[0:25] >> Everybody welcome to the Thursday September 3rd meeting

[0:28] of the Planning Commission.

[0:30] This is being held in the library Parks and Rec building

[0:33] Council chambers.

[0:34] Please fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk.

[0:37] You'll have three minutes to make your comments.

[0:39] Please note all commission time limits and rules of decorum

[0:42] will apply to public comments.

[0:44] This meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission

[0:47] is hereby called to order.

[0:48] Will you please stand and join in the Pledge of Allegiance.

[0:56] [Reciting Pledge of Allegiance]

[1:09] Thank you.

[1:10] May we please have a roll call?

[1:18] [Reading names]

[1:34] Commissioner Tzang and Commissioner Funes are absent.

[1:38] Chair Pamukcu: Are there any changes to the agenda?

[1:40] Any announcements from staff?

[1:44] >> No staff announcements.

[1:47] Chair Pamukcu: Then does any member of the public wish

[1:49] to address the Commission for an item that

[1:51] is not on the agenda tonight?

[1:52] If so fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk.

[1:57] >> We have no members of the public that would like

[1:59] to provide public comments.

[2:02] Chair Pamukcu: With no speakers then we will move on.

[2:04] Next on the agenda is the disclosure

[2:06] of ex parte communications if any commissioner

[2:09] has had communication with applicants

[2:11] dig site or project physics had interactions with third parties

[2:14] or have any conflicts regarding any items on the agenda you may

[2:17] disclose them at this time if you

[2:18] would like to recuse yourself for an item you can also do that

[2:21] at this time.

[2:25] Hearing none.

[2:26] We will move on to the next item which is the consent calendar.

[2:33] May we have a listing of the consent calendar items?

[2:38] >> Item number one is consideration and approval

[2:40] of minutes from the July 16th 2026 Planning Commission

[2:44] meeting.

[2:45] Item number two is consideration and approval of minutes from

[2:49] the July 16th 2026 Special Planning Commission Meeting.

[2:55] Chair Pamukcu: Thank you.

[2:56] Does any Commissioner wish to pull an item from consent?

[3:00] Does any member of the public wish

[3:01] to address the Commission for an item on the consent calendar

[3:04] at this time?

[3:05] If so please fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk.

[3:09] >> We have no members of the public who would like to provide

[3:11] public comments.

[3:13] Chair Pamukcu: With no speakers can

[3:16] I please have a motion on the consent calendar?

[3:19] >> I'd like to make a motion to accept the consent calendar.

[3:24] Chair Pamukcu: Roll call please.

[3:30] [Reading names]

[3:42] Chair Pamukcu: Thank you.

[3:43] The consent calendar is approved.

[3:45] Next item on the agenda is item number three.

[3:48] Will the clerk please read?

[3:55] >> Item three this evening is a report regarding resolutions

[3:58] approving a request for a use permit design review

[4:02] and tentative map to construct the Genentech research and early

[4:08] Development Center project in the master plan zoning District

[4:11] in accordance with the titles 19 and 20 of the South San

[4:14] Francisco Municipal Code and making a determination that

[4:17] the phase one redevelopment projects are fully within

[4:20] the scope of environmental analysis as described

[4:27] in the Checklist and Addendum and no further environmental

[4:30] review is required per guidelines sections 15162,

[4:35] 15164, 15168, n 15183.

[4:40] And then items three A and three B

[4:43] are the associated resolutions.

[4:47] Chair Pamukcu: Thank you.

[4:49] We are opening the public hearing

[4:50] and calling for staff report.

[4:54] >> Good evening Chair and Vice Chair and other commissioners I

[4:58] will be presenting on behalf of staff this evening.

[5:04] So as we are all aware in 2026 is the 50th anniversary

[5:09] of the founding of Genentech.

[5:13] And this aerial shot shows the growth

[5:16] they've achieved in the first 50 years at South San Francisco.

[5:18] This evening we will discuss their first step

[5:21] in achieving their vision for the next 50 years

[5:23] in South San Francisco.

[5:24] As you are aware the city regulate

[5:28] what is allowed on the campus through the Genentech campus

[5:35] Master plan which was recently updated in 2020.

[5:38] The Master plan establishes an overall development envelope

[5:42] providing flexibility and a mix of use types

[5:46] to be built over time if they implement transportation

[5:51] management throughout the campus area.

[5:52] One of the primary goals of the 2020 Master Plan

[5:55] is to create a strong campus centered environment

[5:58] with the upper campus as the heart of the campus.

[6:05] Staff and their project team will

[6:07] go into more detail on the overall vision

[6:08] and implementation for the changes to the upper campus

[6:11] but at a high level overview Genentech

[6:15] has identified a redevelopment program

[6:17] that consists of six separate but interrelated

[6:20] campus developments.

[6:21] Each of those is identified on the slide.

[6:25] This evening the Planning Commission

[6:29] is only considering entitlements for the first and largest

[6:32] portion of the phase one redevelopment projects.

[6:35] The research and Early Development Center .

[6:41] Each of the other five development projects

[6:43] will come back before the Planning Commission

[6:45] for a use permit and approval at some point in the future.

[6:55] The project would consist of six new rectangular shaped R&D

[6:59] buildings with approximately one point 3,000,000 square foot

[7:03] of total area .

[7:10] These are larger buildings that take up

[7:12] the majority of the right hand portion of the site.

