ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 5
2 would be replaced with entertainment-oriented uses, including a sports arena, concert theater, cinema, and more conference/exhibition space and hotel rooms. The 2011 Specific Plan also required a general plan amendment to eliminate the General Plan prohibition on housing within the Baylands.
The City commenced preparation of an EIR evaluating the developer’s 2011 Specific Plan. The City Council directed that the EIR evaluate several additional land use variants at the same level of detail as the developer’s Specific Plan.
Given that these other variants did not include the same level of design detail as the developer’s proposed Specific Plan, the City prepared a Program EIR as defined under CEQA. Program EIRs are typically prepared for policy documents where specific details pertaining to site development are not available and therefore cannot be described or analyzed in the EIR.
The draft Program EIR was published in June 2013. Following an extensive public review process, the Final Program EIR was published in June 2015. The Planning Commission reviewed the Final Program EIR and project from September 2015 to August 2016. City Council review of the Final Program EIR and project ran through 2016 and 2017.
2018
In July 2018, the City Council certified the Final Program EIR, approved General Plan Amendment GPA-1-18, and directed that GPA-1-18 be placed on the November 2018 ballot for ratification. Voters approved GPA-1-18 as “Measure JJ” in November 2018 with 55% of the voters in support.
GPA-1-18, as ratified under Measure JJ, amended the General Plan Land Use Element to establish a Planned Development land use designation allowing between 1800-2220 residential units, 6.5 million square feet of commercial development and 500,000 square feet of hotel. As shown in the land use diagram below, nonresidential development is distributed both west and east of the rail line, while residential uses are permitted only in the northwest quadrant of the site generally bounded by Bayshore Boulevard on the west, the City and County of San Francisco on the north, the Caltrain rail line on the east, and the line of Main Street (extended) on the south.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 5
3
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 5
4 GP-1-18 also established a number of policies as set forth below:
Development within the Baylands Subarea shall be subject to the City’s approval of a single Specific Plan for the entirety of the Baylands Subarea and a development agreement that is consistent with General Plan policies, incorporate(s) all applicable EIR mitigation measures, and is consistent with the following standards:
A. The single Specific Plan and development agreement subject to City review and approval referenced above shall include:
1. detailed plans for Title 27 compliant closure of the landfill and Remedial Action Plans for OU-1 (subsequently renamed SM-OU) and OU-2 that have been approved by all appropriate regulatory agencies, which include, but shall not be limited to, CalRecycle, the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department, the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board;
2. a specific schedule establishing the time frames by which (i) the landfill must be closed in full compliance with Title 27 and (ii) the remediation of OU-1 and OU-2 must be completed; and
3. specific means by which the City may enforce the applicant’s adherence to the schedule for closure and remediation and specific consequences, e.g., monetary penalties, suspension of building permits, etc., that the City may impose on the applicant for failing to adhere to the schedule.
B. A reliable water supply approved by the City of Brisbane to support proposed uses within the Baylands shall be secured prior to site development.
C. All residential development shall be designed and remediated to accommodate ground level residential uses and ground level residential-supportive uses such as daycare, parks, schools, playgrounds, and medical facilities.
D. Each increment of development shall be provided with appropriate transportation related and other infrastructure, facilities, and site amenities as determined by the City. Such transportation related and other infrastructure, facilities, and site amenities (e.g., parks, open space preservation, habitat enhancement) shall be provided at the developer’s cost.
E. Baylands development shall be revenue positive to the City on an annual basis where all City costs (e.g., annual operating costs, maintenance and replacement of equipment, facilities, infrastructure, cultural resource and habitat protection and management etc.) are exceeded by project-generated revenues to the City (e.g., to the City’s General Fund, enterprise funds, special funds, etc.) during all phases of development and upon final buildout.
F. Sufficient assurances for the satisfactory ongoing performance of site remediation and site development (e.g. site monitoring, performance bonds, environmental insurance) shall be provided as determined by the City.
G. The required Specific Plan for the Baylands shall include a sustainability program for new development consistent with the principles of the Sustainability Framework for the Brisbane Baylands, Final Report accepted by the City Council on November 5, 2015. Baylands development shall be designed so as to be energy neutral on an ongoing basis.
H. Key habitat areas, including Icehouse Hill and Brisbane Lagoon and adjacent habitat as identified in the 2001 City Open Space Master Plan shall be preserved, enhanced, and protected.
I. The historic Roundhouse shall be protected and preserved. The required Specific Plan shall ensure rehabilitation of the Roundhouse for adaptive reuse at the developer’s cost.
J. Development shall be designed to protect uses from the 100-year flood, including 100 years of projected sea level rise as determined based on regulatory standards or guidelines in effect at the time of project
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 5
5 construction, with the reference to guidelines and sea level rise projections approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer based on context-specific considerations of risk tolerance and adaptive capacity.
K. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit to export soil or move soil from the existing landfill area for incorporation in a remediation or grading plan, the soil shall be tested in a manner approved by the City. 2019-2025
The 2011 Specific Plan submitted by the property owner was inconsistent with GP-1-18/Measure JJ and could not be approved. In 2019, the developer indicated their intent to revise the Specific Plan application to be consistent with the provisions of GP-1-18/Measure JJ.
GP-1-19: Follow-Up General Plan Amendments
In approving GP-1-18, the City Council directed staff to process a follow up general plan amendment (GP-1-19) to fully implement Measure JJ and ensure the General Plan maintained internal consistency. There were also several substantive amendments to the Circulation Element to reflect recently adopted State requirements regarding traffic congestion and how vehicle delay is evaluated, specifically that intersection Level of Service is no longer considered an environmental impact under CEQA. To address the issue of how traffic could be managed on regional arterial streets, GP-1-19 added Program C.1.b to the Circulation Element that generally calls for preparation and implementation of design plans for Bayshore Boulevard and the Geneva Avenue extension providing for a combination of roadway, intersection, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facility improvements that accommodate regional through traffic while enhancing mobility for Brisbane residents and businesses. This program was the basis for preparing the Bayshore Mobility Plan, discussed later in this attachment. GP-1-19 was approved by the City Council in January 2020.
Home For All Community Conversations
In 2019 the City sponsored a series of community conversations regarding future planning for the Baylands, in collaboration with San Mateo County Home for All (a Countywide collaborative funded by the County of San Mateo) and Common Knowledge (a civic engagement consulting firm). The purpose of these conversations was to provide the community the opportunity to engage in a dialogue regarding its desires, values, and goals for the anticipated revised Brisbane Baylands Specific Plan and future development of the site, consistent with the land use parameters established by Measure JJ. Representatives of Baylands Development, Inc. (BDI; the applicant’s new business entity managing the project) attended these conversations to hear firsthand the community’s desires and expectations as it initiated preparing a revised Specific Plan to submit to the City.
Revised Baylands Specific Plan
In 2020 the applicant submitted a preliminary revised Specific Plan to the City. While this submittal was not complete, it provided sufficient information regarding the applicant’s proposal for the City to initiate the process of preparing a new project-level EIR (Baylands Specific Plan EIR). As noted previously, the City certified a program EIR when approving GP-1-18. The level of detail and information contained in the Program EIR was not sufficient to adequately address the potential environmental impacts of the revised Specific Plan. More information regarding the Baylands Specific Plan EIR is included in the analysis section of this staff report.
BDI submitted a revised draft Specific Plan to the City of Brisbane in 2023. Preliminary review of the developer’s draft specific plan by City staff identified several issues that needed to be addressed to ensure the draft Specific Plan would meet minimal legal adequacy requirements. City staff review of the 2023 draft Specific Plan was limited
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 5
6 to reviewing for minimum compliance with legal requirements for Specific Plan adequacy; it did not represent a comprehensive review of the overall document. Ultimately the 2023 draft Specific Plan was further revised by the developer, culminating in the 2025 version of draft Specific Plan that is evaluated in the 2025 DEIR (see discussion below).
