,-,0-
~~';(
~:r:~
"'-'"
"-
ci
w
c;:
52
w
>
w
>
-'"
';(:3
o ~U::>
...J U_
w WI
G: Ow
W I>
ID <.:>0
:;:~
b~
e~
J,<.:>
we
IDeS
jlf)ci
~~~
CIl-<>
::>0
wO'"
"'wo-
::>0
CIl-<w
o ID
d~...J
z-<...J
w~:2
:I:>-CIl
~~~
:=01.&.1
.~~
N;I;-<
...J
...J
-<
I
CIl
w
'"
::>
CIl
o
...J
U
..z
~w
I-I
OCll
z-<
w'"
",I-
::>"-
~o
...JZ
Uo
z-
wI-
-<
:I:U
CIlO
-<...J
'"
1-":
II
'"
o
ii'
w
l-
X
W
...J
...J
"- -<
OOI
OWCll
~Q::i=~
~<~~
::>w CIl
0>'->-
-<-<CIl
~::I:~Z
~:J~<
~:2~~
olf)~W
Uwlf):I:
~O::: !-
~~~::2i
~g~~
l&...UOlf)
z~<(~ .
~:J:~eJ~
:I:~-<~~
~f:~~~
~ ~::>>-~
ZJ-Q:::V1
u...OU<
o~~~b:
>-~t;<(i:5
CO If)o:
u....J~wC)
~~~~~
a...~eJoL.a.J
..,:O>I-~
UO~::I:
W
I
I-...J
>-0
ID'"
I-
zZ
wO
>U
(31:
~:J
-<
...J::>
...JO
-<
I'"
CIlw
I-
w-<
"'~
::>
CIlO
OU
...JCIl
U-
ZU
wZ
-<
I'"
CIl"-
-<z
"'-<
I-(/)
"-
OI
I-
w::>
NO
Vi(/)
wu..i
I02
I-->-!!!
.!::>
LOUQ
w
"-
>-
I-
<(
~ Vi
CIl
Cl w W
'" :Z
0 0 "-
0 >- >: 0
-< I- >->=
W U u-<
..., l- e:; <.:> Z ZU
0 w Z -<
W Z Ci "- -<c;:
a:: '" Z ::> ,,--
I- ...J ::>(/)
0.., (/) 0 :; U u(/)
N U u:3
ID 0 ou
., 'i'>-
-<::lID
:>!~o
-<><w
-<>
<.:>;1;0
z~'"
zoo..
cs~~
OA 19 HElnOl:lOBJ..S3M
I I~
'-----
~
~a::
i g~
I :r:w
I (!)O
:::lC) i
~~ I
08:
~~
wCf.)
~
I ~ I
E
i It
I
~
L
'i'
I
uJ~~"""
~~~\;!iliD
U}>~uJ::::E
O::Ea::Z
::i::lO(l)
o~~
JJJ
ll!~ 't1 'ij"ll!81
o:~ ~~~g
. rooW
L~ffi~
~
~
'"
o
~
.~~~,~" ',,-"- '\ '
"'~ ,', ,'. '," "," ,""-'
~~~~~~~~~::~~:~: .
. .;:.:: .;:..,,,">':;\
'~<, "- ,~ " ""-'.'.>'\:
:\"...,' ~,' ""
'.:-; '" ,,'<-"
~~ .:;: ~
~< ~\
~< '~~
,"". '~'"
" " " " -," '
,:> ,,:~~
.~>:, ,"~" '..',
<," "'-.:" ~>. ~~< ,..>~> ~
<~;:<;;>'>>;:><~
~-..:~,,;~,~;;>;;,<
" " " ~~<,~~.<'''- ,~"- ',,-
D """''..1
I
<.:>
Z
>=
(/)
x
w
W
I
l-
I
U
I-
-<
;I;
...J
...J
-<
I
(/)
xe
(/)Z
zo
-...J
"--
::>
",ID
o
o;:~
~I-
X"-
Wo
W
II
I-CIl
.z
"'C;:
~
~z
uQ
CIl
~~
1-0
>-...J
IDO
'"
01-
wZ
>0
OU
'"
,,->-
,,-I-
-<:J
-<
w::>
IDO
jeJ
4~
(/)~
"'0
8~
~u
-<Z
~~
(/),,-
wz
~~
~~
~g
I-(/)
."-
<00 r-:~
/
...J
-<'
1:6
:iVi
~~
(/)0
z<.:>
o~
,,-0
::>:::!
::>
8ID
eo
>u
o(/)
&:~
w-<
IDE
:J~
:1(/)
"'I
(/)1-
...J::>
-0
;:::(/)
w,,-
00
0>-
ZI-
-<-
U
j!l!
CLI-
w ,...
w
i)j <i: ~ <D
0
0 0
5J '"
'" w
~ z
"' ;;
"'
8
'"
~ G
0 0
...
Z
~
::l
~
ffi
a:
Z
~...(!J
_zz
:tw9
~==<l:
g>3r:6
<l:~z
za:1ii
CWW
w...~
,zO
zw<l:
o.Ja::a::
~~;2~
~~EI
2i==~~
owzoo
::e>OCl
...::if=w
_c",oo
::ewzo
a:cn:;:)IL
wo""O
o..o..zo:
WOOIL
cna:"'Cl
::lo..~~
o
'!i
i
"
"'
w
'"
:>
2
'"
<;;
~ -<
if ::;;
o -<
Z
4:
-1
Cl..
Q >-~
N w'"
> ::x::b:
..I 1 .......0
In z.....
Ob
_z '"
I- r l- I!!
4:
IX u Zo
LIJ 0 ~~
..I -1 ~Gio
..I (f) 8:5~
w 0 ~g~
C!) ::E
Ci ~~c3
~68r--
z ::>occn"'
'" W gg13:t
'" III
w i3lii~gj
"' rn
~ c:: ::l~LLS
0 ::E ocoztO
~ o/l ~'"'<C~
'" ~~~ci
w
z ri cn~5~
I I ~ ::E ~"o...J
"cn~
O'Sv 6~ff2909002 '
^~~~all
I
I
I
II
*'
~
~
~
z
<(
-1
CL
N
I-
Z
w~
::;i;C\
Cl..'"
00
...J....
wb
>z
w
o
W
l-
I/)
-,-===.. -,
OJ
,
"
'"
I'
-:':.
'..
'-.
N
I
'"
..
e
"
'-.
"'
"'
I
\:.1
J7iL
w
u:
e
@
WI--
~~
0::
W
I--
...J
<(
f:
N
.l/~ 01 ,6t
--=.-1
@
~
"'
<D
r
'"
;r--<j:,SL
\./ r ))
,J.e
y
,.
~
Il I If'
It) k
.l/l \:-,t II
.
....
w~
~t:
w5e
~I= V1
~~
~~
'"
~
N
I--
X
W
Jl'\,jj
if
I--
X
W
..
'-.
..
,
'..
8
SSV"B .G.~~ ~~~~~n1V (3)
<D
I
'"
l~
Ii
,<<
I~
, :r
1 0
II !!I!
!! ~
i: -I
,I <<
lL_J
:>'
"'~
Ogw
~!t~w
ci ~~~
.........o~~
t5 ~~
<<. ~
t;;~
!i
w
m
~o
",10'
~(3
~o
E~
~
8
z
jiiJ
.t/~ \:-,ll
,
I
~ ...-i
o 15,
3~~~ I
~8t1li: J
t5 rt~~ I
~ ~:~ i t
Vlg~t51 ~
~:'i~ I
O~:lt.: I
~ ~I
"- L_
.7'-.\ICIl
\ I!~
'<o,-__-4'i.....J
'~
"
\0
,<~ )~
8202'S2019002
0'8t ~l'\a'9NINNI1"d A~I;J~a:I1
w
u:
I- >-Q
!::u
;::) UIIl
0 ~0
>- <z It)
j u< .....
'"
z"-
c.:> Oz
III < >-
Z ~1Il I-
i= Q.x 0
ell- <
<( z:::> Q.
W _0 <
III I-IIl U
<
w"- z
<IlS III 0 0
III
~~ '"
Z 02>- w
t=u Q.
j III <!::
x~ mu el
< Z
Cl.. wI- -Q. j::
L5 ----. iJi< <
a::: ~>- :::>uQ. w
:::>m lIlel~ III
0 0:: ~o
0 <( oZ- 0
xw wi=C w
...J C9 <> IIl<Z III
..... ~o ow< 0
Z ~'" Q.IIlX Q.
b Q. ~-.t- 0
0 Z OQ. '"
I ~~
W >- Ci Q. Q.
III .
0 ~
Cl..
~~ ,9
Ev F
1 z
I=- 0
~ j::
<
>
w
....J
w
~ I-
Z
0
0::
"-
it
iJj
,...
.
<(
~ gs
o 0
~ :
~ g
8
N
~ 0
o 0
I--
Z
r:!
;:,
<(
Iii
w
0:
Z
<(1--<9
alZZ
xwg
O:!i<(
iii~dJ
C(~~
Zo:CJl
cww
~!Z6
~~~o:
~<(;2i1i
<(g:c-
OCJlI--:C
!!;i~3
gwz~
:E;:eQw
1--...J0(1)
-czo
:Ew::>D.
O:CJ)...,O
WOza:
D.D.0D.
WOOD
~g:~~
fiJ
>
o
~
~
"
:0
Z
OJ
Q
~ <(
<i' ::;;
o <(
e
N
'-.
~---:-
gt
<Dei
"V1
o
o
g.::..
=~,.
'1'/'l! '\~
if ~ ni';
@o. 01"
~~~~~
r r=-::::::::::::.:J..=. -=- -=- -=- -=, -r---:..---------------------,l
I' II C\ II
I I W I I ~ S"IVHO "V8 318VM" I I
:: i :: @j) 0 0 0 d:
~~ ~~ ': "V8IHsnS(N) :1
~~~ I n
o-::5z I ""7
OffiiS J
z{/}u I
~ I
1:5
<(
~
V1
V1
ox
z
if
o
,s
@
~.[
~l.
'"
z
'"
~
go
is
I
~
S2
+--J
%@
~
t-
X
w
1l"
j\ ~~ i
f-- -+- -W ~ -L..
/ \ ~" I
/ --"1'"---'
/ \
/
/
i
~
<<
~
a.
~
-<~
~ ~i5
3~ ~~ E;~
ir~
\~
~~~tn~ ~ ~
~~O~~ ~ 0 ~::l
~~~!!!~ ('.I ffi 8~........
F~~~O N t: lll:>-~
~;;;gab I ~ ~!~
8S~;; ~ t,~~
\
'-I~
10' L'
2 c::
@; i r
~ 1 L
'I; IC =
! Lh[ J
iC[-
If:
~ i r
~l~~i
I,
'I ~ I~ c:;
f "q I~~
}--'. ~I.~ ~ 8
(. U "-
-J - ;:1 lL.
A~~ i I 8
Ii i 0::
:(,
,
"
Jj:::J
z
o
j::
<
>
W
....J
W
W
o
ii1
...J
~
I-
W
Cl
w
a:::
;::)
III
o
...J
Ub
~~
~~
g~
0>
I
;...
~
w
u:
N
'-.
,
cr,
1'"0
" v
It
"
,
w
u
E
o
g
JJ
(
, I
,
,
,
//
f:
f:
g
~
w
~
'"
z
~~~
-<~
r ~r;i
, Uz
~ ~~
V1:>'
. 0
~~
g1:3
~'"
~z
~o
"I"
~<<
gg
~
~
"
m
'"
)~(
I
~
w
~
~ ~
~~
;g ,,\ ~
/ ~ \ ",
/ ~ \ \ ,
! \1 \ /
/ ~\1;/ ;X,
,,/ /-r
/ '" /
...,
.J? ~~ g~~ ~
g~,ll.....J
0g~~
S~~~
~:!1
.L-,L
t-
X
w
1'1'
\
oC
~~
1--'
I ~~ I
100 I
L":-.J
\
\\
\
\
\
'\
Ev
'"
'"
w
'"
~
o
z
'"
'"
~
o
en
o
::E
~
z
w
CD
en
IX:
::E
ell
ex:
::E
0::
w
...
20
Wo::
U<(
c:;>
~~~
&:5~
OmO>
IX<(
~ c:; U.
o:::Jo,....
<(~U'"
ao~;;:
CIJ~za;
I "';2'"
g~LL~
~lfl~!!:!.
g~~o
1-<;:1-2
"'OI;:::>..J
~gj~~
/
\
\ "'~ /
14/
/<::~
/ OU)
/ z~ \
.I
/
\
\
~.
o,x~
~~~3:~~
~t3~C)~w
~Vj~~~~
g8~~~~
N
N
'-.
~f:
"
~
<.5
V1
:>
'-.
z'"
ww
IN
Uw
....w
::zE
w~
~'"
<(
'"
ti
~
~
o
8
t-
X
w
l'j~~ ~~ ~~
-a:~ rj~~ ~u
~~~~ ~i;~ . z~
rHf\". ~
- ,I i
r'~ , \/(
"
i ~a.1
1 - [ ..J
I
i~ . ~
{1~ .:
lit-I-
j tx;~
- ~~~
~~
~tJ
~~
giS
E;
>-0
Uo.
~li:
ffi~
::E%
wo
@m
'~ :>' ~_'
0
0
'"
'"
~
eo ;
V1
g I
~ 2
::> 0
0 0
0 r'"
'" <(a::
"- ~o
=> :::JU
, <(a::
w
ox :r~
<( ~o
:>' ~I
g W
z
2-
~ w
u
E
0
g
.9-,S
~
<(
0::
CI
<(
o
CI
z
8~
oIlS!;!
o~
<(
g
t-
Z
~
D..
::>
o
o
o
r
r
<(
~
<(
I
~~
~~
:J~
-~
g5
\
!
/
/
\
,
t-
X
w
V1:>'
zg
~J"
_V1
WW
-'"
:>'
o
o
'"
....
:;]
'"
V1
Z
W
:>'
~
g
/J
(
~
~~
~~
;~
_a.
Planning Commission
Staff Report
DATE: November 16,2006
TO: Planning Commission
SUBJECT: East Jamie Court OfficelR&D - Use Permit Modification, Modified TDM Plan
and Design Review of minor changes to an approved two building office/R&D
complex on a 6.l3-acre site at the southeast comer of East Jamie Court and
Haskins Way, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay. The approved project consists
of two buildings totaling 133,000 sq. ft.: one two-story structure over a parking
level (57,700 sq. ft.) and one three-story structure (75,300 sq. ft.), with a parking
ratio of 2.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet. The revised project consists oftwo three-
story buildings of the same layout and design of the original plan, but totaling
162,000 sq. ft. (29,000 sq. ft. increase) over a depressed parking level extending
beneath both buildings, and providing a parking ratio of 2.8 spaces per 1,000
square feet, in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District in accordance with
SSFMC Chapters 20.32, 20.74, 20.85, 20.91 and 20.120.
Modification of approved Development Agreement in accordance with South San
Francisco Municipal Code Chapter 19.60.
Owner:
Applicant:
Richard Elmo Haskins/owner
Alexandria Real Estate Equities
Case No.:
P02-0042: UPM06-0003, TDM06-0007, DAA06-0002 &
Addendum to certified Mitigated Negative Declaration MND02-
0042
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission take the following actions: 1) accept the
Addendum to the Certified Negative Declaration MND02-0042; 2) approve UPM06-0003 &
TDM06-0007 based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions of
approval; and 3) adopt a resolution recommending the City Council approve modifications
to the Development Agreement (DAA06-0002).
BACKGROUND:
On November 21,2002, the Planning Commission approved Use Permit UP02-0042 to construct
a two building office/R&D complex on a 6. 13-acre site at the southeast comer of Haskins Way
and East Jamie Court, adjacent to the San Francisco Bay. The project consists of two buildings
totaling 133,000 sq. ft.: Bldg 1- two stories over a parking level (57,700 sq. ft.); and Bldg 2-three
Staff Report
Subject: East Jamie Ct. Office/R&D Project
Date: November 16, 2006
Page 2 of 4
stories (75,300 sq. ft.) in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District. In January 2005, the
applicant requested and was granted a one-year extension of permit approvals. Last December,
the City Council approved a Development Agreement which extends the life of the entitlements
for a period often years and clarifies and obligates several project features and mitigation
measures including public art, pump station and sewer main improvements, mitigation fees for
traffic impacts and public safety enhancements.
Due to the current strong market conditions the applicant has undertaken preliminary
construction of the entitled project but has proposed a modification to increase the two-story
building to three stories, increasing the overall project size by 29,000 square feet, and
necessitating additional environmental review, a modification of the Use Permit and TDM Plan,
and amendment of the Development Agreement.
DISCUSSION
The proposed revised project consists of two three-story buildings (instead of one two-story and
one three-story structure) of the same layout and design as the original plan, resulting in a total
building area of 162,000 sq. ft. (29,000 sq. ft. increase), and an increase in floor area ratio from
0.5 to 0.61. The site plan remains essentially unchanged since the increased parking increment is
to be accommodated beneath the building.
Design Review
The Design Review Board discussed the project at its April meeting and had no concerns with
the proposed revision.
Zoning/General Plan Consistency
The project continues to comply with all development standards of the P-I Planned Industrial
Zone District. The approved parking ratio of 2.82 spaces per 1,000 sf of building space has been
maintained without impacting the site plan since the additional parking has been accommodated
beneath the buildings. Additionally, the project continues to support the goals and policies of the
General Plan, East of 101 Area Plan and the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Plan of high-
quality, well-designed office and research and development projects throughout the northern
portion of the East of 101 area.
Revised Draft TDM Plan - A draft TDM Plan was approved with the original plan based on an
FAR of 0.50, with a target mode shift rate of 28%. Since the FAR is now proposed to be
increased to 0.61, a revised plan has been prepared that reflects the increased requirements to
achieve a 30% alternative mode shift. All required elements are included as well as provisions
incorporating the increased review requirements (annual and triennial reviews).
Staff Report
Subject: East Jamie Ct. Office/R&D Project
Date: November 16, 2006
Page 3 of 4
Environmental Analysis
An addendum to the 2002 approved Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared
for the revised project in accordance with provisions of CEQA. CEQA permits an addendum
where: no substantial changes in the environment have occurred since certification of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration; no major revisions are required to the Mitigated Negative
Declaration; and, no new or increased impacts or new information has occurred since the
approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration. No new supplemental significant impacts are
identified.
Development Agreement
As indicated in the attached draft, minor amendments have been included in the Development
Agreement to reflect the revised project size, but all original features remain essentially
unchanged. (Changes are shown in strike-out/underlined italics)
· Term of Development Agreement - The requested duration of the Development Agreement
remains ten years from the effective date.
· Swift Avenue Sewer Main and Pump Station No.3 Upgrades - The Agreement clarifies the
"fair share" financial contribution required of the development for the improvement which
has recently been completed, estimated to be $525,500.00.
· Public Art - The Agreement sets out minimum requirements for value of public art on the
site ($150,000.00 $162,000.00) as well as for timing of installation.
· East of 101 Area Traffic Impact Fees -The Development Agreement obligates the applicant
to pay the fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
· Public Safety Enhancements - The Agreement requires some added public safety features:
Emergency operations room. The applicant will provide a small room outfitted with
double doors, a phone jack, shelving units, and two (2) standard electrical outlets within
the ground floor of one of the buildings for use in the event of an emergency.
Enhanced internal radio communications. The applicant will be required to have an
emergency radio communications study prepared to determine internal emergency radio
communication needs. If any deficiencies are noted the applicant will be required to
incorporate appropriate mitigation measures into the project design (ex. internal
communications wiring, signal boosting, installation of antennae and other related
equipment, etc.)
Staff Report
Subject: East Jamie Ct. Office/R&D Project
Date: November 16, 2006
Page 4 of 4
· Accelerated Bay Trail Installation - Owner shall install all of the imvrovements constituting
the lower portion of the "Bay Trail" no later than the second anniversary of the Effective
Date. All such imvrovements shall be installed in accordance with the BCDC Permit.
CONCLUSION:
Staff recommends approval of the revised project as it remains essentially consistent with the
approved project while including a minor increase in square footage to respond to market
demand. The proposed project continues to comply with the goals and objectives of the City's
General Plan to develop high-quality, well-designed office and R&D developments throughout
the northern portion of the East of 101 area. In addition, the project complies with all the
development standards and requirements of the P-I Planned Industrial Zone District. An
Addendum to the Certified Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared which identified no
new supplemental significant environmental impacts over those that were identified in the
approved environmental document. Some minor changes to the previous conditions of approval
have been added to address the minor changes in the development. Consequently, staff
recommends that the Planning Commission approve the project based on the attached findings
and Conditions of Approval.
- ?-
~.. / \ '" . .-
~ - - ~ .~_.._--
Attachments: Proposed Findings of Approval
Proposed Conditions of Approval
November 21, 2002 PC Staff Rpt.
Addendum
Draft Resolution w/attachment (Revised & Restated Development Agreement)
Revised TDM Plan
Plans
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF APPROVAL
UPM06-0003/TDM06-0007
(November 16,2006 Planning Commission Meeting)
As required by the "Use Permit Procedure" (SSFMC Chapter 20.81) and the "Transportation
Demand Management" Ordinance (SSFMC Chapter 20.120) the Planning Commission makes
the following findings in support of the request to approve a Use Permit Modification to allow
an office/R & D complex on a 6. 13-acre site adjacent to the San Francisco Bay consisting of two
three story buildings totaling 162,000 sq. ft. in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District, and a
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to reduce project traffic impacts. These
findings are based on public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San
Francisco Planning Commission which include, but are not limited to: Plans dated March 31,
2006 prepared by Dowler Gruman Architects; Approved Mitigated Negative Declaration
MND02-0042 prepared by Morehouse Associates and Addendum to Approved Mitigated
Negative Declaration MND02-0042 prepared by Allison Knapp, Consulting Planner; the
Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan, prepared by The Hoyt Company dated
August 7, 2006; minutes of the April 18, 2006 Design Review Board meeting; Planning
Commission staff report dated November 16, 2006; and testimony received at the November 16,
2006 Planning Commission meeting:
1. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the land use being
proposed. The suitability of the site for development was analyzed thoroughly in the
environmental document prepared for the project.
2. The proposed Office/R&D project is consistent with the Mixed Industrial and Coastal
Commercial General Plan policies concerning uses and allowable FAR. General Plan
Guiding Policies promote bioscience uses in the East of 101 Area. Additionally, the
proposed FAR of 0.61 is supported due to the mixed use land use designation which
provides for F ARs of up to 0.4 for the industrial designation and up to 1.0 for the coastal
commercial portions.
3. The proposed project is consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan which the General Plan
identifies as the guide for detailed implementation of General Plan policies, and
specifically with the following design policies:
DE-l and DE-5 which support designs which take advantage of Bay views;
DE-22 which promotes on-site landscaping as a unifying element in campus
development recommends de-emphasizing the visual prominence of parking areas
by placing them to the rear of the site; and
DE-23, which recommends that open space be designed to include seating areas
with views of the Bay.
4. The proposed project meets or exceeds the minimum standards and requirements of the
City's Zoning Ordinance which designates the site P-I Planned Industrial. Offices and
research and development uses are permitted uses in the zone. A use permit is required
because the project will generate in excess of 100 vehicle trips per day and because the
building exceeds a height limit of 60 feet.
Proposed Findings of Approval
UPM06-0007 & TDM06-0007
Page 2 of2
5. Transportation Demand Management
a. The proposed TDM measures are feasible and appropriate for the project,
considering the proposed use or mix of uses and the project's location, size and
hours of operation. Sufficient measures have been included in the plan to achieve
the required 30% alternative mode usage.
b. The performance guarantees provided in the plan will ensure that the target 30%
alternative mode use 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 and triennial surveys.
Additionally, the applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program
costs associated with monitoring and enforcing the TDM program.
6. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment
Program for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area, and specifically with
the following:
a. To create and develop local job opportunities and to preserve the area's existing
employment base.
b. To replan, redesign and develop areas which are stagnant or improperly used.
7. An Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration approved by the Planning
Commission in November 2002 for the East Jamie Court Project has been prepared for
the project in accordance with the provisions of CEQA. The Addendum identifies no
new supplemental significant impacts associated with the revised project.
8. The proposed project will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of
the community, nor unreasonably detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements.
9. The proposal complies with the City's Design Guidelines.
PROPOSED SUPPLEMENTAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P02-0042: UPM06-0003
(November 16, 2006 Planning Commission Mtg.)
All conditions of approval regarding UP02-0042 approved by the Planning Commission on
November 21,2002 remain in effect except as modified or supplemented by the following
conditions:
A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follow:
1. The project shall be constructed substantially as indicated on the attached plans dated March
31, 2006, prepared by Dowler Gruman Architects, except as otherwise modified by the
following conditions:
2. Childcare - In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.115.030,
prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall pay a childcare fee in effect at the
time of building permit issuance. Currently the fee is of $0.57 per gross square foot of
building.
3. TDM
a. In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.120.070, prior to
issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit a Final TDM Plan for review
and approval by the Chief Planner. The Final TDM Plan shall substantially reflect the
Preliminary TDM plan prepared by The Hoyt company. The Plan shall be designed to
achieve a minimum 30% alternative mode use over the life of the project.
b. The Final TDM Plan shall outline the required process for on-going monitoring
including annual and triennial surveys.
c. The applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program costs associated with
monitoring and enforcing the TDM program.
[Planning Division contact: Susy Kalkin (650) 877-8535]
B. Engineering Division requirements shall be as follow:
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. In accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements of the approved Negative
Declaration for the subject project, the applicant shall pay its proportionate share
Proposed Supplemental Conditions of Approval to UP02-0042
UPM06-0003
Page 2 of 5
of the estimated cost to design, construct and install traffic signal and
channelization improvements at the intersection of East Grand and Allerton
Avenues. The cost for this improvement was estimated to be $545,000 in 2003.
b. The applicant shall, in accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements for the
development, pay its proportionate share (year 2020 estimated traffic share) of the
estimated cost of the right-of-way acquisition and design and construction costs to
widen the intersection of Littlefield and East Grand Avenues, as described in the
traffic mitigation measures contained in the project Negative Declaration. The
estimated cost for this widening work in 2003 was $1,070,000.
c. The applicant shall, in accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements for the
project, reimburse the City for its proportionate share ofthe cost to construct a
new traffic signal and railroad crossing protection at the intersection of Haskins
Way and East Grand Avenue.
3. OYSTER POINT OVERPASS CONTRIBUTION FEE
Prior to receiving a Building Permit for the proposed new office/R&D development, the
applicant shall pay the Oyster Point Overpass fee, as determined by the City Engineer, in
accordance with City Council Resolutions 102-96 and 152-96. The fee will be calculated
upon reviewing the information shown on the applicant's construction plans and the latest
Engineering News Record San Francisco Construction Cost Index at the time of payment.
The estimated fee for the subject 162,000 GSF office and biotech R&D development is
calculated below. (The number in the calculation, "8466.48", is the September 2006
Engineering News Record San Francisco construction cost index, which is revised each
month to reflect local inflation changes in the construction industry.)
Trip Calculation
162,000 gsf R&D use @ 12.3 trips per 1000 gsf = 1993 new vehicle trips
(Note: The plans submitted with this application show every floor of each building being
used for both office and "R&D". If the actual tenant improvements submitted by the
applicant or future tenants clearly identify a different mix of office and R&D space, the fee
will be recalculated at the appropriate ratio as identified in the Oyster Point Overpass Fee
Resolution.)
Contribution Calculation
1993 trips X $154 X (8466.48/6552.16) = $ 396,594
Proposed Supplemental Conditions of Approval to UP02-0042
UPM06-0003
Page 3 of 5
4. EAST OF 101 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES
Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for any building within the proposed project, the
applicant shall pay the East of 101 Traffic Impact fee, in accordance with the resolution
adopted by the City Council at their meeting of September 26, 2001, or as the fee may be
amended in the future.
Fee Calculation (as of October 2006)
162,000 gsfOffice/R&D @ $2.11 per each square foot = $ 341,820
(Please note that this fee is subject to periodic increases as may be approved by resolution ofthe
City Council. The applicant will be required to pay the fee in effect when the building permit is
issued.)
5. SEWER SYSTEM CAPACITY STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT FEE
The City of South San Francisco has identified the need to investigate the condition and
capacity of the sewer system within the East of 101 area, downstream of the proposed
office/R&D development. The existing sewer collection system was originally designed
many years ago to accommodate warehouse and industrial use and is now proposed to
accommodate uses, such as offices and biotech facilities, with a much greater sewage flow.
These additional flows, plus groundwater infiltration into the existing sewers, due to ground
settlement and the age of the system, have resulted in pumping and collection capacity
constraints. A study and flow model is proposed to analyze the problem and recommend
solutions and improvements.
The applicant shall pay the East of 101 Sewer Facility Development Impact Fee, as adopted
by the City Council at their meeting of October 22, 2002. The adopted fee is $3.19 per
gallon of discharge. The applicant shall meet with the Director of Public Works to
determine the projected discharge from the project. The Director of Public Works will
determine the amount of capacity required in accordance with the criteria established in the
Resolution adopted by the City Council on October 22,2002. The Carollo Study, which
forms the basis for the system upgrades, calculated Office/R&D uses to require a capacity of
400 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of development. Based on this calculation, the
potential fee would be, if paid this year: 0.4 gallons per square foot (400 gpd/l000 sf) x
$3.19 per gallon x 162,000 sq. ft. = $ 211,816. The sewer contribution shall be due and
payable prior to receiving a building permit for each phase of the development.
(Engineering Division Contact: Sam Bautista, (650) 829-6652)
Proposed Supplemental Conditions of Approval to UP02-0042
UPM06-0003
Page 4 of 5
C. Water Quality Control Division requirements shall be as follow:
The following items must be included in the plans or are requirements of the Stormwater and/or
Pretreatment programs and must be completed prior to the issuance of a permit:
1. A plan showing the location of all storm drains and sanitary sewers must be submitted.
2. The onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide
Stormwater Logo.
3. Storm water pollution preventions devices are to be installed. A combination oflandscape
based controls (e.g., vegetated swales, bioretention areas, planter/tree boxes, and ponds) and
manufactured controls (vault based separators, vault based media filters, and other removal
devices) are required. Existing catch basins are to be retrofitted with catch basin inserts or
equivalent. These devices must be shown on the plans prior to the issuance of a permit.
If possible, incorporate the following:
. vegetated/grass swale along perimeter
. catch basin runoff directed to infiltration area
. notched curb to direct runoff from parking area into swale
. roof drainage directed to landscape
Manufactured drain inserts alone are not acceptable they must be part of a treatment train.
One of the following must be used in series with each manufactured unit: swales, detention
basins, media (sand) filters, bioretention areas, or vegetated buffer strips.
4. The applicant must submit a signed maintenance schedule for the stormwater pollution
prevention devices installed.
5. Applicant must complete the Project Applicant Checklist for NPDES Permit
Requirements prior to issuance of a permit and return to the Environmental Compliance
Coordinator at the WQCP.
6. Roof condensate must be routed to sanitary sewer. This must be shown on plans prior to
issuance of a permit.
7. Trash handling area must be covered, enclosed and must drain to sanitary sewer. This
must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit.
8. Loading dock area must be covered and any drain must be connected to the sanitary se\\er
system. This must be shown on plans prior to issuance of a permit.
9. Install a separate process line for sample monitoring before mixing with domestic waste
in sanitary sewer. This must be shown on plans prior to the issuance of a permit.
Proposed Supplemental Conditions of Approval to UP02-0042
UPM06-0003
Page 5 of 5
10. Install separate water meters for the building and landscape.
11. Fire sprinkler system test/drainage valve should be plumbed into the sanitary sewer
system. This must be shown on the plans prior to issuance of a permit.
12. A construction Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan must be submitted and approved
prior to the issuance of a permit.
13. Plans must include location of concrete wash out area and location of entrance/outlet of
tire wash.
14. A grading and drainage plan must be submitted.
15. An erosion and sediment control plan must be submitted.
16. Applicant must pay sewer connection fee at a later time based on anticipated flow, BOD
and TSS calculations.
17. Applicant will be required to obtain a wastewater discharge permit. Contact Kevin
Maffei at Water Quality Control (650) 829-38810.
[Contact Cassie Prudhel, Water Quality Control, (650) 829-3840]
Planning Commission
Staff Report
DATE: November 21,2002
TO: Planning Commission
SUBJECT: East Jamie Court OfficelR&D - Use Permit to construct a two building office/R &
D complex on a 6. 13-acre site adjacent to the San Francisco Bay. The project consists
of two buildings totaling 133,000 sq. ft.: Bldg 1- two stories over a parking level
(57,700 sq. ft.); and Bldg 2-three stories (75,300 sq. ft.) in the Planned Industrial (P-I)
Zoning District.
Applicant:
Owner:
Case Nos.:
Alexandria Real Estate Equities
Richard Haskins
UP-02-0042 & MND-02-0042
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration MND-
02-0042 and approve Use Permit UP-02-0042 based on the attached findings and subject to the
attached conditions of approval.
BACKGROUND
The General Plan designates the site a combination of Light Industrial and Coastal Commercial,
which allows office/R&D uses. Additionally, office/R&D uses are permitted in the Planned
Industrial (P-I) Zone District. However, uses which generate in excess of 100 average daily trips,
which exceed 60 feet in height, and which include a request for a reduced parking standard for R&D
uses require Use Permit approval [SSFMC Section 20.32.060, Table 20.70.030, and 20.74.070(c)].
A Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM Plan) is also required because the project
generates in excess of 100 average daily vehicle trips in accordance with SSFMC Chapter 20.120.
DISCUSSION:
Project Description
The applicant proposes to construct two office/research and development buildings totaling 133,000
square feet on a vacant 6. 13-acre site located at the southeasterly comer of Haskins Way and East
Jamie Court. The site is bordered on the south by San Francisco Bay, on the east by the South San
Francisco Scavenger Company's MRF/TS, on the north side of East Jamie Court by Yellow Freight
Trucking, and on the west by multi-tenant office/warehouse businesses.
Staff Report
RE: Alexandria - UP-02-0042
Date: November 21, 2002
Page 2
Building/Site Design
Site Design - The project layout has been designed to maximize visual and physical access to the
Bay. The two buildings are situated toward the rear of the site, separated by a large plaza which
opens onto a wide landscape setback along the bay frontage. Walkways are provided from the plaza
leading to the Bay Trail improvements which are included within this landscaped area.
Bay Trail - The project provides a 100 foot landscaped setback from the Bay that includes the
shoreline trail as well as periodic seating areas; neither the buildings nor parking encroach into the
shoreline band. This trail will provide a link to the trail improvements at the Scavenger site to the
north, and will tie in with more informal trail improvements to the south.
The proposed trail improvements encroach upon State lands which the State granted to the City in
the early 1900's. The terms of the grant allow the City to lease the lands for any and all purposes so
long as there is no interference with navigation or commerce. BCDC requested the applicant seek
authorization from the City to provide the trail in this location as it would bring residents closer to
the bay edge and would connect nicely with existing trail improvements on either end ofthe site.
Staff supports this request as a beneficial use of these lands, and has included a condition of approval
requiring the applicant obtain a lease with the City prior to issuance of a building permit.
Building Design - The project is comprised of two buildings: Building 1, a three level (two-stories
over a parking level), 57,700 square foot building, and Building 2, a three story, 75,300 sq. ft.
building. Building materials consist primarily of precast concrete walls with a prominent metal wall
panel along the East Jamie Ct. and bayside elevations which provides and interesting angular
architectural feature. Additionally, curtain wall systems are provided at the stairwells sited on either
side of the main plaza.
Design Review Board - The Design Review Board reviewed the project at its May and July 2002
meetings and was very complimentary of both the building and landscape design, noting only a
minor concern with the spacing ofthe trees along the southerly side of the building. The Board
recommended grouping the trees to optimize view corridors and provide added interest. The plans
have been subsequently revised to address this concern.
General Development Standards
Subject to approval ofthe parking variance, discussed below, the project meets all of the
development standards of the PI Planned Industrial Zone District as shown below:
Staff Report
RE: Alexandria - UP-02-0042
Date: November 21,2002
Page 3
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
PI Planned Industrial
Setbacks
Front
Street side
Rear
20 feet minimum
10 feet minimum
None
Height
60 feet, additional height
allowed subject to
obtaining a use permit
Parking
R&D - 4/1000 sq. ft. for
the first 50,000 sq. ft., and
3/1 000 for space in excess
of 50,000 sq. ft.!
- 449 spaces
10% minimum
Landscaping
Parking and TDM
Proposed Proi ect
20feet
10feet
6 ft.
Building 1 - 61 ft to top of
roof screen
Building 2 - 66 ft to top of
roof screen
375 parking spaces (2.82
spaces/l,OOO sf)
23.7% onsite, plus 1.1 acres
off-site
The proposal provides for 2.82 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet, or 375 parking spaces for
the project, which is less than the standard rate provided in the Off-Street Parking Regulations
of the Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 20.74), but consistent with the ratios approved at several
other similar proj ects in the East of 101 Area. The standard parking requirement for Research
and Development uses is 4/1000 sq. ft. for the first 50,000 sq. ft., and 3/1000 for space in
excess of 50,000 sq. ft. However, this standard also specifically allows for a reduction in
those requirements subject to a use permit. In addition, the TDM Ordinance allows the
Planning Commission to reduce parking standards so long as the amount of parking generated
by the standards is supported by the overall TDM Plan for the project.
Staff supports the reduced parking rate for this project based on the following factors and specifically
because they support the overall efforts of the TDM plan as well as the City's General Plan Policies
which promote parking reductions for projects implementing trip reduction programs:
1 The Zoning Ordinance specifically allows for a reduction in those standards subject to approval of a use permit.
Staff Report
RE: Alexandria - UP-02-0042
Date: November 21,2002
Page 4
~ TDM - The TDM Ordinance promotes reduced parking rates for projects implementing trip
reduction programs since reduced parking will encourage employees to use public transportation
or other alternative modes of travel other than single occupant vehicles.
~ Similar Projects - The City has allowed reduced parking standards in several office/R&D
projects as indicated below:
o Gateway Specific Plan Area -2.83 spaces/l000 sq. ft. for Lots 1 and 9 in the Gateway Area,
generally the area on the west side of Gateway Boulevard, north of Corporate Drive.
o Bay West Cove - allowing for a ratio of2.83 spaces/l,OOO sq. ft. for both office and R&D
proj ects.
o Genentech Overlay Zone - 2.5 spacesll 000 sq. ft. for office buildings and 1.5 spaces/l 000
sq. ft. for R&D buildings.
o 345 East Grand Office/R&D - 2.58 spaces/l,OOO sq. ft.
Furthermore, as has been stated by the City's TDM consultant, "The ability and willingness to
rideshare is directly linked to parking availability. By not providing an overabundant supply of
parking spaces at full buildout, the City is laying the groundwork for successful promotion of
alternative transportation."
Preliminary TDM Plan
In accordance with the TDM Ordinance, the applicant has prepared a preliminary TDM plan
designed to achieve a minimum 28% alternative mode use, consistent with the request to allow an
FAR of 0.5. In general, the preliminary TDM plan provides for the requisite mode shift goal, and
includes all mandatory elements including participation in shuttle programs, carpool & vanpool
ridematching and preferential parking, showers and locker facilities, guaranteed ride home program,
secure bicycle parking, on-site program coordinator, etc. as well as reduced parking.
General Plan/Redevelopment Plan Consistency
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan which designates the property a
combination of Mixed Industrial and Coastal Commercial
· Mixed Industrial allows a wide range of manufacturing, industrial processing, general service,
warehousing, storage and distribution, and service commercial uses. The maximum Floor Area
Staff Report
RE: Alexandria - UP-02-0042
Date: November 21, 2002
Page 5
Ratio is 0.4, with an increase to a total FAR of 0.6 for uses with low employment intensity, such
as wholesaling, warehousing and distribution.
· Coastal Commercial allows business/professional services, offices, convenience sales,
restaurants, public marketplaces, personaVrepair services, limited retail, hotels/motels with a
coastal orientation, recreational facilities, and marinas. Maximum FAR ranges from 0.5 for
retail to 1.0 for offices, and 1.6 for hotels.
· East of 101 General Plan Guiding Policies - The General Plan includes the following Guiding
Policy 3.5-G-3 which supports the proposal:
"3.5-G-3 -
Promote campus-style biotechnology, high-technology, and research and
development uses."
The proposal is consistent with the above referenced General Plan designations and policies
concerning uses and allowable FAR. As indicated in the above referenced General Plan Guiding
Policy, the City seeks to promote bioscience uses in the East of 101 Area. As examples, the
Planning Commission and/or City Council has approved similar developments in both the Mixed
Industrial Category (Axys Pharmaceuticals - a 63,200 sq. ft. R&D building at 468 Littlefield
Avenue, in Nov. 1999) and in a mixed Business and Technology Park/Coastal Commercial area
(Britannia East Grand Master Plan - a 27 acre, nine-building R&D campus at 450 East Grand
Avenue, in April 2002). Additionally, the proposed FAR of 0.5 is supported due to the mixed use
land use designation which provides for FARs of up to 0.4 for the industrial designation and up to
1.0 for the coastal commercial portions.
East of 101 Area Plan
The proposed project is also consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan which the General Plan
identifies as the guide for detailed implementation of General Plan policies, and specifically with the
following design policies:
DE-l and DE-5 which support designs which take advantage of Bay views;
DE-22 which promotes on-site landscaping as a unifying element in campus development
recommends de-emphasizing the visual prominence of parking areas by placing them to the
rear of the site; and
DE-23, which recommends that open space be designed to include seating areas with views
of the Bay.
Staff Report
RE: Alexandria - UP-02-0042
Date: November 21,2002
Page 6
Redevelopment Plan
The proposed use is consistent with the goals and objectives ofthe Redevelopment Program for the
Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area, and specifically with the following:
a. To create and develop local job opportunities and to preserve the area's existing
employment base.
b. To replan, redesign and develop areas which are stagnant or improperly used.
Environmental Analysis
In accordance with the provisions of CEQA, an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
have been prepared for the project. The key environmental issues identified in the study were traffic,
geology, site drainage and storm water runoff, and construction impacts.
~ Traffic - The proposal is projected to generate 188 AM Peak Hour trips and 188 PM peak hour
trips. The traffic study prepared for the project analyzed 12 intersections in both the near-term
(2003) and long-term (2020). In the near term, the project would impact the following
intersections:
Gateway/South Airport
Allerton/E. Grand
HaskinslE. Grand
HarborlForbeslE. Grand
E. Grand/E. Grand Overpass
LOS D to LOS E in the PM peak hour
LOS E to LOS F in the PM peak hour
LOS C to LOS F in the PM peak hour
LOS D to LOS E in the AM peak hour
LOS E to LOS F in the AM peak hour
Additionally, the project would contribute to existing and/or projected deficiencies at 3 other
intersections. As outlined in the attached conditions of approval, in addition to implementing a
TDM Plan to reduce trip generation, the applicant will be required to contribute towards
improvements at these locations both through payment of East of 101 Transportation
Improvement Fees and contributions for specific identified improvements (see Engineering
Conditions) thereby reducing traffic impacts to a less than significant level.
~ Geology - The proj ect site was initially part of the Bay and was reclaimed by placing fill across
the site between 1970-72. The fill was retained by constructing a perimeter dyke that extends
beneath the southern edge of the site. Because of this unique situation, significant soil studies
have been conducted on the site to ensure that the buildings can be supported. Mitigation
measures are identified in the IS/MND to reduce potential impacts to a less than significant
level.
Staff Report
RE: Alexandria - UP-02-0042
Date: November 21,2002
Page 7
~ Stormwater/Construction Impacts - Construction activities will be required to comply with
measures to suppress dust and control noise levels. A health and safety plan needs to be prepared
as part of the demolition permit application to ensure that hazardous materials in the ground on
the site does not become airborne. An NPDES permit and Storm Water Pollution Prevention
Plan (SWPPP) will be required to prevent on-site soils from getting into the City's storm
drainage system especially during construction. These mitigation measures would reduce the
impacts to a less than significant level.
Several comment letters were received during the review period. The attached "Response to
Comments" document has been prepared to address all comments provided on the initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed project complies with the goals and objectives ofthe City's General Plan, the East of
101 Area Plan and the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Plan to develop high-quality, well-
designed office and R&D developments throughout the northern portion of the East of 101 area. In
addition, with the exception of parking standards, the project complies with all the development
standards and requirements of the P-I Planned Industrial Zone District. The City's General Plan and
TDM Ordinance support the concept of reduced parking requirements as a strong component in
support of trip reduction efforts, and the requested reduction is similar to standards approved in other
similar developments within the East of 101 area subject to TDM mandates. Consequently, staff
recommends that the Planning Commission adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve
UP-02-0042 based on the attached findings and subject to the attached conditions of approval.
-Ltf:z~6
Susy Ka .
Principal Planner
'"
ATTACHMENTS: Proposed Findings of Approval
Proposed Conditions of Approval
Project Narrative
Preliminary TDM Plan
Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program
Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (planning Commissioners only.
Additional copies available upon request.)
Response to Comments - (PC Only; copies available upon request)
Plans - November 7, 2002
PROPOSED FINDINGS OF APPROVAL
UP-02-0042
(November 21, 2002 Planning Commission Meeting)
As required by the "Use Permit Procedure" (SSFMC Chapter 20.81) and the "Transportation
Demand Management" Ordinance (SSFMC Chapter 20.120) the Planning Commission makes
the following findings in support of the request to approve a Use Permit to allow an office/R & D
complex on a 6. 13-acre site adjacent to the San Francisco Bay consisting of two buildings
totaling 133,000 sq. ft.: Bldg 1- two stories over a parking level (57,700 sq. ft.); and Bldg 2-three
stories (75,300 sq. ft.) in the Planned Industrial (P-I) Zoning District, and a Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Plan to reduce project traffic impacts. These findings are based on
public testimony and the materials submitted to the City of South San Francisco Planning
Commission which include, but are not limited to: Plans dated November 7, 2002 prepared by
Dowler Gruman Architects; Draft Initial Study and Negative Declaration - East Jamie Court
Project and Response to Comments on that document prepared by Morehouse Associates; the
Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan, prepared by Sequoia Solutions; minutes
of the May 21,2002 and July 16, 2002 Design Review Board meetings; Planning Commission
staff report dated November 21,2002; and testimony received at the November 21,2002
Planning Commission meeting:
1. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the land use being
proposed. The suitability of the site for development was analyzed thoroughly in the
environmental document prepared for the project.
2. The proposed Office/R&D project is consistent with the Mixed Industrial and Coastal
Commercial General Plan policies concerning uses and allowable FAR. General Plan
Guiding Policies promote bioscience uses in the East of 101 Area. The Planning
Commission and/or City Council has approved similar developments in both the Mixed
Industrial Category (Axys Pharmaceuticals - a 63,200 sq. ft. R&D building at 468
Littlefield Avenue, in Nov. 1999) and in a mixed Business and Technology Park/Coastal
Commercial area (Britannia East Grand Master Plan - a 27 acre, nine-building R&D
campus at 450 East Grand Avenue, in April 2002). Additionally, the proposed FAR of
0.5 is supported due to the mixed use land use designation which provides for FARs of up
to 0.4 for the industrial designation and up to 1.0 for the coastal commercial portions.
3. The proposed project is consistent with the East of 101 Area Plan which the General Plan
identifies as the guide for detailed implementation of General Plan policies, and
specifically with the following design policies:
DE-l and DE-5 which support designs which take advantage of Bay views;
DE-22 which promotes on-site landscaping as a unifying element in campus
development recommends de-emphasizing the visual prominence of parking areas
by placing them to the rear of the site; and
DE-23, which recommends that open space be designed to include seating areas
with views of the Bay.
Proposed Findings of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 2 of 4
4. With the exception of parking, the proposed project meets or exceeds the minimum
standards and requirements of the City's Zoning Ordinance which designates the site P-C
Planned Commercial. Offices and research and development uses are permitted uses in
the zone. A use permit is required because the project will generate in excess of 100
vehicle trips per day and because the building exceeds a height limit of 60 feet.
5. The proposed parking supply is warranted based on the following:
a. The project is required to implement a Transportation Demand Management
Program on an on-going basis over the life of the project with a required
alternative mode shift of 28%. The TDM Ordinance supports reduced parking
rates for projects implementing trip reduction programs since reduced parking will
encourage employees to use public transportation or other alternative modes of
travel other than single occupant vehicles.
b. The reduced parking rate reinforces the policies of the City's General Plan, as put
forth in General Plan policies 4.3-1-11 and 4.3-1-12, as follow:
- Establish parking standards to support trip reduction goals by allowing parking
reduction for projects that have agreed to implement trip reduction methods
- Amend the Zoning Ordinance to reduce minimum parking requirements for
projects proximate to transit stations and for projects implementing a TDM
program."
c. The number of parking spaces provided by the reduced standard will serve all
existing, proposed and potential uses as effectively and conveniently as would the
standard number of parking spaces required by Chapter 20.74. This is supported
based on the trip reductions goals required of the project, the fact that similar
reduced standards have been accepted and/or successfully applied within several
large developments in the city, including the Gateway Specific Plan District, Bay
West Cove Specific Plan District, the Genentech Campus, and 345 East Grand.
6. Transportation Demand Management
a. The proposed TDM measures are feasible and appropriate for the project,
considering the proposed use or mix of uses and the project's location, size and
hours of operation. Sufficient measures have been included in the plan to achieve
the required 28% alternative mode usage.
b. The performance guarantees provided in the plan will ensure that the target 28%
alternative mode use 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
Proposed Findings of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 3 of 4
required process for on-going monitoring including annual surveys. Additionally,
the applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program costs associated
with monitoring and enforcing the TDM program.
7. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Redevelopment
Program for the Downtown/Central Redevelopment Project Area, and specifically with
the following:
a. To create and develop local job opportunities and to preserve the area's existing
employment base.
b. To replan, redesign and develop areas which are stagnant or improperly used.
8. A Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project in accordance with
the provisions of CEQA. Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project
which will reduce all identified impacts to a less that significant level. The Mitigated
Negative Declaration discusses several Project Mitigations that are needed to
accommodate the additional traffic that generate by the proposed use that will require the
applicant to pay fees to fund specific improvements as outlined below:
a. In accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements of the approved Negative
Declaration for the subject project, the applicant shall pay 9% of the estimated
cost to design, construct and install traffic signal and channelization
improvements at the intersection of East Grand and Allerton Avenues. The cost
for this improvement is estimated to be $545,000. The applicant's 9% share is
$49,050.
b. The applicant shall, in accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements for the
development, pay 9% of the estimated cost ofthe right-of-way acquisition and
design and construction costs to widen the intersection of Littlefield and East
Grand Avenues, as described in the traffic mitigation measures contained in the
project Negative Declaration. The estimated cost for this widening work is
$1,070,000. The applicant's 9% share would be $96,300.
c. The applicant shall, in accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements for the
project, reimburse the City for 20% ofthe estimated $530,000 cost to construct a
new traffic signal and railroad crossing protection at the intersection of Haskins
Way and East Grand Avenue. The applicant's 20% share of the work would be
$106,000.
9. The proposal will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the
community, nor unreasonably detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements.
Proposed Findings of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 4 of 4
10. Subject to minor modifications, included as conditions of approval, the proposal complies
with the City's Design Guidelines.
PROPOSED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
P02-0042
(November 21, 2002 Planning Commission Mtg.)
A. Planning Division requirements shall be as follow:
1. The project shall be constructed substantially as indicated on the attached plans dated
November 7, 2002, prepared by Dowler Gruman Architects, except as otherwise modified by
the following conditions:
2. The applicant shall comply with all mitigation measures identified in the "Initial Study and
Mitigated Negative Declaration - East Jamie Court Project", prepared by Morehouse
Associates. Prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall prepare a checklist
outlining mitigation measures and status of implementation.
3. Childcare - In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.115.030,
prior to issuance of a building permit the applicant shall pay a childcare fee in the amount of
$0.50 per gross square foot of building.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall enter into a lease with the City for
use of the State Lands located to the south ofthe subject property for installation of required
Bay Trail improvements.
5. Final landscape and irrigation plans shall be submitted with building permit plans and shall
reflect the following: at a minimum, 15% of all trees shall be 24" box specimen size.
6. The applicant shall cooperate with the City in the development/implementation of a regional
shuttle service if such is considered by the City.
7. TDM
a. In accordance with South San Francisco Municipal Code Section 20.120.070, prior to
issuance of a building permit the applicant shall submit a Final TDM Plan for review
and approval by the Chief Planner. The Final TDM Plan shall substantially reflect the
Preliminary TDM plan prepared by Sequoia Solutions. The Plan shall be designed to
achieve a minimum 28% alternative mode use over the life of the project.
b. The Final TDM Plan shall outline the required process for on-going monitoring
including annual surveys.
c. The applicant shall be required to reimburse the City for program costs associated with
monitoring and enforcing the TDM program.
8. No signs are included in the project approval.
9. All roof-mounted equipment shall be contained in screened enclosures, subject to the review
and approval of the City's Chief Planner.
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 20f8
10. The applicant shall comply with the Planning Division's Standard Conditions, entitled
"Standard Conditions And Limitations For Commercial Industrial And Multi-Family
Residential Projects", revised February 1999.
[Planning Division contact: Susy Kalkin (650) 877-8535]
B. Engineering Division requirements shall be as follow:
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. The developer shall comply with the traffic mitigation recommendations
contained in the approved traffic impact study for the project.
b. The design of the project shall include storm water pollution filters, such as grassy
swales or mechanical devices, that will remove pollutants from the site's storm
water runoff, so that the adjacent San Francisco Bay water will not be polluted by
runoff from this project.
c. In accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements of the approved Negative
Declaration for the subject project, the applicant shall pay 9% of the estimated
cost to design, construct and install traffic signal and channelization
improvements at the intersection of East Grand and Allerton A venues. The cost
for this improvement is estimated to be $545,000 (year 2003 estimate). The
applicant's 9%, year 2020 build date, share is $49,050.
d. The applicant shall, in accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements for the
development, pay 9% (year 2020 estimated traffic share) of the year 2003
estimated cost of the right-of-way acquisition and design and construction costs to
widen the intersection of Littlefield and East Grand Avenues, as described in the
traffic mitigation measures contained in the project Negative Declaration. The
estimated cost for this widening work in 2003 is $1,070,000. The applicant's 9%
share would be $96,300.
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 3 of8
e. The applicant shall, in accordance with the traffic mitigation requirements for the
project, reimburse the City for 20% of the estimatedyear 2003 cost of$530,000 to
construct a new traffic signal and railroad crossing protection at the intersection of
Haskins Way and East Grand Avenue. The applicant's 2020 build year 20% share
of the work would be $106,000.
f. As noted in the project environmental documents, development ofthe site will
increase the amount of storm water runoff that flows off of the property. The
City's storm drain system within Haskins Way does not currently have capacity to
accommodate additional runoff into the system. In order to mitigate this problem
and accommodate the additional runoff from the proposed development, the
developer shall increase the system's storage capacity by replacing the existing
48" storm drain pipe, from the manhole at the intersection of Haskins Way with
East Jamie Court, to the next downstream manhole 77 feet south, with a 6-foot by
4-foot concrete box culvert. Plans for this improvement shall be prepared by the
applicant's civil engineer and submitted for the review and approval of the City
Engineer. The cost of designing, constructing and installing the box culvert,
including the cost of all permits to perform the work, shall be borne by the
applicant.
g. Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project, the applicant shall pay
the various East of 101 infrastructure impact fees detailed below.
3. OYSTER POINT OVERPASS CONTRIBUTION FEE
Prior to receiving a Building Permit for the proposed new office/R&D development, the
applicant shall pay the Oyster Point Overpass fee, as determined by the City Engineer, in
accordance with City Council Resolutions 102-96 and 152-96. The fee will be calculated
upon reviewing the information shown on the applicant's construction plans and the latest
Engineering News Record San Francisco Construction Cost Index at the time of payment.
The estimated fee for the subject 133,000 GSF office and biotech R&D development is
calculated below. (The number in the calculation, "7643.89", is the October 2002
Engineering News Record San Francisco construction cost index, which is revised each
month to reflect local inflation changes in the construction industry.)
Trip Calculation
133,000 gsfR&D use @ 12.3 trips per 1000 gsf = 1636 new vehicle trips
(Note: The plans submitted with this application show every floor of each building being
used for both office and "R&D". rfthe actual tenant improvements submitted by the
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 4 of8
applicant or future tenants clearly identify a different mix of office and R&D space, the fee
will be recalculated at the appropriate ratio as identified in the Oyster Point Overpass Fee
Resolution.)
Contribution Calculation
1636 trips X $154 X (7643.89/6552.16) = $ 293,923
4. EAST OF 101 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES
Prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for any building within the proposed project, the
applicant shall pay the East of 101 Traffic Impact fee, in accordance with the resolution
adopted by the City Council at their meeting of September 26, 2001, or as the fee may be
amended in the future.
Fee Calculation (as of October 2002)
133,000 gsfOffice/R&D @ $1.51 per each square foot = $ 200,830
(Please note that the traffic impact fee is proposed to be increased early next year to $2.10 per
square foot for office/R&D projects. If this increase is approved by the City Council the fee
would be 133,000 gsf@ $2.10 per SF = $279,300. If the applicant has not obtained a building
permit and begun construction prior to the date on which the fee is increased, the applicant will
be required to pay the revised fee.)
5. ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC MITIGATION MEASURES
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration identified several additional mitigation
measures either at intersections that are currently in the East of 101 Transportation
Improvement Program or which the City is contemplating including in an Updated East of
101 TlP Fee, as outlined below:
a. East Grand Overcrossing/East Grand - Necessary mitigation identified in the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is as follows: Restripe Northbound approach on
East Grand Avenue to provide two right-turn lanes and one left-turn lane. In accordance
with the findings of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the applicant shall
be required to pay its fair share contribution of 10% of the cost ofthis improvement.
b. Gateway Boulevard/East Grand Avenue - Necessary mitigation identified in the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration is as follows: Widen northbound Gateway Blvd.
to provide a second right-turn lane. In accordance with the findings of the Initial
Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, the applicant shall be required to pay its fair
share contribution of7% of the cost of this improvement.
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 5 of8
c. Harbor Way/Forbes Boulevard/East Grand Avenue - Necessary mitigation identified in
the Initial StudyIMitigated Negative Declaration is as follows: Widen southbound
Forbes Blvd. to provide a second through lane. ill accordance with the findings ofthe
Initial StudyIMitigated Negative Declaration, the applicant shall be required to pay its
fair share contribution of 5% of the cost ofthis improvement.
d. Airport Boulevard/San Mateo Avenue - Necessary mitigation identified in the Initial
StudyIMitigated Negative Declaration is as follows: Restripe southbound Airport Blvd.
to provide one left-turn lane, two through lanes and one shared through-right lane. ill
accordance with the findings of the Initial StudyIMitigated Negative Declaration, the
applicant shall be required to pay its fair share contribution of 4% of the cost of this
improvement.
e. Gateway Boulevard/South Airport Boulevard - Necessary mitigation identified in the
Initial StudyIMitigated Negative Declaration is as follows: Restripe the northbound
approach on S. Airport Blvd. to provide one share right-through lane and one right-turn
lane. In accordance with the findings of the Initial StudyIMitigated Negative
Declaration, the applicant shall be required to pay its fair share contribution of2% of the
cost of this improvement.
Note: The City is presently considering an amendment to the East of 101 Traffic hnpact
Mitigation Fee to address the these improvements which were not identified as required
improvements in the original Fee Study adopted by the South San Francisco City
Council on September 26,2001 (Resolution No. 99-2001). If the above referenced
mitigation measures are included in an amended East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee prior to
issuance of building permits for the subject project, the applicant shall pay the amended
East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee rather than the individual contributions for the five
improvement outlined above.
6. SEWER SYSTEM CAPACITY STUDY AND IMPROVEMENT FEE
The City of South San Francisco has identified the need to investigate the condition and
capacity of the sewer system within the East of 101 area, downstream of the proposed
office/R&D development. The existing sewer collection system was originally designed
many years ago to accommodate warehouse and industrial use and is now proposed to
accommodate uses, such as offices and biotech facilities, with a much greater sewage flow.
These additional flows, plus groundwater infiltration into the existing sewers, due to ground
settlement and the age of the system, have resulted in pumping and collection capacity
constraints. A study and flow model is proposed to analyze the problem and recommend
solutions and improvements.
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 6 of8
The applicant shall pay the East of 101 Sewer Facility Development Impact Fee, as adopted
by the City Council at their meeting of October 22, 2002. The adopted fee is $3.19 per
gallon of discharge. The applicant shall meet with the Director of Public Works to
determine the projected discharge from the project. The Director of Public Works will
determine the amount of capacity required in accordance with the criteria established in the
Resolution adopted by the City Council on October 22, 2002. The Carollo Study, which
forms the basis for the system upgrades, calculated Office/R&D uses to require a capacity of
400 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of development. Based on this calculation, the
potential fee would be, ifpaid this year: 0.4 gallons per square foot (400 gpd/1000 sf) x
$3.19 per gallon x 133,000 sq. ft. = $ 169,708. The sewer contribution shall be due and
payable prior to receiving a building permit for each phase of the development.
7. SWIFT AND KIMBALL SEWER IMPROVEMENTS REIMBURSEMENT
The applicant also shall reimburse the developer of the Britannia East Grand project for a
fair-share cost of the sewer main and pump station improvements that they will be
constructing along Swift Avenue and Kimball Way. The cost of the reimbursement shall be
determined by the City Engineer, based upon the applicant's projected sewage flow rates, the
portion of the sewer improvements to be used by the subject development and the
documented cost for the design, construction and inspection of the public improvements by
Britannia's contractor and consultants.
(Engineering Division Contact: Richard Harmon, (650) 829-6652)
c. Police Department requirements shall be as follows:
1. Municipal Code Com?liance - The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Chapter
15.48 of the Municipal Code, "Minimum Building Security Standards" Ordinance, revised
May 1995. The Police Department reserves the right to make additional security and safety
conditions, if necessary, upon receipt of detailed/revised building plans and after observation
of operational procedures.
2. Lighting Levels
a. Parking lots (including parking lots with carports) driveways, circulation areas, aisles,
passageways, recesses, and grounds contiguous to buildings shall be provided with high
intensity discharge lighting with sufficient wattage to provide adequate illumination to
make clearly visible the presence of any person on or about the premises during the
hours of business darkness and provide a safe, secure environment for all persons,
property, and vehicles on site. Such lighting shall be equipped with vandal-resistant
covers. A lighting level of .50 to 1 foot-candles minimum, maintained at ground level
is required.
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 7 of8
b. The parking garage shall have a lighting level of 5 foot-candles for parking areas and
travel lanes. A lighting level of 10 foot-candles is required in stairwells and areas
adjacent to the elevators.
c. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan to be
reviewed and approved by the Police Department. Lighting plans shall include
photometric and distribution data attesting to the required illumination level.
3. Special Conditions
a. Interactive speakers shall be required throughout the garage to enable patrons to
summon security without having to dial a phone.
b. The complex shall employ a uniformed security guard 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
(police Department contact person: Sergeant Mike Newell (650) 877-8927)
D. Fire Prevention requirements shall be as follow:
1. Provide fire sprinkler system and class ill wet standpipes
2. Provide fire alarm system
3. Provide on-site fire hydrants
4. Provide fire access to roof if screened.
[Contact: Maurice Dong, Assistant Fire Marshall- (650) 829-6671]
E. Water Quality Control Division requirements shall be as follow:
1. The new onsite catch basins are to be stenciled with the approved San Mateo Countywide
Stormwater Logo.
2. In accordance with the Municipal Code and federal law, new stormwater pollution control
devices stromceptor/CDS units are to be installed in any new drainage inlets. Existing catch
basins are to be retrofitted with fossil filter Flow Guards inserts or equivalents. In addition,
the applicant is required to submit a maintenance schedules for the inserts and
stormceptor/CDS units to the Environmental Coordinator.
Proposed Conditions of Approval
UP-02-0042
Page 8 of8
3. The applicant shall pay a Sewer Connection fee for the new building. Fee will be based on
tenant occupancy.
4. Separate water meters are required for landscaping and buildings.
5. An Erosion Control Plan with winterization controls is required prior to the issuance of a
grading permit.
6. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit a Stormwater Management
Plan for the site.
7. Ifbuilding is intended for biotechnology use, then a sampling port shall be required along
with separate lab and sanitary sewer systems.
8. Additional comments will be provided when building plans are received.
[Contact: Ray Honan, Environmental Compliance Coordinator - (650) 877-8634]
DRAFT
RESOLL-TIO~- A~D
ADDE~DC~ TO BE
DISTRIBl,-TED
EARLY ~EXT WEEK
AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
East Jamie Court Office I Research and Development Project
This AMENDED AND REST A TED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE EAST
JAMIE COURT OFFICE / RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROJECT is dated
, 2006 ("Restated Agreement"), between ARE-EAST JAMIE COURT, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company ("Owner"), and the CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, a
municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("City").
Owner and City are collectively referred to herein as "Parties."
RECITALS
A. WHEREAS, California Government Code ("Government Code") Sections 65864 through
65869.5 authorize the City to enter into binding development agreements with persons
having legal or equitable interests in real property for the development of such property
or on behalf of those persons having same; and,
B. WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65865, the City has adopted rules and
regulations, embodied in Chapter 19.60 of the South San Francisco Municipal Code
("Municipal Code"), establishing procedures and requirements for adoption and
execution of development agreements; and,
C. WHEREAS, this Restated Agreement concerns property located on a 6. 13-acre site at the
comer of Haskins Way and East Jamie Court, as shown and more particularly described
in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference ("Property"); and,
D. WHEREAS, ARE-East Jamie Court, LLC, the Owner, has a legal interest in the Property;
and,
E. WHEREAS, on November 21, 2002, City's Planning Commission approved Conditional
Use Permit P02-0042 (the "Use Permit") for the development of the Property as depicted
on the East Jamie Court Development Plan Set dated November 7, 2002, prepared by
Dowler-Gruman Architects (a copy of such Use Permit is attached hereto as Exhibit B
and incorporated herein by reference); and,
F. WHEREAS, on January 11, 2006, after conducting all proceedings and making all
findings necessary for the valid adoption and execution of a development agreement for
the Property in accordance with Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5, the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"), and Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal
Code, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1365-2006, approving and adopting a
development agreement for the Property (which Ordinance took effect on February 10,
2006); and
Page] of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
G. WHEREAS, on March 10, 2006, Owner and City entered into a certain Development
Agreement for the East Jamie Court Office Research and Development Project (the
"Original Agreement"), as approved and adopted by the City Council; and,
H. WHEREAS, Owner has submitted an application to the City for modifications of the Use
Permit and the Original Agreement to permit the development of the Property as depicted
on the amended East Jamie Court Development Plan Set dated March 31, 2006, prepared
by Dowler-Gruman Architects (the "Amended Plan Set") (a copy of such Amended Plan
Set is attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference); and
I. WHEREAS, Owner has requested that the City enter into this Restated Agreement to set
forth the rights and obligations of the parties relating to the development of the Property;
and,
1. WHEREAS, all proceedings necessary for the valid adoption and execution of this
Restated Agreement have taken place in accordance with Government Code
Sections 65864 through 65869.5, CEQA, and Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code; and,
K. WHEREAS, the City Council and the Planning Commission have found that this
Restated Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and
programs specified in the South San Francisco General Plan as adopted on October 13,
1999, and as amended from time to time; and,
L. WHEREAS, on ,2006, the City Council adopted Ordinance No.
approving and adopting this Restated Agreement and the Ordinance thereafter took effect
on , 2006.
AGREEMENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, pursuant to the authority contained in Government
Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5 and Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code and in
consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, agree as follows:
1. Amends and Restates Original Agreement
The Parties hereby agree that (i) this Restated Agreement amends, restates, and
supersedes the Original Agreement in its entirety, and (ii) the Original Agreement shall
have no further force or effect from and after the date this Restated Agreement becomes
effective. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any action taken by the Parties pursuant to the
Original Agreement prior to the date this Restated Agreement becomes effective shall be
and remain valid and authorized, as if such actions had been taken pursuant to this
Restated Agreement.
2. Effective Date
Pursuant to Chapter 19.060.140, notwithstanding the fact that the City Council adopts an
ordinance approving this Restated Agreement, this Restated Agreement shall be effective
Page 2 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
and shall only create obligations for the Parties from and after the date that the ordinance
approving this Restated Agreement takes effect ("Effective Date").
3. Duration
This Restated Agreement shall expire on March 10, 2016. If litigation against the Owner
(or any of its officers, agents, employees, contractors, representatives or consultants) to
which the City also is a party should delay implementation or construction on the
Property of the "Proiect" (as defined in Section 4 below), the expiration date of this
Restated Agreement shall be extended for a period equal to the length of time from the
time the summons and complaint is served on the defendant(s) until the judgment entered
by the court is final and not subject to appeal; provided, however, that the total amount of
time for which the expiration date shall be extended as a result of such litigation shall not
exceed five (5) years.
4. Proiect Description: Development Standards For Proiect
The project to be developed on the Property pursuant to this Restated Agreement (the
"Proiect") shall consist of (i) two (2) office/research and development buildings, each
with three (3) floors, containing an aggregate of approximately 162,000 square feet,
(ii) parking below each building that will accommodate up to 139 parking spaces,
(iii) surface parking that will accommodate up to 320 parking spaces, and (iv) related
improvements, all as provided in the Amended Plan Set and as approved by the City
Council.
(a) The permitted uses, the density and intensity of uses, the maximum heights,
locations and total area of the proposed buildings, the development schedule, the
provisions for vehicular access and parking, any reservation or dedication of land,
any public improvements, facilities and services, and all environmental impact
mitigation measures imposed as approval conditions for the Project shall be
exclusively those provided in the Amended Plan Set, the Use Permit (and any
addenda thereto in effect as of the Effective Date) (the "Operative Use Permit"),
the Development Plan, the Mitigated Negative Declaration (and any addenda
thereto in effect as of the Effective Date), this Restated Agreement (as approved
by the City Council), and the applicable ordinances in effect as of the Effective
Date (including, but not limited to, the applicable provisions of the Municipal
Code in effect on the Effective Date), except as modified in this Restated
Agreement.
(b) Subject to Owner's fulfillment of its obligations under this Restated Agreement,
upon the Effective Date of this Restated Agreement, the City hereby grants to
Owner a vested right to develop and construct on the Property all the
improvements for the Project authorized by, and in accordance with, the terms of
this Restated Agreement, the Amended Plan Set (as approved by the City
Council), and the applicable ordinances in effect as of the Effective Date.
Page 3 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
(c) Upon such grant of right, no future amendments to the City General Plan, the City
Zoning Code, the Municipal Code, or other City ordinances, policies or
regulations in effect as of the Effective Date shall apply to the Project, except
such future modifications that are not in conflict with and do not prevent the
development proposed in the Amended Plan Set (as approved by the City
Council); provided, however, that nothing in this Restated Agreement shall
prevent or preclude the City from adopting any land use regulations or
amendments expressly permitted herein or otherwise required by State or Federal
Law.
(d) The Operative Use Permit shall not require an extension during the term of this
Restated Agreement provided Owner is not in material breach of the terms of this
Restated Agreement or the Conditions of Approval for said Operative Use Permit.
5. Permits For Proiect
If the Project is to be built in phases, Owner shall submit a Development Plan for
development of the Project within sixty (60) days of applying for a grading permit for the
first phase of the Project. The Development Plan shall address, at a minimum, the
landscaping and common improvements required for each phase of the Project.
For each phase, City shall issue building permits and certificates of occupancy only after
the City has reviewed and approved Owner's applications therefor. City staff review of
applications for permits, certificates, approvals, or other entitlements shall be limited to
determining whether the following conditions are met:
(a) The application is complete; and,
(b) Owner has complied with the conditions of the City Council's approval of the
Project, all applicable Uniform Codes, the Municipal Code, CEQA requirements
(including any required mitigation measures) governing issuance of such permits
or certificates, and Federal and State Laws; and,
(c) All applicable processing, administrative and legal fees have been paid subject to
the provisions of this Restated Agreement; and,
(d) For certificates of occupancy only, City has approved the landscaping and
common improvements for the applicable phase of the Project.
6. Vesting of Approvals
Upon the City's approval of this Restated Agreement, such approvals shall vest in Owner
and its successors and assigns for the term of this Restated Agreement, provided that the
successors and assigns comply with the terms and conditions of this Restated Agreement,
including, but not limited to, submission of insurance certificates and bonds for the
grading of the Property and construction of improvements.
Page 4 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October] 3, 2006
7. Cooperation Between Parties in Implementation of Restated Agreement
It is the Parties' express intent to cooperate with one another and diligently work to
implement all land use and building approvals for development of the Property in
accordance with the terms of this Restated Agreement. Accordingly, Owner and City
shall proceed in a reasonable and timely manner, in compliance with the deadlines
mandated by applicable agreements, statutes or ordinances, to complete all steps
necessary for implementation of this Restated Agreement and development of the
Property in accordance with the terms of this Restated Agreement. City shall proceed in
an expeditious manner to complete all actions required for the development of the
Project, including but not limited to the following:
(a) Scheduling all required public hearings by the City Council and City Planning
Commission; and
(b) Processing and checking all maps, plans, permits, building plans and specifications
and other plans relating to development of the Property filed by Owner or its
nominee, successor or assign as necessary for development of the Property, and
inspecting and providing acceptance of or comments on work by Owner that
requires acceptance or approval by the City.
Owner, in a timely manner, shall provide City with all documents, applications, plans and
other information necessary for City to carry out its obligations hereunder and to cause its
planners, engineers and all other consultants to submit in a timely manner all necessary
materials and documents.
8. Acquisition of Other Property; Eminent Domain
In order to facilitate and insure development of the Project in accordance with the
Amended Plan Set and the City Council's approval, City may assist Owner, at Owner's
request and at Owner's sole cost and expense, in acquiring any easements or properties
necessary for the satisfaction and completion of any off-site components of the Project
required by the City Council to be constructed or obtained by Owner in the Council's
approval of the Project and the Amended Plan Set, in the event Owner is unable to
acquire such easements or properties or is unable to secure the necessary agreements with
the applicable property owners for such easements or properties. Owner expressly
acknowledges that City is under no obligation to use its power of eminent domain.
9. Maintenance Obligations on Property
All of the Property subject to this Restated Agreement shall be maintained by Owner or
its successors in perpetuity in accordance with City requirements to prevent accumulation
of litter and trash, to keep weeds abated, and to provide erosion control, and to comply
with other requirements set forth in the Municipal Code, subject to City approval.
(a) If Owner subdivides the property or otherwise transfers ownership of a parcel or
building in the Project to any person or entity such that the Property is no longer
Page 5 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
under single ownership, Owner shall first establish an Owner's Association and
submit Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions ("CC&Rs") to the City for review
and approval by the City Attorney. Said CC&Rs shall satisfy the requirements of
Section 19.36.040 of the Municipal Code.
(b) Any provisions of said CC&Rs governing the Project relating to the maintenance
obligations under this section shall be enforceable by the City.
10. Fees
(a) Owner shall not be responsible for any fees imposed by the City in connection
with the development and construction of the Project, except as otherwise set
forth in this Restated Agreement.
(b) No fee requirements (other than those identified herein) imposed by the City on or
after the Effective Date and no changes to existing fee requirements (other than
those currently subject to periodic adjustments as specified in the adopting or
implementing resolutions and ordinances) that occur on or after the Effective
Date, shall apply to the Project.
(c) Any existing application, processing, administrative, legal and inspection fees that
are revised during the term of this Restated Agreement shall apply to the Project,
provided that (1) such fees have general applicability; (2) the application of such
fees to the Property is prospective; and (3) the application of such fees would not
prevent development in accordance with this Restated Agreement.
11. New Taxes
Any subsequently enacted City-wide taxes shall apply to the Property, provided that:
(1) the application of such taxes to the Property is prospective; and (2) the application of
such taxes would not prevent development in accordance with this Restated Agreement.
12. Assessments
Nothing herein shall be construed to relieve the Property from common benefit
assessments levied against it and similarly situated properties by the City pursuant to and
in accordance with any statutory procedure for the assessment of property to pay for
infrastructure and/or services which benefit the Property.
13. Additional Conditions
Owner shall comply with all ofthe following requirements:
(a) Sewer Main Improvements: City has constructed a new swift sewer main (the
"Sewer Main") between the boundary of Slough Estates Britannia East Grand
Project (the "Britannia East Grand Proiect") and City's pump station at the
intersection of Swift Avenue and Kimball Way. The current estimate of the total
Page 6 of 2S
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
actual costs incur red in connection with the construction of the Sewer Main
improvements is Three Million Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($3,055,000.00).
The City Engineer has determined that Owner should contribute 17.2% of this
total estimated cost, or Five Hundred Twenty-Five Thousand Four Hundred Sixty
Dollars ($525,460.00), as a proportional share reflecting the benefits to the
Property from the Sewer Main improvements, calculated according to projected
estimated sewer flows within the Sewer Main. Substantially concurrently with,
but not later than, the issuance of a building permit for any building within the
Project, Owner shall pay City the amount of Five Hundred Twenty-Five
Thousand Four Hundred Sixty Dollars ($525,460.00). To ensure that
contributions toward construction of the Sewer Main improvements are fairly
apportioned among the parties who receive the benefits of the Sewer Main, City
shall reimburse Slough, LLC, in its capacity as developer of the Britannia East
Grand Project, for the difference between the total actual costs incurred in
connection with the construction of the Sewer Main improvements and the sum
total of the contributions made by Slough, LLC, and Owner, which difference is
currently estimated to be Dollars
($ .00). No later than January 31,2007, the City Engineer shall
present Owner with a final accounting of the actual costs incurred in connection
with the construction of the Sewer Main improvements. If this figure exceeds
Three Million Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($3,055,000.00), Owner shall pay City
a supplemental contribution equal to 17.2% of the difference. If this figure is less
than Three Million Fifty-Five Thousand Dollars ($3,055,000.00), City shall pay
Owner an amount equal to 17.2% of the difference.
(b) East of 101 Traffic Impact Fees: Substantially concurrently with, but no later
than, the issuance of a building permit for any building within the Project, Owner
shall pay the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee as established by Resolution of the
City Council dated September 26, 2001 and as updated by Resolution of the City
Council dated August 24, 2005, or as the fee may be updated and revised by the
City Council in accordance with Section 10(b) above. Presently, the fee
calculation would reflect the result of multiplying 162,000 square feet by the
current total fee applicable to General Office or Research and Development uses
of $2.11 per square foot, or Three Hundred Forty-One Thousand Eight Hundred
Twenty Dollars ($341,820.00). As noted above, however, the actual fee paid
depends on the fee schedule for the East of 101 Traffic Impact Fee in effect at the
time of fee payment.
(c) Public Art Contribution: Owner shall install and provide artwork for public
display at the Project. Said artwork shall cost, in the aggregate, no less than One
Hundred Sixty-Two Thousand Dollars ($162,000.00). Owner may satisfy a
portion of this condition by installing a portion of the artwork within the "Bay
Trail" to be installed by Owner at the Project in accordance with the permit (the
"BCDC Permit") issued by the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development
Commission (the "BCDC"). The required artwork shall be installed at the Project
no later than the date on which the certificate of occupancy is issued for the first
Page 7 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
building within the Project. The location of the artwork and the artwork to be
installed by Owner shall be subject to the reasonable approval of the City prior to
installation; provided, however, the location of any artwork to be installed within
the "Bay Trail" and the artwork to be so installed also shall be subject to the
reasonable approval of the BCDC prior to installation. Artwork installed pursuant
to this Section shall be maintained by Owner or, in the event Owner's interest in
the Property is conveyed or subdivided, by Owner's successors, or, if applicable,
by the Owner's Association for the Project. If an association of owners is created,
said maintenance obligations and a budget related thereto shall be included in the
CC&Rs for the Project. The cost of the artwork to be installed pursuant to this
Section shall be adjusted on each anniversary of the Effective Date in an amount
equal to the lesser of (i) the percentage increase in the Engineering News Record
Construction Cost index for the San Francisco Bay Area, and (ii) three percent
(3%).
(d) Public Safety. Owner shall provide access for public safety personnel, including
Fire and Police, to a multi-use facility room to be located on the ground floor of
one of the two buildings in the Project. At a minimum, this room shall include a
storage closet approximately three (3) by five (5) feet in dimension with double
doors, a phone jack, some sort of shelving units, and two (2) standard electrical
outlets. Additionally, Owner shall, prior to issuance of a building permit, conduct
or arrange to have conducted an emergency radio communications study to
determine internal emergency radio communication need based on the individual
building types in the Project. Owner shall furnish the Fire Chief with a copy of
the results of this study. If the study reveals that the Project's internal radio
communications are deficient, Owner shall, at its sole cost and expense,
incorporate appropriate mitigation measures into the project design. Such
mitigation measures could include, but shall not be limited to, internal
communications wiring, signal boosting, and the installation of antennae and
other related equipment.
(e) Lower Portion of Bay Trail: Owner shall install all of the improvements
constituting the lower portion of the "Bay Trail" no later than the second
anniversary of the Effective Date. All such improvements shall be installed in
accordance with the BCDC Permit. For purposes of this Restated Agreement, the
lower portion of the "Bay Trail" shall mean the portion of the "Bay Trail"
highlighted on the site plan attached hereto as Exhibit D and incorporated herein
by reference.
14. Indemnity
Owner agrees to indemnify, defend (with counsel selected by City subject to the
reasonable approval of Owner) and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed
councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any
and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for any personal injury
or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or
Page 8 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
inactions by Owner, or any actions or inactions of Owner's contractors, subcontractors,
agents, or employees, in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or
maintenance of the Project, provided that Owner shall have no indemnification obligation
with respect to gross negligence or willful misconduct of City, its contractors,
subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition
of any public improvement after the time it has been dedicated to and accepted by the
City or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or
maintenance bond).
15. Interests of Other Owners
Owner has no knowledge of any reason why Owner, and any other persons holding legal
or equitable interests in the Property as of the Effective Date, will not be bound by this
Restated Agreement.
16. Assignment
(a) Right to Assign. Owner may at any time or from time to time transfer its right,
title or interest in or to all or any portion of the Property. In accordance with
Government Code Section 65868.5, the burdens of this Restated Agreement shall
be binding upon, and the benefits of this Restated Agreement shall inure to, all
successors in interest to Owner. As a condition precedent to any such transfer,
Owner shall require the transferee to acknowledge in writing that such transferee
has been informed, understands and agrees that the burdens and benefits under
this Restated Agreement relating to such transferred property shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the transferee.
(b) Notice of Assignment or Transfer. No transfer, sale or assignment of Owner's
rights, interests and obligations under this Restated Agreement shall occur
without the prior written notice to City and approval by the City Manager, which
approval shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. The City Manager shall
consider and decide the matter within ten (10) days after Owner's notice, provided
all necessary documents, certifications and other information are provided to the
City Manager.
(c) Exception for Notice. Notwithstanding Section 16(b ), Owner may at any time,
upon notice to City but without the necessity of any approval by the City, transfer
the Property or any part thereof and all or any part of Owner's rights, interests and
obligations under this Restated Agreement to: (i) any subsidiary, affiliate, parent
or other entity which controls, is controlled by or is under common control with
Owner, (ii) any member or partner of Owner or any subsidiary, parent or affiliate
of any such member or partner, or (iii) any successor or successors to Owner by
merger, consolidation, non-bankruptcy reorganization or government action. As
used in this subsection, "control" shall mean the possession, directly or indirectly,
of the power to direct or cause the direction of management or policies, whether
through the ownership of voting securities, partnership interest, contracts (other
Page 9 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
than those that transfer Owner's interest in the property to a third party not
specifically identified in this subsection (c)) or otherwise.
(d) Release Upon Transfer. Upon the transfer, sale, or assignment of all of Owner's
rights, interests and obligations under this Restated Agreement pursuant to
Section 16( a), Section 16(b ), or Section 16( c) of this Restated Agreement, Owner
shall be released from the obligations under this Restated Agreement, with respect
to the Property transferred, sold, or assigned, arising subsequent to the date of the
City Manager's approval of such transfer, sale, or assignment or the effective date
of such transfer, sale or assignment, whichever occurs later; provided, however,
that if any transferee, purchaser or assignee approved by the City Manager
expressly assumes any right, interest or obligation of Owner under this Restated
Agreement, Owner shall be released with respect to such rights, interests and
assumed obligations. In any event, the transferee, purchaser or assignee shall be
subject to all the provisions hereof and shall provide all necessary documents,
certifications and other necessary information prior to the City Manager's
approval.
(e) Owner's Right to Retain Specified Rights or Obligations. Notwithstanding
Section 16(a) and Section 16(c), Owner may withhold from a sale, transfer or
assignment of this Restated Agreement certain rights, interests and/or obligations
which Owner shall retain, provided that Owner specifies such rights, interests
and/or obligations in a written document to be appended to or maintained with
this Restated Agreement and recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder prior
to or concurrently with the sale, transfer or assignment of the Property. Owner's
purchaser, transferee or assignee shall then have no interest or obligations for
such retained rights, interests and obligations and this Restated Agreement shall
remain applicable to Owner with respect to such retained rights, interests and/or
obligations.
(f) Time for Notice. Within ten (10) days of the date escrow closes on any such
transfer, Owner shall notify the City in writing of the name and address of the
transferee. Said notice shall include a statement as to the obligations, including
any mitigation measures, fees, improvements or other conditions of approval,
assumed by the transferee. Any transfer which does not comply with the notice
requirements of this Section and Section 16(b) shall not release the Owner from
its obligations to the City under this Restated Agreement until such time as the
City is provided notice in accordance with Section 16(b ).
17. Insurance
(a) Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance. During the term of this Restated
Agreement, Owner shall maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general
liability insurance with a per-occurrence combined single limit of not less than ten
million dollars ($10,000,000.00) and a deductible of not more than ten thousand
dollars ($10,000.00) per claim. The policy so maintained by Owner shall name
Page 10 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
the City as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest
clause or cross-liability endorsement.
(b ) Workers Compensation Insurance. During the term of this Restated Agreement,
Owner shall maintain Worker's Compensation insurance for all persons employed
by Owner for work at the Project site. Owner shall require each contractor and
subcontractor similarly to provide Worker's Compensation insurance for its
respective employees. Owner agrees to indemnify the City for any damage
resulting from Owner's failure to maintain any such required insurance.
(c) Evidence of Insurance. Prior to City Council approval of this Restated
Agreement, Owner shall furnish City satisfactory evidence of the insurance
required in subsections (a) and (b) and evidence that the carrier will provide the
City at least ten (10) days prior written notice of any cancellation or reduction in
coverage of a policy if the reduction results in coverage less than that required by
this Restated Agreement.
1. In the event of a reduction (below the limits required in this Restated
Agreement) or cancellation in coverage, or change in insurance carriers or
policies, Owner shall, prior to such reduction, cancellation or change,
provide at least ten (10) days prior written notice to City, regardless of any
notification by the applicable insurer. If the City discovers that the
policies have been cancelled or reduced below the limits required in this
Restated Agreement and no notice has been provided by either insurer or
Owner, said failure shall constitute a material breach of this Restated
Agreement.
2. In the event of a reduction (below the limits required by this Restated
Agreement) or cancellation in coverage, Owner shall have five (5) days in
which to provide evidence of the required coverage during which time no
persons shall enter the Property to construct improvements thereon,
including construction activities related to the landscaping and common
improvements. Additionally, no persons not employed by existing tenants
shall enter the Property to perform such works until such time as the City
receives evidence of substitute coverage.
3. If Owner fails to obtain substitute coverage within five (5) days, City may
obtain, but is not required to obtain, substitute coverage and charge Owner
the cost of such coverage plus an administrative fee equal to ten percent
(10%) of the premium for said coverage.
(d) The insurance shall include the City, its elective and appointive boards,
commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives as additional
insureds on the policy.
Page II of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
18. Covenants Run With The Land
The terms of this Restated Agreement are legislative in nature, and apply to the Property
as regulatory ordinances. During the term of this Restated Agreement, all of the
provisions, agreements, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations
contained in this Restated Agreement shall run with the land and shall be binding upon
the Parties and their respective heirs, successors (by merger, consolidation or otherwise)
and assigns, devisees, administrators, representatives, lessees and all other persons or
entities acquiring the Property, any lot, parcel or any portion thereof, and any interest
therein, whether by sale, operation of law or other manner, and they shall inure to the
benefit of the Parties and their respective successors.
19. Conflict With State or Federal Law
In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations, enacted after the Effective Date,
prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Restated Agreement,
such provisions of this Restated Agreement shall be modified (in accordance with
Section 20 set forth below) or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State
or Federal laws or regulations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Owner shall have the
right to challenge, at its sole cost, in a court of competent jurisdiction, the law or
regulation preventing compliance with the terms of this Restated Agreement and, if the
challenge in a court of competent jurisdiction is successful, this Restated Agreement shall
remain unmodified and in full force and effect.
20. Procedure for Modification Because of Conflict With State or Federal Laws.
In the event that State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date
prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Restated Agreement
or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the Parties shall meet
and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Restated Agreement to
comply with such State or Federal law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension
of this Restated Agreement shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with
Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code.
21. Periodic Review
(a) During the term of this Restated Agreement, the City shall conduct "annual"
and/or "special" reviews of Owner's good faith compliance with the terms and
conditions of this Restated Agreement in accordance with the procedures set forth
in Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code. City may recover reasonable costs
incurred in conducting said review, including staff time expended and attorneys'
fees.
(b) At least five (5) calendar days prior to any hearing on any annual or special
review, City shall mail Owner a copy of all staff reports and, to the extent
practical, related exhibits. Owner shall be permitted an opportunity to be heard
orally or in writing regarding its performance under this Restated Agreement
Page 12 of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
before the City Councilor, if the matter is referred to the Planning Commission,
then before said Commission. Following completion of any annual or special
review, City shall give Owner a written Notice of Action, which Notice shall
include a determination, based upon information known or made known to the
City Councilor City's Planning Director as of the date of such review, whether
Owner is in default under this Restated Agreement and, if so, the alleged nature of
the default, a reasonable period to cure such default, and suggested or potential
actions that City may take if such default is not cured by Owner.
22. Amendment or Cancellation of Restated Agreement
This Restated Agreement may be further amended or terminated only in writing and in
the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 65865.1, 65867.5, 65868, 65868.5 and
Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code.
23. Restated Agreement is Entire Agreement.
This Restated Agreement and all exhibits attached hereto or incorporated herein contain
the sole and entire agreement between the Parties concerning Owner's entitlements to
develop the Property. The Parties acknowledge and agree that neither of them has made
any representation with respect to the subject matter of this Restated Agreement or any
representations inducing the execution and delivery hereof, except representations set
forth herein, and each Party acknowledges that it has relied on its own judgment in
entering into this Restated Agreement. The Parties further acknowledge that all
statements or representations that heretofore may have been made by either of them to the
other are void and of no effect, and that neither of them has relied thereon in its dealings
with the other.
24. Events of Default
Owner shall be in default under this Restated Agreement upon the happening of one or
more of the following events:
(a) If a warranty, representation or statement made or furnished by Owner to the City
is false or proves to have been false in any material respect when it was made; or
(b) A finding and determination by the City made following an annual or special
review under the procedure provided for in Government Code Section 65865.1
and Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code that, upon the basis of substantial
evidence, Owner has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of
this Restated Agreement; or,
(c) Owner fails to fulfill any of its obligations set forth in this Restated Agreement
and such failure continues beyond any applicable cure period provided in this
Restated Agreement. This provision shall not be interpreted to create a cure
period for any event of default where such cure period is not specifically provided
for in this Restated Agreement.
Page 13 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October] 3,2006
25. Procedure Upon Default
(a) Upon the occurrence of an event of default, City may terminate or modify this
Restated Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Government Code
Section 65865.1 and of Chapter 19.60 of the Municipal Code.
(b) The City shall not be deemed to have waived any claim of defect in Owner's
performance if, on annual or special review, the City does not propose to
terminate this Restated Agreement.
(c) No waiver or failure by the City or Owner to enforce any prOVISIOn of this
Restated Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any provision of this
Restated Agreement or of any subsequent breach of the same or any other
proVISIon.
(d) Any actions for breach of this Restated Agreement shall be decided in accordance
with California law. The remedy for breach of this Restated Agreement shall be
limited to specific performance.
(e) The City shall give Owner written notice of any default under this Restated
Agreement, and Owner shall have thirty (30) days after the date of the notice to
cure the default or to reasonably commence the procedures or actions needed to
cure the default; provided, however, that if such default is not capable of being
cured within such thirty (30) day period, Owner shall have such additional time to
cure as is reasonably necessary.
26. Attorneys' Fees and Costs
(a) Action By Party. If legal action by either Party is brought because of breach of
this Restated Agreement or to enforce a provision of this Restated Agreement, the
prevailing Party is entitled to reasonable attorney's fees and court costs.
(b) Action By Third Party. If any person or entity not a party to this Restated
Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any
provision of this Restated Agreement or the Project approvals, the Parties shall
cooperate in defending such action. Owner shall bear its own costs of defense as
a real party in interest in any such action, and shall reimburse City for all
reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by City in defense of any such
action or other proceeding.
27. Severability
If any material term or condition of this Restated Agreement is for any reason held by a
final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, and if the same
constitutes a material change in the consideration for this Restated Agreement, then either
Party may elect in writing to invalidate this entire Restated Agreement, and this entire
Page 14 of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
Restated Agreement shall be deemed null and void and of no further force or effect
following such election.
28. No Third Parties Benefited
No person other than City, Owner, or their respective successors is intended to or shall
have any right or claim under this Restated Agreement, this Restated Agreement being
for the sole benefit and protection of the Parties and their respective successors.
Similarly, no amendment or waiver of any provision of this Restated Agreement shall
require the consent or acknowledgment of any person not a party or successor to this
Restated Agreement.
29. Binding Effect of Restated Agreement
The provisions of this Restated Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the
Parties originally named herein and their respective successors and assigns.
30. Relationship of Parties
It is understood that this Restated Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and
voluntarily entered into by City and Owner and that the Owner is not an agent of City.
The Parties do not intend to create a partnership, joint venture or any other joint business
relationship by this Restated Agreement. City and Owner hereby renounce the existence
of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing
contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed
as making the City and Owner joint venturers or partners. Neither Owner nor any of
Owner's agents or contractors are or shall be considered to be agents of City in
connection with the performance of Owner's obligations under this Restated Agreement.
31. Bankruptcy
The obligations of this Restated Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy.
32. Mortgagee Protection: Certain Rights of Cure
(a) Mortgagee Protection. This Restated Agreement shall be superior and senior to
all liens placed upon the Property or any portion thereof after the date on which
this Restated Agreement or a memorandum of this Restated Agreement is
recorded with the San Mateo County Recorder, including the lien of any deed of
trust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof
shall defeat, invalidate, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good
faith and for value, but all of the terms and conditions contained in this Restated
Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against all persons and entities,
including all deed of trust beneficiaries or mortgagees ("Mortgagees") who
acquire title to the Property or any portion thereof by foreclosure, trustee's sale,
deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise.
Page 15 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
(b) Mortgagee Not Obligated. No foreclosing Mortgagee shall have any obligation or
duty under this Restated Agreement to construct or complete the construction of
any improvements required by this Restated Agreement, or to pay for or
guarantee construction or completion thereof. City, upon receipt of a written
request therefor from a foreclosing Mortgagee, shall permit the Mortgagee to
succeed to the rights and obligations of Owner under this Restated Agreement,
provided that all defaults by Owner hereunder that are reasonably susceptible of
being cured are cured by the Mortgagee as soon as is reasonably possible. The
foreclosing Mortgagee thereafter shall comply with all of the provisions of this
Restated Agreement.
(c) Notice of Default to Mortgagee. If City receIves notice from a Mortgagee
requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Owner hereunder and
specifying the address for service thereof, City shall deliver to the Mortgagee
concurrently with service thereof to Owner, all notices given to Owner describing
all claims by the City that Owner has defaulted hereunder. If City determines that
Owner is in noncompliance with this Restated Agreement, City also shall serve
notice of noncompliance on the Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereof on
Owner. Until such time as the lien of the Mortgage has been extinguished, City
shall:
(i) Take no action to terminate this Restated Agreement or exercise any other
remedy under this Restated Agreement, unless the Mortgagee shall fail,
within thirty (30) days of receipt of the notice of default or notice of
noncompliance, to cure or remedy or commence to cure or remedy such
default or noncompliance; provided, however, that if such default or
noncompliance is of a nature that cannot be remedied by the Mortgagee or
is of a nature that can only be remedied by the Mortgagee after such
Mortgagee has obtained possession of and title to the Property, by deed-in-
lieu of foreclosure or by foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings, then
such default or noncompliance shall be deemed to be remedied by the
Mortgagee if, within ninety (90) days after receiving the notice of default
or notice of noncompliance from City, (A) the Mortgagee shall have
acquired title to and possession of the Property, by deed-in-lieu of
foreclosure, or shall have commenced foreclosure or other appropriate
proceedings, and (B) the Mortgagee diligently prosecutes any such
foreclosure or other proceedings to completion.
(ii) If the Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting
foreclosure or other appropriate proceedings by reason of any process or
injunction issued by any court or by reason of any action taken by any
court having jurisdiction over any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding
involving Owner, then the times specified above for commencing or
prosecuting such foreclosure or other proceedings shall be extended for
the period of such prohibition.
Page 16 of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
(d) Performance By Mortgagee. Each Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the
obligation, at any time prior to termination of this Restated Agreement, to do any
act or thing required of Owner under this Restated Agreement, and to do any act
or thing not in violation of this Restated Agreement, that may be necessary or
proper in order to prevent termination of this Restated Agreement. All things so
done and performed by a Mortgagee shall be as effective to prevent a termination
of this Restated Agreement as the same would have been if done and performed
by Owner instead of by the Mortgagee. No action or inaction by a Mortgagee
pursuant to this Restated Agreement shall relieve Owner of its obligations under
this Restated Agreement.
(e) Mortgagee's Consent to Modifications. Subject to the sentence immediately
following, City shall not consent to any amendment or modification of this
Restated Agreement unless Owner provides City with written evidence of each
Mortgagee's consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld, to the
amendment or modification of this Restated Agreement being sought. Each
Mortgagee shall be deemed to have consented to such amendment or modification
if it does not object to City by written notice given to City within thirty (30) days
from the date written notice of such amendment or modification is given by City
or Owner to the Mortgagee, reasonable evidence of the delivery of which notice
shall be provided to City if given only by Owner.
33. Estoppel Certificate
Either Party from time to time may deliver written notice to the other Party requesting
written certification that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party (i) this Restated
Agreement is in full force and effect and constitutes a binding obligation of the Parties;
(ii) this Restated Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing,
or, if it has been amended or modified, specifying the nature of the amendments or
modifications; and (iii) the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its
obligations under this Restated Agreement, or if in default, describing therein the nature
and monetary amount, if any, of the default. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall
endeavor to execute and return the certificate within ten (10) days after receipt thereof,
and shall in all events execute and return the certificate within thirty (30) days after
receipt thereof. However, a failure to return a certificate within ten (10) days shall not be
deemed a default of the Party's obligations under this Restated Agreement and no cause
of action shall arise based on the failure of a Party to execute such certificate within
ten (10) days. The City Manager shall have the right to execute the certificates requested
by Owner hereunder provided the certificate is requested within six (6) months of the
annual or special review. City acknowledges that a certificate hereunder may be relied
upon by permitted transferees and Mortgagees. At the request of Owner, the certificates
provided by City establishing the status of this Restated Agreement with respect to any
lot or parcel shall be in recordable form, and Owner shall have the right to record the
certificate for the affected portion of the Property at its cost.