[7:16] To the left or west is a regional utility plant

[7:20] and electrical distribution hub that would serve the center

[7:24] project and most of the rest of the phase one redevelopment

[7:27] projects.

[7:28] As I show this overview rendering

[7:31] I'm going to pause the staff presentation

[7:34] and allow the Genentech to walk the Commission

[7:38] and public through the proposed project design

[7:41] layout and other important details.

[7:42] After the applicant's presentation

[7:45] I will come back and talk the Commission

[7:48] through the requested entitlements

[7:49] and with that introduction I will hand off the presentation

[7:54] to Sophie Martin.

[8:08] >> Thank you very much and good evening chair vice chair

[8:10] and commissioners.

[8:12] I lead site planning for the campus of South San Francisco.

[8:16] I am joined this evening with Foster and Partners

[8:20] our architect and Kelly Johnson with the design studio

[8:25] our landscape architect.

[8:27] I'll begin by talking through a little bit about how

[8:30] this project fits into our overall vision for the campus

[8:34] and then hand it to Ben to walk through the architecture.

[8:38] We are celebrating 50 years here and very proud of that fact.

[8:44] They have grown together over the last five decades and we are

[8:47] very excited to bring this project to you this evening

[8:50] as it represents the next major step in our ability to continue

[8:56] that legacy of innovation and service of patients for decades

[9:00] to come anchored here .

[9:05] As Billy mentioned today you can see our existing campus occupies

[9:11] four point 8,000,000ft² on approximately 225 acres

[9:16] on the far eastern end of Oyster Point.

[9:20] All told the campus comprises about 58 buildings

[9:25] and an overall FAR of just 0.5.

[9:33] In the future our proposed campus

[9:36] will include a portfolio of buildings

[9:38] that Billy mentioned that come together and work together

[9:43] to address our fundamental business needs to enhance

[9:46] our employee experience and to provide

[9:49] the necessary infrastructure all of these projects

[9:54] together which I'll highlight in a moment

[9:56] will comprise development on our site represents over half

[10:03] of that new development.

[10:06] I also want to emphasize this redevelopment of our site is

[10:11] fully consistent with the master plan adopted in 2020 with

[10:15] the goals of that creating a denser more pedestrian oriented

[10:19] environment as Billy mentioned is also consistent with

[10:22] the city's General plan .

[10:27] This map highlights all of the projects that together comprise

[10:29] what we refer to as phase one.

[10:32] It's the largest and the first in line.

[10:36] It's the biggest and most complex.

[10:38] It will take the longest to build

[10:40] which is why it is coming before you here first.

[10:44] From the sequa standpoint all of these projects

[10:48] are disclosed and analyzed together

[10:49] because we expect to be constructing and delivering

[10:54] them and operating them more or less simultaneously.

[10:57] We are still working through the exact phasing plan

[11:00] of these projects but we thought it

[11:03] was prudent and appropriate to consider

[11:06] their effects cumulatively which is why they are all

[11:09] shown together.

[11:12] But tonight we are really going to focus

[11:17] on the center specifically as well as the modifications

[11:20] to the existing parking structure

[11:22] that lies just to the south which we will refer to

[11:24] as parking structure a.

[11:26] There will be some modifications to that structure that link it

[11:29] to the center and help provide a connection across our very

[11:34] hilly campus for the teams that work

[11:37] in the southern Subcampus who collaborate with those who

[11:41] will be located in the center.

[11:43] The other projects will come forward

[11:47] over the course of the next several years

[11:49] as I said still working through that exact phasing process

[11:53] but you will get a glimpse of some of them this evening.

[11:57] Finally we are also proposing a tentative map that

[12:00] will consolidate parcels on our upper campus enabling

[12:03] the placement of all of these new buildings

[12:06] as well as the rerouting of the utilities

[12:08] that is necessary to serve them accordingly.

[12:11] So with that I will hand it over to walk through the G center.

[12:23] >> Thank you Sophie.

[12:24] Good evening.

[12:24] So perhaps to reiterate the point

[12:27] that's just being made before the area which we are going

[12:29] to be looking at the area highlighted

[12:31] within that green boundary with a larger hatched area referring

[12:35] to the rest of phase one to cover subsequent applications

[12:38] so you can see those structures plus the parking structure

[12:43] and here you can actually see a more rendered site plan which

[12:49] shows everything in context of the master

[12:51] plan of the rest of phase one.

[12:55] Highlighting that to the west which

[12:58] is enabling an all electric campus

[13:00] and removal of fossil fuels as part of the project

[13:03] and then these signs and lab buildings.

[13:08] Access to the site will remain via DNA way, primary vehicle

[13:15] access and also on East Grand Avenue

[13:19] will provide continuing access to the parking structure

[13:22] from the South campus there and then

[13:24] there's a number of fire and service roads

[13:27] which are highlighted in orange which circulate around the phase

[13:31] one buildings providing servicing and ability

[13:35] to maintain safe operations for the buildings themselves.

[13:38] The campus plaza in the center is a pedestrian core.

[13:44] The idea behind the campus master plan and our vision plan

[13:50] is really thinking about what is the future?

[13:53] The future is how do we transform these buildings which

[13:55] are aging out and how do we serve the needs of science

[13:59] in the future?