City advisory bodies (Complete Streets, Open Space and Ecology, Park and Recreation Commission) were provided with the opportunity to review and comment on the draft 2025 Baylands Specific Plan. Comments on the draft 2025 Baylands Specific Plan from these advisory bodies are included within the Final EIR (Attachment 4 of this staff report).
Final EIR
As noted previously, the City initiated the Specific Plan project-level EIR process in 2020 by issuing a Notice of Preparation (NOP). A revised NOP was published in 2023 to reflect a change in the planned water source for the project from what was originally anticipated in 2020 when the EIR process was initiated. The draft EIR was ultimately published on April 3, 2025, and made available for public review until September 2, 2025. The Final EIR was published on May 14, 2026, and is addressed in detail later in this attachment.
Other Activities
While the applicant finalized their Specific Plan submittal and the City was preparing the draft EIR, other notable statewide and local actions and activities noted below impacted the City’s Baylands planning efforts.
City of Brisbane 2023-2031 Housing Element
As a precursor to preparation of the City’s Housing Element for 2023-2031, the City was assigned a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) of 1,588 units. The RHNA is the number of new dwelling units the City must plan on accommodating over the 2023-2031 8-year planning cycle. If a jurisdiction does not have enough capacity in its existing residential zoning districts to accommodate its RHNA, the City must adopt zoning amendments to accommodate its RHNA. Brisbane does not have sufficient residentially-zoned property to accommodate 1,588 units, and the adopted Housing Element identifies rezoning the Baylands subarea via adoption of the Baylands Specific Plan as the means to satisfy the bulk of its RHNA obligations. Utilizing the Baylands to satisfy RHNA obligations imposed both substantive and procedural requirements on the Baylands Specific Plan. State law establishes minimum density, size, and other requirements that must be met when properties are rezoned to satisfy RHNA. If the Specific Plan does not comply with these standards, the State could determine that such residentially-zoned properties do not count for purposes of meeting RHNA.
A notable procedural requirement relates to timing of adoption of the rezoning via approval of the Specific Plan.
Under State law, the City has three years from Housing Element adoption to rezone properties to satisfy its RHNA obligations. The City’s Housing Element was adopted on May 18, 2023. The City has not met this deadline.
However, the City recognizes the critical importance of meeting its Housing Element obligations and is committed to moving the Specific Plan process forward in a timely manner.
High Speed Rail (HSR)
Another external factor relates to the California HSR project. In their efforts to implement the voter approved initiative to provide high speed rail service between San Francisco and Los Angeles, the California High Speed Rail Authority (CAHSRA) identified the Baylands as the preferred site for a 125 acre light maintenance facility (LMF) to store and service trains. This action was taken without the concurrence of either the City of Brisbane or the
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 5
7 Baylands property owner. CAHSRA prepared a joint EIR/Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) analyzing the potential impacts of this proposed facility. City review of the EIR/EIS revealed numerous deficiencies in the environmental document, and the City of Brisbane filed a lawsuit against CAHSRA in 2022 regarding the inadequacies of the environmental document. This lawsuit was settled in 2024 (California High-Speed Rail Authority and City of Brisbane Reach Settlement Agreement) Under the settlement agreement, CAHSRA agreed to reduce the footprint of the LMF from 125 to 45 acres. The City agreed to evaluate a project alternative in the Baylands Specific Plan EIR (under preparation at the time), incorporating the reduced size LMF. The City further agreed to accommodate a reduced size LMF in the staffrecommended Baylands Specific Plan. CAHSRA and the City agreed to collaborate on the final design of the LMF in the future when the HSR project advances to the point of full project design. The staff-recommended Specific Plan and the EIR’s Modified Alternative 1 are consistent with the Settlement Agreement’s terms.
Remediation
A longstanding issue of community concern regarding the potential development of the Baylands is the historic contamination of the site, and ensuring the site is adequately remediated to ensure the safety of future residents, workers, and visitors. These concerns are reflected in provisions of Measure JJ, which require the approval of remediation plans by the appropriate regulatory agencies, schedules for the completion of remediation, and incorporation of enforcement measures to ensure remediation is completed. For remediation purposes the site is divided into two Operable Units (SM-OU and OU-2) west of the train tracks, and the former landfill on the east. (Operable Units (OUs) are distinct, portions of a large or complex environmental cleanup site based on geographic areas, specific contaminants, cleanup methods required, and/or agency responsible for oversight.) BDI submitted Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) for both OUs to the appropriate state regulatory agencies – Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). It also submitted a landfill closure plan for approval from the RWQCB. The RAP for SM-OU was approved in October 2021, while the RAP for OU-2 was approved in December 2021. The landfill closure plan was approved in February 2025. While the City of Brisbane does not have legal authority over remediation or landfill closure plans, the City was an active participant in the review of these plans, hiring an independent third-party consulting firm to review these plans and provide comments to the regulatory agencies.
2026
The Final Baylands Specific Plan EIR was published on May 14, 2026, alongside staff’s recommended Baylands Specific Plan. The 2026 Staff Recommended Specific Plan incorporates staff-recommended revisions to the 2025 Specific Plan prepared by BDI to respond to issues that emerged through the environmental review process, to achieve consistency with adopted City ordinances and policies, and to enhance staff’s ability to implement the Specific Plan over time. The Planning Commission held two workshops (May 28, 2025, and June 11, 2025) prior to the June 25, 2026, public hearing providing detailed overviews of the 2026 Staff Recommended Specific Plan and the Final EIR. City Council hearings are anticipated to begin in early fall following Commission review.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
Attachment 6: Detailed Final EIR and Responses to Comments & Mitigation Monitoring analysis
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
1 Final EIR & Responses to Comments & Mitigation
Monitoring
Attachment 6 Contents
Draft and Final EIR..............................................................................................................................................2 Written Comments and List of Commenters .........................................................................................................4 Responses to Comments....................................................................................................................................4 Relationship of Specific Plan EIR To The Program EIR............................................................................................4 Relationship of the Proposed High-Speed Rail Light Maintenance Facility to the Baylands Specific Plan.............5 Analysis of Jobs-Housing Balance ..........................................................................................................................5 Relationship of Site Remediation and Final Landfill Closure to the Baylands Specific Plan ...................................5 Enforceability of Mitigation Measures...................................................................................................................6 GHG Impacts and Mitigation Measures.................................................................................................................6 Geneva Avenue Design ..........................................................................................................................................7 Bayshore Mobility Plan ..........................................................................................................................................8 Revisions to the Draft EIR.......................................................................................................................................8 Final EIR Chapter 16 - Maximum Building Heights and Towers .............................................................................8 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting ................................................................................................................9
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
2 Draft and Final EIR
The 2025 Brisbane Bayland Specific Plan Draft EIR (Draft EIR) was prepared following the City’s July 2018 certification of the prior, programmatic EIR associated with the adoption of GP-1-18. After the public review and comment period concluded, the City made revisions and additions to clarify and amplify the Draft EIR’s analysis.