Page 17 of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
34. Force Maieure
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained herein, either Party shall be excused
for the period of any delay in the performance of any of its obligations hereunder, except
the payment of money, when prevented or delayed from so doing by certain causes
beyond its control, including, and limited to, major weather differences from the normal
weather conditions for the South San Francisco area, war, acts of God or of the public
enemy, fires, explosions, floods, earthquakes, invasions by non-United States armed
forces, failure of transportation due to no fault of the Parties, unavailability of equipment,
supplies, materials or labor when such unavailability occurs despite the applicable Party's
good faith efforts to obtain same (good faith includes the present and actual ability to pay
market rates for said equipment, materials, supplies and labor), strikes of employees other
than Owner's, freight embargoes, sabotage, riots, acts of terrorism and acts of the
government. The Party claiming such extension of time to perform shall send written
notice of the claimed extension to the other Party within thirty (30) days from the
commencement of the cause entitling the Party to the extension.
35. Rules of Construction and Miscellaneous Terms
(a) The singular includes the plural; the masculine gender includes the feminine;
"shall" is mandatory, "may" is permissive.
(b) Time is and shall be of the essence in this Restated Agreement.
(c) Where a Party consists of more than one person, each such person shall be jointly
and severally liable for the performance of such Party's obligation hereunder.
(d) The captions in this Restated Agreement are for convenience only, are not a part
of this Restated Agreement and do not in any way limit or amplify the provisions
thereof.
(e) This Restated Agreement shall be interpreted and enforced in accordance with the
laws of the State of California in effect on the date thereof.
36. Exhibits
Exhibit A - Legal Description and Map of Property
Exhibit B - Original Use Permit
Exhibit C - Amended Plan Set
Exhibit D - Site Plan (Depicting Lower Portion of "Bay Trail")
Page 18 of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
37. Notices
All notices required or provided for under this Restated Agreement shall be in writing
and delivered in person (to include delivery by courier) or sent by certified mail, postage
prepaid, return receipt requested or by overnight delivery service. Notices to the City
shall be addressed as follow:
City Clerk
P.O. Box 711, 400 Grand Avenue
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Notices to Owner shall be addressed as follows:
ARE-East Jamie Court, LLC
c/o Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.
385 E. Colorado Boulevard, Suite 299
Pasadena, CA 91101
Fax: (626) 578-7318
Attn: Corporate Secretary
A Party may change its address for notice by giving notice in writing to the other Party
and thereafter notices shall be addressed and transmitted to the new address.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Page 19 of25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
IN WITNESS WHEREOF this Restated Agreement has been executed by the parties on the
day and year first above written.
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
By:
Barry M. Nagel, City Manager
ATTEST:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM
Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney
OWNER
ARE-EAST JAMIE COURT, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
By: Alexandria Real Estate Equities, L.P.,
a Delaware Limited Partnership,
Managing Member
By: ARE-QRS, Corp.,
a Maryland Corporation,
General Partner
By:
Print Name:
Print Title:
Page 20 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13, 2006
EXHIBIT A
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
All that certain real property in the City of South San Francisco, County of San Mateo,
State of California, more particularly described as follows:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 2, AS DESIGNATED ON THE MAP ENTITLED "PARCEL MAP, BEING A
RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 5, AS SAID PARCEL IS DELINEATED AND SO
DESIGNATED UPON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP RECORDED IN BOOK47 OF
PARCEL MAPS AT PAGES 4 & 5, SAN MATEO CO. RECORDS, SOUTH SAN
FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO CO., CALIFORNIA", WHICH MAP WAS FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ON OCTOBER 23, 1981, IN BOOK 51 OF MAPS AT PAGES 96 AND 97.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM, WATER RIGHTS AS LIE BENEATH THE SURF ACE OF THE
EARTH, WITH NO RIGHT OF SURFACE ENTRY, AS CONTAINED IN THAT
QUITCLAIM DEED FROM ARTHUR S. HASKINS, JR., TO CALIFORNIA WATER
SERVICE COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, DATED OCTOBER 2, 1981,
AND RECORDED OCTOBER 30, 1981, UNDER INSTRUMENT NO. 2299-AT, RECORDS
OF SAN MATEO COUNTY.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 015-102-120
JOINT PLANT NO. 015-010-102-25A
METES AND BOUNDS DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 2, AS DESIGNATED ON THE MAP ENTITLED "PARCEL MAP, BEING A
RESUBDIVISION OF PARCEL 5, AS SAID PARCEL IS DELINEATED AND SO
DESIGNATED UPON THAT CERTAIN PARCEL MAP RECORDED IN BOOK47 OF
PARCEL MAPS AT PAGES 4 & 5, SAN MATEO CO. RECORDS, SOUTH SAN
FRANCISCO, SAN MATEO CO., CALIFORNIA", WHICH MAP WAS FILED IN THE
OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OF SAN MA TEO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ON OCTOBER 23,1981, IN BOOK 51 OF MAPS AT PAGES 96 AND 97.
BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF PARCEL 2, THENCE ALONG THE
WESTERL Y LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, NORTH, 115.08 FEET; THENCE WEST, 20.78
FEET; THENCE NORTH, 201.65 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONGTHE ARC OF A
NON-TANGENT CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE RADIUS POINT OF WHICH BEARS
SOUTH 43050'30" EAST, 30.00 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47000'48", AN
ARC DISTANCE OF 24.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 86049'42" EAST, 874.36 FEET;
THENCE SOUTH 275.50 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89055'25" WEST, 874.68 FEET; TO THE
POINT OF BEGINNING, CONTAINING 6.13 ACRES, MORE OR LESS.
Page 21 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
EXHIBIT A
(Cont'd.)
PROPERTY MAP
[ See Following Page]
Page 22 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
East Jamie Court Restated DA
EXHIBIT B
ORIGINAL USE PERMIT
[ See Following Pages]
Page 23 of 25
October 13, 2006
East Jamie Court Restated DA
EXHIBIT C
AMENDED PLAN SET
[ See Following Pages]
Page 24 of 25
October 13,2006
EXHIBIT D
SITE PLAN (DEPICTING LOWER PORTION OF "BAY TRAIL")
[ See Following Page]
Page 25 of 25
East Jamie Court Restated DA
October 13,2006
EAST JAMIE COURT
PRELIMINARY TRANSPORTATION DEMAND
MANAGEMENT PLAN
Prepared for:
~I
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
and
ALEXANDRIA REAL ESTATE EQUITIES, INC.
Prepared by:
THE HOYT
COMPANY
ID
(916) 448-2440
Originally Submitted June 11, 2002
Updated August 7, 2006
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARy.......... .......... ..... .................................. ............. ......... ........................i
SUMMARY OF UPDATED TDM MEASURES.................................................................... ii
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE............................................................................1
2.0 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT GOALS ...................................1
3.0 EMPLOYEE MODE SPLIT EAST OF HIGHWAY 101..............................................2
Table 1 - Comparable Transportation Mode-Use Rates ............................................3
Table 2 - Estimated Alternative Transportation Modes............................................3
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION............................................................................................ 4
Table 3 - Summary of Project Modifications ..............................................................4
TDM Site Plan............................................................................................................... 5
5.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT....................................................................................... 6
5.1 Parking Supply................................ ...... ....... .., ............ ........ .... ... ........... ........ ... ..... 6
Table 4 - East Jamie Court Parking Assessment ........................................................6
5.2 Free Parking for Car and Vanpools and Clean Fuel Vehicles............................ 6
5.3 Preferential Car and Vanpool Parking........... ............... ................ ....... ................ 6
5.4 Passenger Loading Zones..................................................................................... 7
5.5 Motorcycle Parking ....... ................. ......... ......... ........... .............. ...................... ...... 7
6.0 CARPOOL AND V ANPOOL RIDEMATCHING SERVICE ....................................7
7.0 TRANSIT....................................................................................................................... 8
7.1 Direct Route to Transit.......................................................................................... 8
7.2 Shuttle Services to East Jamie Court ....................................................................8
Table 5 - Shuttle Service to East Jamie Court .............................................................8
Shuttle Services ............................................................................................................ 9
7.3 Shuttle / Bus Stops................................................................................................ 10
7.4 Caltrain................................................................................................................. 10
7.5 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) .........................................................................10
7.6 Sam Trans.............................................................................................................. 10
7.7 Down town Dasher Taxi Service......................................................................... 11
7.8 Ferry Service.................... ....... ........................... ............ ..................... ..................11
8.0 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES ...........................................................11
8.1 Pedestrian Connections. ........ ............ ...... ........................ ............ .............. ..........11
8.2 Bicycle Parking - Long-Term and Short-Term ..................................................11
Table 6 - Bicycle Parking Recommendation............................................................. 12
8.3 Bicycle Connections............................................................................................ .12
8.4 Bicycle Resources ........... ....................................... ........ ............................. ..........12
San Mateo County Bicycle Map................................................................................ 13
Bay Trails Bicycle Map.. .................. ......... ..... ....... .......... ............ .......... ............... .......14
8.5 Shower and Clothes Lockers ..............................................................................15
Table 7 - Proposed Shower and Locker Facilities ....................................................15
9.0 EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR............................................. 15
9.1 Designated Employer Contact.......................................................................... ..16
9.2 Employee Transportation PI yer......................................................................... .16
9.3 Promotional Programs...................................................................................... ..16
9.4 Tenant Training and Developer-Provided Resource Representative .............17
9.5 Transportation Information for Visitors and Applicants .................................17
10.0 ALTERNATIVE COMMUTE EMPLOYEE INCENTIVES ......................................17
10.1 Carpool Incentive Program............................................................................... 18
10.2 511 Rideshare Reward$ .................................................................................... .18
10.3 Vanpool Incentives.......................................................................................... ..18
1 0.4 Try Transit Program........................................................................................ ..18
11.0 GUARANTEED RIDE HOME PROGRAM............................................................ ..19
12.0 FLEXTIME................................................................................................................... 19
13.0 TELECOMMUTING ...... ................. ........................... ............ ........... ................. ........ 20
14.0 INFORMATION BOARD / KIOSK. ....................... .... ....... ..... ......... .................... ....... 20
15.0 ON-SITE AND NEARBY PROJECT AMENITIES ...................................................20
15.1 Cafe ........................ .................... ........ ................ ..................... ............................ 21
15.2 Recreational and Bicycle Facilities ...................................................................21
16.0 KICK-OFF EVENT........... ..... .... ...... .............. ............ ............ ....... ............. ........... .......21
17.0 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION .......................................21
18.0 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT....................................... 22
18.1 Annual Employee Commute Survey. ............ ....... ...... ..................................... 22
18.2 Annual Summary Report ...... ......... ..... ............. .... ......... ............ .......... ....... ....... 23
18.3 Triennial Report................................................................................................. 23
18.4 Penalty for Noncompliance.............................................................................. 23
18.5 Lease Language..... ....... ............. ........ ............... ...... ....................... ............... ...... 24
19.0 CONCLUSION ....... .............. ................... ................. ....... ........................................ ... 24
EXHIBIT A - Transportation Demand Management Program, June 11, 2002
EXHIBIT B - Accounting of C/ CAG Trip Credits, East Jamie Court, updated-
August 7, 2006
ATTACHMENTS:
Employer Shuttle Rider Pass Program
Downtown Dasher - Mid-day Taxi Service
Sample Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program
Employee Transportation FIyer
Carpool Incentive Program FIyer
Rideshare Reward$ FIyer
Vanpool Program FIyer
Try Transit Program FIyer
Guaranteed Ride Home Program
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Traffic congestion and air pollution are critical concerns in maintaining a healthy
economy and lifestyle within the City of South San Francisco. Traffic congestion results
in time lost to residents and commuters, and increased demand on City fiscal resources
for roadway construction and maintenance. Mobile sources, such as automobiles,
account for 50% of all air pollution in South San Francisco.
The developer of the East Jamie Court project prepared a Preliminary Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) Plan in June 2002. This plan was designed to achieve a
28% alternative mode use that addresses both traffic and air quality concerns in South
San Francisco. The plan assumed occupancy based on a speculative tenant, 133,000
square foot building, 375 parking spaces and a floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.50. A copy of
the 2002 plan is provided in Exhibit A.
Modifications to the project increase the building size by 29,000 square feet, add 84
parking spaces and creates a FAR of 0.61. This plan, updated May 2006, includes City
ordinance-required and extra measures, annual survey monitoring and triennial
reporting. The plan has a variety of infrastructure and incentive-based measures which
encourage all forms of alternative mode use such as car and vanpool, transit and
shuttles, bicycling, walking, and telecommuting.
An important feature, although not a formal IDM plan measure, is the reduced level of
parking made available for the project. The project proposes a modest parking
availability with 14.4% less parking than code for the development at 2.83/1,000 square
feet. City code is 3.3/1,000 square feet. The reduced parking level will help to
discourage single occupancy vehicle (SOV) use. Other measures such as shuttles,
carpool spaces, showers and bicycle facilities, and commuter incentives, including the
Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH) program, will support employees who choose
alternatives to driving alone.
This plan is performance based. The modified project is required to achieve a 30%
alternative mode-use by tenant employees. The mode-use will be monitored annually
with the first employee commute survey to be conducted one year after occupancy. An
alternative mode-use summary report will be submitted to the City's Economic
Community Development Director after the annual employee commute survey has
been conducted. Every three years thereafter, a triennial report will be made to the City
to document the mode-use rate at the project.
Efforts to reduce drive-alone commuting and expand the mode options available to
commuters can take many years to develop and mature. The current commute
environment to San Mateo County and the City of South San Francisco will offer project
commuters lower levels of roadway congestion and higher highway travel speeds
according to recent regional surveys conducted by the Alliance and RIDES.
Correspondingly, the transportation alternatives available to commuters may be less
attractive when compared with the ease and convenience of driving alone. Reduced
traffic congestion contributes toward SOV usage. In addition, all tenant-employers and
their employees will be provided with free parking, which may further encourage
drive-alone usage.
III The Hoyt Company
Page i
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
The updated elements contained in this plan are consistent with other South San
Francisco employee commute programs. This plan will meet the 30% alternative mode-
use goal. This TDM plan has been updated to reflect the appropriate measures required
by the City. A summary of updated measures is provided below.
SUMMARY OF UPDATED TDM MEASURES
Transportation Dema.nd..ManagemenfMeasures
2001 City Ordinance Required Measures
A. Bicycle parking (long term)
~ Bicycle parking (short term)
~ Carpool and vanpool ridematching assistance
D. Designated Employer/Tenant Point of Contact (ETC)
!:.. Direct route to transit (well-lit path or sidewalk to shuttles)
~ Free parking for carpool and vanpools
G. Guaranteed/Emergency Ride Home program
H. Information Boards/Web site
l Passenger drop off and loading zone
L Pedestrian connections
K. 10% preferential Carpool & Vanpool parking (surface lot)
~ Promotional programs
M. Showers
M. Clothes lockers
N. Utah-Grand Shuttle System
- South San Francisco Caltrain Station
- Glen BART Station
- South San Francisco BART Station
O. Transportation Management Association participation
_ Annual Employee Survey (100%, non response = SOV)
Annual TDM Report to City Council & Planning Commission
& Triennial Reporting
TDM Site Plan
June 2002
28% TDM
Plan
2006 Updated
30% TDM
Plan (The
Hoyt
Company)
yes yes
yes yes
yes yes
yes yes
not stated yes
not stated yes
yes yes
not stated yes
yes yes
not stated yes
yes yes
yes yes
yes yes
not stated yes
yes yes
yes yes
yes n/a
not stated yes
not stated yes
yes yes
yes yes
not provided yes
m The Hoyt Company
Page ii
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
SUMMARY OF UPDATED TDM MEASURES - CONTINUED
Additional Measures in TOM Plan
~ Bicycle connections
D. Flextime
L On-site/Nearby amenities
- Cafe
- On-site recreational (Greenbelt area)
- Direct link to recreational (Bay Trails)
H. Telecommuting
yes
not stated
not stated
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Kick-off Transportation Fair
New employee orientation & training/ initial commuter
survey
Provide taxi vouchers to employees for medical
_ appointments
Developer reimburse: tenant-employee vanpool medical
exams
Taxi voucher for local business travel
_ Developer-provided tenant training and assistance
Developer-provided Commute Program Resource
Representative
_ Developer-provided assistance to procure GRH grants
_ Developer to petition shuttles for bike racks
Developer contribution to RIDES for Bike to Work event
_ Charter buses for group activities
Shuttle Shelter or waiting areas
Tenant-provided vanpool or transit subsidy $20-$50/ mo.
Pre-tax Payroll Deductions/Commuter Choice ($105/mo.)
encouragement
_ Carpool, Vanpool, Transit Incentives
_ Secure motorcycle parking
Downtown Dasher - free midday services
Tenants to provide visitors and applicants with
_ transportation options, schedules and maps
_ Participate in Spare the Air Program
_ Bicycle resources (www.511.org)
Lease language - tenant TDM requirements
Include transportation link for future Bay Ferry Service
not stated
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
not stated
yes
yes
yes
yes
not stated
not stated
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
yes
yes
no
no
I no
no
yes
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
ill The Hoyt Company
Page iii
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
1.0 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The East Jamie Court project supports the City of South San Francisco's policy of
focusing clustered development along major transportation corridors. This project is
located near to and is served by U.S. Highway 101 and Interstate 280, a Caltrain station,
and a BART station.
The comprehensive plan of trip reduction measures identified in this report is essential
to realizing the trip reduction potential of the project. The combination of these critical
factors will provide the momentum to maintain a 30% alternative mode-use rate for this
project.
Through monitoring efforts, such as the annual survey of employees to determine
transportation mode split, the project will be able to better focus transportation
coordination efforts and encourage tenant employees to use alternative transportation.
The first mode-use survey report will be submitted to the City of South San Francisco
after one year of occupancy.
2.0 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT GOALS
The basic premise of Transportation Demand Management (TDM) is the maximum
utilization of existing transportation resources. The City of South San Francisco, as is
typical of other urban areas in the United States, has hundreds of millions of dollars
invested in roadway infrastructure and public transit infrastructure. The goal of TDM
is to more efficiently and economically take advantage of these major capital
investments.
The following are three basic goals that can be achieved through effective utilization of
TDM measures:
1) Convert trips to an alternative mode of transportation (e.g., transit, carpools or
vanpools, bicycling)
2) Provide technological solutions (e.g., compressed natural gas, electric/hybrid
vehicles, or other zero emission vehicles)
3) Eliminate trips (e.g., compressed work weeks, telecommute)
Until recently in the United States, the answer to relieving congestion on roads, and in
parking structures, was to build more roads and parking structures (similar in concept
to building another manufacturing plant to expand productivity on levels). Current
economics and limited resources affect the ability to build and maintain more roads or
parking structures. This reality necessitates better utilization of the existing
transportation infrastructure (similar to adding a second shift at an existing plant). To
this end, TDM measures support the transition to a greater use of existing alternative
transportation options.
The measures and programs outlined in this plan support and meet the 30% trip
reduction goal as identified in by the City of South San Francisco's TDM Ordinance
1300-2001.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 1
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
Using the City of South San Francisco's TDM Ordinance guidelines, the estimated
number of trips needed to meet a 30% reduction for the number of employees estimated
to occupy the project is 122.
This TDM Plan also meets many requirements of the Revised CICAG Guidelines for the
Implementation of the Land Use Program approved by the City I County Association of
Governments (CI CAG) of San Mateo County in September 2004. Trip credits identified
in this Preliminary TDM Plan for the project total more than 263. The CI CAG
accounting of all trip credits applicable in this updated Preliminary TDM Plan is
provided in Exhibit B.
3.0 EMPLOYEE MODE SPLIT EAST OF HIGHWAY 101
According to the Commute Profile 2005 Regional Report, prepared by RIDES for Bay
Area Commuters, the San Mateo County alternative mode-use rate is approximately
29% with the Bay Area regional rate comprising approximately 34% alternative modes.
The larger Bay Area alternative mode use rate is indicative of paid parking in the more
urban core areas, whereas parking is free or much less expensive in many areas of San
Mateo County (e.g. the City of South San Francisco).
The 2005 Employee Transportation Survey conducted by the Alliance identified the San
Mateo County alternative mode-use rate at 29.9%. The overall alternative mode-use
rate for the City of South San Francisco was identified at 30.2%.
J
In Fall 2005, an employee commute survey was conducted at a similar employment site
in South San Francisco at Britannia Oyster Point. Results from the survey indicated an
alternative commute mode rate of 35%. However, it should be noted that this nearby
employment site offers employee commute subsidies that enhance their alternative
mode-use performance. It is unknown if a future employer at the Jamie Court project
will offer subsidies to employee.
Table 1 shows the comparison of alternative mode-use rates for the Bay Area Region,
County of San Mateo, City of South San Francisco and a similar employer site.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 2
East Jamie COUrt Pre~tnjnary TDM Plan
Ta.ble 1
Comparable Transportation Made-Use Rates
August 7,2006
San Mateo Coun
Ba Area Re ion
Ci of South San Francisco
South San Frandsco _ Britannia
a ster POint Cam Us
29.0%
34.0%
29.9%
30.2%
Based On CUrrent and histOrical alternative mode-use data for the South San Francisco
and East of Highway 101 bUSiness areas, an example of estimated employee alternative
made-use distribution Was calCUlated. This estimate reflects the TnM measures
deScribed in this plan but does not assume that commute SUbsidies are Provided. Table
2 shows the Various altemative transportation mOdes estimated for a life science tenant
at the East Jamie COurt project.
35.0%
Drive alone to work site
Car 001
Transit
Other (,notorc de, teleconunute)
Bic de
Van 001
Walk
1IJ"on-commutin (sick, vacation, bUsiness travel)
Total
Ta.ble 2
Estimated Alternative Transportation MOdes
The implernentation of TnM measures identified in this plan will result in an estUnated
30% alternative mode USe rate representing apprOXimately 122 emplOyees from a total
of 405. This sample scenario prOvides a distribution example of employee altemative
transportation chOices, depicting a typical Workweek day, for the Project. The actuaJ
distribution of transPortation mOdes could Vary and Will be clarified in the survey
results.
61.92%
16.45%
9.48%
1.98%
0.99%
0.62%
0.50%
8.08%
100.00%
250.8
66.6
38.4
8.0
4.0
2.5
2.0
32.7
405
OJ The Hoyt Company
Page 3
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7,2006
4.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project is a 6.13-acre project owned by Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.
(Alexandria) in the City of South San Francisco located south of the u.s. Highway 101
in South San Francisco in an area that is known as the birthplace of the biotechnology
industry .
The project is two Class-A office/laboratory buildings containing 162,000 square-feet.
The proposed construction consists of two, three-story buildings and is intended to
accommodate life science and office tenants.
The project is designed to maximize opportunities for pedestrian, bicycle, carpool,
transit and shuttle connectivity. Forty carpool parking spaces are planned with one
space designated for a vanpool. Six Class I bicycle lockers and four bicycle racks will be
provided at the building for bicycle commuters at no charge to employees. Showers
and lockers will also be provided for bicycle, pedestrian and other alternative
commuters. Shuttle services to BART and Caltrain are located one block north from the
site on Haskins Way the project. Nearby food service is within two blocks and the Bay
Trails bicycle trails parallels the project helping to create a self sufficient development
reducing the number of trips made daily to and from the project.
The Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is 0.61. This increased or bonus FAR requires the need for
more stringent employee surveys and triennial reporting to the City.
Parking will be provided at a ratio of 2.83 cars per 1,000 square-feet. Approximately 459
vehicle parking spaces (320 surface and 139 lower level garage spaces) are planned for
the site, a 14.4% reduction from city code.
A TDM site plan is provided on page 5. This site plan shows the location of preferential
parking, bicycle facilities, pedestrian connections and direct routes to transit. It also
depicts the location of showers and lockers, information kiosks and the recreational
greenbelt. Table 3 shows a summary of the project modifications. '
Table 3
Summary of Project Modifications
R&D Use 100% 100% none
Em 10 ees 330 405 75
S uare Feet 133,000 162,000 29,000
Parkin Ratio 2.50/1,000 2.83/1,000
Parking Spaces 375 459 84
FAR 0.5 0.61 0.11
TDM Goal 28% 30% 2%
Employee Use 92 122 29
m The Hoyt Company Page 4
, I
\ I
\1
"
"
'I ~
I,
II
I,
"
1 .' I "Z
<~'" \: ~
,...1 ,\ ...:!J
~
I I
I I
"
I I
I'
I'
, I
, I
: \
I \
: /
I I
I '
I I
: ,
; \
\ \
, I
I '
\ \
I I
, \
\ \
, I
, I
\ '
I I
j ,
, ,
I I
I '
I \
I \
~ '\
I \
\
\
\
\
,
,
\
,
,
\ I
\ I
, I
, '
\ I
, I
, I
\ '
\ ,
I \
I \
\ "
, ,
\ ,
\ \
, ,
\ \
, ,
'. \
\.f \
, ,
I \
I \
, ,
I ,
I \
I '
I \
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I '
I '
, .-
I /
I I
I I
I I
, ,
I I
I I
I ,
I '
, r--'
I I
,".1 :
,
I
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
~
~a
O~
U~
C1) (l)
.~ ~
SU5
~:E
~O
~~
~
~
::s
~
~
to
w
@
! $
t ,?(-
~i~{;;~)
l.~~ 1..>1"[::
-"'" ' ~ '
~"" \.'"
~ <~!-
f- $ .,
>'" .J- ~~
(:;-)
)~ f<,
- ~" 1
, -
/'" - ~
,_ $ i
';;..>::"
~{>; )
I .
. _ J
,r-""" ,.-..."
, ,,~ f ,- i
, J..._"/
t::
'"^
-z
~
~
e
~
~
~
C>
--:.1'."/
'.
. ,
'~llc'
-i-
tr
l'~l'
ro,:
;1-\ / -',
j;' ('
-,' \. ' ;. -" '",- _ .",/-r-..... r~~'/.~
'. '. ~ ,~ " <., " <> , <,.,-~,
I ( " ; '--../ '--' ......~- - '- -,-/ '--'-~' ,- -j
!' " '-. .,/
f-~" ~ --
,. / -'l\ "'['''
'.1 ..< ',I ~ =' -' --.-CJ }
I'~~r~
11 .,..."../'. ~:f
~~~}I ~
( -,' '-----.-::J
.. .-..
-~
m The Hoyt Company
August 7, 1006
!~~
~~i
i~~
Q:f ~
~i~'i'
...~ :s 6
'Iii
~ ~ 31
di~~"'-'
... '\
\ ..
\ \//
\.<.-~~_::~:>/
Page:
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
5.0 PARKING MANAGEMENT
5.1 Parking Supply
There will be a total of 459 surface and garage parking spaces.
The ability and willingness to rideshare is directly linked to parking availability. By not
providing an overabundance of parking spaces at full build out, the project is laying the
groundwork for successful promotion of alternative transportation. Preferential parking
spaces placed near the building entrances (within 100 feet of building entrances) are an
excellent incentive that sends a clear visual message to employees and the community
that alternative transportation is important.
The City parking code for this type of project is one space for each 250 square-feet for
the first 50,000 square feet and 3/1,000 square feet thereafter for the remaining 75,000
square feet. The East Jamie Court project is proposing a 2.83/1,000 square feet parking
ratio. This is a 14.4% reduction in on-site parking. Table 4 shows the reduction of
parking for the project.
Table 4
East Jamie Court Parking Assessment
536
459
(77)
14.4%
However, all employees will be provided with free parking which may encourage drive
alone usage.
5.2
Free Parking for Car and Vanpools and Clean Fuel Vehicles
,.f
Parking will be free for all carpool, vanpool and clean-fuel vehicle participants.
5.3 Preferential Car and Vanpool Parking
One effective means of encouraging employees to rideshare and/ or use a clean-fuel
vehicle is to reserve the most preferred parking spaces for the exclusive use of car and
vanpools. These preferred parking spaces will be designated with signage and
pavement striping.
Upon completion of this project, a minimum of 10% of employee parking will be
designated for carpool, vanpool, and clean-fuel vehicles. The project will provide 40
carpool parking spaces and one vanpool space in premium, convenient locations (i.e.,
close to buildings, in the shade, etc.) within 100 feet of the building entrance. These
preferential parking spaces will be specially signed and/ or striped and may require
employee registration and permitting.
OJ The Hoyt Company
Page 6
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
5.4 Passenger Loading Zones
In order to facilitate disembarking and embarking of rideshare passengers, passenger
loading / unloading areas will be provided. Passenger loading zones for carpool and
vanpool drop off will be located in the main entrance north of the public plaza.
5.5 Motorcycle Parking
A secure area will be provided for motorcycle parking.
6.0 CARPOOL AND V ANPOOL RIDEMATCHING SERVICE
Regional Rideshare Program's Ridematch Service, via 511.org and the Peninsula Traffic
Congestion Relief Alliance (Alliance) provide free car and vanpool matching services.
On-site employer contacts will promote the on-line 511 service directly to employees on
a regular basis and allow the Alliance to solicit carpool sign-up at on-site employer
events such as annual Transportation Fairs, Wellness or Benefits events, etc.
Tenant/ employer contacts can also research employee ZIP code data from Human
Resource records and offer to match up employees who live near each other.
Car and vanpooling will be strongly encouraged at the project. An Employee
Transportation Flyer will be able to promote the free personalized matching assistance
through the 511 Rideshare and Alliance programs. This car and vanpool ridematching
service provides individuals with a computerized list of other commuters near their
employment or residential ZIP code, along with the closest cross street, phone number,
and hours they are available to commute to and from work. Individuals are then able
to select and contact others with whom they wish to car or vanpool. They will also be
given a list of existing car and vanpools in their residential area that they may be able to
join if vacancies exist.
The 511 system gives commuters the information they need to make more informed
choices when planning trips. By calling in or logging on, commuters can get up-to-the-
minute information about traffic conditions, public transportation options, ridesharing,
and bicycling anytime, anywhere throughout the greater Bay Area Region and northern
California.
The 511 system offers one-stop shopping for traffic, transit, rideshare and bicycle
information in the region. The nine-county system is the first 511 service to go online in
California. It provides links to 511 systems in Sacramento, Oregon and Nevada and is
available from any phone, provided the carrier supports 511. Most counties in the
region have wireless and landline access to the service through major carriers.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 7
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
7.0 TRANSIT
Caltrain, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) and SamTrans provide transit service to South
San Francisco in proximity to the project site. Shuttle services are provided from the
South San Francisco BART and South San Francisco Caltrain Stations providing links
for transit riders near to the project site.
7.1 Direct Route to Transit
A well-lit pedestrian path will be provided from the building, utilizing the most direct
route, to the nearest shuttle stop. East Jamie Court project transit riders will connect
with shuttles within two blocks at Haskin Way and Swift Avenue.
7.2 Shuttle Services to East Jamie Court
Working with the Alliance, the project utilizes a comprehensive shuttle system with
both peak period and lunchtime service (via the Downtown Dasher). Shuttle services
are provided near to the project site. A Utah-Grand Area Caltrain and a BART shuttle
offer 17 peak morning trips and 18 peak evening trips for employees. Daily shuttle
service totals 35 trips.
The Utah-Grand Area BART shuttle circulates between the South San Francisco BART
station and the project at 15, 30 and 45-minute frequencies. There are currently a total
of 18 BART shuttle trips to and from the project site.
The Utah-Grand Area Caltrain shuttle service circulates between the South San
Francisco Caltrain Station and the project during the morning and evening peaks at 20,
and 35-minute frequencies. Seventeen (17) Caltrain shuttle trips provide connecting
service to and from the project site.
Table 5 shows the number of shuttle trips provided to the project site for connectivity to
the South San Francisco BART and Caltrain stations.'
Table 5
Shuttle Service to East Jamie Court
Utah-Grand Area Caltrain Shuttle
Utah-Grand Area BART Shuttle
8
9
9
9
17
18
The South San Francisco Employer Shuttles, including the Utah-Grand Area shuttles,
operate on an employee pass program. Participating projects, tenants or employers
who contribute funding for the shuttles are provided with free passes for their
employees. An Employer Shuttle Rider Pass Program flyer is provided as an
attachment. Shuttle route maps are provided on page 9.
GI The Hoyt Company
Page 8
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
Caltrain Shuttle Map
UTAH - GRAND AREA CAL TRAIN SHUTTLE
eat,S
SSF
Caltrain
Station
E. ran
i~~
>
~
.l!l
III
<:l
S!
ffi
SSF
Conference
Ctr
Haskin Way
between
Swift &
Grand
~
<
EAST
JAMIE
COURT
.
BART Shuttle Map
UTAH - GRAND AREA BART SHUTTLE
Sister
T Cities
0:
SSF
BART
Station
tD
101
Q)
::>
c:
~
"
~ *..
'0
Ql
~
E
:.::i
Haskin Way
between
Swift &
Grand
339
Harbor
EAST
JAMIE
COURT
m The Hoyt Company
Page 9
East Jamie Court Preliminary IDM Plan
August 7, 2006
7.3 Shuttle/Bus Stops
Shuttle drop-off and pick-up locations for commuter service, BART and Caltrain are
located off-site, within two blocks at Haskin Way and Swift Avenue.
7.4 Caltrain
Caltrain operates a frequent fixed-route commuter rail service seven days a week
between San Francisco and San Jose, as well as limited service to and from Gilroy on
weekdays. Caltrain operates on 15 to 30-minute frequencies during the peak periods in
the morning and evening. Midday service operates approximately every hour. Service
is less frequent during weekends, and holidays.
Caltrain service is available approximately 1.22 miles from the project at the South San
Francisco station located at 590 Dubuque Avenue and Grand Avenue. The Gateway
Area Caltrain Shuttle provides connecting service to the project site.
Caltrain services were enhanced in 2004 to add express trains during peak hours.