[14:00] There are a number of processes drawn out

[14:03] across a very difficult terrain which is also compounded

[14:06] by quite difficult weather as we have this evening as

[14:09] well so the big idea is bringing everyone together

[14:12] closer on the upper campus on the upper terrain

[14:16] and bringing groups of scientists

[14:17] together to work better and collaborate.

[14:20] On the core of that is creating a flexible planning building

[14:25] block which is universal and flexible and will stand the test

[14:31] of time and by combining these together to create these

[14:34] collaborative clusters we create a diagram which overcomes

[14:37] the scale of what would be a very large building at one point

[14:41] 2,000,000ft² if it was just one singular building it would be

[14:44] massive.

[14:45] This actually brings the scale down and embeds it

[14:47] into the landscape opens up views landscape daylight

[14:53] and access at different points.

[14:55] And gives it something more of a terrain of a campus

[14:59] feel than a consolidated building.

[15:02] So the building itself consists of largely a combination

[15:07] of workplace and lab space and collaboration space

[15:12] between those which rises up from a service level at level

[15:18] one through two lab and workplace all the way up

[15:24] and then there is mechanical spaces on the service level

[15:28] and at the rooftops as well.

[15:30] The expression of the building is really

[15:33] something we spent a long time to think about what

[15:36] is the integrity of the site and the integrity of expression

[15:40] here is really based around scale, the human scale,

[15:45] the scale of the structure and expression of a concrete frame

[15:48] and the expression of passive shading elements

[15:51] to reduce the solar gain on the facade to reduce the overheating

[15:56] and create an incredibly high performing facade

[15:59] which maximizes the views and daylight of this location.

[16:03] And material terms we are looking

[16:06] at a combination of concrete and light tones

[16:11] a spandrel which is the balustrade of the floorplate

[16:16] and perhaps a rippled glass which picks up

[16:19] the light of the site vision glass

[16:21] and then aluminum panels for the shading.

[16:24] And you can see here the building

[16:27] uses the terrain of the site to modulate

[16:29] the scale so as this terrain is sloping in different directions

[16:34] across the site at some point we are digging in

[16:37] and we are concealing the scale of the building

[16:40] so it can appear as a four story building or at other points

[16:43] appears as a five story building so we are playing

[16:45] with that scale and here for instance in the east west

[16:49] section you can see how we are using

[16:51] that to reduce the scale by bringing that down and sinking

[16:57] the loading dock out of public line of sight

[16:59] to enhance the environment.

[17:03] Here you can see through these cross sections

[17:07] the red line representing the existing topography and how

[17:10] we are working with that topography

[17:12] and sometimes digging in and sometimes filling in

[17:15] to actually conceal the mass of the building

[17:18] to bring the scale of the buildings down.

[17:20] And here you can see the overall composition of how they come

[17:24] together and their mechanical penthouses which are all

[17:28] screened on all four sides taking a lot of effort to screen

[17:31] all of the mechanical systems also on the regional utility

[17:34] plant which also consists of a thermal storage tank which is

[17:37] highly efficient and a sustainable way to store heat

[17:41] and cooling for the building so we don't need fossil fuels .

[17:48] This is a view where you see it from its full story viewpoint.

[17:52] This is from the Northwest looking towards the southeast .

[17:56] This is a view which you can see is the view looking down

[18:00] towards the bay.

[18:02] This is the central plaza between this building

[18:05] and the next part of phase one which would be a rich employee

[18:09] experience connect the buildings at different levels

[18:14] and then here very important is to create a space where

[18:18] scientists can come together and feel at one with nature

[18:22] and be stimulated by nature come and be sheltered

[18:25] from the wind which as we all know

[18:27] is very strong at different times of the day

[18:30] and this very human scale courtyard is something

[18:32] very important in.

[18:36] Lastly this is the connection back

[18:39] if you're coming from the parking structure into work

[18:42] this is your connection from the south.

[18:45] You can see the way that the blades and the materiality

[18:48] of those has the opportunity to pick up colors

[18:50] of the landscape around it.

[18:52] And then this is the view from the southwest --

[18:57] southeast looking Northwest.

[18:59] There's a garden space with a ramp celebrating

[19:03] the ecology of the site and enriching

[19:07] the ecology of the site here.

[19:09] You can see the buildings are five stories high

[19:12] as that service level daylights get into those spaces

[19:16] so people can also work in them.

[19:18] It's very important to us.

[19:21] And lastly just to touch on the other component of this which

[19:26] is the parking structure on East Grand this is largely being kept

[19:31] as it is as intact but the key feature of the enhancement

[19:37] is the enhancement to the vertical circulation to enhance

[19:41] connections between the South campus portion using express

[19:48] elevators to take them up to that bridge level

[19:51] so you see this kind of lantern is a signifier

[19:55] and is representative of that vertical circulation

[19:58] with the bridge which passes over the top of the parking

[20:02] structure so that will be a new bridge which goes on there

[20:05] and allows that pedestrian access for people who are

[20:08] working in this lower campus,

[20:10] the South campus on the left hand side up to the new center

[20:14] to build greater collections and collaborations in the future.

[20:18] And lastly this is a view around that central core plaza

[20:23] a place for employees to sit at in safety unsheltered

[20:28] from the wind.

[20:30] I'll go to Kelly for the landscape.

[20:35] >> Thank you.

[20:37] Moving to the landscape of the project

[20:40] the overall landscape concept is inspired

[20:42] by the geology and a native plant communities of our point

[20:49] San Bruno setting.