The Draft EIR, as revised, is a key component of the Final EIR. Key sections of the Draft EIR revised include:
• Project description
• Project objectives
o Implement the City’s Housing Element by providing a mix of housing types, sizes, and densities that contributes to local and regional housing needs for all economic segments of the community, as well as for families and individuals of all ages and physical abilities. o Implement the Brisbane General Plan, including General Plan Amendments GP-1-18 (Measure JJ) and GP-1-19.
o Preserve and enhance the site’s natural resources and historic features within a system of permanent open space that:
▪ Restores, and enhances wetlands and natural habitats within the Baylands; ▪ Promotes visual connectivity between the Baylands, San Bruno Mountain, and San Francisco Bay;
▪ Adapts to climate change and sea level rise; and
▪ Provides a range of recreational opportunities and open space experiences for Baylands residents and workers, as well as for the larger Brisbane community. o Enhance Brisbane’s economic vitality by ensuring that Baylands development will be revenue positive for the City.
o Establish the Baylands as a leading model of sustainable development consistent with the principles of the City’s Sustainability Framework for the Baylands o Attract office-based employment to the Baylands that provides a broad range of high paying jobs as well as training and advancement opportunities for the community’s young adults. o Enable residents, workers, and visitors to be less dependent on cars. • Analysis of the physical environmental impacts that would result from Baylands Specific Plan development, including their significance, mitigation measures to avoid or reduce significant impacts, and the significance of impacts after mitigation measures are implemented Topics included in the Draft EIR include:
o Land Use and Planning;
o Hazards and Hazardous Materials;
o Population and Housing;
o Hydrology and Water Quality;
o Aesthetic and Visual Resources;
o Geology, Soils, and Seismicity;
o Biological Resources;
o Utilities, Service Systems, and Water Supply;
o Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources;
o Public Services and Facilities;
o Transportation;
o Recreational Resources;
o Air Quality;
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
3 o Wildland Fire;
o Greenhouse Gas Emissions;
o Energy Resources; and
o Significant Unavoidable Impacts:
▪ Impact AQ-1: Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants for which the Basin is in Nonattainment ▪ Impact NOI-1: Temporary Increase in Ambient Noise Levels during Construction ▪ Impact NOI-2: Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels from Stationary Sources ▪ Impact NOI-3: Permanent Increase in Ambient Noise Levels along Roadways ▪ Impact NOI-5: Cumulative Impact Related to Pile-Driving Vibration during Construction; and
▪ Impact NOI-6: Cumulative Impact Related to Exacerbating Human Annoyance or Hazards to Buildings due to Increased Vibration Levels (Placing High-Density Residential Uses Immediately Adjacent to the Caltrain Right-of-Way)
• City and other agency approvals needed to implement the Project o City of Brisbane
o Cal Water
o Bayshore School District
o Bayshore Sanitary District
• Areas of controversy/issues to be resolved
o Compatibility of proposed high-density development with the existing Brisbane community and adjacent residential neighborhoods in San Francisco;
o Proposed development of 20+ story residential and office towers along the west side of the Caltrain line;
o Residential development needed to comply with Regional Housing Needs Allocation occurring on lands within the former Southern Pacific railyard that are contaminated and subject to remediation pursuant to the regulatory authority of state agencies; o Commercial development on the former Brisbane Landfill subject to final landfill closure pursuant to the regulatory authority of state and county agencies; o Availability of a water supply to serve proposed Baylands development and impacts associated with the proposed California Water Company supply;
o Potential impacts on existing biological habitats and implementation of identified mitigation measures;
o Adaptation to sea level rise and water quality impacts on the Brisbane Lagoon and San Francisco Bay;
o Traffic;
o Air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions impacts, including emission of toxic air contaminants (Section 4.9, Air Quality, and Section 4.10, Greenhouse Gas Emissions); o Noise during construction;
o Potential for liquefaction and ability of soils to safely support mid- and high-rise structures; o Adequacy of existing and proposed public infrastructure, facilities, and services for the Baylands; o Availability of active recreational facilities and effects on windsurfing resources within the Candlestick Point State Recreation Area; and
o Relationship between the Baylands Specific Plan and the California High Speed Rail Authority’s proposed light maintenance facility within the Baylands. • Alternatives
The following alternatives were analyzed in the EIR:
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
4 o No Project Alternatives:
▪ No Project-No Build; and
▪ No Project-General Plan Buildout
o Proposed Density Alternatives, which redistributed the Specific Plan’s proposed density in different configurations within the Baylands planning area:
▪ Proposed Density Around an Operating 45-Acre Light Maintenance Facility; ▪ Modified Proposed Density Around an Operating 45-Acre Light Maintenance Facility Alternative, which was added to the Final EIR to analyze the environmental effects of the 2025 Saff Recommended Specific Plan;
▪ Proposed Density, Balanced Commercial Development; and ▪ Proposed Density, Lower Maximum Building Heights
o Reduced Density Alternatives, which redistributed and reduced the Specific Plan’s proposed density:
▪ Reduced Commercial Development;
▪ Reduced Density Development Around an Operating 45-Acre Light Maintenance Facility; ▪ Reduced Density, Balanced Commercial Development; and ▪ Reduced Density, Lower Maximum Building Heights (identified in EIR as the environmentally superior alternative)
• Other mandatory topics
o Irreversible environmental effects
o Growth inducing impacts
o Cumulative impacts
Written Comments and List of Commenters
During the 180-day Draft EIR public comment period, the City received approximately 40 comment letters on the draft EIR. The list of commenters and comment letters are included in Chapters 12 and 13 of the Final EIR.
Responses to Comments
Chapter 13 of the Final EIR provides written responses to all comments that are relevant to the EIR. Consistent with the CEQA guidelines, comments unrelated to the EIR are acknowledged but not responded to. To address themes or similar concerns that recurred in multiple comment letters, a number of general responses were prepared.
These broad concerns and general responses are briefly summarized below.
Relationship of Specific Plan EIR To The Program EIR
In July 2018, the City Council certified a Program EIR in conjunction with approval of GP-1-18. Several comments raised concerns that the City should have relied on the previously certified Brisbane Baylands Program EIR instead of preparing a new EIR. The Project Draft EIR analyzed the 2025 Baylands Specific Plan project in relation to CEQA requirements for preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR. This analysis determined the following:
• The 2025 Specific Plan made substantial revisions to the 2011 Brisbane Baylands Specific Plan that was analyzed in the Program EIR. The 2025 Specific Plan proposes a change in water service agency for the Baylands, Beatty, and Sierra Point areas; doubling in size of the on-site water recycling facility and involving construction of off-site recycled water facilities that were not analyzed in the Program EIR. • Many of the physical environmental effects that would result from the 2025 Specific Plan project represent new significant environmental effects that were not previously identified in the Program EIR or
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
5 would cause substantial increases in the severity of previously identified significant effects. These new and substantially more severe environmental impacts are described in the draft EIR. The draft EIR further identifies mitigation measures from the previous program EIR which are applicable to the project, as well as those mitigation measures which do not apply.
Relationship of the Proposed High-Speed Rail Light Maintenance Facility to the Baylands Specific Plan
Several comments asserted that the Specific Plan did not address the Light Maintenance Facility (LMF) that is proposed by the California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) within the Baylands and that the EIR did not therefore analyze impacts associated with Baylands development adjacent to the LMF.
In approving the San Jose to San Francisco high speed rail segment, the Authority identified an LMF to be constructed and operated on approximately 121 acres of the Baylands Specific Plan area, east of the Caltrain rightof-way. In September 2024, the Authority and the City of Brisbane reached an agreement wherein the Authority would pursue a smaller (approximately 45-acre) LMF within the eastern portion of the site. The draft 2025 Specific Plan prepared by BDI did not accommodate an LMF.
In order to both analyze impacts associated with the Specific Plan proposed by the applicant and also analyze a land use pattern for Baylands development that would accommodate the 45-acre LMF, the September 2024 settlement agreement between the City and the Authority provides for the Baylands Specific Plan EIR to address the 45-acre LMF “as a CEQA alternative, as provided for in Cal Code Reg., Tit. 14, Sect. 15126.6(d).” As noted previously, the Draft EIR identified and analyzed an alternative wherein Tunnel Avenue would be realigned to the east, providing a 45-acre site within which the Authority could develop a high-speed rail LMF. While the impacts of Baylands development around an operating 45-acre LMF are addressed in the Draft EIR, analysis of impacts associated with LMF construction and operation is the responsibility of CAHRA.