However, this new service does not provide an express stop to the South San Francisco
Caltrain Station and hence will not benefit employees at the 681 Gateway Boulevard
project.
7.5 Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART)
BART is a 92.7-mile, 43-station automated rapid transit system located along five lines
of double track. Trains traveling up to 80 mph connect San Francisco to Colma and
other East Bay communities - north to Richmond, east to Pittsburg/Bay Point, west to
Dublin/Pleasanton, and south to Fremont. Service is scheduled every 15 minutes
during peak periods. Service during Holidays, and weekends are modified.
BART-to-the-Airport expanded the system by 8.7 miles along the peninsula from Colma
to a new intermodal station in Millbrae. Four new stations were created including the
South San Francisco Station located between EI Camino Real and Mission Road to the
south of Hickey Boulevard. The project is approximately 3.39 miles from the South San
Francisco BART Station.
7.6 SamTrans
SamTrans provides bus service throughout San Mateo County, with connections to the
Colma, Daly City, and South San Francisco BART stations, San Francisco International
Airport, peninsula Caltrain stations and downtown San Francisco.
The system connects with San Francisco Muni, AC Transit and Golden Gate Transit at
San Francisco's Transbay Terminal, with the Dumbarton Express and with Santa Clara
Valley Transportation Authority in Menlo Park and Palo Alto.
There is no direct SamTrans service east of Highway 101 area. SamTrans service does
connect at the South San Francisco BART Station and subsequently the Utah-Grand
Area Shuttle Service that drops off and picks up within two blocks at Haskin Way and
III The Hoyt Company
Page 10
East Jamie Court Preliminary TOM Plan
August 7, 2006
Swift Avenue. SamTrans does not provide a direct connection to the South San
Francisco Caltrain Station, however; Routes 130, 292, 133, and 132 are within
approximately 1/ 4-mile walking distance from this station and the connecting shuttle
services near the project site.
7.7 Downtown Dasher Taxi Service
This free taxi service provides an 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. pick-up service throughout the
East Highway 101 business parks in South San Francisco. Using existing shuttle stops,
taxis drop off riders at locations in the downtown retail area. The Downtown Dasher,
operated by the Peninsula Yellow Cab of South San Francisco and managed by the
Alliance, requires an employer provided voucher and a trip reservation before
10:00 a.m. This midday service is currently free to participating employers. A detailed
Downtown Dasher flyer is provided as an attachment.
7.8 Ferry Service
Currently, no scheduled water transit service exists in the South San Francisco area.
Water transit service to South San Francisco is anticipated by September 2009. Prior to
this service becoming operational, employees will be given a link to this resource.
8.0 BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES
8.1 Pedestrian Connections
A safe, convenient and well-lit pedestrian path is provided, utilizing the most direct
route, to the nearest shuttle stop close to the project. Lighting, landscaping and
building orientation is designed to enhance pedestrian safety.
8.2 Bicycle Parking - Long-Term and Short-Term
Free Class I and Class II bicycle parking facilities will be provided on-site as follows:
· Commercial, R&D, and office uses: one bicycle space for every 50 vehicle
spaces required.
· Restaurants, retail: one bicycle space for every 50 vehicle spaces required.
Six Class I (long-term) bicycle lockers or a covered, enclosed, secure area will be
provided to enhance the viability for bicycle commuters. These Class I bicycle lockers
and four Class II bicycle racks will be placed at the building. Table 6 shows the
recommended and total number of bicycle facilities for the proposed project. This level
of bicycle parking slight! y exceeds the City's required parking levels.
Note: The Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance provides a 50% match for the costs of
purchasing and installing any bike parking, from basic racks to high security lockers, up to a
maximum of $500 per unit.
III The Hoyt Company
Page 11
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
Table 6
Bicycle Parking Recommendation
Class I - long-term
Class II - short-term
6
4
All bicycle parking facilities will be located in convenient, safe and well-lit areas with
maximum space for the ingress and egress of bicycles.
8.3 Bicycle Connections
The project has excellent connections directly parallel to south lot line to regional
bicycle facilities and the San Francisco Bay Trail. The Bay Trail is a network of multi-use
pathways circling San Francisco and San Pablo Bays. The ultimate route is planned to
be a 400-mile route through nine Bay Area counties and 42 shoreline cities. The trail
provides commuters an exceptional pathway to bicycle or walk to work in the South
San Francisco Area. A map of surrounding bikeways is provided on page 13. A map
of the Bay Trails is provided on page 14.
8.4 Bicycle Resources
Free Bike Buddy matching, bicycle maps and resources are provided via the 511 system.
Bicycle commuters looking to find a riding partner can log-on to bicycling.,511.org for
more information. .
The Alliance provides a free one-hour, on-site Bike and Pedestrian Safety Program for
employees. This workshop teaches commuters about bicycling and walking as a safe,
stress-relieving commute mode; traffic laws for bicyclists and pedestrians; bicycle
maintenance tips; and offers a drawing for free bicycle-related prizes. A program flyer
is provided as an attachment.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 12
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
~
~
~
-;;
;;; ~ ~ti: ~
li '2 i: .~
" clj Vl " ~~ ~
>. ,;, :a .c :I: E t
- ." t.c ~, E .!:$ '6
c: ~ ::i :;:: ~ 17 ~ C
"'''' U I.) :ge
~ C- .;:; :-::)1( ~ 'J.
0 ea ~ '" ~6' ,.
u:i!E r; tel .1\!1 '!1 ij1 it r~ " ~
'l:l c " l': .:;
= c '" ~ oci ~ " ~
0 G) CI ~ " g
" 'C ;:i Ul
G) 13 ~ '" ~ ... E ~
- " .. " 's.
ea >. ~ CI rn g; .~
:i!E CJ .. It . el ~ f4 .c ~ v. ;.
III :5 t . " ~ .~
i:D 'C ., 'E '" E J ?' C ~
c: : ~ :; ..;:
c E ... " 0 ~
ea c E ~ 13
E:: " ~ ~ v. "
C/) ~ -E .
w c;: t. t
01.) 0:
'8 'E1 'G . . .
~ a:
~ ~
~ c
,
" !l
::Or'"
-
,~
c
S e
~ b
~ ...
11 ~
:a .2
~ ~
~ .~
(/l IJ.
t: <:t
~ ;,
& c2
..ci
o
.S
Cl>
-:5
.s
~'
'"
z~
~
's
~
" >.
iil]
CJ ~
rn E
'j(
~
0.
0.
~
..
o
ci
t'-
"l.
...
""
,:..;
~
!:!
~
^
o
I
~L
~
J,..
~
0..
m The Hoyt Company
Page 13
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
i tit as
.Q r::: e ~ r:::
U)i: ~_ i:
i: as.: 0 as
m:=(/)o.:=
l!-
...r:::
.-
_0
(/)0.
i
..0
:VO>
~Q
~
-a.
~6>
~~
~
'S:-
~
^?S . r:,6e
O...J
0_ 0
C/l (J
- <( cn.,m
u -- ::3
a: (,),,,
Z s:: VI
oCt I- CO C
1..--
c: LL~
L.L. >- Cc..
%.A' CO
<. ........00
v:dJJ
August 7, 2006
... as
.!.c
(I)>i:
>-0 as
00:2:
... as
.CD_ e
e-
- ...
>-0 as
00.:=
0_
eer:::
~2o
ena1o.
-
Q)U
.- Q)
e.-
cae
..,0..
-1::
m=
cac
K
, ;'3
I ~~ ;r
. tJj~ (}jesS
,!> @{" ~
0''0- /J/&!J&I < 0... .
II-!/') .. .
fi
......
:::J
Colm~
~I ...
...... s- .:.::
@ ~v 0.5...
-.....; ~o as CI)
Q) 00. 0. <V
it f?
.... ,p
.1E
~ 0
o ~
.r::: -
... u
::Jet:
~ oast!
~ en tJ) u.. AivJ
~Q~ Joq.JeH
"0 *'
/R
'e~
~
-0
,,~
(,
Q)
~..
Q.l
m~
(J)J
-"t:
tba.
as<<
(/)0:
::>OC
.. ~........r.l"t
18 j~ 0>
III Cl ~
.c: ~m C , Z
~ :t::~ 'l3
Q, ~iil .slj; "C CD '[! 0
~ "ii _ "C CD C .... e
~ - .c: !-iij 0. C
l.! eel .Q 8 >. :J
....g -~ =~ .. .....
~el ~l ....:> !;
-... i;'~ '" eo Q)
i;'15 -CD .c:
~o ~.g Ill"" iil .......
"i (g "ij m~ =~ ~o Q, :G,~ c:
Iij~ c"C "t: "l/l >oC -~ ;;ts"C ,.. !-j ~
~Q, g16 med <<II t:
mCD 'iii~= OCDCD 'c .su-
=1 :>.c: ~c =CD t:o. o;l CD E! I
=lIl e! 'g:3 'g c 0 "v
Ill:> f!CD ..~ ~...I!! 0- :!: 0: ~:
..,; ~~ 0. CD mE? 01- oCD -f) -
....~ Cl!li; Cl Cl
';.; E~ gs .. "C >. ,Ii c ~...a
III!!!,.. t:
>0 CD ._.0 C:>"" iil ~ :E 0&
<<I.c: &iii5 1::; Co .!!!::3 :5 il;jlD Ill... 0 dl ... ..
alel) ;:)z ;:)z Q.u. oc...Q ii:aIc a. u:: t
o~o
'"
'41 (il; I
~
.-~
/" E\ caff\\' IV . .
(~~
(')
Page 14
m The Hoyt Company
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
8.5 Shower and Clothes Lockers
Showers and clothing lockers will be installed for the use of employees walking and / or
biking to work and others who wish to change after commuting via alternative
transportation. Two showers (one for each gender) and 16 locker facilities are
recommended for installation in the building.
Shower and locker facilities will be provided free of charge for all employees. Table 7
shows the number of proposed shower and locker facilities planned for the project.
Table 7
Proposed Shower and Locker Facilities
9. 0 EMPLOYEE TRANSPORTATION COORDINATOR
The East Jamie Way project will provide an Employee Transportation Coordinator
(ETC) who will have the primary responsibility for implementing this Plan. The ETC
may be a part time or outsourced coordinator who manages the TDM Program. The
ETC will be responsible for providing employee commute program assistance to
tenants and employees, producing on-site transportation fairs and promotional events,
collaborating with the Alliance to maximize employer resources, conducting the annual
survey and producing the triennial report. TDM industry data supports that having an
ETC has a very positive impact on increasing alternative mode use. This position will
be filled by:
Name:
TBD
Address:
East Jamie Court
South San Francisco, CA 94080
Phone:
The ETC will provide the following services:
· Promote trip reduction and air quality strategies to employees at the
project site.
· Be the main point of contact for employer contacts and employees
wanting to commute using an alternative.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 15
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
· Conduct annual employee surveys and provide reports to the City of
South San Francisco, which will include commute patterns, mode splits,
and TDM program success (process includes: annual surveying of
employees, tabulation of data, and provision of results in report format).
· Evaluate survey results for alternative transportation potential and/ or
changes to current program.
· Catalog all existing incentives that encourage employees to utilize
alternative transportation programs.
· Work with local agencies such as Caltrain, SamTrans, BART, the Alliance,
511 and the Bay Area Air Quality Management District and post
informational materials on the transportation kiosks in employee common
areas, as well as disperse alternative program information to employees
via designated employer contacts, posters, flyers, banners, campus
newsletter, new employee orientation, etc.
· Participate in the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD)
Spare the Air program. Spare the Air day notices will be forwarded to
employees to encourage not driving to work alone.
· Coordinate and manage various aspects of the plan that require periodic
updating or monitoring, such as the GRH program, car and vanpool
registration, parking enforcement, locker assignment and enforcement.
9.1 Designated Employer Contact
The developer will require a designated contact to be identified for all future
tenants/ occupants. The designated tenant/ employer contact will be the official contact
for the East Jamie Court TDM program described in this plan. The designated
employer contact will maintain on-site TDM programs and employee outreach,
administrate the annual surveys and provide information continuity for the
developer /landlord and the City of South San Francisco.
9.2 Employee Transportation Flyer
At the time of move-in, the tenant will distribute an Employee Transportation FIyer to
all employees commuting to the project site. All subsequent new employees will also
receive the flyer and TMD benefits and program training. This flyer will include (but
not be limited to) information about carpool parking, transit opportunities, shuttle
services, bicycle routes and GRH information. A sample flyer is provided as an
attachment.
9.3 Promotional Programs
The future tenant, prior to occupancy, will host a pre-move Transportation Fair or
conduct a pre-move marketing campaign, with a heavy emphasis on carpooling, transit
and shuttle resources. Throughout the year, maintain employee awareness by hosting
OJ The Hoyt Company
Page 16
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
other transportation fairs. As lunch-time events, these fairs will higWight transit and
trip-planning services and rideshare matching and other commute opportunities at the
new site. The Transportation Fairs will bring together transit and transportation
providers (Caltrain, BART, SamTrans, the Alliance), bicycle advocates, ridematching
organizations (511), and the Employee Commute Program for a comprehensive
presentation.
Other events and promotions on-site at the project may include Bike to Work Week,
Caltrain Day, Rideshare Thursday's or a comprehensive transportation/ commute fair.
Various transit and rideshare organizations will be invited to set up a marketing booth
during lunch-time at a central location at the building during the year to promote the
alternative commute options available to employees. Free trial transit passes will be
available for first time riders. Periodic on-site tabling would also be recommended
throughout the year.
9.4 Tenant Training and Developer-Provided Resource Representative
If requested, Alexandria will provide the tenant(s) with TDM program start-up
assistance. A TDM resource representative can offer support, training and planning
assistance for the tenant's programs.
9.5 Transportation Information for Visitors and Applicants
Tenants will provide visitors and applicants with transportation alternatives and
information via the company Web site or on-site transportation kiosks.
10.0 AL TERNA TIVE COMMUTE EMPLOYEE INCENTIVES
Tenants at the East Jamie Court project will be encouraged to offer their employees
some form of alternative commute incentive. Incentives may include a pre-tax, payroll
deduction (Commuter Choice) for transit and vanpool users, transit subsidies and/ or
commute subsidies.
The Commuter Choice option is a tax-free salary payroll deduction of up to $105 per
month per employee, for vanpool and rail transit pass fares through a voucher program
(Commuter Check). An employee can deduct up to $1,260 a year from their salary as a
pretax payroll deduction. This program encourages non-drive alone commute trips.
Transit or commute subsidies can be a set dollar amount or a percentage of the montWy
costs of transportation. Employment sites that offer transit or commute subsidies
generally tend to have higher levels of alternative mode-use. Subsidies can be provided
in tandem with the pre-tax option.
Other carpool, vanpool and transit incentives are available to encourage employees to
try and use alternative transportation options.
ID The Hoyt Company
Page 17
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
10.1 Carpool Incentive Program
Employees at the East Jamie Court project can participate in the "You Pool, We Pay!"
program offered by the Alliance. Employees who are currently driving alone, and are
commuting to, from or through San Mateo County, are encouraged to try carpooling.
When employees form a new carpool with two or more people over the age of 18, or
add a new member to an existing car pool, all carpool participants will each receive a
$40 gas card incentive.1 A carpool program flyer is provided as an attachment.
10.2 511 Rideshare Reward$
Employees who carpool may register for rewards through the 511 rideshare program
Eligible carpoolers can earn $10 in gas or Safeway gift cards for every five days
carpooled, up to $100 over three months. As an added bonus, a lucky commuter who
carpools 40 or more days during the course of the program can enter a year-end
drawing for $1,000 in gift cards.
Rideshare Rewards runs from May 1 through October 31, 2006 on a first-come, first-
served basis until funds are depleted.
The new vanpool incentive will provide $300 to $900 in gas cards to new vans that meet
eligibility requirements and successfully complete three to nine consecutive months of
operation. The gas cards will also be offered on a first-come, first-served basis, until the
funds are exhausted. Employers and/ or individuals who start a new vanpool may be
eligible to receive the gas cards, which will be awarded to the party designated to
handle the vanpool's finances. A 511 Rideshare Reward$ application is provided as an
attachment.2
10.3 Vanpool Incentives
As an incentive for vanpooling, the Alliance will pay half of the cost for the first 3
months of vanpooling, up to $80 per month. Drivers of new vanpools, on the road for
at least 6 months, can receive $500.00. This one time incentive is provided for those
who join a new vanpool in the last six months and have not vanpooled for a three-
month period before joining a new van. A vanpool program flyer is provided as an
attachment.
10.4 Try Transit Program
The Alliance offers a Try Transit Program provides free transit tickets to people who are
interested in trying public transit to get to work. These tickets are meant for people who
are new to transit. Commuters requesting tickets must work, live in or drive through
San Mateo County. A copy of the Try Transit Program is provided as an attachment.
J http://www.commute.org/programs.htm#carpool
2 http://rideshare.511.org/ rideshare_rewards/ rewards.asp
m The Hoyt Company
Page 18
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
Transit ticket options include:
· One BART ticket
· 3 round-trip Caltrain tickets
· 6 one-way SamTrans tickets,
· 6 Dumbarton tickets
· 3 round-trip VT A tickets.
11.0 GUARANTEED RIDE HOME PROGRAM
The tenant will be required to participate in the GRH program managed by the
Alliance. The lease agreement will identify the process for the employer to register for
this program with the Alliance. The Alliance covers 75% of the cost for GRH services.
The employer pays the remaining 25% cost. A sample Alliance GRH program flyer is
provided as an attachment.
All employees who commute to work using transit, bicycle, or by carpool or vanpool,
will be guaranteed a ride home in the case of a personal emergency, or when they
unexpectedly have to work late thereby missing the last bus, or their normal carpool
home. The GRH program has proven very successful as it removes one of the major
objections employees have to giving up their private automobile, especially those with
young families.
The GRH program provides employees with a security blanket, a feeling of reassurance
that if a child becomes ill or injured during the day the employee can get to them
quickly. If employees need to work late and miss their bus or carpool, or if their
vanpool breaks down, they are guaranteed a ride home.
12.0 FLEXTIME
.:r
In order to use alternative modes of transportation, employees may need special
consideration regarding start and end times of work. For example, if an employee's
workplace opens at 9:00 a.m. The carpool drops the employee off at 8:45 a.m., and
he/ she must wait until the building is opened. Many employees would drive alone
given those conditions. Flextime allows the employer to adjust business open and close
times to facilitate the use of alternative commute modes.
The project will encourage that tenant(s) provide flextime to employees who desire to
commute via alternative transportation rather than the Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV).
Project buildings will be open and accessible in the early morning and early evening
hours to support an active flextime program.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 19
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
13.0 TELECOMMUTING
Telecommuting will be a viable option for employees at the East Jamie Court project.
Tenant-employers will be encouraged to write telecommuting policies. If requested,
tenants will be provided with information on the benefits of telecommuting.
The fiber optic network and infrastructure to support telecommuting is available in the
street and is available to building tenants. The project proponent will ensure all
buildings are "fiber ready". If the tenants so choose to connect to the fiber network,
these wires allow multiple data transmissions over phone/ cable lines and will speed
data transmission for the businesses in the project. Provision of this equipment is a part
of ensuring that telecommuters enjoy fast, smooth data transmission between their
workplace and telework office.
Telecommuting involves the use of telephones and computers to enable an employee to
work off-site or outside of the traditional work place. It can mean working at home or
at a telecenter. Many employers look at telecommuting as a way to reduce work-space
demand.
Telecommuting, used as a tool to reduce the cost of doing business and employee
commute trips, has proven to be very effective. The secondary and related benefits
include recruitment and retention value, reduced sick time and absenteeism, improved
productivity and morale, and reduced stress. The benefits mentioned above focus on
employers and employees, but telecommuting will also reduce our energy consumption
relating to commuting, vehicle miles traveled, and mobile source emissions.
14.0 INFORMATION BOARD/KIOSK
Two information boards or kiosks will be located in each building in a common
gathering area (e.g. lobby, employee entrance, break or lunch room). The kiosks will
contain transportation information, including GRH information, transit and shuttle
schedules, SamTrans, Caltrain, BART, Downtown Dasher, 511 ridematching and other
related information. Information will be updated periodically by the ETC or designated
employer contact. Kiosks can be wall-mounted or free-standing, rotating units.
15.0 ON-SITE AND NEARBY PROJECT AMENITIES
On-site amenities provide employees with a full-service work environment. Eliminating
the need for an automobile to make midday trips increases non-drive alone rates. Many
times, employees perceive that they are dependent upon the drive-alone mode because
of the number of errands and activities that must be carried out in different locations.
By reducing this dependence through the provision of services and facilities at the work
site, an increase in alternative mode usage for commute-based trips should be realized.
W The Hoyt Company
Page 20
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
15.1 Cafe
A cafe and bakery is located within a two-three block walking distance northwest of the
project site. This cafe is operated by a private vendor and is available to East Jamie
Court employees and the general public.
15.2 Recreational and Bicycle Facilities
A greenbelt area will be incorporated at the East Jamie Court site as part of the project
construction. This greenbelt area will offer project employees a recreational area for
walking, meditation or picnicking.
The Bay Trails project provides bicycle connectivity directly to the south of the project,
parallel with the property line, for commuters and recreational users. The Bay Trail is a
planned recreational corridor that, when complete, will encircle San Francisco and San
Pablo Bays with a continuous 400-mile network of bicycling and hiking trails. It will
connect the shoreline of all nine Bay Area counties, link 47 cities, and cross the major
toll bridges in the region. To date, approximately 240 miles of the alignment-over half
the Bay Trail's ultimate length-have been completed.3
16.0 KICK-OFF EVENT
Upon 75% occupancy, the tenant will host a commute alternative kick-off
event/ celebration or employee marketing campaign. Transportation service providers,
such as BART, SamTrans, Caltrain, and the Alliance, will be invited to set up exhibit
booths/ tables. To encourage employee participation in the event, the tenant will
provide food, such as popcorn, hot dogs and refreshments, and give-a-ways, such as
commuter mugs, water bottles, t-shirts, etc. The tenant will set the date for the event
and advertise the event at least two weeks in advance.
17.0 TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
Transportation Management Associations (TMAs) are typically private, nonprofit
organizations run by a voluntary Board of Directors with typically a small staff. They
help businesses, developers, building owners, local government representatives, and
others, work together to collectively establish policies, programs and services to address
local transportation problems. The key to a successful TMA lies in the synergism of
multiple groups banding together to address and accomplish more than any single
employer, building operator, developer, or resident could do alone.
In South San Francisco, the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance operates as a
TMA organization. The Alliance provides:
· Shuttle programs
· Carpool and vanpool matching
· Transit advocacy
· Information on local issues
3 http://www.abag.ca.gov /bayarea/baytrail/ overview.html
GI The Hoyt Company
Page 21
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
· Parking management programs
· Trial transit passes
· Emergency ride home programs
· Enhanced bicycle facilities
· Car and vanpool incentives
· Teleworking
· Training
· Marketing programs
· Promotional assistance
· Newsletter
The tenant will register in the Alliance GRH program for their employees and to use the
resources and services available. Participating with the Alliance is a valuable asset for
project tenants. The Alliance is a clearinghouse for information about alternative
commute programs, incentives, and transportation projects affecting San Mateo County
businesses.
18.0 COMPLIANCE MONITORING AND ENFORCEMENT
The intent of the City of South San Francisco's TDM Ordinance is to reduce single
occupancy vehicle (SOV) trips and in doing so lessen the resulting traffic congestion
and mobile source related air pollution. It is important to ensure TDM measures are
actually implemented and effective. Therefore a monitoring and enforcement program
is necessary for each application. Because the City's TDM Program is performance
based (i.e. project required percentage alternative mode usage and corresponding trip
reduction at 30%), an annual evaluation program will allow the East Jamie Court
project, Alexandria and the City to assess the effectiveness of the unique program
designed for their project, and to make adjustments as necessary to consistent! y meet or
exceed the requirement.
Alexandria's East Jamie Court will establish and maintain a 30% trip reduction at the
proposed project site that is subject to annual monitoring. Annual monitoring and
penalty programs are consistent with previously approved methodologies implemented
by the City of Sunnyvale at other project sites in the east of Highway 101 area.
Alexandria plans to voluntarily promote, encourage, and support alternative commute
mode usage for employees at the East Jamie Court project.'
18.1 Annual Employee Commute Survey
An employee commute survey will be a critically important part of the monitoring
process to determine the success or failure of TDM measures. This report, via results
from an employee survey distributed and collected by the ETC will provide
quantitative data (e.g., mode split) and qualitative data (e.g., employee perception of the
alternative transportation programs). Employees who do not participate in commute
survey will be counted as drive-alone or SOV commuters by default. The tenant will be
strongly encouraged to support and participate in the promotion and marketing of the
annual employee survey. Lease language will identify this requirement.
Survey data may then be used to focus TDM marketing and the efforts of the ETC. The
TDM program could be re-tooled, if necessary, to maintain the project's 30% peak hour
alterative commute use rates and commitment at the site. A summary report based on
results from the employee commute survey will be submitted to the City of South San
Francisco and presented to the Planning Commission and the City Council.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 22
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
18.2 Annual Summary Report
Each year, Alexandria via tenant-employee survey data, will prepare an annual TDM
summary report and submit same to the City to document the effectiveness of their
TDM Plan in achieving the goal of the alternative mode usage and 30% trip reduction
by employees within the Project. The TDM summary report will be prepared by an
independent consultant or TMA who will work in concert with the East Jamie Court
ETC. The TDM summary report will include a determination of historical employee
commute methods provided by information obtained from a survey of all employees
working in the building.
If the trip reduction rates have not been achieved, the report will explain how and why
the goal was not reached and specify additional measures and activities that will be
implemented in the coming year to improve the modes use rate.
The initial TDM summary report on the Property will be submitted within one (1) year
and each year thereafter following the granting of a certificate of occupancy with
respect to the building. The survey reporting is targeted for the 4th quarter of each
year.
18.3 Triennial Report
For projects with increased FAR, a triennial report will also be required. Modifications
to the East Jamie Court project have increased the FAR and require the project to
conduct the triennial report. The triennial report will state whether the development
has or has not achieved the required percent alternative mode-use. If the development
had not achieved the require modes use, the applicant will:
· Explain how and why the goals have not been reached
· Describe additional measures that will be adopted in the coming year to attain
the required mode-use rate
· Provide an implementation schedule by month of additional measures
The triennial report will also include a comparison of historical responses on the survey
and identify if mode share has changed significantly and describe in detail as to why
the mode share changed. The Chief Planner will review reports. Reports that indicate
failure, will be submitted to the City Council.
18.4 Penalty for Noncompliance
If after the initial triennial report, the subsequent triennial report indicates that, in spite
of the changes in the Final TDM Plan, the required alternative mode-use is still not
being achieved, or if the applicant fails to submit a triennial report, the City may assess
a penalty. The penalty shall be established by City Council resolution on the basis of
the project size and actual percentage alternative mode use as compared to the percent
alternative mode use established in the TDM Plan.4
4 Ordinance No. 1300-2001, Chapter 20.120, Transportation Demand Management, South San Francisco
Municipal Code, October 2001.
m The Hoyt Company
Page 23
East Jamie Court Preliminary TDM Plan
August 7, 2006
18.5 Lease Language
The developer will draft lease language for all tenants that require the designated
employer contact, compliance and implementation of the TDM program (including
annual survey and reporting, and registration in the Alliance Guaranteed Ride Home
Program). The lease language will also identify the tenant's potential penalties for
failure to achieve the 30% alternative mode use rate, failure to participate in the annual
employee commute survey, or failure to submit the annual report as identified by the
City of South San Francisco.
The lease language will be worded similarly:
Tenant hereby agrees to designate one of its employees to act as a liaison with Landlord to
facilitate and coordinate such programs as may be required by governmental agencies to reduce
the traffic generated by the East Jamie Court project as required by the City of South San
Francisco as part of conditions of approval and to encourage the use of public transportation and
ridesharing.
19.0 CONCLUSION
The developer is committed to achieving and maintaining a 30% employee alternative
mode use at the proposed project. This TDM Plan provides the details of their
commitment to the City of South San Francisco.
The East Jamie Court project supports the policies of focusing clustered development
along transportation corridors (Highway 101 and 1-280), and transit corridors (Caltrain
and BART).
In order to be part of the transportation solution, this project contains the density and
critical mass necessary to encourage the use of all alternative modes of transportation
including bicycling, carpooling, vanpooling, and public transit. ,f
By balancing air quality with economic growth, the East Jamie Court project will help
South San Francisco thrive as a community. It is projects like these that will contribute
to South San Francisco's future livelihood.
III The Hoyt Company
Page 24
.,
a
EXHIBIT A
1
Transportation Demand Management Program, June 11, 2002
~)
June 11, 2002
Transportation Demand Management Program
for
Alexandria Real Estate Equities
Haskins Way and Jamie Court Projects,
South San Francisco, California
Prepared by Richard Booth
Sequoia Solutions Consulting
2995 Woodside Road Suite 400
Woodside, Ca. 94062
650.747.9745
rdbooth@earthlink.net
Haskins Way and Jamie Court Projects
Transportation Demand Management Program
-An overview-
a. Alexandria Real Estate Equities ("Alexandria") is committed to being a good
neighbor in the community and understands the importance of minimizing
environmental impacts in the South San Francisco Cabot, Cabot, and Forbes
Industrial Park. Alexandria realizes that informing tenants of the alternative
methods of commuting available will lead to reductions in congestion and
pollution and have a positive contribution to the community. Alexandria desires to
attract and retain excellent tenants, offer an attractive worksite, as well as a
creative, productive, and comfortable environment for its employees. Alexandria
is committed to encourage and assist tenants to develop and utilize an extensive
and innovative, Transportation Demand Management Program.
b. Alexandria shall require all tenants to designate at least one employee as a
TDM "point of contact" representative within their respective company.
Alexandria shall coordinate the training of such personnel. Alexandria will also
designate an Alexandria representative to serve as a resource to each tenant-
appointed TDM personnel. Such representative will be available via telephone or
email to assist with commute questions, concerns, or transit service problems.
This employee will prepare historical surveyed commute records for annual
submission of a TDM Report to the City of South San Francisco Planning
Department. All new tenants and their employees shall be required to participate
in a "new employee orientation program". Most importantly, this program will
explain the importance of trip reduction methods and their benefits to the
community. The program orientation will also address the TDM mission
statement, alternative commute options, provide transit schedules, maps, and
offer free ride matching services. All new employees shall complete a commuter
survey indicating the modes of commuting available, and what their expected
mode would be.
c. Alexandria will promote the use of the existing Peninsula Congestion Relief
Alliance's ("Alliance"), Utah! East Grand Shuttle Bus System, and the use of
public transit modes of travel. These commuter shuttles operate during peak
commute hours to the South San Francisco CalTrain Station, and to the San
Francisco Glen Park Bart Station. Appropriate areas shall be designated for
passenger loading, as well as adequate sheltered waiting areas, such as the
building lobby.
?
d. Alexandria will advocate to its tenants the use of the Alliance "Emergency Ride
Home" program. This allows employees who utilize alternative forms of
commuting a free ride home for emergencies up to four times per year via
taxicabs or rental cars. Alexandria will assist tenants in procuring grant monies
available for such programs.
e. Alexandria will encourage its tenants to sponsor taxi vouchers for the
transportation of employees for medical appointments, during regular business
hours. A typical program would apply to round trip transportation, (20 miles each
way), up to two times per year. This is an incentive to not bring a vehicle to work
(or to use one).
f. Per the Commuter Check Program, pre tax payroll deductions will allow up to
$100.00 per month for public transit passes, and the expense for participating in
van pools. In addition, Alexandria will encourage its tenants to subsidize and
match each additional dollar for this program up to $50.00 per month, per
partici pant.
g. Vanpools will be provided by tenants as an attractive method of commuting.
Van pools will be established, subject to economic feasibility and employee
participation. Alexandria will reimburse the primary and secondary drivers for
required medical exams. Dedicated "preferential parking" areas will be provided
in highly visible and signed, areas. Passenger loading areas shall be designated.
h. Bicycling will be a viable commute option. Alexandria will require its tenants to
include shower facilities within their buildings to help promote cycling as an
alternate commute option. Alexandria will designate specific common area
locations within the project for bicycle lockers or racks. Alexandria will also
petition existing shuttle operators to include equipment on transit shuttles to
accommodate bicycles. Common bicycle and transit commute routes will be
shared and published.
i. Alexandria will designate secure areas for motorcycles. These signed areas will
be equipped with methods of impact protection from moving vehicular traffic.
j. Alexandria will supply tenants with information to assist them in developing a
formal telecommuting program to be available for selected employees;
dependent upon position and specific work requirements. This information will
include "how to" instructions, including sample contracts between management
and employees, feedback mechanisms, with ergonomics, insurance and worker's
compensation issues.
k. Taxicab vouchers will be available for local business transportation, including
travel to and from the S.F.O. International Airport. Visitor promotional materials
will be available to promote the use of public transit to / from SFO Airport.
~
Tenants will be encouraged to subsidize one-way taxi rides as incentives. Taxi
loading zones will be designated.