[20:51] The concept is adapted to each open space responding

[20:54] to the specific building context and the anticipated user

[20:59] experience.

[21:00] As this diagram denotes the landscape

[21:03] is organized into six distinct gardens

[21:06] named for their predominant landscape.

[21:10] We have the bedrock garden come on the water garden come

[21:16] with a tree garden and then the heart courtyard

[21:19] has been mentioned.

[21:22] The material and planting pallets

[21:26] drive from the site's geology and native plant communities.

[21:30] It is also informed by our prior experience of the campus.

[21:35] The species of plants selected are well

[21:38] suited for the dry windy conditions of Point San Bruno.

[21:42] The material is also used texture and color

[21:46] to further evoke the site's natural geology

[21:48] while incorporating selected salvaged materials

[21:51] from the existing campus.

[21:55] Looking at the overall landscape plan

[21:58] the surrounding landscape outside

[22:00] of the building kind of to the south west

[22:05] is restored as naturalized grassland using native planting

[22:12] and reinforcing the site's natural character where

[22:15] the program is not needed.

[22:18] The six gardens within the building

[22:20] create distinct amenities while sharing a common language

[22:24] with the outer naturalized landscape.

[22:27] And the broader campus.

[22:31] Zooming in this plan gives us a closer view of the six landscape

[22:36] areas and the relationships to the buildings.

[22:38] As Ben denoted a lot of the circulation comes from the south

[22:43] so as people come from the garage

[22:45] we were just looking at they come through the PSA

[22:50] connector labeled seven here with trees along the side

[22:53] directly to the heart labeled number one

[22:56] and when people enter at grade there is a grand stair

[23:00] and the elevated pedestrian walk label number

[23:03] four in the diagram which further connects

[23:05] the site to the rest of campus.

[23:08] Going down to that southern area with the existing parking garage

[23:13] this area also has restored naturalized planting

[23:18] with a few additional trees that provide shade

[23:21] along the adjacent sidewalks.

[23:23] Lastly there's a small zigzagging stair in the Hillside

[23:27] which directly connects back to the elevated pedestrian walk.

[23:31] Thank you.

[23:49] >> So Genentech did provide a model as you see here.

[23:52] Of the commission would like to take a couple of minutes

[23:54] to look at that until we get into this presentation

[23:56] we can or we can wait until after my presentation.

[24:02] Whichever the commission would prefer.

[24:09] Keep going?

[24:11] Okay.

[24:20] So getting into the entitlements required

[24:25] to prove the proposed project in the master plan

[24:33] all projects that come through require conditional use

[24:37] permit design review.

[24:38] Also asking for a tentative map approval

[24:41] and also looking at sequence analysis.

[24:45] The use permit and design review entitlements

[24:49] both require that the project show consistency

[24:52] with the General Master plan and zoning

[24:55] so I'll start with the zoning consistency discussion.

[24:58] At a high level the proposed center

[25:01] is consistent with all of the development standards including

[25:04] the floor area ratio.

[25:07] Zoning ordinance section 20.260 of the Master Plan District

[25:15] includes a subsection related to Transportation System

[25:19] Management.

[25:19] This is typically specific to transportation demand management

[25:25] but I've also included the off street parking

[25:29] discussion in this section as these three relate

[25:33] with one another.

[25:35] As you're all aware it comes before the Planning Commission

[25:39] on an annual basis to discuss their compliance

[25:41] with the transportation requirements

[25:44] and they most recently came before you

[25:46] in the spring of this year.

[25:49] That's where their October 2025 analysis found a 60% no share

[25:57] split inclusive rework options and with the trip cap

[26:02] they're about a third of what the trip

[26:07] cap would allow on site.

[26:11] The totality of the phase one redevelopment projects

[26:15] would decrease campus wide parking which

[26:18] is in keeping with the goals.

[26:22] The total amount of parking for the entire campus

[26:26] would be reduced to just over 6000 parking spaces.

[26:29] The proposed project is in compliance with the zoning

[26:33] ordinance requirements.

[26:35] In terms of consistency with the master plan

[26:38] these slides show how the project

[26:42] meets the four main objectives.

[26:46] This one deals with land use objectives and urban design

[26:51] objectives and then how it is consistent with transportation

[26:55] and infrastructure and sustainability objectives.

[27:01] As part of the Genentech Master Plan Consistency discussion

[27:06] staff also wanted to highlight how vehicular access

[27:09] and circulation will be handled with the eventual closure of DNA

[27:14] way .

[27:18] In 2025 required the roadways highlighted in this image.

[27:22] Has the ability to close portions of these streets

[27:26] to through traffic.

[27:28] Of public access is maintained and if service and fire access

[27:32] is maintained throughout the campus the project

[27:36] itself includes construction on the portion that

[27:39] is colored orange in the image.

[27:45] The site circulation image shows how the proposed project

[27:50] will comply with the requirements

[27:51] of their acquisition.

[27:53] Public vehicular circulation would

[27:55] continue on all the roadways indicated in blue

[27:58] and then service and emergency vehicular access

[28:02] would be accommodated by the internal road

[28:04] network indicated in Orange.

[28:07] The project team has worked closely

[28:09] with the city including public works fire and police

[28:13] to ensure that site circulation will meet all of our emergency

[28:17] access infrastructure needs.

[28:21] The application does include a tentative map.