Analysis of Jobs-Housing Balance
Various comment letters raised issues regarding how the issue of “jobs-housing balance” was addressed in the Draft EIR and asserted that the Baylands Specific Plan would exacerbate the existing regional jobs–housing imbalance in Brisbane and surrounding jurisdictions.
The “job-housing balance,” is the relationship between the number of dwelling units and number of workers within a given area, and is not by itself a physical environmental effect and is therefore not directly addressed in the Baylands Specific Plan Draft EIR. However, the physical environmental effects resulting from the combination of residential development (2,200 units), commercial use (6.5 million square feet), and hotel use (500,000 square feet) proposed in the Specific Plan and the relationship between Baylands jobs and housing were considered in the Draft EIR in such topic areas as vehicle miles traveled, air quality, greenhouse gas emissions, and energy. The Draft EIR further analyzed and concluded the project is consistent with regional growth projections.
Relationship of Site Remediation and Final Landfill Closure to the Baylands Specific Plan
Several comments raised issues regarding the site remediation and Title 27 landfill closure that would be required for Baylands development, including questions about specific provisions of the remediation plans. Site remediation, including establishment of cleanup levels within the western portion of the Baylands and Title 27 landfill closure within the eastern portion of the site, is subject to the regulatory authority of state and county agencies as
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
6 discussed previously. Remedial Action and landfill closure plans have been approved and site remediation and landfill closure subject to state and county regulatory approvals and oversight are required to precede Baylands development. The City will issue grading permits as required to implement remediation and landfill closure plans.
Enforceability of Mitigation Measures
A number of comments expressed concerns regarding the implementation of EIR mitigation measures, including who would be responsible for undertaking and enforcing mitigation actions, and the extent to which the successful implementation of mitigation measures would be ensured. As required under CEQA, a “mitigation monitoring and reporting program” (MMRP) is required to ensure that the mitigation measures and project revisions identified in the EIR are implemented. The MMRP for the Baylands is presented in Chapter 17 of the Final EIR and is discussed in more detail in Attachment 7 of the staff report.
GHG Impacts and Mitigation Measures
The Draft EIR contained Threshold GHG-1, which analyzed whether the Baylands Specific Plan would result in a net increase in average annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions generated by Specific Plan land uses. The Draft EIR analysis concluded the project would result in a net increase in GHG emissions within the Specific Plan area, which would require the incorporation of feasible mitigation measures under a “net zero” GHG emissions impact threshold. The Draft EIR identified several mitigation measures, including requirements for low global warming refrigerants, use of renewable fuels for shuttles and other on-site facilities, promoting EV vehicle usage, and the purchase of GHG offset credits. Specifically, MM GHG-1e: GHG Offset Credits would have required the Specific Plan applicant to retire GHG offset credits in a quantity sufficient to offset 100 percent of the Project’s construction emissions and 100 percent of the Project’s operational emissions, for a 30-year period.
Several comments questioned the effectiveness, feasibility, and/or enforceability of MM GHG-1e because GHG emissions offset credits are not a reliable method for reducing the Specific Plan’s significant and unavoidable GHG emissions impact. Some comments also state that Mitigation Measure MM GHG-1e is not consistent with guidance from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and Bay Area Air District (Air District). Some comments recommend alternative mitigation measures to GHG offset credits.
As discussed in detail in Chapter 15 of the Final EIR, the City exercised its discretion as the lead agency to establish significance thresholds and decided to remove both Threshold and Impact GHG-1 from the EIR, and instead rely exclusively on Thresholds GHG-2 and GHG-3 to evaluate the Project’s GHG emissions impacts. This change more closely aligns the EIR’s analysis to local and state climate and housing goals, including consistency with the Bay Area Air District’s recommended GHG thresholds and policy direction from CARB. The removal of GHG-1 does not trigger the need for recirculation of the EIR because it does not introduce new significant environmental impacts or increase the severity of previously identified impacts. Instead, it represents a refinement in analytical approach.
With the removal of Threshold GHG-1, mitigation measures that were tied specifically to GHG-1 were also removed from the EIR, including MM GHG 1-e. However, many of the GHG reduction strategies have been incorporated into staff’s recommended Specific Plan, and Thresholds GHG-2 and GHG-3 continue to reflect a commitment to sustainability that exceeds the minimum thresholds recommended by the Air District.
Chapter 15 of the Final EIR includes revisions to the GHG section of the Draft EIR reflecting the revision noted above.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
7 Geneva Avenue Design
Commenters expressed concerns about the proposed extension and design of Geneva Avenue, focusing on transit functionality, mitigation measures, safety, and multimodal access. A central theme of these comments was the appropriateness of the Draft EIR’s mitigation measure MM TRA-2 requiring a six-lane cross-section on the Geneva Avenue bridge over the Caltrain rail line. Commenters questioned whether bus rapid transit (BRT) on Geneva Avenue could be effectively implemented, particularly without coordination west of Bayshore Boulevard into Daly City. Commenters also raised concerns that mitigation measure MM TRA-2 could induce additional vehicle travel and undermine the project’s VMT reduction goals, as well concerns regarding the need for dedicated BRT lanes to achieve long-term regional transit objectives and ensure reliable, congestion-free service.
The applicant’s 2025 draft Specific Plan proposed a six-lane configuration for Geneva Avenue, with two travel lanes and one BRT lane in each direction, for the entirety of Geneva Avenue, , except for the bridge crossing over the Caltrain right-of-way. For the Geneva Avenue bridge,2025 draft Specific Plan proposed a four-lane roadway with:
• Two lanes in each direction, one of which would be called a “shared transit/travel lane”; • No dedicated BRT lane; and
• A shared use pathway for bicycles and pedestrians.
Thus, the applicant’s 2025 draft Specific Plan did not include dedicated BRT lanes like would be provided along Geneva Avenue to the east and west of the bridge.
The Bi-County Study and a Caltrans 2013 Project Study Report both propose that the entirety of the Geneva Avenue extension provide six lanes, including the bridge crossing of the Caltrain right-of-way. Draft EIR Mitigation Measure MM TRA-2a reflects the consensus of the cities of Brisbane, San Francisco, and Daly City, San Mateo County, transportation agencies in both San Francisco and San Mateo counties, and Caltrans achieved in the BiCounty Study that a six-lane configuration should be provided along the Geneva Avenue extension. Mitigation Measure MM TRA-2a thus requires the following facilities:
• For the entirety of Geneva Avenue, including the bridge crossing of the Caltrain right-of-way-two mixedflow vehicular travel lanes; and a dedicated BRT lane (total three lanes) in each direction. • For Geneva Avenue on either side of the Geneva Avenue bridge over the Caltrain right-of-way-- a Class IV protected bikeway; and sidewalk.
• For the Geneva Avenue bridge over the Caltrain right-of-way- A shared use pathway for bicycles and pedestrians.
Retaining BRT lanes along the entirety of the Geneva Avenue extension would support project and regional VMT reduction goals by improving travel times and reliability for transit riders and thus increasing the competitiveness of transit as an option compared to automobile travel. Together, these improvements would enhance east–west connectivity and strengthen multimodal access through the Baylands Specific Plan area while addressing the safety issues identified in the Draft EIR.
While Mitigation Measure MM TRA-2a requires a six-lane roadway configuration along the entirety of the Geneva Avenue extension, it does not add any provisions to the Specific Plan that would require Baylands development to pay for the entirety of bridge construction. Recognizing the regional nature of the Geneva Avenue extension, the Baylands Specific Plan includes County Measure W and an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District as potential funding mechanisms for the Geneva Avenue bridge, while excluding private (project) funding for the bridge. The proposed revisions to Mitigation Measure MM TRA-2b, provide for “fair share contributions from developments
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
8 participating in Bi-County Transportation Program funding” in addition to County Measure W and Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District.