I. The S.S.F. Downtown Dasher program will be promoted for mid day travel to
the downtown area.
m. Tenants will be required to provide visitors and job applicants with the local
public transportation options, shuttle schedules, and transit maps for the area, to
encourage the use of public transit.
n. Alexandria will expedite through the tenant TOM "point of contact" personnel,
employee surveys to determine current modes of commuting. The surveys will be
conducted via e-mail, or other acceptable methods of communication. Non-
responses to commute surveys are to be counted as "drive alone".
o. Tenants will be encouraged to participate in the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District's "Spare the Air" program during unhealthy weather
conditions. Participants will be requested to not drive to work alone, and seek
other methods of commuting. Enrollment will be via the BAAQMD Web page, and
a "Spare the Air Day' notification will be sent via e-mail, as soon as it is
forecasted. Participation in other local ride share promotions throughout the
year, will also be encouraged.
p Alexandria will make an annual financial contribution to RIDES For Bay Area
Commuters, "Ride Your Bike to Work Week", promotion, to help promote bicycle
commuting.
'q. Chartering of busses for group activities and off site meetings will be
encouraged. Services provided by tenants will include booking, group discounts,
invoicing, and special services, as needed.
r. At the time that commuter Bay Ferry Services are available, Alexandria will
investigate including commuter transportation links to the proposed Oyster Point
Ferry Terminal.
4
June 11, 2002
Transportation Demand Management Program
for
Alexandria Real Estate Equities
Haskins Way and Jamie Court Projects,
South San Francisco, California
Alexandria is committed to developing an environmentally conscious project
complete with an effective Transportation Demand Management (TOM) program.
Alexandria will encourage its tenants to consider the program as part of a
comprehensive benefit package designed to attract and retain quality employees.
Alexandria will educate tenants about commuting alternatives in efforts to foster
increased community awareness.
The proposed full project build out population based on 100% R&D use, is
approximately 330 employees, in two buildings, for a total project of 133,000
square feet. (2.5 employees per 1,000 square feet). A surface parking area, with
a one level underground parking garage (55 spaces) is also part of this
development.
Projected individual element goals are based on the level of employee
participation (28%, or 93 employees) utilizing commute alternatives. It is
anticipated that the level of employee participation will increase over time, due to
the expanded TOM program efforts and incentives offered to employees.
This enhanced TDM Program identifies the methods that will meet, and exceed
this goal of commute trip reduction.
This project is intended to be developed in two construction phases, Building No.
1, with 57,600 square feet, (44% of project) during 2003, and Building No.2,
which will consist of 75,400 square feet, (56% of project) during 2004.
!;
A. PROGRAM ELEMENTS:
1. New employees shall be required to participate in a new employee orientation
program. This program will explain the TOM Mission Statement, explain
alternative commute options, and provide transit schedules, maps, and offer free
ride matching services to encourage the formation of carpools. All new
employees will complete an "Initial Commuter Survey". The survey will ask new
employees to select their expected mode(s) of transportation from a list of
commuting options available to the project. This method has been proven to be a
very effective means to promote alternative commute patterns, before new
employees commuting habits are established. Passenger drop off and loading
areas shall be designated. Carpools shall have a minimum of ten percent of the
preferential parking areas in the garage.
Carpools:
Phase 1
Program goal: 13
Employee trips saved daily: 13
Phase 2
Program goal: 17
Employee trips saved daily: 17
Total element goal: 30
2. The program will effectively promote the use of the existing Alliance Shuttle
Bus System, and the use of mixed public transit modes. Commuter shuttles
operate during peak commute hours to the South San Francisco CalTrain
Station, and to the San Francisco Glen Park Bart Station. The Alliance has
confirmed that capacity and willingness to accommodate additional users should
not be a problem. Employer operated shuttles connecting to public transit have
been identified as the most effective marketing method of attracting passengers
to public transit systems. (Source: SamTrans and CalTrain 20 year marketing
plans). Shuttle shelters will be included, as appropriate.
Shuttles:
Phase 1
Program goal: 15
Employee trips saved daily: 15
Phase 2
Program goal: 18
Employee trips saved daily: 18
R
Total element goal: 33
(Additional daytime trips are also saved utilizing available alternative
transportation modes, for lunches, errands, and medical appointments, although
not part of these figures).
3. The program will advocate to its tenants the use of the Peninsula Congestion
Relief Alliance's "Emergency Ride Home" program. This allows employees who
utilize alternative forms of commuting a free ride home for emergencies up to
four times per year via taxicabs or rental cars. (50% grant matching funds are
available to the employers that participate in this program). These types of
programs have been identified as the number one incentive for employees to
rideshare. Employers have seen increases of 15-20% in ridesharing when this
type of program is offered to employees (Source: RIDES 1999 Commute
Survey). This program will promote an increased use of alternative transit,
however some employees will already be using these modes. It is a deciding
factor in not driving alone, and a valuable method to deal with the unknown
urgent need for an employee to quickly get home for emergencies.
ERH:
Phase 1
Program goal: 8% of employees
Employee trips saved daily: Indirect program benefit.
Phase 2
Program goal: 10% of employees
Employee trips saved daily: Indirect program benefit.
Total element goal: 18% Indirect program benefit
4. Alexandria will encourage tenants to provide transportation for employee
medical appointments, during regular business hours, via taxi vouchers, for a
round trip, up to two times per year. This is an incentive to not bring a vehicle to
work.
Phase 1
Program goal: 1% of employees
Employee trips saved daily: Indirect program benefit
Phase 2
Program goal: 1 % of employees
Employee trips saved daily: Indirect program benefit
Total element goal: 2% Indirect program benefit
7
5.Per the Commuter Check Program, pre tax payroll deductions will allow the
employee up to $100.00 per month for public transit passes, and the expense for
participating in vanpools. In addition, Alexandria will encourage its tenants to
subsidize and match this program up to $ 50.00 per month, per participant.
Transit pass subsidies of as little as $15.00 per month has shown a significant
increase in monthly commute pass sales in other areas of the state. (Source: The
Hoyt Company).
Phase 1
Program goal: 5% of employees
Employee trips saved daily: Indirect program benefit
Phase 2
Program goal: 7% of employees
Employee trips saved daily: Indirect program benefit
Total element goal: 12% Indirect program benefit
6. Vanpools will be provided by tenants as an attractive method of commuting.
Vanpools will be established, and subsidized, subject to economic feasibility and
employee participation. Alexandria will reimburse the primary and secondary
drivers for required medical exams. Advertising methods such as "wrapping" the
vanpools may subsidize some of the operating expenses. Dedicated "preferential
parking" areas will be provided in highly visible areas. Subsidies for van pools by
employers, is the most desired factor in deciding to van pool (Source: RIDES
2000 Commute Profile).
Vanpools:
Phase 1
Program goal: 9
Employee trips saved daily: 9
Phase 2
Program goal: 11
Employee trips saved daily: 11
Total element goal: 20
7. Bicycling will be promoted as a viable commute option. Bicycle lockers,
storage areas, racks, and showers, will be available. The local Bayside Trail
provides important trail links to other areas. Common bicycle and transit
commute routes of the employees in the area will be shared and published.
Bicycles:
Phase 1
R
Program goal: 3
Employee trips saved daily: 3
Phase 2
Program goal: 3
Employee trips saved daily: 3
Total element goal: 6
8. Motorcycles will be accommodated in secure, signed designated areas, with
methods of impact protection from automobile traffic. Motorcycles pollute less,
may use carpoo/lanes, and cross toll bridges during commute hours for free.
Motorcycles:
Phase 1
Program goal: 1
Employee trips saved daily: 1
Phase 2
Program goal: 1
Employee trips saved daily: 1
Total element goal: 2
9.Telecommuting reduces both traffic and the need for employee parking
facilities. Alexandria will supply tenants with information to assist them in
developing a formal telecommuting program with "how- to" instructions, including
contracts between management and the employees, feedback mechanisms,
ergonomics, insurance and worker's compensation issues. The information will
also include suggestions for possible methods to track telecommuting days.
Telecommuting:
Phase 1
Program goal: 1
Employee trips saved daily: 1
Phase 2
Program goal: 2
Employee trips saved daily: 2
Total element goal: 3
1 O. The use of taxicab vouchers will be encouraged for local business
transportation, including travel to and from the S.F.O. International Airport.
Indirect commute impact.
q
11. The S.S.F. Downtown Dasher program will be promoted for midday travel to
the downtown area. Alexandria will encourage its tenants to pay for round trip
program vouchers. Indirect commute impact.
12. Tenants will be required to provide visitors and job applicants with public
transportation options, shuttle schedules, and transit maps for the area, to
promote the use of public transit. Indirect beneficial impact to program.
13. Employee surveys shall be conducted to determine current modes of
commuting. The surveys will be conducted via e-mail. Non-responses to
commute surveys are to be counted as "drive alone". Indirect benefit to program.
14. An employee contact person will be available to answer commute questions,
concerns, or transit problems. This employee will be available via telephone or e-
mail. This employee will prepare historical surveyed commute records, for annual
submission of a TOM Report to the City of South San Francisco Planning
Department. This person will work in conjunction with the Peninsula Congestion
Relief Alliance to assist in the promotion of ridesharing programs, and events.
Indirect benefit to program.
15. Employees will be encouraged to participate in the Bay Area Air Quality
District's "Spare the Air" program during unhealthy weather conditions.
Participants will be requested to not drive to work alone, and seek other methods
of commuting. Enrollment will be via the BAAQMD Web page, and "Spare the Air
Day' notification will be sent via e-mail, as soon as it is forecasted. Indirect
benefit to program.
B. MEASURING TOM PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS:
Alternative methods of commute modes:
New TOM Program Gains: (eliminate trips
( 9.0%) Carpools: 30 round trips per day
(10.0%) Shuttles: 33 round trips per day
( 6.0%) Vanpools: 20 round trips per day
( 2.0%) Bicycles: 6 round trips per day
( 0.5%) Motorcycles: 2 round trips per day
( 1.0%) Telecommuting: 3 round trips per day
(28.5%)
TOTAL: 94 round trips/ day reduced
10
New program goal: 94 new reduced round trips, per day
(93 would be required)
TOM Program gains: 94 round trips per day (reduction)
Employee daily trips saved: 94
Projected Employee Participation Goal: 28.5%
C. The City/County Association of Governments (C/CAG) Project Guidelines:
The designed TOM program is required to have the capacity to fully mitigate the
193 new peak a.m., and 184 p.m. commute trips that would be generated by this
project:
TOM
Quantity:
Measure:
Bicycle lockers and racks.
Showers and changing rms.
Shuttle to transit w/ ERH
Transit ticket subsidy
Preferential parking carpools
Preferential parking van pools
Van pool program w/ERH
Emergency Ride Program
O. CONCLUSION:
T rip
Credit:
One per every 3 (1)
Two per ea. (4)
Two per round trip seat (13)
One per ea. $20.lmonth min. (33)
Two per space (12)
Seven per space (3)
Ten per space
One per every two members (100)
1
8
26
33
24
21
30
50
Total trip credits:
193*
An employee participation level of 28.5% indicates that with a projected
population of 330 employees, the potential of 93 employees could actively
participate in alternative modes of commuting. TOM Program offerings could
reasonably eliminate 94 daily round commute trips at this project location.
In addition, alternative mid day transportation options are to be made available to
reduce the need for a vehicle. (These methods are very effective in reducing
congestion, parking demands, and reducing "cold start" pollution sources,
although not used in the calculated daily trip reduction figures). On site amenities
will further reduce the need for mid day travel, and parking demand. Attractive
options to driving alone will be supported, and with the available choices of
transit options, employer subsidies, and marketing, this program can be an
effective tool to encourage commuters to forgo drive alone situations.
11
The new TDM Plan identifies the need of a total of 93 daily commute trip
reductions, at full project completion and activation. Employee and tenant
surveys will provide sufficient feedback on the success and effectiveness of this
program.
Management supports, and understands the importance of an effective TDM
Program, as part of a proven, progressive business environment.
End.
1?
J
EXHIBIT B
]
Accounting of C/CAG Trip Credits
East Jamie Court
Updated - August 7, 2006
rj
EXHIBIT B
Accounting of C/CAG Trip Credits for East Jamie Court 30% TDM Plan
Updated - August 7, 2006
Bicycle Parking -long-Term (Class I) (6)
Bicycle Parking - Short-Term (Class II) (4)
Total Bicycle Storage
Carpool and Vanpool Ridematching Service
Designated Employer Contact - ETC
Direct Route to Transit
Free Parking for Carpool and Vanpools
Guaranteed Ride Horne program
Information Boards / Kiosks
Passenger Loading Zone
Pedestrian Connections
Preferential Carpool Parking (40)
Preferential Vanpool Parking (1)
Promotional Programs
Showers (2)/ Clothes Lockers (16)
Additional Credit for combination with bicycle lockers
Shuttle Program (assumes 9.48% ridership - 38 employees)
Additional Credit for Guaranteed Ride Home program
Transportation Management Association Participation
Annual Em 10 ee Commute Surve
Additional TDM Measures
Bicycle Connections
Flextime
On-site amenities
Additional Credit for combination of any 10 elements
Child-care at/near 'ob site
:g
TDM Plan/Transportation Action Plan
Downtown Dasher - free midday service
10 0.33 3
1 0 0
1 5 5
1 0 0
100% 0 0
10 1 10
1 5 5
1 0 0
1 5 5
40 2 80
1 7 7
1 0 0
2 10 20
1 5 5
38 1 38
38 1 38
1 5 5
1 1.5 1.5
.'11III-
_ ,~"\ -~!j;f '1jL,-,,!~~~. . .0'; _:~""_,_.},,, ",",X'K -,
1 5 5
12 1 12
3 1 3
1 5 5
4 1 4
1
1
10
1
10
1
Bicycle lockers and racks
Showers and changing rooms
Shuttle to transit w / ERH
Transit ticket subsidy ($20/mo)
Preferential parking carpools
Preferential parking vanpools
Vanpool program w / ERH
Emer enc Ride Home ro rams
3
4
13
33
12
3
3
100
0.33 0.99
2 8
2 26
1 33
2 24
7 21
10 30
0.5 50
~f,'r'.."'.."'~
~IflJlf~~Ji,lil
'orl~@~@~G~iff>ti;,;~t@reaitetJ.;
"""....Jt,~'. Ii. ..,., .,... .!!il", '. )'~"", ,''',e,,,.,.... .,.."..'"
1
ATTACHMENTS
)
Employer Shuttle Rider Pass Program
Downtown Dasher - Mid-day Taxi Service
Sample Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program
Employee Transportation Flyer
Carpool Incentive Program Flyer
Rideshare Reward$ Flyer
Vanpool Program Flyer
Try Transit Program Flyer
Guaranteed Ride Home Program
J
- - ------- ----- ---
,.........:..:,.,. -.-::'..-,,<>,:"-,<,::
.,....-... --....,......-.....
,,_:,-./:_,-:::_;'t:.f:
www.com.mute..org.
P,eninsufa Trame'
Conge.sUon aene' Alllance
r r 50 Ba'j1111f Dr'i'..~.SUite 107
PhOI1e. 650-588-8] 10
falCb50-'58B-Bl1 r
Emall: Sl1ul.:mesSlcammute,OIrg
a. Soutn S,an! ~=rancjsco
Em '0 10yer Squtt'e
.~ider ?ass Program
Soon,th'eSO'uth San Francisco Employer ShutUes on the
Oyster Point and Utah-Grand routes will be an
EXCLUSIVE benefitfor participating Employers.
Passes wW be provided, to participating SO'uth San
Frandsco Enlpl:oyers" for distribution to' their employees.
Non-participating company employees can purchase
passes through the Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief
Alliance.
This pass program' will beg'in on April 3" 2006. Passes
win expire at the end of each service period.
For miore informaNon, contact the AWance1s shuttle
departm:ent at 650-5BH.S170 or via emaU at
s hu Ules@comm'ute.,org:.,
i;';,'.:i.:.:: ,...'.':...,....':::_,:.'..'.::,,:,:';_:::;;:,.
.:',,' :." '.-' .'-- ........,.:--.-..,
. ; This FREE.servic~pl .
. ,'. 2 p.m. from your;workplq
. drop-off locations in ,thedow
Bacchanal Restaurant
Cecelia's Restaurant &
Pizzeria
Galli's Sanitary Bakery
Hot Shots Gourmet Coffee
and Tea
Makin' Waves Salon
265 Grand Ave.
113 Grand Ave.
Hors d'euvres and beverages at Happy Hour Prices
10% off one purchased meal
324 Grand Ave.
219 Grand Ave.
341 Baden Ave.
Morning Brew Coffee Co.
Western States Bank
713 Linden Ave., Ste. A
225 Grand Ave.
. , Downtown
. Traffic Congas
, San Francisco
of Commerce.
Th~ program is
the . TrQnsp~rtatio
. . . ~), .- - .', ---.,;:.,,.. -",~
CoJnty Associotio
,~ty, the SaliM
.n6fity andJh~
10% off any purchase
50% off all drinks (up to a $5 value)
10% off retail purchase
Buy one specialty coffee at regular price, and get one
of equal/lesser value FREE
Free Checking - No Monthly Service Charge
LEGEND
~ BACCHANAL RESTAURANT
@ CECElIA'S RESTAURANT & PIZZERIA
@) GALLI'S SANITARY BAKERY
~ HOT SHOTS GOURMET COFFEE AND TEA
(@ MAKIN' WAVES SALON
@) MORNING BREW COFFEE CO.
6Y WESTERN STATES BANK
TAXI DROP-OFFS
t GRAND AVE. & LINDEN AVE.
~ 733 AIRPORT AVE.
Bicyc e and Pedestrian
Safety Program
Attention Bicycle Commuters
Get A Free One Hour Bike And Pedestrian
Safety Workshop At Your Jobsite
This Fun, Energizing Workshop Includes:
. Tips on including Bicycling as a safe, stress relieving
commute mode
. Coverage of Traffic Laws for Bicyclists, Pedestrians,
and Motorists around Bicyclists and Pedestrians
. Basic Bicycle Maintenance Tips
. Free bicycle related Door Prizes
Ask Your Employer To Give Us A Call,
And The ALLIANCE Will Do The Rest!!!
If you would like more information on the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Safety Program, please call The ALLIANCE at 650-588-8170,
visit our website at www.commute.orq , or e-mail us at
ALLIANCE@commute.orq
Rev 2
.
PENINSULA
TRAFFIC
CONGESTION
RELIEF
ALLIANCE
1150 Bayhill Drive
San Bruno, CA
94066
P: 650-588-8170
F: 650-588-8171
Belmont. Brisbane' Burlingame' Colma . Daly City' E. Palo Alto' Foster City' Half Moon Bay'
Millbrae . Pacifica' Redwood City' San Bruno. San Carlos' San Mateo' S. San Francisco
* Sample Employee Transportation Flyer *
East Jamie Court
using alternative transportation is easy!
rI~
~~,.,~
, -
.. '" [~l
:<,~ -~, ',' ,,:..,:-,,;f
r{1.-l~~
( ~--=- .
~r-
[------------------- - -.. -- -
n~~
---- ......- -- - - --- -- --- --
-..-- ----.
Transit services to South San Francisco areas are provided by SamTrans, Caltrain and BART. Visit
www.caltrain.com. www.samtrans.com and www.bart.gov for updated schedule and service information.
The Utah-Grand Area BART shuttle offers 18 daily trips from South San Francisco BART Station near to
East Jamie Court. The Utah Grand Area Caltrain shuttle offers 17 trips per day from the South San Francisco
~altrain Station. SamTrans routes 130, 132, 133, 35 and 36 connect with the Utah-Grand Area BART shuttles
at the South San Francisco Station. For shuttle schedules and maps, log on to commute.org.
~EIT7iE)~
511 is the regional ridesharing service that will help you to find a vanpool or carpool partner. Please call 511
or log on to www.511.org for ridematching services and other alternative transportation options.
,
The Peninsula Traffic Congestion Relief Alliance provides commute incentives such as FREE gas for carpoolers,
FREE trial transit tickets (Caltrain, BART, SamTrans, and others), vanpool rebates, and bike locker subsidies.
For more information, log on to commute.org or call (650) 588-8170.
~~
Regional bicycle route maps are available to bicycle commuters and recreational bicycle users. To view a map,
log on to www.511.org. Access the Bay Trails directly south of the public plaza. Bicycles are allowed on SamTrans
buses and Caltrain. Lockers are available at stations and at the East Jamie Court site.
Employees who work at East Jamie Court and primarily use alternative transportation (transit, vanpool, carpool,
bicycle, or walk) for their monthly commute can obtain a FREE Guaranteed Ride Home (GRH). In the event of
an emergency or illness, the GRH program provides a free taxi or rental car for your return trip home (requires
employer registration). See your company representative for more information.
8/7/06
E. rand
>
11l
~o1) :c
CIl
iij
C>
III c
;;,
C ~* 4
CIl
> J:
<(
~ Haskin Way
iIi
t: SSF "0 between
Gi
Conference <;: Swift &
~ E
:;( Ctr ::i Grand
EAST
JAMIE
COURT
339 Harbor
lm!illr~ ~
UTAH - GRANO AREA BART SHUTTLE
tD
Sister
r Cities
0:
SSF
BART
Station
EAST
JAMIE
COURT
"C
>
iii
~
.8
(ij
::c
~ .
wilt
Q) c
:;;,
c: ~*
C1) 4
>
<(
Haskin Way
between
Swift &
Grand
101
Mitchell Ave
339
Harbor
@511RIDESHARE$
. RewaRD
Guidelines
Eligibility Rules
Participants in 511 Rideshare Rewards
must:
1 Register with the 511 Regional
Rideshare Program ("511 Rideshare")
Ridematch service. New applicants can
register online at 511.org-click Rideshare,
or call 511 and say "Rideshare" for live
assistance.
2 Work within the nine county Bay Area
region (Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin,
Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa
Clara, Solano, or Sonoma counties).
3 Currently be driving alone to work.
Driving alone is defined as operating a
motor vehicle to travel to work with no
other adult passengers. Participants must
not have carpooled to work for more than
three days the past three months prior to
submission of a Rideshare Rewards
application.
4 Submit completed Rideshare Rewards
application by fax to the 511 Rideshare
office before starting to carpool and to
log trips. The fax number is 510-893-2029.
5 Commute to work on at least five or
more days (Monday through Sunday)
during the program.
6 Participate during a consecutive 90-day
period between start of Rideshare
Rewards (May 1, 2006) and program
conclusion (December 29, 2006, or until
funds are depleted, whichever is sooner).
7 Not have received any rideshare
incentives from any other local, regional
or state transportation program in the
past 90 days.
a Not join or form a vanpool, only a
carpool. Commuters in vanpools are
ineligible for Rideshare Rewards.
However, new vanpools can receive up to
$900 in gas cards. Go to 511.org-click
Rideshare for more information. Or call
511 and say "Rideshare:'
9 Not work for the Bay Area Air Quality
Management District, the Metropolitan
Transportation Commission, or 511
Rideshare.
Participation Guidelines
1 The 511 Regional Rideshare Program
has the right to terminate this program
with or without notice at any time for any
reason.
511 Regional Rideshare Program
511 Rideshare Rewards ("Rideshare Rewards") is an incentive program that
rewards commuters who switch from driving alone to carpooling to work. New
carpoolers may earn a gift valued at $10 for every five days carpooled, up to $100
over a 90-day period. A bonus prize will be awarded to one participant, picked in
a drawing at the end of 2006, who carpools 40 days or more during the 90-day
program period.
2 If accepted into the 511 Rideshare
Rewards program, participants may
carpool within the assigned 90-day period
and receive a gift card valued at $10 for
every five days carpooled, up to $100.
3 Transporting children to school or day
care does not qualify for the incentive.
4 All information supplied by the
participant shall be correct, current and
complete. The 511 Regional Rideshare
Program has the right to refuse applica-
tions and/or discontinue participation in
the program, including the right to
withhold the gift card, if we believe that
the participant has failed to meet the
eligibility or participation guidelines. We
reserve the right to contact you, your
carpool partner(s) and your office
supervisor to verify the information
provided.
5 If a dispute arises regarding any aspect
of the program, regarding interpretation
of the rules, accuracy of the information,
or eligibility to participate, the 511
Regional Rideshare Program will be the
final decision maker regarding such a
dispute and all decisions will be final.
Implementation Steps
1 Register with the 511 Regional
Rideshare Program to find names of other
potential carpoolers. If you are not
registered, go to the Rideshare page of
511.org, or call 511 and say "Rideshare" to
sign up.
2 Download the 511 Rideshare Rewards
application online at 511.org-click
Rideshare Rewards, or call 511 and say
"Rideshare" to request a form.
3 Fax the completed and signed
application to 510-893-2029.
4 On the application, indicate a preferred
90-day participation period. 511 Rideshare
will assign a start and end date, based on
the time applications were received, and
will try to accommodate participants'
preferred start dates.
5 Participants will receive an e-mail or
fax notifying acceptance of the applica-
tion. The notification will specify the
participant's start and end dates within an
assigned 90-day period.
6 If the acceptance notification is not
received within one week, please call 511
and say "Rideshare" to inquire about the
status of your application. It is the
applicant's responsibility to ensure that
511 Rideshare receives your application.
7 Upon acceptance into the program by
e-mail or fax, download the monthly
Commute Log online at 511.org-click
Rideshare Rewards, or call 511 and say
"Rideshare" to request a log.
a Complete the Commute Log indicating
your mode of travel on a daily basis for
commuting to work. Sign the Commute
Log and have your carpool partner(s) sign
the log and fax it to 510-893-2029.
Participants who switch carpool partners
after submitting an application must
update their carpooler(s) information by
completing and faxing a revised applica-
tion before submitting the Commute Log.
9 Commute Logs need to be completed
and submitted three times during the
90-day program period, at the end of each
30- day period. The Commute Log must
be faxed within five days after the end of
each 30-day period.
10 The reward will be mailed to
participant within four weeks after the
end of the ninety-day period and after
verification of information. Participants
may select either a gas or Safeway gift
card to be mailed to the participant's work
or home address. Participants will need
to designate which gift card they prefer
on their application form. The gift value
will be in $10 increments.
11 Contest. 511 Rideshare will award a
total of one (1) bonus prize of $1,000 in
gas or Safeway gift cards at the end of the
Rideshare Rewards program. 511
Rideshare will hold a drawing among the
participants that carpooled 40 or more
days during their 90-day program period.
The contest winner will be an individual
carpool member in a verifiable carpool.
Contest winner is not defined as the
entire carpool or any group of, or all
carpool members, in a verifiable carpool.
By accepting the prize, contest winner
grants 511 Rideshare the right to use
his/her name, photograph and likeness
for public relations purposes. The bonus
prize will be awarded after October 31,
2006 and before January 31, 2007.
51' RIDESHARE is funded by grants from the Federal
Highway Administration, U.S. Department of
Transportation, the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission, the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District and county congestion management agencies.
@511RIDESHARE$
l Rewa ~D
Application
I UNDERSTAND AND AGREETO
THE FOLLOWING STATEMENTS:
I have provided a verifiable and
accurate work and home mailing
address and understand that all
materials, including the rewards
("incentives") will be sent to my
preferred mailing address. I acknowl-
edge that I have read and understand
the 511 Rideshare Rewards Guidelines
and certify that I am eligible to partici-
pate and receive the incentives
provided by the 511 Regional Rideshare
Program and that I am not an employee
of the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District, the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission, or 511 Rideshare.
I understand that it is a condition of my
participation that all information I
supply will be correct, current, and
complete. I understand that the 511
Regional Rideshare Program has the
right to refuse my participation in this
program and the right to withhold
incentives if the 511 Rideshare Rewards
program believes I have failed to meet
this obligation.
I understand that the incentives offered
through this program are provided to
applicants first come, first served, and
that the 511 Rideshare Rewards
program has the right to terminate this
program at any time without notice.
I understand that if a dispute arises
regarding any aspect of the 511
Rideshare Rewards program, including,
but not limited to, the interpretation of
the Guidelines, or eligibility to partici-
pate, 511 Rideshare shall be the final
decision maker regarding such disputes.
Any decision by 511 Rideshare shall be
final and binding on my status as a
participant in the program.
I understand that any incentives I
receive from the 511 Rideshare Rewards
program are subject to federal and state
taxes and that any tax liability that may
result is solely my responsibility.
(CONTINUED)
Solo drivers who start carpooling
can earn up to $100!
Applicant Information
(please press firmly and use black ink)
FIRST NAME
LAST NAME
MIDDLE INITIAL
HOME ADDRESS (PO boxes not sccepted)
CITY
STATE
ZIP COUNTY
DRIVERS LICENSE
HOME PHONE
WORK PHONE
EMAIL"
*at least one of these two fields is required
FAX NUMBER"
My preferred 90-day participation period is from
(dates)
to
Optional: Gender (circle one):
Male
Female
Optional: Age (circle one): Under 18 18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55+
How did you hear about the 511 Rideshare Rewards Program (circle one):
Radio TV Print
Web/Email
Co-worker Mail Employer
Event
511 Phone
Your Work Mailing Address
(please provide a complete and accurate mailing address and contact information)
EMPLOYER
ADDRESS
SUITE/DE PT
CITY
STATE
ZIP
COUNTY
WORK PHONE
WORK FAX
OFFICE SUPERVISOR NAME" (for verificstion purposes)
WORK PHONE
Your Preferred Gift
{note first and second choices}
Gas Card
Safeway Card
APPLICANT SIGNATURE (required)
DATE
APPLICANT NAME (printed)
Fax completed 511 Rideshare Rewards Application to 510-893-2029
'i 11.org - Rideshare
8/11/06 12:38 PM
!i~11
\ '
.
511 RideMatch Service
Commute Rewards
Carpooling
Vanpooling
Downloads
Carpool Lanes and Lots
Employers
Real Stories
Commute Calculator
En Espaflol
Skip Navigation
What is "skiD navioation"?
SEARCH RIDESHARE:
m2J
About 511 Rideshare
Newsroom
Suooestions I Tell a Friend Rideshare
Site Directory
Brought to you by MTC and ~
Area TransDortation Partners
Privacv I Accessibility
http://rideshare.511.org/vanpooling/guidelines.asp
VANPOOLING
In this section:
About I Start a VanDoo) I RideMatch Service J Drivers I Rewards I Seats Available I FAOs
Van pool Start Incentive
(( back
Eligibility Requirements:
A van pool is eligible for the incentive when all the following conditions are met
1. A new primary driver or new driver/coordinator registers with the 511 Regional
Rideshare Program and forms a new vanpool*, AND
2. The van stays on the road with at least seven passengers for three to nine
consecutive months, AND
3. The van pool has an origin or destination within the 511 Regional Rideshare
Program service areat, AND
4. The coordinator or driver has provided a complete fist of passengers and
current day-time contact information for months one, three, six and nine, AND
5. The new van has no more than 40 percent participants from a previous van
operating in the last 180 days and the previous van must still be on the road,
AND
6. The van meets all of the eligibility requirements.
Reaister online to become a vanpool driver or contact a 511 Regional Rideshare
Program Vanpool Consultant by calling 511, say Rideshare.
* Only employers and/or individuals who have financial responsibility for the van and
who register and form a van pool with the 511 Regional Rideshare Program after April
1, 2004, are eligible. Definition of a new van pool is any van with seven to 15
passengers that meets all of the following criteria: (1) new coordinator/primary driver
in the 511 Regional Rideshare Program's database who has not been in an active
vanpooJ for the last six months, (2) new route (city to city), (3) new vehicle on the
road. Upon van formation, all drivers/coordinators must submit an Eligibility
Requirements Form, which is a vanpool passenger list, for months one, three, six
and nine as proof of campaign eligibility. Random calls will be made following the
submission of each of the four passenger lists to van pool participants for
verification that at least seven passengers are present in the van pool. $300 to $900
in gas cards will be awarded on a first-come, first-served basis, until all funds are
exhausted to vans that meet all eligibility requirements. Qualified recipients of the
gas card incentive will be notified by phone within thirty (30) days after completion
of the third, sixth and ninth months. The 511 Regional Rideshare Program reserves
the right to make the final determination of eligibility on a case-by-case basis. The
incentive is designed to foster new vans rather than rearranging the current fleet.
Exceptions may be made for vans that are clearly new (e.g., a former coordinator
from the East Bay moves to the South Bay, etc). Any discrepancies in information
gathered during verification calls may disqualify the van. If conflicting information is
provided, preference will be given to information that disqualifies the van.
t 511 Regional Rideshare Program service area - Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin,
Napa, San Francisco, San Mateo, Santa Clara, Solano and Sonoma counties
'::ommute.org - About Us - Free Transit Ticket Survey
8111/06 12:38 PM
I QuickLinks
l~
Alliance
Proarams
FREE Transit
Tickets
Get an Emeraencv
Ride Home
Rebates for new
vanDoo! DartlciDants
CarDool Incentive
Proaram
Bike Parklna at
Half Cost
veloD A
.ultre Proaram
The Bike and
Pedestrian
Safety Proaram
.I
: 'ee ~ 'ans 'I 7ic(e~ ~'str' J Jf 01 ? 'og 'a '1
Tired and frustrated with driving alone on your long commute to work every day?
Interested in public transportation options, but never taken the time to try it?
If you're over 18, live or work in San Mateo County and have not used public transportation to
commute to work, you could be eligible for a free ticket on BART,
SamTrans, Caltrain, VTA, Dumbarton Express or M Line. Just complete the questionaire below and we'll mail you a free
ticket from the transit agency of your choice.
Despite what you might think, public transit is very convenient. When you try
public transportation you can:
. Save hundreds of dollars a year in auto expenses (gas, insurance, maintenance, tolls, etc.)
Work or relax during your commute and reduce the amount of stress you feel
· Use the new found time you have to read, talk with friends, or get ahead at work
.
. Get to work and get home on time regardless of the weather, traffic accidents, breakdowns, etc.