[28:25] The engineering division has reviewed the tentative map

[28:27] and finds that it meets all necessary municipal code

[28:30] requirements and included relevant conditions of approval

[28:33] as part of the overall project conditions of approval.

[28:37] From a general planning consistency standpoint

[28:40] the General Plan Land use designation

[28:43] for the overall campus is business technology Park

[28:47] which allows for campus like environments

[28:50] for corporate headquarters research and development

[28:52] facilities and offices.

[28:55] The general plan also includes overarching goals

[28:57] related to South San Francisco remaining a hub of science

[29:01] development and improving the use of one on one subarea

[29:05] to improve connectivity for workforces

[29:08] and to increase alternative travel modes.

[29:12] The project is consistent with and will

[29:15] be a focal project in meeting the general long term vision.

[29:21] This slide shows the estimated development fees for the project

[29:27] which total approximately 54 million

[29:30] based on 2026 calculations.

[29:33] Actual building permit fees will be determined when

[29:39] Foundation permits are issued.

[29:42] Moving to an environmental review

[29:45] while it's the only portion of the phase one redevelopment

[29:49] projects that is before the Planning

[29:51] Commission for entitlements tonight

[29:54] the California Environmental Quality Act

[29:56] requires analysis of the whole of the action which

[29:59] means all of the individual parts of an activity.

[30:02] Based on this consistency analysis evaluated

[30:07] each of the phase one redevelopment projects

[30:10] individually and collectively under one document

[30:12] and so that includes all of the buildings

[30:16] or parts of the project that are identified

[30:18] in green on this slide.

[30:20] In 2020 the City Council certified

[30:25] an environmental impact report or EIR

[30:28] for the Genentech Master Plan.

[30:31] The 2020 Master Plan EIR evaluated the potential impacts

[30:35] of the proposed growth and additional employees identified

[30:39] in the 2020 Master Plan for Genentech.

[30:42] Subsequently in 2022 the City Council

[30:47] certified for the 2040 General Plan Update Zoning Code

[30:52] Amendments and Climate Action Plan.

[30:54] The General Plan EIR evaluated potential impacts

[30:58] and additional growth envisioned in the General Plan update.

[31:02] Together we refer to those two as the prior EIR.

[31:08] The guidelines allow cities to consider

[31:10] whether projects potential environmental effects

[31:13] have already been evaluated and disclosed in the prior EIR

[31:17] and whether additional environmental review is

[31:20] necessary.

[31:21] To determine this a consistency checklist and addendum

[31:26] was prepared.

[31:30] The consistency checklist assign each of the projects

[31:36] and came to the following primary conclusions.

[31:38] The phase one redevelopment projects

[31:41] do not trigger any of the conditions

[31:43] under section 15162 that would require

[31:47] a subsequent or supplemental EIR.

[31:50] The project's environmental effects fall within the scope of

[31:56] and are consistent with what was already evaluated in the prior.

[32:04] The projects match the density and land use assumptions

[32:07] in the General Plan and the Campus Master Plan

[32:11] and there are no new significant on site

[32:14] off site or cumulative impacts beyond what the prior is already

[32:20] examined and then for the new transmission

[32:24] line that will connect to the electrical substation

[32:29] the proposed changes are minor enough that an addendum rather

[32:32] than a subsequent is appropriate under section 15164.

[32:38] Based on these findings staff concludes

[32:42] that the checklist and addendum to the prior

[32:46] is the appropriate documentation for the phase one redevelopment

[32:52] project.

[32:54] So coming to the last portion the reimagining

[33:00] of the overall campus is a significant investment

[33:04] that allows them to continue as a primary hub for the industry

[33:09] within South San Francisco and furthers

[33:11] the city's goals related to connectivity, innovation,

[33:14] and sustainability.

[33:16] So based on the findings and conditions of approval

[33:20] contained in the Associated resolutions staff

[33:24] recommends the Planning Commission

[33:25] take the following two actions.

[33:27] First that you move to adopt the resolution making

[33:31] a determination that the project is within the scope of the phase

[33:34] one redevelopment projects the checklist

[33:38] and addendum and second move to adopt the resolution approving

[33:42] the entitlements request and including the errata

[33:46] which you have a copy of in front of you

[33:48] which changes the conditions of approval specifically

[33:54] engineering condition of approval number 47

[33:57] so the last sentence reads the city will

[33:59] be responsible for implementing the construction of the city

[34:03] capital improvements of the sanitary sewer mains

[34:06] identified in condition of approval 45.

[34:09] The original conditions incorrectly

[34:12] stated condition of approval 44.

[34:16] The last thing I will state is that the Planning Commission

[34:22] also received comment letters from the following groups

[34:28] from the San Mateo Labor Council the building

[34:32] and Construction Trades Council, Bay Area Council Congressman

[34:37] Kevin Mullin, California life Sciences, chamber

[34:40] of San Mateo County, North coast state carpenters Union

[34:44] and the South San Francisco Chamber of Commerce.

[34:47] All of those comments in support of the proposed project.

[34:52] With that that ends the staff presentation.

[34:55] Both staff and the team are happy to answer any questions.

[35:01] I will turn it over to the commission.

[35:06] >> Do any of the commissioners want to take a moment to see --

[35:11] or should we jump in?

[35:14] Okay.

[35:17] All right.

[35:18] Do commissioners have questions for staff or applicant?

[35:26] >> I've got two major questions the first of which can probably

[35:29] be disposed of pretty promptly.