Because the extension of Geneva Avenue through the Baylands serves not only the Specific Plan area but is a regional facility envisioned in the Bi-County Transportation Study to serve development in Brisbane, San Francisco, and Daly City, any changes in the currently proposed six-lane configuration of the Geneva Avenue extension need to be coordinated with other agencies responsible for improvements to the portions of the Geneva Avenue corridor outside of Brisbane.
Bayshore Mobility Plan
A wide range of concerns were raised regarding the proposed Bayshore Mobility Plan. Many comments raised concerns about traffic congestion, particularly skepticism about the proposed road diet that would reduce travel lanes. Other comments expressed concern that this change could worsen congestion or emergency access and evacuation on Bayshore Boulevard and surrounding streets. Pedestrian and bicycle safety was another prominent topic. Commenters called for continuous sidewalks along the full length of Bayshore Boulevard and other trafficcalming features to improve safety for pedestrians.
Several comments requested pedestrian bridges across Bayshore Boulevard, particularly to provide safe school access and to separate children from vehicle traffic. Other comments also expressed concern for the safety of school children. Evacuation safety was also mentioned in multiple comments, with concerns that narrowed roadway capacity could impede emergency egress. See separate discussion in the staff report and attachment 8 regarding the Bayshore Mobility Plan, including a summary of response to Draft EIR comments.
Revisions to the Draft EIR
Proposed changes to the Draft EIR made either in response to comments received or as staff-initiated changes to the Specific Plan are included to clarify the Draft EIR text and are set forth in Chapter 14 of the Final EIR. These changes are also integrated into the Draft EIR presented in Volumes 1-3 of the Final EIR. The revised text does not provide new information that would result in any new significant impact not already identified in the Draft EIR nor a substantial increase in the severity of an impact identified in the Draft EIR that cannot be mitigated to less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures agreed to by the Applicant. Thus, none of the text revisions would require recirculation pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15088.5.
Final EIR Chapter 16 - Maximum Building Heights and Towers The applicant’s 2025 Specific Plan proposed buildings up to 18+ stories and 270 feet in height along the west side of the Caltrain right-of-way, and visual simulations presented in the Draft EIR illustrate that these buildings would impede scenic views of San Francisco Bay, the Brisbane Lagoon, and San Bruno Mountain from several public viewpoints. Draft EIR Table 4.5-2 also illustrated the visual perception of closely spaced Baylands buildings as a single unbroken building mass. The Draft EIR therefore concluded that Baylands development would result in a significant aesthetic impact.
Program EIR Mitigation Measure 4.A-1a required that development within 350 feet of the eastern boundary of the Specific Plan area (US Highway 101) be limited to a maximum height of 80 feet. The Draft EIR concluded this measure would not effectively preserve scenic views of the Bay or San Bruno Mountain as seen from Central Brisbane, the Sunnydale neighborhood, US Highway 101, or the Candlestick Point State Recreational Area shoreline. Because additional mitigation was therefore needed to preserve scenic vistas, Mitigation Measure MM
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
9 AES-1a eliminated the proposed 18+ story residential and commercial towers by limiting building heights to no more than:
• 12 stories (150 feet) for office buildings
• 8 stories (100 feet) for residential buildings
The Draft EIR concluded that implementation of these measures would remove obstructions of scenic vistas and reduce impacts to less than significant.
Comments were received on the Draft EIR objecting to the elimination of residential tower buildings, These comments emphasized the need for housing in the Bay Area and raised concerns regarding the constraints that eliminating residential tower buildings would have on the production of housing within the Baylands.
Draft EIR Mitigation Measure MM AES-1b was revised to eliminate the previously recommended building height limits and instead limit the number of residential and commercial tower buildings and concentrate them in proximity to the Bayshore Caltrain Station within a ¼-mile walking distance of the station. Chapter 16 of the Final EIR includes a revised alternative specific plan reflecting the incorporation of this mitigation measure. The alternative, identified as Modified Alternative 11, represents a minor revision to Draft EIR Alternative 1, Project Development Around an Operating LMF, which is in turn similar to the proposed Baylands Specific Plan. Modified Alternative 1 differs from the proposed project and Alternative 1 by incorporating revised Mitigation Measure MM AES-1b, thereby limiting the number of 18+ story buildings to four, all of which would be located north of Geneva Avenue within a ¼-mile walking distance of the Bayshore Caltrain Station.
Given the similarity of Modified Alternative 1 to the proposed project and Alternative 1 analyzed in the Draft EIR, the analysis in Chapter 16 of the Final EIR demonstrates that Modified Alternative 1 would have the same conclusions as for the project and Alternative 1. Thus, no new or substantially more-severe significant environmental impacts would occur beyond those addressed in the Draft EIR. All mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR, including modifications made as a result of responses to comments identified in Chapter 14, Modifications to the Draft EIR, also apply to Modified Alternative 1.
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15097 require public agencies “to adopt a reporting or monitoring program for changes to the project which it has adopted or made a condition of project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.” The purpose of such a program is to ensure that when an environmental document identifies mitigation measures, those measures are, in fact, implemented.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) included in Chapter 17 of the Final EIR is based on the mitigation measures presented in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) prepared by the City of Brisbane to analyze impacts of proposed 2025 Baylands Specific Plan project. As lead agency, the City of Brisbane is responsible for implementation of this MMRP.
The MMRP identifies:
• Significance of Impact Being Mitigated: Identifies the nature of the impact addressed in the mitigation measure for which implementation of the mitigation measure is required. • Mitigation Measure: Provides the full text of the mitigation measure 1 Modified Alternative 1 serves as the basis for the staff recommended Baylands Specific Plan as discussed elsewhere in the staff report.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 6
10 • Mitigation Measure Compliance and Timing Requirements: Designates the party or parties responsible for implementing the mitigation measure, which typically includes the Specific Plan and/or site-specific development project applicants, their agents (e.g., construction contractors, qualified biologists) where relevant, and future site users and operators of proposed public facilities within the Baylands. All mitigation measures are enforceable against successors in interest to any of these parties. • Enforcement Actions/Reports and Timing Requirements: Identifies the party at the City of Brisbane responsible for determining compliance with the mitigation measure; designates the party responsible for documenting, reporting, and monitoring implementation activities; and designates the party responsible for enforcement and monitoring implementation activities, including procedures and frequency of documenting and reporting mitigation implementation.