. Help reduce environmental pollution and overcrowded roads
. Use pre-tax dollars to pay for your public transportation expenses
Be one of the first to complete the questionnaire below and we'll mail you free transit tickets
from the transit agency of your choice as mentioned below. Please note that this offer is for one ticket request, per
person, one time only.
Try Transit Free Tickets Order Form (All fields are required)
First Name:
Last Name:
Home Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
Phone number:
Email Address:
Employer Name:
Employer Address:
City:
State:
Zip:
h tip: Ilwww.commute,org/programsJree_tran_ticket,asp
EMERGENCY RIDE HOME
PROGRAM
Are you ready to improve recruitment and retention rates, reduce
parking congestion, and attract employees from a wider area, while
providing a subsidized, low cost benefit to your employees?
Do it all with the Alliance's
Emergency Ride Home Program
Most employees choose to drive their own personal vehicle to work
because they don't want to be stranded at work should an
emergency arise. With the Emergency Ride Home program,
employees are given the assurance that, in the case of an
emergency, they will be provided with a free taxi ride or a 24-hour
car rental.
A
We pay 750/0 of the ride!
The participating employer pays the remaining 25%. Historically,
program costs remain very low because emergencies are
infrequent. The Alliance can help you design easy administration
policies that prevent program abuse.
Employer cost of one Emergency Ride Home: average $12
Trusting your employer will be there for you in an emergency:
Priceless
PENINSULA
TRAFFIC
CONGESTION
RELIEF
ALLIANCE
The Alliance does all the work.
If you have any questions or are unsure if your company
could benefit from this or other no to low cost commute
programs, contact us at 650-588-8170 or via email at
alliance@commute.org.
1150 Bayhill Drive
Suite 107,
San Bruno,CA
94066
P: 650-588-8170
F: 650-588-8171
o
...
EB
'\
~~I'
u
~!,'n
~~~"
:"00-,,:1
~
~~
j Yql:1
:-tl"g]
z
<C
...J
0-
W
C)
<C
z
-
<C
~
c
~
C)
:z
-
c
<C
~
C)
~
<C
:z
-
~
-
...J
W
~
0-
~"ifo;:
~<,I'_C"
('~ f[~. ~
~ It... I
.-
\<
l{~_
~,
,
:;;.
'f'.
~
<, \
lo';';
~iri (1:71
~/'" ,~:-(
]:~~2
. .~
s:'
1'"4' '?
OJ ,"'0
< ~~
<r,( .....
I
\ .
-)(
",1 ~ ~~
' '~~t",?
t~~ ~J ~~O 0, 0
\~
';,.
o 0
~I~ ;1:.)>
;;;:~ <D~7'~'
I L
'~i
'~
P'I
y
0.>'-....:.....
~cj.\...J ....&
.',
1
o
l
'~I~'V
I ~ 1:9~
o
CO
J
11
u u~
...........-=
---'" .:0
=:3..=.
=
==-'
1
1=
~-
.,. "\
.E
If:
T~'
, ~
I
i
\-
.
,;
,,'
.\,.,
k,l
';!; .',
~, f
"J
~J
U
f
~-
f:l
~.-",. 'f,
. - -
, .
-
.--
,
-
::J
80) I
. "}'
-- .,f....
E~ ;,i
co if;) ~..
~~
cor;
w
I
\
I
\
(
)
\
! ~
u
z
\ g
z
f
f
I ~ i II
f ~ , i!
I ~ fuhi
! ! IlilJi i
! ! hit!! h
I I [!hh I' I
i Iii tIJI"" i. t 1
I ih la: it :1 III
~ I · lfllli P, P
~ i! :flflll~l I f I, i~Jlllf
:s ! r rUHf JIIIIII' J~ti"l.
I ~ ftJ!~ij,J. iii!IIJil!J~IJ}I:J
~ w
~ .~~"~Hj "~ ~<i,,!l.
~ J ~fl~~~~IJ ~:~~=21 ~~~~l!J~~!
e
I
i
~ llld III
~~~;~ ilt~
_ _HHi Hi
! I
j ~! f
! ~i ;/
R ~HU~~U~ ~~ J ~i ~ .I~;
- - - - - - J It I B ei !
~d' d~ i
JIll t ~I ~ i - ~~! ,
~ ldllllh! II h 11,IIllII
- - I~ Ihiq~1 I
1 J ~ ;. ih il. A
J j J.lJII )1 j! t I: i~H!in
I J _ J 'II. 112 II · i I dig I r!~ h
I p I i H ! J ~ I il ~ i' d $~
_! j HUH I _ J L 1.1 i L i ig 1;1 ; ill ~I
~~~~!~bh~~ ~Sa ~ ~ ~X~.dtUii
JJu,U,u'UU..iH ! ~ 1 i i~".".U L
... "... ... .
I I I I r I , r,-r,-,-,..r-l-,-r'---'-l-rl-r-l-'--' I-I , rrrr-,
l
e e e a ..
HH t g
) ~;:::::::::::: ____ _;__________ j! ~jl
..~~~=~=:~:=:~ ~I~!!~~=~~!~~~~~ u!
----- -------------
\ j J II
I I flit
I11I II JR II) 1.1 !JJI 1! i If I
\ JJ!fJuuIIL J~JhJllJldlnL t I Iii
f? . 1] 1;.1
~ .J ~ I I . ,_ J!
: flU 'pH j J ul} 11 - i ~li
'Ill L hll.l L lllllli ill.lllllL · I Ii!
I J!;iPMI~I!b!~I~ ~dll~Hllll~ltU~H ~I! -I tJ
i I "HliJilHliJli - J ~ B ulID3H Hflu _ ~L :.i : II
I-
Ir
:::>
, 0
o
w
~
I-
~
~
~~ n
I~ n
~
AVMSNI)lSVH
';;y
i
I ~
I, I Iii
I ~! !. I! .;; ;
1_ _ _ : _ ~ _ _ _ _ ~ _ ~ _'~ _ J _ _1_:: _ _ _ : _ _ _ : _ : _:
~ ~~!~~,~,~~~,,~~g~~ """"~"dd~d"dddddd
"",'.Jl'~"'klll"'" ~:~:.:::.:~~:~:=~
, I
i IIll) 1,]1 il! I 11)1 J )1 ~l, J
~_ IJI~jiJlfIIJJI!ijj_ lIIJ!il!IIIJJiJ~"
I-
~J I! l J 1
~fJ ~I IJ Jl~J 11.)1
~ ~ Illl Iltllllill I ,11'1 JJ~tll jji
~_ 1111.JJI_ijj,lliJl_ illllllll.II..JII
w ---
a:: 1m ~~,~ E B ql! H ~ ~ U d 3 I h I i. ' ~. ~ !. ~,U;I~,~,M,
'~E'~'LI~""''QI""m,l.l''Lt.lo
Q;9 ~
-()-
<> ]i
'"
<> U
...
<>
N ............ -=
--'
0 ::::3C-:>
==
EB ==
r -
~_;l
z
<(
~
a..
w
a..
<(
u
en
c
z
<(
~
~
<(
Z
-
:E
-
..J
W
c:::
a..
, ;
: "':~fi
;1 ~
.1
~r
I
~
IiI.'"
t
'4".,.1
I '
" '
,
t :;
j
I -
:1
, .
-~
, ....... ,
~.,"..,.,
I
Q): ~~,/
OE .t
~,',n,
.;.~
CU.. ,,,.
~I~'
CU-
w
r
i
,
;
L
1
"
F;
,
~
I'
-
~
<(
...,
.... .,
en
<(
LU
~~~
"
:,>~
:,.
- ~-'
- .. LL,~
_~M ~NI)lS~H,.
~
6
~
~]
i,+
;~
"
~~~~~.
_...~>~ ,~:~"'.l'.-,~.. .<t\.,' -.;..'
,:OJ
:l
" ..- :<,<
.-;.~
"di
;1,.-
,
.;,
~
o
l')
~
<c
c
C>
z
-
C
...J
-
::::)
OJ
r:::-
C>
-(.9
~a.
M~
~_a.:
..........0
(01010
~~~
oolIlN
W-O
o::N"7
()-IIO
<(We;
(),
MO::Z
.............a.
(00:<(
it:
<i. w
W a:l
0::: ::::iii:
<C ~
~ ul
o
~ D::
o ~
g:iLen
-I<C~
....::::iii:O
il:-Ien
-wen
OOW
~o:::en
0:::"" en
a..il:<c
LLLLLLLL LLLLLLLL
00000000 00000000
(.9(.9(.9(.9 (.9(.9(.9(.9 .....
0000 0000 ~
0000 010100
....00.... CON..N~ II
a5o;o;cO -10 -10 LL
NNNCO ~N~"" en
C")
('II
-1-1 C) -1-1 C) Q
Ww Z Ww ,.:
>>-1- >>-I~ CD
WWWC WWWC ('II
-1-1>= -1-1>....1 LL
ClClW::J ClClWS
ZZ-llXl ZZ-IlXI en
=:lOClI- =:lOClI- Q
Q
o() 0:: en O()Q:;en Q
O::W:cW O::WI<C N
(.9001-3: (.9OOI-W CD
....I ....I .....
~ ~ II
D::
0 0 ~
l- I-
o
8
-
W
I-
-
en
o
...
~~
it,
~
.......... -'X
3-"
='-"'-
==
-
-
I. =
~~.
j:'
"',
,',.r..
;'",
. "
;,
~ !~
I,
I
~
1.1 :'
,I
z
<C
-I
n.
W
I-
-
en
t.i
>,-
~\
f J'
if
} ~,
~'lhJ
'.,"",.
.
1
!_l"
.........
.
S.
o
~:I
. E I ;..~.~~
CO" ,~
J '
~I';
r;:,'!:.
.....,
I r
I f
I ,
i ,
l ,
Ii
II
,
~
,
....
a::
::>>
0-
U
w
-
~
<(
..,
....
V)
~
w
/1' I
......L.......
,
"
~ -.....
\
I
~
'1=
t;:,
.,
I }lL,,~)
r .
I J.o" - '-"""'....
j
~
..~
~
/
'~ [f=
~
..I .'
/
J
~
r--
t---
~'.
oJ
}
1==
t
...
~
,)..
)..
.~
...:.-. .
iit{l'
r
~
..
r.<
~~
..~..~-
.........
~5' ~
,.:'
1-
..,.,
la
~~"il'
@l
Ii'1
~
8
------....,
~
,.If I I ,. i I -
-
oj'
'"
~ ~ I
r:.. 1
, I
'.. I
""'"
:i
u
w
::>
~, '
~
<;>-
z
~
o
o
Q.
::l;
<(
<r
~8~ ~
r. ~ '/
~ ;
r d"
~ .-".
-I-
i
!
I ~h ,_l~
~ ~,>:j
-
~ ~Jo __ ~ _ _\
, 9-- -
/" '\oF \
f
,
\-
"
t.-
\
, .
f' \ '
~ \ \
~~\ \ :
\[ \
~'(u\. ,,~.,-~'~
\ -, .. \ <")
\, <J: ._ \--
t r'''''"""--
1 <( 'I I
\;i
r ~.
\ )7\' \
'..,-
"
l
Q. c I
:::>
Q. ~
:IE :IE
~ <r !
u ,
w I ~
...J
w II
tl
.,~
, ~
:!o,...\,....:_lo,.. :
l
i
!
i r
L _'
.
I
!
Q.
:::>
Q.
~
[- - ("
I
1
,!,. .,
~-
p
\'
.:.-
,- 'V7 . '\ ~ ("
, -go
r I
c~ \
fo ~
'c
~ - 10 'I
~ \
L , \ ~ - - \
\ 'J \ - f
~
.,
r
'...........-
L
f
'r--
L
.L-
I-
L
~ L-
1
--....I \""'"-
"'"' I--
"--
~
1
l-...
...-
~
l-
\;--
~
L
L
~ ~
,/
lI---
f
z I J
Q. ~
:::> I" 0
c 0
Q. .~ ) Q. t I
::l'
~ :IE , I
~ t
I 1
m%i. I \
- " 0 ,
. -[ I \
~ ~ I G
,
I .
I .
0
~ ..l,..
......1
r.c: ]:
,
I
.c: L \
" J \
( \
) II
L' 1 \
~~ II \
- ,I~
I
- - 'II ~
l(
L~, .:..-
I
l~ )''1
., 1 J
~
J
"-
,.
~
T "' -.;; y~' "''' ""
:i
u
w
:IE
.> ~
. ~,~ ~ IIA ....
_ ~ _~~. _ ) r ~
-~. . I
~ '\ LJ-J 1 J..l }J~d t'l.J 1 J ,1
I.
.~
,
,I I I . I
CJ
I l
r
~1
1
~ ...
IJ
\
I
-l:.
..
..
~
\
I
J
11111111111111111 .t.~
o
.- '
~
;;..
~
,"
~
~
,
\
t
t
r
,
I
,
.
l\
~ \
l' t
I 'I "\ J
1\ f
\:' ./
,
\!
(:)
N
(:)
(:)
EB
I
I
z
<C
...J
c..
....J
W
>
W
....J
(!)
z
52
0:::
~
(:)
'"
ui
...........=
---'
::::;3t:.....:>
==
===
Ii
u,
-
I
1-
~~.
i'!~
'r:,.
~.~ i~ '
f "' ~
. I~
fSt
-I f
. ,
. ,
I l'
'J
"
~
~ '!?
~"o"
.; ~ ~ .
1:; :,'
If
iI
.~
",i
\~. 'f'
-;>>,- . .
It
r ,I" :
I" .
,
..~~lt( "
", f)j~~
+-'
~-
:J
o .
0' '::
;.
... ' -r."
,))
(]). ".'
.~I ~.
...., 101,',.
+-' ~~
en
CO-
W
II:!
r:;:
8. "oI!l
:'.~J
1--
,;,
l-
I
r
1
1- _
:}
r
I-
I I
I
I
I'
~
ill'
,~
L.,.~
@ J
It:,
--;- ~""1'~,
"-'-'- >4-
>l
r -""',,,---'
... ~;"
~
II'"' :;l<.,g- ......
.#J...._
E
, ,/Ii
~ ~t-
'I:' -
.... :
~
-<l-
v,
>
f" -J.
~
~ '-
0.-
~
t,-
!!'-=-
1,.- l-I~'
~~
~<.:
~+,
"",
~~~
..,. - + - --r:T -
,_ -, , --~ z~
--J \.--..', - ~
:f::--J: .. . L~ ~~
" ~ L ~o-,~ r
~o-,S
""
'T
I
oj
o
o
(V)
N
+
II
u..u..u..
cncncn
000
.0~Lt).
CO ,N
'Lt) ,
~N~ >
II II II ::1
. Cl::: Cl::: Cl:::' W
000 fr:
000 0
............... 0
u.. u.. u.. .
--.J
-"'0"'0 LL
tnC'" I-
~NM (/)
fr:
LL
I
- ~ I,
~.~---~' ;:
i71. - -----,
\/'.
'V
~
-
\
\
}
'l'
.!:..
'JI"
4-"-
I
"'lI
L
J
-~.
I
.
...
:'
J j..
11 L J ~J
{
.or... .--
...
\
o
o
. u.. u.. u... (V)
cncncn N
0000 +
o 0
,,00 II
. '0:0:'
~NN >
II II II ::1
Cl::: Cl::: Cl::: W
. 000' fr:
000 0
..... ..... ..... 0
u..u..u..
--.J
.-"'0"'0. LL
tnc",
~NM ~
fr:
LL
t~
I
,.j
.~
.j
.
.
\
,
L - - ~~
-
- i!
-,
'"'::'. ,l
I
.: =
t
~t
.
I
II
it
i~-
I
I,
I
I
~'
~
r
,
I
)
r
l
~
, /
, I
,i"
~ 1
q L
:1.
~
,
.
l'
.,
,
\,
'I
.
o
('oj
o
~\,
o
J
8
\
~
~ I
\ \
I
\ ,
\ \
\
~\
t,
I'.
II'
r
, I
.
t
I
, · i
, I
, I
\
I
\,
4
.
.
"
\ '
~ --,
\ 4 \_ _
. __ M_
.
1~
/)
~"
~;;.o
I
.1
I,
l
.0
l
II
i =-
a. -
~'
I
t -
~.::. .i
II
z
<(
...J
a..
0:::
o
o
...J
LL
e
z
=:J
o
0:::
C)
.'
I
,
\
\
\
\
~' I,...",-'.'~ ,:- 0-)0, W.
I J' <( J
.. 0 ~
, r~---~L
\1
/
"
T
I \
,
,
,
I
r
I
!i"'''
..
.
o
'<t
ll~"
"=
L "c:..:::l
U~
..........=
---'
==:3"--"
==
==
I
1-
~ ,;'
h.l\
'-l,t
.W
,> \;,
.~_ _.t.
. I,,;
~t~
-I \
~
. .
41 ~....
I
~
.~~
1:1 :
;,
!
'C,' It
" I
f'
"i,
I"V.',
f
,I
if
1/.
4\A, ,
-+-'
~.
:J
8 ',..,
...
Q)" . ,;'"
.-. ~'f
S 1I,'.'\'it
\.\1 .'-".
...., ~-'
~~;
..~~
~
i
Vl
Z
o
~
>
W
-I
W
~
:J
o
U
w
L
<(
---.
~
Vl
<(
W
Vl
Z
o
~
~
-I
W
w
Q
Vl
~
d:l
0
..,.
0
N
0
;"
0
en
z
o
-
~
::>
w
..J
W
u ~~
........... ""'=
--'
:::3~
==
==
[~
~
~~t~'i.' '
, -.',
r ~"'.", ".,'
~..' ,( '.. ~; .-
>.,~
~.~ ~~'" "
.: ~"" t~ .'./;
""-'" ~
'1,"'<
I~
i'f
RJ ;.'.,'
I;,
I
i
1:1 .,.'
ii' ,
II~
f
fi t
~.4,.
;'
,
i
:~
~ i'
..--
~
::J
8 ~~,
.~: I:~:"
E t""
I~:
cu"r
-, ,!
~f ~ll
(3
I
..-..;. II-
-l
, ,
'."' ~
\
i: ");
..' :J 'I.:>
.f~ ~
. . W
,;
" iF' ~Jtlll ~
,'~ tl ~
,~~~" 0
li~'.t U
&~,",kl,.E'. ~
J.~',~ 'fJ-'ti
li,.:/j'*' <(
J." J,t." r ---,
~r~; ~
(/)
<(
W
, 1
- J-
.....--1 ~~ 1
J -
.. ... '.
" '
rt~'.~~:
I
[7L
, .\
ill.......
.,~""""""':t;.;.<
. I
... ,
! .
- ~
1:
-zr - ,. ~J- ~
\
I ~
l -
r'I
~
I
~]~~
........=
I; ~=
I -
DRn"
RESOlUTion TO
IE DISTRIIUTED
nEXT IUEEK.
ADDENDUM
EAST JAMIE COURT OFFICE R&D PROJECT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Adopted by the City of South San Francisco Planning Commission
November 21, 2002
November 2006
Table of Contents
I. Background 1
Project Location and Context............................................................................... 2
Project Description............................................................................................... 2
II. Environmental Checklist..................... .... .................... ................ ........... .......... .... II
1. Aesthetics................................................................................................. 12
2. Agricultural Resources............................................................................. 13
3. Air Quality............................................................................................. ..13
4. Biological Resources............................................................................... .16
5. Cultural Resources................................................................................. ..18
6. Geology and Soils................................................................................... .19
7. Hazards................................................................................................... .21
8. Hydrology............................................................................................... .23
9. Land Use................................................................................................. .25
I o. Mineral Resources ................................................................................. ..26
II. Noise....................................................................................................... .26
12. Population and Housing.......................................................................... .28
13. Public Services ....... ................. ......... ............. ......................... ..................29
14. Recreation............................................................................................... .30
15. Traffic and Transportation .......................................................................3 I
16. Utilities and Service Systems......................... ..........................................33
17. Mandatory Findings of Significance...................................................... ..34
III. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected........................................................3 5
IV. Determination..................................................................................................... .32
Initial Study Preparer .......................................................................................................3 7
Agencies and Organizations Consulted...........................................................................3 7
References.................................................................................................................... ....37
SUPPLEMENTAL INITIAL STUDY
CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO
AUTHORITY
Pursuant to Section 15064 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, the City of
South San Francisco CA has prepared the following Initial Study of potential impacts of the
proposed 29,000 East Jamie Court development project (2006 Project).
The following Initial Study evaluates the potential 2006 Project impacts over those evaluated in
the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for and adopted by the City of South
San Francisco on November 21, 2002 (2002 IS/MND) (SCH#2002092042). The project analyzed
in the 2002 IS/MND is the construction of a two-building, two-and three-story complex for use
as Office and Research and Development (Office/R&D), as well as associated site preparation,
grading, trenching, building construction and construction of a segment of the Bay Trail. The
2002 IS/MND evaluated potential off- and-on site impacts and identified required mitigation
measures. The IS/MND was prepared, circulated for public review and adopted pursuant to state
CEQA law. Although not required by law, the City also prepared a "Response to Comments
Document" in 2002. A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) was also
adopted for the 2002 Project (Planning Commission Action UP-02-0042 and MND-02-0042).
Environmental Background-Documents Incorporated Herein by Reference
. The 2002 IS/MND and MMRP (SCH#2002092042).
. Intersection Analysis - Crane Transportation Group (November 2006)
. Genentech Master Plan EIR - EIP (2006) [SCH No. 2005072165]
. South San Francisco General Plan and Environmental Impact Report (SCH#97122030),
Certified October, 1999.
. East of 101 Area Plan.
1. Project Title:
East Jamie Court Project
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
Planning Division,
Economic & Community Development Department
City of South San Francisco
315 Maple Avenue
South San Francisco CA 94083
3. Contact Person & Phone Number:
Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner
(650) 877 8535
4. Project Location:
Southeast corner ofE. Jamie Ct. and Haskins Way
APN 015-102-250; Parcel 2
5. Existing Land Use:
Approved and under construction on the site is a
133,000 square foot building in two structures for
Office and Research and Development
6. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.
Pasadena CA
7. General Plan designation:
Mixed Industrial/Coastal Commercial
8. Zoning District:
P-I, Planned Industrial
9. Description of Project:
Construction of a 29,000 square foot third-story
addition on the approved two-story portion of the
Office/R&D complex on a 6.13-acre parcel adjacent
to San Francisco Bay. The total floor space would
be 162,000 gross square feet. A Use Permit
Modification is required in order to construct the
proposed 29,000 square foot addition.
10. Floor Area Ratio:
0.61 (the ratio of proposed building floor space to
site acreage).
11. Parking Provided:
An addition of 84 parking spaces to the approved
2002 Project parking for a total of 459 surface and
subsurface parking is proposed at a ratio of2.83
spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area.
12. Lot Coverage Proposed:
20.3 percent (the building footprint would
encompass 20.3 percent of the parcel)
13. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
The project site is located approximately one (1)
mile east of Highway I 0 I on the southeast corner of
Haskins Way and East Jamie Court. The site is
bordered on the south by San Francisco Bay, on the
east by the South San Francisco Scavenger
Company Material Recovery Facility and Transfer
Station, on the north side of East Jamie Court by a
trucking company terminal and on the west side of
Haskins Way by multi-tenant industrial businesses.
Page 2
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
14. Other Public Agency Approvals
Required:
None.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
Page 3
III. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by the 29,000 square
foot 2006 Project.
Aesthetics
Agricultural
Resources
Cultural Resources
Air Quality
Geology/Soils
Biological Resources
Hazards and
Hazardous Materials
Hydrology /W ater
Quality
Land Use/ Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population/Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Transportation/
Circulation
Utilities/Service
Systems
Mandatory Findings
of Significance
IV. DETERMINATION
On the basis ofthis initial evaluation:
I find that the Proposed Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared
I find that the Proposed Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MA Y have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required,
but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or NEGA TIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and
(b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjecUSupplemental Initial Study
Page 4
X I find that the proposed project impacts are equal to or less than the impacts and
mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study and Mitigation Negative Declaration
certified by the South San Francisco City Council on November 21, 2002 SEIR and that
an Addendum to the existing Mitigated Negative Declaration shall be prepared. This
finding is based upon the requirements of Section 15164, California Code of Regulations,
Title 14, Chapter 3 wherein an Addendum may be prepared if some changes or additions
are necessary to a previously certified Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and none
of the conditions identified in Section 15162 have occurred. I find that pursuant to
Section 15161 there are no:
(I) Substantial changes in the project that will require major revisions to the previous
MND due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
(2) Substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project will be
undertaken which will require major revisions to the previous MND due to new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
identified significant effects.
And that there is no:
(3) New information of substantial importance that has become available and was not
known at the time of the previous MND that would result in one or more significant
effects not identified previously, significant effects that would be substantially more
severe than identified in the previous EIR, mitigation measures or alternatives
previously found not feasible or considerably different from ones identified before
and would substantially reduce the effects of the project are declined by the project
applicant.
~
~WKalk'
Chief Planner
A/n'. '7 2oD~
Da~
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 5
Project Location and Context
The project site consists of 6.13 acres of land in the East of 10 I portion of South San Francisco,
located on the southeast comer of East Jamie Court and Haskins Way. The site is generally flat
but has a distinct slope to the south, towards San Francisco Bay. The site is under construction
for the 133,000 square foot Office/R&D complex that was approved in 2002.
Surrounding land uses include a truck terminal to the north, the South San Francisco Scavenger
Company Materials Recovery Facility and Transfer Station to the east, San Francisco Bay to the
south and a mix of multi-tenant industrial uses to the west.
Exhibit 1 shows the project site location.
Project Background and Description
An Initial Study was prepared for a two building two-and three-story 133,000 square foot
complex to be used for Office/R&D on East Jamie Court. The Initial Study resulted in the City
of South San Francisco adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program on November 21, 2002. This 2006 Initial Study evaluates the impacts of
constructing an additional 29,000 square feet to the approved two-story building for a total of
162,000 square feet on the site.
Comparison of the Approved 2002 Project and the proposed 2006 Project:
· Development intensity would increase from 133,000 to 162,000 gross square feet. This
would be an increase of 29,000 gross square feet over the 2002 Project. The Floor Area
Ratio would increase from 0.50 to 0.61.
· The maximum height of the buildings would be the same as previously approved at 89
feet from finished grade to the top of the building screen on the roof for Building 2, the
taller of the two approved buildings.
· On site parking would be increased from 375 spaces to approximately 459 spaces by
expanding the subterranean parking area to extend beneath both buildings instead of just
one of the buildings. The parking ratio would remain 2.8 spaces per I ,000 square feet of
building area.
· Exterior building colors, materials, landscaping and overall design would not
significantly change from the 2002 Project approval.
· The extension of the Bay Trail through the southerly portion of the project site would be
constructed as approved in 2002.
· Proposed uses within the buildings would be the same as approved in 2002.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 6
EXHIBIT 1
II. Environmental Checklist
I) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should
be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards factors
(e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific
screening analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-
site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less-than-
significant with mitigation, or less-than-significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one
or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less-Than-Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant
Impact" to a "Less- Than-Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less-than-significant level
(mitigation measures from Section 17, "Earlier Analysis," as described in (5) below, may be
cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063 (c) (3) (D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above cha:klist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures
based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less- Than-Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific
conditions for the project.
6) Lead Agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 8
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to
the page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead
agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each agency should identify: (a) the significance criteria or threshold, if
any, used to evaluate each question; and (b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to
reduce the impact to a less than significant level.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 9
III. ENVIRONMENTAL TOPICS
The following Environmental Checklist form is used to describe the impacts of the proposed
project, as detailed in the Project Description. Potential environmental impacts are described as
follows:
Potentially Significant Impact: An environmental impact that could be significant
and for which no feasible mitigation is known. If any potentially significant impacts
are identified in this Checklist, an Environmental Impact report (EIR) must be
prepared.
Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated: An environmental impact that requires
the incorporation of mitigation measures to reduce that impact to a less-than-
significant level.
Less- Than-Significant-Impact: An environmental impact may occur, however, the
impact would not be considered significant based on CEQA environmental
standards.
No Impact: No environmental impacts are proposed.
1. Aesthetics
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the Proposal:
a. Have a substantial adverse
effect on a scenic vista?
x
b. Substantially damage
scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a
state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the
existing visual character or
quality of the site and its
surroundings?
x
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 10
d. Create a new source of
substantial light or glare
which would adversely
affect day or nighttime
views in the area?
x
Discussion
The 2006 project delta is the addition of a third story on a two-story building. The 2002 Initial
Study identified two potentially significant impacts should the project be approved: a substantial
adverse impact on a scenic vista (Impact I a), and the creation of a new light source that could
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.
The 2002 Initial Study concluded that with adherence to the following mitigation measures, these
two potentially significant impacts would be less than significant.
. The first mitigation measure would require adherence to East of 101 Area Plan policies
DE-I, DE-5, DE-I7, DE-24, DE-52, DE 54, DE-56 and DE-58, which require new
development projects to take advantage of views and view corridors.
. The second mitigation measure included in the 2002 Initial Study requires the project to
comply with East of lOl Area Plan Design Policy DE-29, regulating levels of security
lighting.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not significantly alter scenic vistas in the area nor
significantly add to light or glare impacts. The 2006 Project is the addition of a third story to an
approved and under construction two-story building. Mitigation measures imposed in the 2002
IS/MND and required by the 2002 MMRP would continue to apply to 2006 Project and there
would be no significant supplemental impacts not analyzed in the 2002 Initial Study.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
Page 11
2. Agricultural Resources
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Convert Prime Farmland,
Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps
prepared pursuant to the
Farmland mapping and
Monitoring Program of the
California Resources
Agency, to non-agricultural
use?
x
b. Conflict with existing
zoning for agricultural use,
or a Williamson Act
contract?
c. Involve other changes in
the existing environment
which, due to their location
or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to
non-agricultural use?
x
x
Discussion
The 2002 IS/MND found no impact with regard to conversion of prime agricultural soils,
conflicts with agricultural zoning or Williamson Act Land Conservation contracts with regard to
approval and implementation of the proposed project.
The 2006 Project would not change the conclusion of the 2002 Initial Study with regard to
agricultural resources and there would be no significant supplemental impacts not analyzed in the
2002 Initial Study.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not have any affect on agricultural resources. The approved
2002 Project and the proposed 2006 Project would have no impact on agricultural resources. No
mitigation measures are required.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 12
3. Air Quality
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the Proposal:
a. Conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b. Violate any air quality
standard or contribute
substantially to an existing
or projected air quality
violation?
x
x
c. 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 (including
releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative
thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d. Expose sensitive receptors
to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
x
x
e. Create objectionable odors
affecting a substantial
number of people?
x
Discussion
The 2002 IS/MND identified potentially significant impacts with regard to violation of air quality
standards. Specifically, grading and construction of the 2002 Project would exceed the Bay Area
Air Quality Management District's threshold of significance for emission of dust and other
pollutants. The adopted MMRP includes a mitigation measure that requires construction
contracts for the proposed project include the following provisions:
· Water all active construction activities at least twice daily;
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
Page 13
· Water or cover stockpiles of debris, soil, sand or other materials that can be blown by the
wind;
· Cover all trucks hauling soil, sand, and other loose material or require all trucks to
maintain a minimum of two feet of freeboard;
· Sweep daily (preferably with water sweepers) app paved access roads, parking areas and
staging areas at construction sites;
· Sweep streets daily (preferably with water sweepers) if visible soil is carried onto
adjacent public streets.
This mitigation measure would be required of the 2006 Project as well.
The 2002 Project traffic adds approximately 1,500 vehicle trips to the area. The 2006 Project
would add approximately 320 daily trips. Taken as a whole this would represent approximately
1,800 vehicle trips for the combined 2002 Approved and proposed 2006 Project. The Bay Area
Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) BAAQMD CEQA Guidelines Assessing Air
Quality Impacts of Projects and Plans (Decemberl999) (Guidelines) cites 2,000 vehicle trips as
the threshold for air quality modeling. Additionally, the Guidelines (page 25) cites land use types
and corresponding square footages that would likely generate 80 pounds of NO x per day, which
would trigger an air analysis. The land uses and square footages range from 'Government
Office' (55,000 square feet), to 'General Office' (280,000 square feet). Using the most
conservative threshold, 55,000 square feet, the 2006 Project at 29,000 square feet would not
trigger the need for air quality modeling. Therefore the proposed 2006 Project would not
degrade air quality individually or cumulatively and warrants no further evaluation.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not significantly affect air quality locally or regionally.
Mitigation measures imposed in the 2002 IS/MND and required by the 2002 MMRP would
continue to apply to 2006 Project. The incremental and cumulative vehicle trips would not reach
the threshold of evaluation as generally recognized by the BAAQMD Guidelines.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjecUSupplemental Initial Study
Page 14
4. Biological Resources
Issue
Would the proposal result:
a. 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 the California
Department ofFish and
Game or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse
effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive
natural community
identified in local or
regional plans, policies,
and regulations or by the
California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
c. Have a substantial adverse
effect on federally
protected wetlands as
defined by Section 404 of
the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited
to, marsh, vernal pool,
coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling,
hydrological interruption,
or other means?
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
x
x
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 15
d. Interfere substantially with
the movement of any
native resident or migratory
fish or wildlife species or X
with established native
resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or
impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local
policies or ordinances X
protecting biological
resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or
ordinance?
f. Conflict with the
provisions of an adopted X
Habitat Conservation Plan,
Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation
plan?