[35:30] We did see a circulation map and the main vehicle quarters that

[35:39] were fire and service roads.

[35:43] My question is we have some five story buildings going in that

[35:48] are away from main roads and when there is an incident

[35:52] the fire department will need to bring in --

[35:56] may need to bring in a large ladder truck.

[35:59] I was just wondering if those roads can accommodate a larger

[36:03] ladder truck and the service roads can accommodate -- >> Yes.

[36:08] I do know that the team met directly with the fire Marshal

[36:14] to discuss how all of the service roads

[36:18] would work throughout the site.

[36:21] I actually should look to see.

[36:23] The fire Marshal is not here.

[36:25] And all of the service roads are designed

[36:29] to meet the fire department's needs for access

[36:32] to those buildings.

[36:34] If the team wants to talk any more about that but generally

[36:38] yes it would meet fire department guidelines.

[36:42] >> I just needed for the record that it was checked.

[36:46] The second is we saw some slides that outlined

[36:48] some significant leveling of the campus

[36:52] and that brings basically three interrelated questions here.

[36:59] One confirming that this amount of leveling

[37:01] does not trigger anything additionally

[37:04] environmentally in terms of similar

[37:07] that's not already accounted for that we're in these resolutions.

[37:16] Two what is going to be done with the removed material

[37:21] and three as with many things in Oyster Point

[37:27] we have a history of shipyard and stockyards

[37:32] potentially you may find some older materials that

[37:36] may be contaminated.

[37:38] Are we anticipating any environmental hazards

[37:41] or concerns from the removed materials?

[37:51] >> I will start an answer and then turn it over to the project

[37:53] team.

[37:54] I do know that the analysis did not

[37:58] find there was anything significant

[38:01] from the preliminary analysis that was completed.

[38:06] We do have Scott Gregory who prepared the documents

[38:12] and might be able to talk a little more about that

[38:14] and then I will pass over the material questions.

[38:33] >> I am an environmental consultant .

[38:38] To address your questions about environmental implications

[38:40] to the extent of grading on the site I do

[38:43] think that the document which is called a checklist

[38:47] and supposed to be abbreviated but it's quite a thick document

[38:51] has done a very thorough documentation

[38:53] of the extent of grading that would occur

[38:56] on the site, the geotechnical constraints in how those are

[39:00] overcome through the retaining wall systems

[39:02] and how those systems are designed

[39:05] to protect geotechnical issues landslides and slopes

[39:09] and buildings etc.

[39:10] So I think the full extent of environmental implications

[39:13] of the hydrological geological biological to the extent

[39:18] of grading that would occur on the site was fully addressed

[39:22] and not found to be a new significant effect.

[39:24] In terms of where the soil would go

[39:28] the checklist has identified a couple of different options.

[39:31] One of those is to create a soil storage location

[39:34] within the campus where soil over time

[39:38] there's going to be a lot of movement

[39:39] and some needs to get cut and filled so one option is to store

[39:43] a component of that soil temporarily so it can be cut

[39:49] from one location and stored for a while

[39:51] and moved back to a new location as filled so that's one option.

[39:55] We also studied one option where all of that soil

[39:58] would be essentially exported from the site.

[40:01] We looked at the air quality emissions

[40:03] from the trucks that would occur from that process

[40:06] and found that would not result in new or more severe

[40:10] significant environmental air quality effects.

[40:12] And then your other concern was about --

[40:17] >> I don't expect many -- there wasn't a lot of preindustrial

[40:22] workup but just wondering if there is any worries

[40:27] or potential concerns from prior uses in the areas that will be

[40:31] excavated.

[40:33] >> Within the location we have looked at today and within

[40:36] the adjacent properties where two of the other projects are

[40:40] located there have been detailed geotechnical and environmental

[40:43] site specific studies that have identified the soils within

[40:47] those locations.

[40:49] Didn't find necessarily remnants of historic buildings but did

[40:54] find things like serpentine soils

[40:55] so there will be a process as those cuts are taken

[41:02] to determine the capabilities of those soils

[41:04] to be reused as fill versus those soils that may need

[41:07] to be disposed of in a certain amount of that is assumed

[41:10] to need to be disposed of including

[41:12] those serpentine soils.

[41:15] >> Thank you.

[41:25] >> Any questions for commissioners?

[41:29] >> Just more of a question on population.

[41:31] I know you're demolishing existing buildings.

[41:37] Is it going to merge over to the new ones?

[41:41] It is a beautiful facility and how much impact would that be?

[41:45] But you're tedium is very good though by the way.

[41:49] >> That's correct.

[41:50] These buildings are anticipated to be

[41:52] staffed by workers who are already present on the site.

[41:55] This is not intended to accommodate

[41:57] some surge in employee growth.

[42:00] It is merely to relieve pressure on existing labs that many

[42:06] of which date back to the early 90s and have been retrofitted

[42:10] as many times as they possibly can but are really at the limit

[42:14] of their capacity both in terms of the number of people

[42:18] and scientists they can support as well as the infrastructure

[42:21] they can support to do science in the way it's done now

[42:25] so in short it is really to allow a more generous workspace

[42:30] allocation to the existing population rather than

[42:34] to accommodate growth.

[42:44] >> Can you please educate us and the community.

[42:46] There's a lot of talk about AI taking over and replacing

[42:51] jobs in the city especially in the research.