• Actions to Indicate Compliance/Compliance Approval: Identifies the party at the City of Brisbane responsible for signing off on its completion and defines the action(s) indicating completion of their implementation.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
Attachment 7: Detailed 2026 Specific Plan analysis
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
1 2026 Specific Plan Summary
Attachment 7 Contents
2026 Specific Plan ..............................................................................................................................................3 Plan Organization...............................................................................................................................................3 Vision/Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................3 Chapter 1 - Introduction.....................................................................................................................................3 Chapter 2 - Land Use Program and Planning Districts.........................................................................................4 Planning Districts and Blocks.................................................................................................................................4 Land Use Designations and Building Types............................................................................................................7 Affordable Housing Program................................................................................................................................12 Existing Use Areas................................................................................................................................................12 Chapter 3 – Development Standards and Controls........................................................................................... 14 Building Standards...............................................................................................................................................14 Performance Standards .......................................................................................................................................19 Allowable Land Uses............................................................................................................................................20 Existing Use Areas................................................................................................................................................23 Chapter 4 – Sustainability ................................................................................................................................ 24 Chapter 5 – Conservation and Open Space....................................................................................................... 27 Open Space Framework Summary Table .............................................................................................................28 Urban Plaza..........................................................................................................................................................29 Active Recreation Areas.......................................................................................................................................29 Community Greens..............................................................................................................................................30 Ecological Greenspaces........................................................................................................................................30 Lagoon Park and Lagoon......................................................................................................................................30 Baylands Preserve................................................................................................................................................31 Ecological Park .....................................................................................................................................................31 Visitacion Creek ...................................................................................................................................................32 Icehouse Hill ........................................................................................................................................................32 Stormwater Detention.........................................................................................................................................33 Green edges.........................................................................................................................................................33 Figure 5.3.5 Illustrative Concept Diagram............................................................................................................34 Chapter 6 – Circulation..................................................................................................................................... 35
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
2 Roadways.............................................................................................................................................................35 Intersections........................................................................................................................................................37 Active Transportation Network............................................................................................................................37 Transit Network ...................................................................................................................................................42 Mobility Hubs ......................................................................................................................................................43 Transportation Demand Management ................................................................................................................43 Off-Street Parking ................................................................................................................................................44 Streetscape Design ..............................................................................................................................................45 Chapter 7 – Infrastructure ................................................................................................................................ 46 Site grading ..........................................................................................................................................................46 Grading Sequence................................................................................................................................................47 Sea Level Rise.......................................................................................................................................................48 Stormwater..........................................................................................................................................................48 Potable Water......................................................................................................................................................50 Additional Utility Systems Within the Baylands...................................................................................................51 Chapter 8 – Public Facilities Financing .............................................................................................................. 51 Owner Financing..................................................................................................................................................52 Community Facilities Districts..............................................................................................................................52 Special Assessment Districts................................................................................................................................53 Tax Increment Financing/Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts ...............................................................53 Chapter 9 – Implementation ............................................................................................................................ 53 Phasing.................................................................................................................................................................53 Subsequent City Approval Processes...................................................................................................................54 Development Allocation Process.........................................................................................................................55
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
3 2026 Specific Plan
Plan Organization
Plan Organization The 2026 Staff Recommended Specific Plan (Specific Plan) reflects the structure proposed in developer’s draft 2025 Specific Plan organized as shown below:
• Vision/Executive Summary
• Introduction
• Land Use Program/ Planning Districts
• Development and Design Standards
• Sustainability
• Conservation/Open Space
• Circulation
• Infrastructure
• Public Facility Financing
• Implementation
Each chapter of the Specific Plan is summarized below along with a discussion of applicable, substantive differences between the developer prepared and staff recommended versions of the plan.
Vision/Executive Summary
This chapter provides an overview of the project, including background and planning process. It further sets out design principles for the Specific Plan, which are:
• designing the project to respond to the unique natural setting and integrating development into the natural landscape;
• linking concentrated density with transit;
• creating active and pedestrian streets, frontages and destinations; • integrated sustainability;
• quality and diversity in design; and
• deemphasizing private vehicle usage and parking.
This section further outlines a design process overlaying existing uses, open space, vehicular access, and transit to define a series of districts accommodating a variety of land uses.
Chapter 1 - Introduction
This chapter provides background information regarding the site, purpose of the Specific Plan, and consistency with Measure JJ and the General Plan. It describes the Baylands as a transit-oriented, mixed-use district, integrating, housing, employment uses, open space, and multimodal connections. It also lays out the core planning principles of the document, including concentrating density near transit, creating walkable, connected neighborhoods, integrating natural systems and open space, and ensuring the site develops in a way that is both environmentally and economically sustainable.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
4 Chapter 2 - Land Use Program and Planning Districts
This chapter establishes the overall land use program and how the site is organized, with a clear overall pattern of higher-intensity, mixed-use development concentrated near transit in the northern portion of the site and a transition to lower-intensity uses moving south and toward the edges, across a mix of residential, commercial, mixed-use, and open space areas.
The land use program allows the following maximum allowable development:
Residential: 2,200 dwelling units
Commercial: 6.5 million square feet of commercial and an additional 500,000 square feet of hotel use It also establishes a planning and regulatory hierarchy with a geographic component, a land use-based component, a building type component, and an affordable housing component as specified below:
• Planning Districts and Blocks - Geographically defined districts within the plan area. Maximum allowable development for each district and block within The Baylands is established in Section 2.5; • Land Use Designations - Define permitted land uses and intensity that are distributed within the Planning Districts (Section 2.4);
• Building Types - Building forms envisioned to be developed under the Specific Plan to implement the land use categories (Section 2.4; design standards by building types are in Section 3.2):
• Affordable Housing Program (Section 2.6); and
• Existing Use Areas (Section 2.7).
Planning Districts and Blocks
Five planning districts are proposed, intended to translate the Specific Plan’s overall vision and goals into a physical framework. Each district — Bayshore, Roundhouse, Icehouse Hill, Campus East, and Sustainability — embodies a unique role within The Baylands community, incorporating housing, employment, and open space to various degrees while maintaining flexibility for future phasing and refinement.
Some design elements of the Specific Plan are regulated based on geographic location within the Specific Plan area.
As such, the Specific Plan establishes regulations at district and block levels. A district is composed of multiple blocks, and each district has a distinct purpose and context. The Specific Plan also defines blocks within each district and establishes maximum intensity and density standards for each block. Different street types, what sits next to what, and the kinds of uses in each area all influence how streets are designed, how people get access, and other features at the district and block level. For example, the district/block plan might identify blocks where active ground-floor uses are encouraged or required, or blocks where driveways are not allowed.
Overall maximum development buildout at the block level cannot cumulatively exceed the district maximum.
Recognizing that development of The Baylands will occur over an extended period during which market conditions and demands will evolve, the Specific Plan provides flexibility in that the theoretical block-by-block maximums cumulatively exceed the maximum total buildout for each district. Because the sum of theoretical block-by-block maximums exceeds the allowable development for each district, not all blocks will be permitted to reach their maximum allowable buildout. Specific Plan Section 9.3.2, Development Allocation Process, establishes a process for allocating the maximum allowable district-level development to individual blocks within the district so even if some
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
5 projects are built at higher or lower densities, the districts as a whole still build out to the intended level in terms of the overall density and intensity planned for the entire Specific Plan area.
Figure 1 (SP Fig 2.5.1) depicts the district maps
shown in the Specific Plan. The plan identifies
existing use areas and incorporates them into the
Specific Plan, whereas these areas were excluded
from the developer’s draft Specific Plan.
Additionally, the boundaries of the Sustainability
District have been modified and slightly expanded to
accommodate the potential High-Speed Rail Light
Maintenance Facility (HSR LMF), which was not
reflected in the developer’s draft Specific Plan.
The Specific Plan contains exhibits illustrating the
block pattern of each district. The district regulations also incorporate a table specifying the land use
program and maximum allowable residential and
commercial development within each block as
discussed above. An example of the district and
block regulations (for the Bayshore District) is shown
on the next page.
FIGURE 2.5.1 BAYLANDS DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
6
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
7 Land Use Designations and Building Types
Land use designations define permitted land uses and intensity that are distributed within the Planning Districts.