Discussion
The site has the potential to have the presence of the salt marsh harvest mouse and California
clapper rail, California black rail and the double-breasted cormorant, all of which are special-
status species under state and/or federal law. The 2002 IS/MND analyzed potential impacts
associated with grading and paving the entire site (see page 47 of the 2002 Response to
Comments document) and found several potentially significant impacts related to biological
resources associated with grading, construction and occupancy of the 2002 Project.
The 2002 IS/MND found that the 2002 Project could result in indirect impacts to sensitive
mudflats and tidal salt marsh habitats as a result of human activity on the site. Loss of an
estimated 2,800 square feet of seasonal wetland, located in along a swale on the eastern boundary
of the site, along Haskins Way, was also identified as an impact. Installation of a proposed
underground storm drain pipeline would impact approximately 400 square feet of upper salt
marsh habitat, which is likely jurisdictional wetland area.
The 2002 MMRP requires implementation of the following measures to reduce potentially
significant biological impacts to a less-than-significant level:
· All parking and walkway illumination lights shall be shielded to off-site glare.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 16
· Landscaping between buildings and the Bay Trail shall be increased to provide a denser
band of buffering vegetation. Landscape species shall be limited to native trees and
shrubs, adapted to the coastal environment.
· A minimum 4-foot high protective fence shall be installed on the shoreward side of the
Bay Trail. Humans and their pets shall be excluded from the area. An alternative to a
fence would be dense upland planting acceptable to the Bay Conservation and
Development Commission (BCDC) and the City.
· Leash laws shall be actively enforced and there shall be signs advising trail users of
such.
· Trash bins shall be placed along the Bay Trail and at the look-outs.
· Prior to the start of construction, temporary protective fencing shall be placed between
the construction zone and the shoreline marsh areas to prevent intrusions. The fencing
shall be posted at minimum 300-foot intervals with signs stating "Environmentally
Sensitive Area-Keep Out." The protected areas shall be designated a "no construction
zones" on project maps and plans.
· The City shall engage a qualified biologist to monitor construction activities to ensure
compliance with these mitigation measures. The project applicant shall reimburse the
City for all costs of this monitoring. The biologist shall hold a training session with the
construction contractor, advising all work foremen and other supervisory personnel of
the biological constraints of the project site and the contractor will be held responsible
for violations of these constraints.
· The contractor shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in
accordance with Regional Water Quality Control Board and City of South San
Francisco requirements.
· The project applicant shall prepare a Storm Water Management Plan in accordance with
Regional Water Quality Control Board guidelines and rules. The Plan shall provide on-
site Best Management Practices (BMPs) and structural elements designed to treat
runoff, particularly runoff associated with the "first flush" of urban storms runoff. The
Storm Water Management Plan shall include plans to minimize concentrations of
constituents of concern in storm water runoff, through implementation of specific
management and treatment control measures.
The 2002 MMRP requires implementation of the following measures to reduce impacts to
wetlands and other waters to a less-than-significant level:
· A wetland delineation, in accordance with Corps methodology, shall be performed and
submitted to the Corps for final jurisdictional determination. The delineation shall
include the limits of the shoreline tidal marsh along the entire southerly property
boundary in order to ensure that project and Bay Trail construction do not intrude into
this area. The Corps jurisdictional boundary should also include the outfall area. If the
impacted wetland areas are jurisdictional, Corps, Regional Water Quality Control Board
and Bay Conservation and Development Commission permit applications shall also be
submitted.
· Impacted jurisdictional wetlands shall be replaced with new wetland habitat established
within or adjacent to the project site. Possible locations for the replacement wetlands
could include zones on either side of the Bay Trail. If feasible, based on post-
construction topography and maintenance considerations, the upper salt marsh area to
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
Page 17
be disturbed by the replacement storm drain pipe could be re-established in the same
location. The final designs, locations and extent of replacement wetlands should be
made acceptable to the Corps and Regional water Quality Control Board.
The 2002 MMRP as a matter of law is required of the 2006 Project. The 2002 Initial Study
determined that all other biological impacts would be less-than-significant. No other significant
impacts have been identified in this Initial Study that were not analyzed in the 2002 ISIMND.
The 2002 IS/MND analyzed potential project impacts based upon the entire site being disturbed
by grading, construction, paving and occupancy. The 2006 Project would not increase site
disturbance as the 2006 Project would be the construction of a third story to an approved two
story building and the construction of underground parking in an area where grading, trenching
and construction was analyzed and approved in 2002.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not significantly impact biological resources beyond those
identified, analyzed and mitigated by the 2002 IS/MND and MMRP. The 2006 Project is the
addition of a third story to an approved and under construction two-story building. Mitigation
measures imposed in the 2002 IS/MND and required by the 2002 MMRP would continue to
apply to the 2006 Project and there would be no significant supplemental impacts not analyzed in
the 2002 Initial Study. No additional mitigation is warranted.
5. Cultural Resources
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
1m pact
No
Impact
Would the proposal result: in:
impacts to:
a. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance
of a historical resource as
defined in 1315064.57
x
b. Cause a substantial adverse
change in the significance
of an archaeological
resource pursuant to
1315064.57
x
c. Directly or indirectly
destroy a unique
paleontolgical resource or
site or unique geologic
feature 7
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 18
d. Disturb any human
remains, including those
interred outside of formal
cemeteries?
x
Discussion
No impacts to historical, archeological, Native American or other cultural resources were
identified in the 2002 Initial Study. The 2002 Initial Study notes that the site was created by fill
material in the San Francisco Bay between 1970-72, and it is highly unlikely that it contains
important archaeological resources. The proposed 2006 Project would disturb the same portions
of the site as the 2002 Project. No other or new significant supplemental cultural resource
impacts have been identified in this Initial Study.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not impact cultural resources. The 2006 Project is the
addition of a third story to an approved and under construction two-story building. No
mitigation measures were identified in the 2002 IS/MND and MMRP and no mitigation
measures are warranted for the 2006 Project.
6. Geology and Soils
Issue
Potentially
Significant
1m pact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Expose people or structures
to potential substantial
adverse effects, including
the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving:
i) Rupture of a known
earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most
recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning
Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or
based on other substantial
evidence of a known fault?
Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii) Strong seismic ground
shaking?
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
x
x
Page 19
iii) Seismic-related
ground failure, including
liquefaction?
iv) Landslides?
b. Result in substantial soil
erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c. Be located on a geologic
unit or soil that is unstable,
or that would become
unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially
result in on- or off-site
landslide, lateral
spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive
soil, as defined in Table
18-I-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994),
creating substantial risks
to life or property?
e. Have soils incapable of
adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water
disposal systems where
sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste
water?
x
x
x
x
x
x
Discussion:
The 2002 Initial Study found that all impacts related to seismic ground shaking, ground failure,
soil erosion, liquefaction and expansive soil would be reduced to a less-than-significant level by
adherence to geotechnical policies included in the East of 10 I Area Plan and applicable
provisions of the California Building Code.
The proposed 2006 Project would have approximately the same building footprint as the 2002
Project and the application of appropriate geotechnical policies included in the East of I 0 I Area
Plan and enforcement of California Building Code policies would continue to ensure that soils
and geotechnical impacts would be less-than-significant. This 2006 Initial Study has identified no
supplemental impacts not analyzed in the 2002 Initial Study and mitigated by the 2002 MMRP.
Page 20
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Finding: The approved 2002 Project and the proposed 2006 Project incorporates by law, the
requirements of the Uniform Building Code, the East of I 0 I Area Plan and the South San
Francisco General Plan. Geology and soils impacts are less than significant. No additional
mitigation under CEQA is required as 2006 Project compliance with local, state and federal law
would reduce potential project impacts to less than significant.
7. Hazards
Issue
Potentially Potentially Less No
Significant Significant Than Impact
1m pact Unless Significant
Miti2ated Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment through the
routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous
materials?
x
b. Create a significant hazard
to the public or the
environment through
reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident
conditions involving the
release of hazardous
materials into the
environment?
x
c. Emit hazardous emissions
or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous
materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter
mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which
is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to
Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result,
would it create a significant
hazard to the public or the
environment?
x
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 21
e. For a project located within
an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not X
been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or
public use airport, would
the project result in a safety
hazard for people residing
or working in the project
area?
f. For a project within the
vicinity of a private X
airstrip, would the project
result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working
in the project area?
g. Impair implementation of
or physically interfere with X
an adopted emergency
response plan or
emergency evacuation
plan?
h. Expose people or structures
to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving X
wildland fire, including
where wildlands are
adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Discussion
The 2002 Initial Study noted a potentially significant impact to tre public with regard to the
routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials on the site, specifically that future
building occupants of the project could use hazardous materials. The 2002 Initial Study noted
that future users are required as a matter of law to obtain permits from the San Mateo County
Health Department for hazardous materials handling and must meet all standards and
requirements of other local, state and federal regulatory agencies. Adherence to all of these
standards and requirements would reduce any potential impact related to the transport, use or
disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous materials on the site to a less-than-significant
level.
No other potentially significant hazards or hazardous materials impacts were identified in the
2002 Initial Study.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 22
The project site is not listed on the Cortese List of hazardous sites as of September 22,2006.
The proposed 2006 Project is required by law to adhere to the same statutory permitting
requirements as the 2002 Project. The proposed 2006 Project would not result in a significant
increase of potential impacts or impacts. No mitigation for the proposed 2006 Project is
required.
Finding: The proposed 2006 Project, as a matter oflaw, is required to obtain permits from the
San Mateo County Health Department for hazardous materials handling and must meet all
standards and requirements of other local, state and federal regulatory agencies. No additional
mitigation under CEQA is required as 2006 Project compliance with local, state and federal law
would reduce potential project impacts to less than significant.
8. Hydrology
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Miti2ated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
1m pact
Would the proposal:
a. Violate any water quality
standards or waste
discharge requirements?
b. Substantially deplete
groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such
that there would be a net
deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local
groundwater table level?
c. Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of
the site or area, including
through the alteration of
the course of a stream or
river, in a manner which
would result in substantial
erosion or siltation on-or
off-site?
x
x
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 23
d. Substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of X
the site or area, including
through the alteration of
the course of a stream or
river, or substantially
increase the rate or amount
of surface runoff in a
manner which would result
in flooding on-or off-site?
e. Create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or X
planned stormwater
drainage systems or
provide substantial
additional sources of
polluted runoff?
f. Otherwise substantially X
degrade water quality?
g. Place housing within a
I DO-year flood hazard area
as mapped on a federal
Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map
or other flood hazard
delineation map?
h. Place within a 1 DO-year
flood hazard area structures
which would impede or
redirect flood flows?
1. Expose people or structures
to a significant risk of loss,
injury or death involving
flooding, including
flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
J. Inundation by seiche,
tsunami, or mudflow?
X
X
X
X
Discussion
The 2002 Initial Study determined that all impacts related to hydrology and water quality were
either less-than-significant or would be reduced to a less-than-significant level through
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 24
compliance with NPDES, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans, the County Urban Runoff
Clean Water Program and other requirements which are required as a matter of law. Water
quality impacts of the 2006 Project would remain less-than-significant by adherence to the same
requirements. The 2006 Project would not increase stormwater runoff as the Project would be
within the existing footprint of non-pervious area. Impervious surfaces would be discharged
into the City's drainage system after pre-treatment by on-site grassy swales as reviewed and
approved in the 2002 Project. Flooding on the site was not identified in 2002 nor is it a
potentially significant impact in 2006.
Since certification of the 2002 Initial Study, no significant changes have occurred with respect to
hydrology in the area. Storm water runoff would be similar to or slightly increased from that
evaluated in 2002 The proposed 2006 Project would not result in an increase in impacts over
those identified in 2002.
Finding: The proposed 2006 Project is substantially the same as the 2002 Project and no
significant supplemental impacts with regard to hydrology, drainage or water quality have been
identified in this Initial Study. The mitigation measures required and adopted by the City in the
2002 MMRP would also as a matter of law apply to the proposed 2006 Project.
9. Land Use
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Miti2ated
Less
Than
Significant
1m pact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Physically divide an
established community?
b. Conflict with any applicable
land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with
jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to
the general plan, specific
plan, local coastal program,
or zoning ordinance)
adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
x
x
c. Conflict with any applicable
habitat conservation plan or
natural community
conservation plan?
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
Page 25
Discussion
The 2002 Initial Study identified less-than-significant impacts with regard to checklist item "b"
and "c." Item "b" regarded a potential impact that could have resulted due to an inconsistency
between the floor area ratio (FAR) proposed for the 2002 Project and maximum F ARs allowed
for the Mixed Industrial and Coastal Commercial land use designations on the project site. The
mitigation measures included in the 2002 MMRP included combining the maximum F ARs for
two General Plan land use designations, so that the project FAR thus complies with General Plan
land use standards.
The 2006 Project proposes a 0.61 FAR. The 2002 Approval allows a maximum 1.0 FAR.
Therefore, the 2006 Project is within the permitted FAR. Additionally, the 2006 Project
proposes an updated and more aggressive Transportation Demand Management Plan (TDM Plan)
which complies with and implements the City's TDM Ordinance. The East Jamie Court
Preliminary Transportation Demand Management Plan (updated August 7, 2006) achieves 193
trip credits pursuant to C/CAG regulations (i.e., 30% mode shift required by the City's TDM
Ordinance) due to the transportation measures, mitigations and programs implemented as a part
of the plan. The Planning Commission will also review the TDM Program and 2006 Project
request for an increase in FAR from 0.53 to 0.61.
The 2002 Initial Study noted that the 2002 Project incorporated development of a portion of the
Bay Trail along the shoreline along the property. Under Bay Conservation and Development
Commission (BCDC) standards, no filling, grading, construction or other land use alteration is to
occur within the 100-foot wide shore land band adjacent to the Bay. The 2002 Project and the
2006 Project as required by the adopted 2002 MMRP shall be built to avoid the Section 404
High Tide Line by shifting the southerly limit of slope stabilization between two to 10 feet north
(upslope) to avoid all direct impacts to Corps-regulated habitat. (Morehouse Associates, 2002
Response to Comments Document, page 49, letter from H.T. Harvey & Associates, Ecological
Consultants).
Finding: The 2006 Project includes an updated TDM Program that would achieve a 30% mode
shift and as proposed conforms to the City's General Plan and Zoning. No new significant land
use impacts have been identified in this Initial Study.
10. Mineral Resources
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
1m pact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 26
a. Result in the loss of
availability of a known
mineral resource that
would be of value to the
region and the residents of
the state?
b. Result in the loss of
availability of a locally-
important mineral
resource recovery site
delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan,
or other land use plan?
x
x
Discussion
No known mineral resources were identified on the site through the 2002 environmental review
process. Site conditions have not changed since 2002.
Finding: There are no impacts to mineral resources as a result of the 2002 project or the
proposed 2006 Project.
11. Noise
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Exposure of persons to
or generation of noise
levels in excess of
standards established in
the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of
other agencies?
b. Exposure of persons to
or generation of
excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne
noise levels?
x
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 27
c. A substantial permanent
increase in ambient
noise levels in the X
project vicinity above
levels existing without
the project?
d. A substantial temporary
or periodic increase in X
ambient noise levels in
the project vicinity
above levels existing
without the project?
e. For a project located
within an airport land
use plan or, where such X
a plan has not been
adopted, within two
miles of a public airport
or public use airport,
would the project
expose people residing
or working in the project
area to excessive noise
levels?
f. For a project within the
vicinity of a private X
airstrip, would the
project expose people
residing or working in
the project area to
excessive noise levels?
Discussion
The 2002 ISIMND noted that the East Jamie Court site was subject to significant sources of
exterior noise from a variety of sources, including aircraft, nearby rail lines, vehicles passing on
nearby roads and noise generated by nearby land uses. Incorporation of: 1) General Plan noise
standards and policies regarding noise protection and limitations on groundbome vibration; and,
2) Adherence to Title 24 noise standards which is required as a matter of law as a part of the
building permit process would reduce noise impacts to less-than-significant.
The noise environment within the project area has remained essentially the same since adoption
of the 2002 IS/MND and MMRP. The addition of320 vehicle trips (as noted in the Air Quality
section, above) would not represent a doubling of traffic volumes in the Project area. A three (3)
decibel increase in noise levels would occur ifthere were a doubling of traffic volumes in the
project area. A three decibel increase would be barely perceptible to the human ear. No
City of South San Francisco, November 2006 Page 28
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
significant supplemental noise impacts not analyzed in the 2002 Initial Study have been
identified for this Initial Study. Measures to mitigate noise impacts for the project identified in
the 2002 Initial Study will continue to apply to the 2006 Project.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not increase noise in the project area nor expose sensitive
receptors to excessive noise. Title 24 noise attenuation standards are required as a matter of law
for the 2002 and 2006 Project. No additional mitigation measures are required.
12. Population and Housing
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Miti~ated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Induce substantial
population growth in an
area, either directly (for
example, by proposing
new homes and
businesses) or indirectly
(for example, through
extension of roads or
other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial
numbers of existing
housing, necessitating
the construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere?
x
x
c. Displace substantial
numbers of people,
necessitating the
construction of
replacement housing
elsewhere?
x
Discussion
The 2002 Initial Study identified less-than-significant impacts with regard to population and
housing. The number of jobs associated with the 2002 Project was 330 (2.5 employees per 1,000
square feet). The 29,000 square foot 2006 Project addition would add approximately 79
employees to the site. The site is planned, zoned and approved for Office/R&D. The City has
sites planned, zoned and approved for housing. The potential for inducement of additional
population to the area would remain less-than-significant with the 2006 Project.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 29
Finding: The 2006 Project would not increase the need for additional housing and would not
displace housing.
13. Public Services
Issue
Would the proposal:
a. Would the project result
in substantial adverse
physical impacts
associated with the
provision of new or
physically altered
governmental facilities,
need for new or
physically altered
governmental facilities,
the construction of
which could cause
significant
environmental impacts,
in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios,
response times or other
performance objectives
for any of the public
servIces:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
x
X
X
X
X
Discussion
The 2002 Initial Study noted that the 2002 Project would increase the demand for public
services, including police, fire prevention and emergency services and security measures during
the construction and operational phases of the project. The 2002 Initial Study noted that the
proposed project would increase the demand for fire and emergency services and that the 2002
Project would comply with building and fire codes to reduce impacts to fire services to a less-
than-significant level. The 2006 Project would also, as a matter of law, be required to comply
City of South San Francisco, November 2006 Page 30
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
with standard site and building security measures such as keyed building entry systems, and
submittal of a Security and Safety Plan to the South San Francisco Police Department as a
condition of building permit issuance. Fire and police impacts would be reduced to a less-than-
significant level as a matter of law.
The 2006 Project would not impact local schools, since no residential dwellings would be
constructed.
The 2002 and 2006 Project would provide an estimated two (2) acres of open space adjacent to
San Francisco Bay, including an approximately 850-foot long portion of the San Francisco Bay
Trail; impacts to parks would be less-than-significant.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not increase public service impacts. The 2002 MMRP and
2002 and 2006 conditions of building permit issuance would reduce impacts to less than
significant.
14. Recreation
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
1m pact
Would the proposal:
a. Would the project
increase the use of
existing neighborhood
and regional parks or
other recreational
facilities such that
substantial physical
deterioration of the
facility would occur or be
accelerated?
x
b. Does the project include
recreational facilities or
require the construction
or expansion of
recreational facilities
which might have an
adverse physical effect on
the environment?
x
Discussion
No impact to existing neighborhood or regional parks was identified in the 2002 Initial Study.
The 2002 Initial Study noted that employees of the proposed East Jamie Court project would
City of South San Francisco, November 2006 Page 31
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
likely increase use of the San Francisco Bay Trail adjacent to the site. The Trail is presently
underused. Increased use of the Trail would be consistent with City and regional recreation goals
and policies.
The 2006 Project would also facilitate construction of a portion of the San Francisco Bay Trail
along the project frontage. The 2002 MMRP requires a slight relocation of the Trail, as noted in
the Land Use section, above. The relocation of the Trail would avoid any area within the BCDC
mean High Tide Line jurisdiction.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not increase recreation impacts beyond those identified in the
2002 IS/MND and the 2002 MMRP mitigates the impacts to a less than significant level.
15. Traffic and Transportation
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Miti2ated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the proposal:
a. Cause an increase in
traffic which is
substantial in relation to
the existing traffic load
and capacity of the street
system (i.e., result in a
substantial increase in
either the number of
vehicle trips, the volume
to capacity ratio on roads,
or congestion at
intersections)?
b. Exceed, either
individually or
cumulatively, a level of
service standard
established by the county
congestion management
agency for designated
roads or highways?
c. Result in a change in air
traffic patterns, including
either an increase in
traffic levels or a change
in location that results in
substantial safety risks?
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
x
x
x
Page 32
d. Substantially increase
hazards due to a design X
feature (e.g., sharp curves
or dangerous
intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g.,
farm equipment)?
e. Result in inadequate X
emergency access?
f. Result in inadequate X
parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted
policies, plans, or X
programs supporting
alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
Discussion
Background: Crane Transportation Group has conducted an evaluation of the expected
intersection level of service impacts due to the proposed expansion of the East Jamie Court
project that is projected to add an additional 40 trips to the local roadway system during the AM
peak hour and 39 trips to the local roadway system during the PM peak hour. Analysis was
conducted using the recently developed year 20 IS traffic projections for the Genentech Master
Plan EIR. Net new traffic from the revised East Jamie Court project was distributed to the local
roadway network in a pattern the same as that for the original Jamie Court development.
Overall, traffic from the revised East Jamie Court project would not produce any significant level
of service impacts. Results are presented in Table 1 for AM peak hour conditions and in Table
2 for PM peak hour conditions. As shown, revised East Jamie Court project traffic would not
change any acceptable intersection operation to unacceptable conditions. Also, for those
locations with Base Case (without project) unacceptable operation, the proposed expansion
would not increase traffic volumes by two percent or greater, the significance criteria limit. All
locations with Base Case unacceptable operation would receive less than a one percent increase
in traffic due to the expansion, with the exception of East Grand A venue at Allerton A venue,
which would receive a 1.6 percent addition of traffic during the PM peak hour, less than the
significance criteria level.
All mitigation measures contained in the 2002 MMRP shall continue to apply to the revised
project to ensure that peak hour trip generation impacts on adjacent streets would be less-than-
significant. Payment of transportation improvement funding programs by the project developer
to the City as part of the East of I 0 I Transportation Improvement Plan is required as a matter of
law.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 33
The 2006 Project includes an updated TOM Plan (East Jamie Court Preliminary Transportation
Demand Management Plan, updated August 7, 2006). The TDM Plan is designed to achieve 193
trip credits pursuant to C/CAG regulations (i.e., 30% mode shift required by the City's TOM
Ordinance) due to the transportation measures, mitigations and programs implemented as a part
of the plan. The Planning Commission will also review the TDM Program and 2006 Project
request for an increase in FAR.
There would be no impact or less-than-significant impacts related to changes in air traffic
patterns, increased traffic hazards due to design features or inadequate emergency access
associated with the 2006 Project.
Under Zoning Ordinance parking standards, the project would be required to provide 3.3 parking
spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area, for a total of 534 spaces. A reduced parking standard
of 2.83 parking spaces is proposed for the 2006 Project, resulting in provision of 459 spaces.
This reduction is based on General Plan Policies 4.3-1-1 I to -13, which encourages a reduction of
on-site parking for development projects where TDM programs are implemented. The parking
reduction is also required by the City where increases in floor area are requested as a part of the
TDM Plan to reduce vehicle miles traveled. Additionally, this parking ratio (2.83 parking spaces
per 1,000 square feet) was approved in 2002 and would be the same for the 2006 project.
The 2006 Project would have no impact with regard to conflicts with adopted plans, policies or
programs supporting alternative transportation modes, since the project developer would be
required to prepare and implement a TDM plan.
Finding: The 2006 Project would not require additional mitigation measures from those adopted
by the City in the 2002 MMRP. As indicated, traffic from the revised East Jamie Court project
would not produce any significant level of service impacts.
16. Utilities and Service Systems
Issue
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less
Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the
applicable Regional Water
Quality Control Board
b) Require or result in the
construction of new water or
wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the
construction of which could
cause significant
environmental effects?
x
x
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 34
c) Require or result in the
construction of new storm
water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant
environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project
from existing water
entitlements and resources,
or are new or expanded
entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by
the wastewater treatment
provider which serves or may
serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve
the project's projected
demand in addition to the
providers existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill with
sufficient permitted capacity
to accommodate the project's
solid waste disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state and
local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
x
x
x
x
x
wastewater into adjacent bodies of water. Wastewater generated by the
proposed project would be treated at the City's Water Quality Control Plant located south of the
project site. The 2006 Project would follow the same protocol as a requirement of the 2002
MMRP.
In terms of impacts to storm drain facilities, the 2002 Initial Study determined that the project
includes replacing an existing storm drain outfall into San Francisco Bay which would serve to
reduce impacts to drainage facilities. The storm drain replacement would be used by the 2006
Project addition.
No additional potable water entitlements would be needed to serve the Project based on the 2002
Initial Study. The 2002 Initial Study also noted that adequate landfill capacity exists to serve the
project at the Ox Mountain Landfill in Half Moon Bay, which has at least a 15-year capacity as
of2002.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court ProjectlSupplementallnitial Study
Page 35
Finding: No significant supplemental impacts related to utilities have been identified in this
Initial Study. The 2002 MMRP shall continue to apply to the2006 Project.
17. Mandatory Findings of Significance
Issue Potentially Potentially Less No
Significant Significant Than Impact
Impact Unless Significant
Mitigated Impact
a) Does the project have the
potential to degrade the quality
of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the number
of or restrict the range of a rare
or endangered plant or animal
or eliminate important
examples of the major periods
of California history or
prehistory?
b) Does the project have the
potential to achieve short-term,
to the disadvantage of long-
term, environmental goals??
c) Does the project have impacts
that are individually limited,
but cumulatively considerable?
d) Does the project have
environmental effects which
will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
x
x
x
x
Discussion
a) No. The preceding analysis indicates that the proposed 2006 Project would not have a
significant adverse impact on overall environmental quality, including the potential of
reducing the habitat of fish or wildlife species, elimination of any special-status plants, a
reduction of the number or range of endangered plant or animal species, or elimination of
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 36
important examples of California history or prehistory. All such impacts would be less-
than-significant.
b) No. This 2006 Initial Study does not identify potentially significant impacts.
c) No. No such cumulative impacts have been discovered in the course of preparing this Initial
Study.
d) No. The Initial Study notes no potential impacts that could cause substantial adverse
impacts.
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 37
Initial Study Preparer
Allison Knapp, Knapp Consulting
Agencies and Organizations Consulted
The following agencies and organizations were contacted in the course of this Initial Study:
City of South San Francisco
Susy Kalkin, Chief Planner
References
Association of Bay Area Governments, Proiections 2005
Bay Area Air Quality Management District, CEQA Guidelines, revised December 1999
Brady and Associates, East of I 0 I Area Plan, 1994
Brady and Associates, East of 101 Area Plan EIR, 1994
Department of Toxic Substances Control, Cortese List (website), September 21, 2006
Morehouse Associates, Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, East Jamie
Court Proiect, 2002
City of South San Francisco, November 2006
East Jamie Court Project/Supplemental Initial Study
Page 38
Table 1 (page 1 of 2)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
AM PEAK HOUR
PROJECT: JAMIE COURT TRAFFIC INCREMENT
INTERSECTION
Airport Blvd.!Miller/U.S.l 01 SB Off-Ramp
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!Grand Ave.
(Signal)
Airport Blvd./U.S.10I SB Hook Ramps
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!Terrabay Phase 3 Access
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!Sister Cities Blvd.!Oyster Point
Blvd. (Signal)
Oyster PointlDubuque Ave./U.S.lOl NB On-
Ramp (Signal)
Dubuque Ave./U.S.lOl NB Off-Ramp & SB On-
Ramp (Signal)
Oyster Point Blvd.!Gateway/U.S.101 SB Off-
Ramp Flyover (Signal)
Oyster Point Blvd.!Gull Ave.
(Signal)
Dubuque A ve.!E. Grand Ave.
(Signal)
Gateway/E.Grand Ave.
(Signal)
Harbor Blvd.fE.Grand Ave./Forbes Blvd.
(Signal)
Littlefield Ave.fE.Grand Ave.
(Signal)
S.Airport B1vd./U.S.lOl NB Hook Ramps/
Wondercolor (Signal)
E. Grand A ve.!Grand Ave. Overcrossing
(Signal)
Gateway Blvd.lS.Airport Blvd.lMitchell Ave.
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!San Mateo A ve.!Produce Ave.
(Signal)
Allerton A ve.fE.Grand Ave.
(Allerton Stop Sign Control)
Forbes Blvd.!Allerton Ave.
(Allerton Stop Sign Control)
U.S.10l NB Off-Ramp/E. Grand Ave.!
Executive Drive (E. Grand Stop Controlled)
E-79.2(1) E-79.S
B-19.5(1) B-19.5
C-32.5(1) C-32.5
D-41. 7(1) D-41. 7
C-26.3(1) C-26.3
C-24.4(I) C-24.4
F-134.4(I) F-134.6
C-32.7(1) C-32.7
A-S.3(1) A-S.3
C-25.5(1) C-25.7
C-21.S(') C-21.9
D-40.i') D-42.S
C-32.9(1) C-32.9
D-3S.0(1) D-39.5
C-27.9(1) C-2S.0
C-30.3(1) C-30.3
C-16.5(2) C-16.9
F-166.6(3) F-166.6
A-0.0(4) A-O.O
BASE CASE*
D-37.l(l)
YEAR 2015
BASE CASE
+ PROJECT
D-37.2
11/8/06 Jamie Court
Table 1 (page 2 of 2)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
AM PEAK HOUR
PROJECT: JAMIE COURT TRAFFIC INCREMENT
* Base Case = traffic projections from the Genentech Master Plan EIR (including full Genentech buildout).
(I) Signalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds.
(2) Unsignalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds/Allerton Ave. southbound stop sign controlled approach right
turn to E. Grand Ave.
(3) Unsignalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds/Allerton Ave. northbound stop sign controlled left turn to Forbes
Blvd.
(4) Unsignalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds/E. Grand Ave. westbound right turn to Executive Drive.
Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology
Source: Crane Transportation Group
11/8/06 Jamie Court
Table 2 (page 1 of 2)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
PM PEAK HOUR
PROJECT: JAMIE COURT TRAFFIC INCREMENT
INTERSECTION
Airport Blvd.lMilIer/U.S.lOl SB Off-Ramp
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!Grand Ave.
(Signal)
Airport Blvd./U.S.10l SB Hook Ramps
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!Terrabay Phase 3 Access
(Signal)
Airport Blvd.!Sister Cities Blvd.!Oyster Point
Blvd. (Signal)
Oyster Point/Dubuque Ave./U.S.lOl NB On-
Ramp (Signal)
Dubuque Ave./U.S.lOl NB Off-Ramp & SB On-
Ramp (Signal)
Oyster Point Blvd.!Gateway/U.S.101 SB Off-
Ramp Flyover (Signal)
Oyster Point Blvd.!Gull Ave.
(Signal)
Dubuque A ve.!E. Grand Ave.
(Signal)
Gateway/E.Grand Ave.
(Signal)
Harbor Blvd.!E.Grand Ave.!Forbes Blvd.
(Signal)
Littlefield A ve.!E.Grand Ave.
(Signal)
S.Airport Blvd./U.S.lOl NB Hook Ramps/
Wondercolor (Signal)
E. Grand A ve.!Grand Ave. Overcrossing
(Signal)
Gateway Blvd.!S.Airport B1vd.lMitchell Ave.
(Signal)
Airport Blvd./San Mateo A ve./Produce Ave.
(Signal)
Allerton Ave.iE.Grand Ave.
(Allerton Stop Sign Control)
Forbes Blvd./Allerton Ave.
(Allerton Stop Sign Control)
U.S.10l NB Off-Ramp/E. Grand Ave.!
Executive Drive (E. Grand Stop Controlled)
D-5l.2(1) D-51.5
E_5&.&(I) E-5&.&
B-19.7(1) B-19.7
C-29.2(1) C-29.2
F-171.0(l) F-171.0
C-22.2(1) C-22.3
E-62.4(I) E-62.4
F-207.0(1) F-207.0
B-1 1.4(1) B-ll .4
C-29.&(I) C-30.2
F-154.0(1) F-156.0
B-16.l(I) B-16.0
C-26.0(l) C-26.0
B-13.9(1) B-13.9
F-12&.0(1) F-131.0
F-99.&(I) F-102.0
F-104.0(2) F-115.0
C-19.3(3) C-19.3
B-10.i4) B-10.7
BASE CASE*
B-19.&(I)
YEAR 2015
BASE CASE
+ PROJECT
B-19.&
11/8/06 Jamie Court
Table 2 (page 2 of 2)
INTERSECTION LEVEL OF SERVICE
PM PEAK HOUR
PROJECT: JAMIE COURT TRAFFIC INCREMENT
* Base Case = traffic projections from the Genentech Master Plan EIR (including full Genentech buildout).
(I) Signalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds.
(2) Unsignalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds/Allerton Ave. southbound stop sign controlled approach right
turn to E. Grand Ave.
(3) Un signalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds/Allerton Ave. northbound stop sign controlled left turn to Forbes
Blvd.
(4) Unsignalized level of service-vehicle delay in seconds/E. Grand Ave. westbound right turn to Executive Drive.
Year 2000 Highway Capacity Manual Analysis Methodology
Source: Crane Transportation Group
11/8/06 Jamie Court