[42:55] Can you educate us on the layout of the new buildings,

[43:00] the inside and how it's going to enhance the workforce

[43:06] and not replacing scientists and employees on campus?

[43:13] >> Absolutely.

[43:14] It's a pretty exciting application

[43:16] of artificial intelligence actually

[43:18] and it's been fascinating for me to learn how that is manifest

[43:22] in the workplace and in the design lab buildings.

[43:25] It's been an interesting exercise

[43:27] because the science and technology is changing

[43:30] so quickly that we anticipate by the time this building delivers

[43:35] in six plus years that way of working

[43:39] may have changed yet again so one of the challenges that we

[43:44] and the team have taken on is trying to design the building

[43:47] to be as flexible as possible to imagine and allow those futures

[43:52] but fundamentally the building is

[43:55] designed to accommodate those changes in two major ways.

[43:59] Number one is to allow a much greater degree of automation

[44:04] in the labs than occurs today and this is not

[44:07] so much about taking people out of the picture it's allowing

[44:13] the building and the labs to be continually working even

[44:17] at a time when the scientists may not even

[44:19] be there themselves.

[44:21] The scientists are there and are part of the process

[44:25] thinking of the experience designing it and working

[44:28] directly with their colleagues who may not be at a wet biology

[44:33] bench but who are at the computer screen working

[44:36] on these models helping inform what the next experiment might

[44:41] be and then designing within much more flexible and highly

[44:45] instrumented labs experiments to be able to be run for data to be

[44:52] processed for then the machine learning to help analyze

[44:56] that data and in real time be helping the scientist design

[45:01] and choose and plan out the next experiment.

[45:05] So rather than replacing people is it just functions

[45:10] as an augmented employee essentially allowing the work

[45:14] to happen much faster and in a much more flexible way so not

[45:20] only are the buildings designed to be able to accommodate that

[45:23] flexibility to allow for that change in technology that I

[45:28] think we have an idea about but continue to change in the future

[45:32] and so from an infrastructure standpoint and building layout

[45:36] standpoint much more open utilities that can be connected

[45:40] to and reconnected as labs need to change and also a much closer

[45:45] integration of the bench scientists with those who are

[45:49] working more directly on computers rather than right now

[45:53] we have those in entirely different parts

[45:55] of the campus.

[45:56] This brings those data scientists closer

[46:00] to the actual bench scientists so that collaboration happens

[46:05] more closely in real time.

[46:11] >> Thank you.

[46:16] >> Thank you.

[46:19] Can you just sort of clarify for the record

[46:25] we are doing determination for the whole of this project that

[46:29] is laid out in the model and looking at entitlements

[46:34] specifically for the center but can you clarify what

[46:40] if things were to change after we

[46:42] do the determinations for the whole thing?

[46:52] >> If you adopt or approve the checklist and addendum that

[46:57] looks at the project as it's designed currently.

[47:01] If when they bring forward the Pharmatech R&D center

[47:08] or the logistics center if they make changes

[47:12] to the way those buildings are designed or the way

[47:16] they are situated then there would be another consistency

[47:21] checklist just to look do any of those changes result

[47:27] in new impacts or effects?

[47:31] So every time they bring new entitlements

[47:35] back before the Planning Commission

[47:38] we will be answering the question of

[47:40] is this in keeping with the environmental analysis we've

[47:43] already done or did we need to make some small tweaks to it?

[47:47] But we are looking at the whole of the action at the beginning

[47:52] and if there's any tweaks that are necessary as we move forward

[47:55] we would be able to do that at each

[47:57] of the subsequent entitlement hearings.

[48:02] >> I know that folks see a lot of construction and some of it

[48:05] is moving in different paces or stalled for various reasons.

[48:08] Can you talk about what the timing

[48:10] is of this or if that would not be known why it would be known?

[48:17] >> I will pass it on to the project team.

[48:25] >> For the center specifically we anticipate the project will

[48:28] take approximately four years to construct so that will deliver

[48:33] we hope around the end of 2032.

[48:36] The rest of the projects as I've mentioned

[48:40] that's the largest it is going to take the longest to build

[48:43] and that's why we are starting so early

[48:45] and that's why you're seeing it first.

[48:47] The other projects are smaller at least some of them

[48:51] are slightly less complex and our hope and intention is

[48:55] that the majority of them would ultimately deliver around

[49:00] the same time.

[49:03] There may be some variation in their

[49:05] and we need to work through that internally

[49:09] but within a few years the idea would be that these all

[49:12] come together because as you can see the model and in the plans

[49:16] it is a main component of this reimagining of the site

[49:21] but it really works in concert with the other buildings

[49:24] around it so in order to really achieve the desired campus

[49:28] vision and that pedestrianized core we do need that to all

[49:33] come together around the same time

[49:35] so the idea is that while there may be some delay

[49:38] some might move faster or some slightly slower ideally

[49:41] they will all come together more or less simultaneously.

[49:52] >> Thank you.

[49:52] There's a lot of moving parts here

[49:53] and a lot of things that are in the city's control

[49:56] and some things that are outside the city's control.

[49:59] Do you foresee any issues with some

[50:01] of those elements that involve other jurisdictions or bodies?

[50:08] >> I hope not.

[50:10] We of course will engage with other agencies as required.

[50:16] None of the projects that are part of this proposal

[50:21] encroach into the control jurisdiction.