Building types are the physical structures that will implement the land use designations. The Specific Plan is structured to support a mix of building types within each land use designation to allow for a range of building types and densities over time, rather than applying a single uniform approach across the plan area. For example, the lowdensity residential land use designations allow multiple building types to be constructed, including single-family, duplex, townhomes, and low-rise multifamily. Land use designations and building types are further described below:
Residential Designations:
Low Density Residential (LDR)
• Up to 4-story, low-profile housing (single-family, duplex, townhomes, small multifamily) • Minimum average density (averaged across entire LDR land use): 25 DU/acre • Building types allowed:
– Duplex/Single-family (≤50 ft; individual at-grade garages) – Townhomes (≤50 ft; at-grade or below-grade parking)
– Multi-Family Low (≤50 ft; stacked townhomes or flats) Mid Density Residential (MDR)
• Moderate-scale multifamily and townhomes
• Minimum average density (averaged across entire MDR land use): 75 DU/acre • Building types allowed:
– Townhomes
– Multi-Family Low
– Multi-Family Mid (≤110 ft; located along Sunnydale/Frontage; podium or below-grade parking; ground-floor uses allowed)
High Density Residential (HDR)
• High-profile multifamily housing
• Minimum average density (averaged across entire HDR land use): 95 DU/acre • Building types allowed:
– Multi-Family Mid
– Multi-Family High (≤270 ft; west of Caltrain corridor; structured parking off Frontage Road; may include ground-floor retail/active edges) Multi-Family High buildings may have ground floor retail and active pedestrian environments as indicated in Figure 3.4.1, Active Ground Floor Frontages. Building height restrictions are discussed in Chapter 03, Development and Design. This building type is limited to the High-Density Residential land use designation.
RESIDENTIAL
LAND USE PURPOSE / CHARACTER
MINIMUM
AVERAGE
DENSITY*
MAXIMUM
BUILDING
HEIGHT† PERMITTED BUILDING TYPES
LOW
DENSITY
Establishes a lower-scale residential
pattern with buildings generally up
to four stories.
25 du/ac 50 feet Single-family homes, duplexes,
townhomes, small multifamily
buildings.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
8 RESIDENTIAL
LAND USE PURPOSE / CHARACTER
MINIMUM
AVERAGE
DENSITY*
MAXIMUM
BUILDING
HEIGHT† PERMITTED BUILDING TYPES
MID
DENSITY
Supports a moderate-scale, mid-rise
residential environment with a mix
of attached housing types.
75 du/ac 110 feet Townhomes, low-rise
multifamily, mid-rise
multifamily.
HIGH
DENSITY
Accommodates higher-intensity
residential development, including
mid-rise and high-rise structures.
95 du/ac Up to 270
feet
Mid-rise multifamily, high-rise
multifamily.
* Density standards are established in the Land Use Program (see Chapter 2, Sections 2.4–2.5). † Height limits are regulated by the Development and Design Standards (see Chapter 3).
Commercial Designations:
Low Density Commercial (LDC)
• Supports large-scale, campus-style employment uses
• Oriented along Sierra Point Parkway with emphasis on Bay views • Minimum average FAR (averaged across entire LDC land use): 0.5 (or 2.0 within ½ mile of Bayshore Caltrain Station per MM LUP-2)
• Permitted building type:
– Campus Low-Rise (≤100 ft; primarily office; may include ground-floor retail/public services; parking in at-grade lots or above-grade structures)
Mid Density Commercial (MDC)
• Provides mid-rise office, lab, and research development in campus settings • Minimum average FAR (averaged across entire MDC land use): 1.25 • Permitted building types:
– Campus Low-Rise
– Campus Mid-Rise (≤150 ft; office/lab/R&D; may include active ground-floor uses; parking in surface lots, above-grade structures, or podiums along Frontage Road) High Density Commercial (HDC)
• Allows high-intensity, transit-oriented commercial and hospitality development • Minimum average FAR (averaged across entire HDC land use): 3.5 • Permitted building types:
– Transit-Oriented Development Commercial (≤270 ft; near Caltrain Station Plaza; active ground-floor uses permitted; parking via structures/podiums accessed from Frontage Road) – Hospitality (≤270 ft; hotel and related uses near Urban Plaza; structured/podium parking accessed from Frontage Road; includes up to 500,000 sq ft of hotel space)
COMMERCIAL
LAND USE PURPOSE / CHARACTER
MINIMUM
AVERAGE
FAR*
MAXIMUM
BUILDING
HEIGHT† PERMITTED BUILDING TYPES
LOW
DENSITY
Supports large-scale, low-intensity,
campus-style employment uses
oriented along Sierra Point
Parkway, with an emphasis on
0.5-2.0
FAR**
100 feet Campus Low-Rise buildings
(primarily office; may include
ground-floor retail or
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
9 COMMERCIAL
LAND USE PURPOSE / CHARACTER
MINIMUM
AVERAGE
FAR*
MAXIMUM
BUILDING
HEIGHT† PERMITTED BUILDING TYPES
preserving views to San Francisco
Bay.
public-service uses; at-grade or
above-grade parking).
MID
DENSITY
Provides for mid-rise office,
laboratory, and research
development in a campus setting
adjacent to open space areas.
1.25 FAR 150 feet Campus Low-Rise and Campus
Mid-Rise buildings (office, R&D,
laboratory; may include active
ground-floor uses; surface or
structured parking).
HIGH
DENSITY
Allows high-intensity,
transit-oriented commercial and
hospitality uses near the Bayshore
Caltrain Station Plaza.
3.5 FAR Up to 270
feet
Transit-Oriented Development
Commercial buildings;
Hospitality buildings (hotel and
supporting commercial uses;
parking accessed primarily from
Frontage Road).
* FAR standards are established in the Land Use Program (see Chapter 2, including Section 2.3.1 for minimum density requirements near the Bayshore Caltrain Station). ** Minimum average FAR within ½-mile of Bayshore Caltrain Station (per (MM LUP-2) is 2.0 † Height limits are regulated by the Development and Design Standards (see Chapter 3).
The Amenities Area
This land use designation is intended to be used for indoor and outdoor community gathering spaces and meeting rooms, recreation, fitness, food and beverage, and clubhouse use. Amenities buildings provided for the exclusive use of residents and guests of residents for recreation or social purposes are not considered part of the maximum permitted 6.5 million square feet of commercial development. This area will be low rise in character with buildings having a maximum height of 60 feet.
Open Space
Open Space identified within the Specific Plan includes a variety of parks, playgrounds, trails, wetlands, habitat, water quality, accessory uses serving one or more public recreation, conservation, and other water resource use. A total of 148.4 acres (approximately 27.9%) is designated as Open Space lands, which exceeds the 25% (123.5 acres) of open space required for the Specific Plan’s 532.3-acre land area. The restored Roundhouse and accessory use buildings necessary to support operation and maintenance of Open Space are not included in the maximum allowable 6.5 million square feet of commercial development.
Sustainable Infrastructure
This land use designation allows for various types of infrastructure, including energy (e.g., renewable energy generation, battery energy storage, switching substation), water and wastewater (e.g., water recycling, potable water storage, and pumping facilities), public agency maintenance facilities e.g., City corporation yard, high speed rail light maintenance facility), and other infrastructure uses. Buildings needed to support infrastructure are not included in the maximum permitted 6.5 million square feet of commercial development.
Land Use Program by District
The general distribution of land uses within the districts is summarized in the table below. A notable difference between the Specific Plan and draft versions is the size and configuration of the Sustainability District, as this
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
10 district has been enlarged and slightly reconfigured in the 2026 plan to accommodate a potential High Speed Rail Light Maintenance Facility (LMF).
