Loading...
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