[50:24] That is usually the one that can cause

[50:27] more unpredictability and longer delays in terms of permitting.

[50:31] Obviously everything here is high up on the hill

[50:34] so that doesn't apply.

[50:36] We are below the height restrictions by a wide margin.

[50:41] These buildings are not as tall as the tallest buildings that we

[50:45] have on the site right now on the top of the hill

[50:48] so we don't anticipate any issues there

[50:50] but of course we will proceed with the part

[50:56] 77 regulations as expeditiously as possible

[50:58] and respond to any concerns they may have.

[51:02] Other than that the project will be

[51:04] subject to all of the standard mitigation measures identified.

[51:08] There are some instances in which

[51:11] engagement with other agencies might

[51:14] be appropriate for instance if we do stumble

[51:17] upon any toxic materials then we would have

[51:20] to work through those proper channels

[51:21] but we haven't identified anything else that would hold us

[51:25] up.

[51:30] >> The last thing I was curious about is what this does

[51:32] of course with closing off is it consolidates the property

[51:36] in a way that I think makes sense given the vision that is

[51:41] described here.

[51:42] Can you talk about what is the public's experience

[51:44] on the outskirts of this area like for example I'm not seeing

[51:50] walls or fences or enclosures but can you

[51:54] help me understand what the public might experience

[51:56] as they're moving around this large campus >> The public's

[52:03] experience of the campus in general

[52:04] is not likely to change all that much.

[52:07] What we are talking about with these projects here

[52:10] is restricted to the heart of the campus come

[52:12] at the top of the hill is not really

[52:15] where we see the most public engagement with our site general

[52:18] because it is quite internal to the campus.

[52:21] The remaining portions of the campus that this project does

[52:24] not address will remain more or less unchanged

[52:27] for the foreseeable future.

[52:29] That includes all of the current access points

[52:33] to the Bay trail along our campus shoreline.

[52:36] There are four of them.

[52:38] Those will remain in place.

[52:39] Similarly as you may recall from the Purchase and sale agreement

[52:45] that we have regarding the roadways

[52:47] the portion of DNA way that extends from East Grand

[52:50] up to the top of the hill will remain

[52:52] open to the public in perpetuity so that includes access

[52:56] to the wind harp and it will include access to the new entry

[53:01] way or arrival building that we hope to move forward

[53:05] with as part of this portfolio.

[53:07] What we are hoping there is that the public experience

[53:10] of coming to Genentech will actually be improved.

[53:13] Part of the challenge that we experience on the site right

[53:16] now is it is so big and so spread out

[53:19] that you don't actually really know when you've arrived

[53:22] and it can be hard to understand where as a visitor

[53:25] you are expected to go and where you're welcome

[53:30] and intended so by really consolidating the arrivals

[53:35] experience and making a much more pronounced and legible

[53:40] entryway to the campus we hope that that will actually improve

[53:43] the public's experience of those who

[53:46] come on to the heart of the site and those who are enjoying

[53:49] the bayfront and the more peripheral areas that

[53:52] will be largely unchanged.

[53:55] >> Thank you.

[53:56] Any other questions for commissioners?

[54:04] Does any member of the public wish to address the Commission

[54:08] on this item at this time?

[54:10] Please fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk.

[54:13] >> We have no members of the public wanting to provide public

[54:16] comments.

[54:17] >> Thank you.

[54:18] Then I will close the public hearing

[54:21] and turn this over to the commission for discussion.

[54:24] Would anyone like to make comment?

[54:33] >> Like you said it's a beautiful project.

[54:35] One comment I'm glad in your design

[54:38] is it took into account the four building size and one larger

[54:43] building.

[54:43] The one thing I will say on behalf

[54:48] of how the park was above I was out there working since 1980

[54:55] and seeing How it's grown and expanded

[54:57] and the whole bit due to the efforts

[54:59] being the major landowner out there you've

[55:02] always had beautiful buildings and I see no different with this

[55:06] so I think it's just adding more to the jewel that's already

[55:09] out there and you will have my support.

[55:24] >> Then I will just add I appreciate the thoughtfulness

[55:27] and the phased approach going into this.

[55:32] And in particular seeing a number of ways

[55:38] that this plan exceeds what is required for example the vision

[55:44] of going completely zero carbon I think there's a number of ways

[55:51] that this project is really looking for win win scenarios

[55:56] for the community and the environment

[56:00] and I appreciate the thoughtfulness to that.

[56:04] I also appreciate the ongoing and continued investment

[56:10] in South City and being a neighbor of South City.

[56:15] With that can I get a motion for three a?

[56:22] >> I can make a motion.

[56:24] To adopt the resolution making the determination

[56:26] that the project is within the scope of phase one redevelopment

[56:30] project checklist and addendum.

[56:34] >> Second.

[56:36] >> Roll call please?

[56:59] >> Moved to adopt the entitlements requested.

[57:05] >> Can I ask with the included errata?

[57:07] >> Yes thank you.

[57:09] >> Roll call please?

[57:30] >> Item three passes.

[57:31] Congratulations.

[57:32] On to administrative business.

[57:36] Do we have anything?

[57:41] >> We do not have any administrative business.

[57:46] >> All right.

[57:46] Does any commissioner have items or announcements to make?

[57:52] Then I adjourn this meeting.

Planning Commission on 2026-09-03 7:00 PM

Agenda

Transcript