[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.