LAND USE PROGRAM BY DISTRICT
DISTRICT LAND USE DESIGNATIONS ACREAGE DWELLING UNITS COMMERCIAL DEV (SQ FT) BAYSHORE Low Density Res 15.2
Mid density Res 0.9
High Density Res 3.1
Mid Density Commercial 1.2
High Density Commercial 2.5
Open Space 5.1
Existing Use Area 0.3
Rights-of-Way 12.4
Subtotal 40.6 980 900,000*
ROUNDHOUSE Low Density Residential 28.7
Mid Density Residential 4.9
Mid Density Commercial 2.2
Open Space 7.1
Existing Use Area 2.6
Rights-of-Way 15.9
Sub-Total 61.64 1,220 200,000
ICEHOUSE HILL Mid Density Commercial 43.0 3,400,000
Amenities Area 2.6
Open Space 47.2
Existing Use Area 2.9
Rights-of-Way 9.1
Sub-Total 104.8 3,400,000
CAMPUS EAST Low Density Commercial 72.5 2,500,000
Open Space 40.8
Existing Use Area 8.9
Rights-of-Way 13.02
Sub-Total 135.4 2,500,000
SUSTAINABILITY Sustainable Infrastructure 105.2
Open Space 48.2
Existing Use Area 23.6
Rights-of-Way 13.1
Sub-Total 190.1
*This includes commercial square footage and up to 500,000 square feet of hotel. The square footage designated for commercial use cannot be reallocated to the hotel, and vice versa.
A comparison between the developer’s proposed land use distribution (top-left plan) with the staff-recommended version (bottom-right plan) is shown in the figure below.
Another change involves changes to the west side of the Caltrain rail line. The developer’s draft Specific Plan allowed multiple 270-foot (18+ story) commercial and residential towers between the Bayshore Caltrain Station and Main Street. The Draft EIR found that this pattern would create significant visual impacts and recommended limiting heights to 150 feet (office) and 100 feet (residential).
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
11 (2026) SPECIFIC PLAN
2025 DEVELOPER’S DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
12 Based on public comments, staff revised Mitigation Measure MM AES-1b. Instead of lowering height limits across this entire area, the revised measure would:
• Limit the total number of towers; and
• Concentrate them within a ¼-mile of the Bayshore Caltrain Station, where height has the least visual impact.
Under this approach, the Specific Plan designates four high-density blocks (two commercial, two residential) west of Caltrain and north of Main Street, each of which may contain one tower up to 270 feet.
To implement these changes, the staff-recommended plan updates several block-level land use designations along the west side of Caltrain:
• A high-density commercial block north of Geneva Avenue is redesignated as High Density Residential and split into two blocks, each eligible for one tower.
• Blocks immediately north and south of Geneva Avenue are redesignated from HDR to MDC. • Blocks further south to Main Street (extended) are redesignated from HDR to MDR.
These changes increase Mid Density Residential acreage and reduce High Density Residential acreage but still allow the Specific Plan to deliver the full 2,200 housing units. Concentrating both tall buildings and additional commercial density closer to transit also strengthens the project’s goal of supporting transit ridership and reducing auto dependence.
Affordable Housing Program
The Specific Plan establishes minimum densities for residential development within The Baylands that are consistent with Housing Element Table 5-1, Quantified Objectives for Cycle 6 (2023–2031), Housing Units by Site.
Staff’s recommended changes also require an affordable housing plan to be prepared and submitted to the City for review and approved prior to issuance of the first residential building permit within The Baylands. The affordable housing plan, which may be included as part of a development agreement for The Baylands or as a standalone document, shall, at a minimum, include a program committing to and demonstrating how a minimum of 15% of the total housing units constructed within The Baylands will meet the affordability requirements of the Brisbane Municipal Code. The affordable housing plan must include enforceable provisions and a phasing schedule to ensure timely delivery of the required affordable units, provision of housing suitable for seniors, persons with disabilities, and other special needs groups, and provisions to protect the ongoing affordability of housing constructed for lower income and special needs groups within The Baylands. The Specific Plan further includes requirements that universal design standards be developed and implemented ensuring that residential units are designed to meet accessibility requirements.
Existing Use Areas
The following existing use area within The Baylands shall be included at the time of Specific Plan adoption, as shown on Figure 2.4.1, Existing Use Areas (provided below). The Specific Plan recognizes these uses are not proposed to be modified under the plan and makes provisions for their continued operation. Chapter 3 of the Specific Plan details the development standards for the existing use areas identified below:
• Recology Uses along Tunnel Avenue. This site is utilized by Recology as part of its main facility to the north for the assembly and storage of toter carts within an existing 35,000-square-foot building.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
13 • Golden State Lumber. Golden State Lumber operations include the storage, distribution, and sale of lumber and other building materials and hardware. Facilities include outdoor lumber storage, warehouse and distribution center, and retail space.
• Kinder Morgan Tank Farm. This site is used for the storage and distribution of petroleum products supporting regional fuel distribution operations, including jet fuel distribution for aircraft at San Francisco International Airport. Facilities include multiple large storage tanks, pipelines, and associated infrastructure for fuel handling and transfer. The City leases the most southerly portion of this site for a corporation yard.
• Machinery & Equipment Company. Operations include storage, refurbishment, sales, and distribution of used industrial equipment for various industries. Facilities include a warehouse, repair areas, and administrative offices located in the historic Pacific Fruit Express ice manufacturing plant. • Bayshore Sanitary District Pump Station. The Bayshore Sanitary District operates a sewage pumping station on this site, including pump equipment, underground pipelines, and control systems housed in a small structure.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
14 • Bayshore Boulevard Commercial Uses North. This area is currently used for the sale and distribution of construction materials and supplies. Facilities include a warehouse, retail area, and outdoor storage. • Bayshore Boulevard Commercial Uses South. This site contains an existing warehouse and a facility operated by the Brisbane Sanitary District (BSD) supporting sanitary district operations.
Chapter 3 – Development Standards and Controls
This chapter of the Specific Plan defines uses permitted in each Specific Plan Land Use Category and establishes development standards for The Baylands which regulate at the district, block, and building scales. The intent of these multi-layered standards is to create a community that integrates different types of places with various densities, character, and building forms.
This chapter is organized into the following sections which are further described below:
• Building Standards (Section 3.2). Standards for elements such as setbacks, building design, building height, parking, etc.
• Performance Standards (Section 3.3). Design standards that generally apply project wide and relate to a building’s performance, including lighting design, bird-safe design, landscaping, noise, and vibration mitigation.
• Allowable Land Uses (Section 3.4). List of permitted used by land use designation (including interim uses). • Existing Use Areas (Section 3.5). Standards for existing use areas.
Building Standards
Building standards within the Specific Plan are multi-layered, providing regulations at various scales, and set development controls both project-wide and applicable to specific building types. Some standards apply uniformly to all new development, while others are location specific, based on district and block locations. Building standards are grouped by topic and include:
• Building Land Use and Placement – maximum building heights, lot widths, setbacks, ground floor uses, and parking ratios.
• Modulation and Articulation – standards and descriptions for façade breaks, changes in material, and fenestration.
• Façade Design – standards for entry locations and articulation, landscape requirements. • Roof Design – standards for roofline modulation and variety, roof decks and trellises/shade structures, and photovoltaic utility uses.
• Active Design Features – requirements for active design features in specific building types, consistent with sustainability principles detailed within the Sustainability Framework (Chapter 4). • Other Standards – miscellaneous requirements and standards, such as for on-site open space for residential building types, screening, and/or signage.
Building Land Use and Placement
Building Heights are generally established by building type, summarized in Figure 3.2.2 below. There are, however, some reduced height limits established in particular locations, such as in proximity to the historic roundhouse and along Highway 101. which are intended to avoid potential environmental impacts.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
15 Building Setbacks and Building Frontage Requirements The pedestrian experience of the street is influenced by the positioning of buildings and uses along the sidewalk. By maintaining a consistent street wall, the street offers a sense of enclosure and consistency that helps to define the pedestrian experience and provides convenient and active uses for the pedestrian. To create the desired pedestrian environment, the Specific Plan establishes both minimum and maximum setbacks, which are established for each building type.
Priority Building Frontage is a concept within the Specific Plan that recognizes that relationship of buildings to the street is critical in shaping a user’s experience of whether a place is safe, comfortable, and enjoyable, particularly for pedestrians. In the northwesterly quadrant of the site where the highest level of pedestrian activity is expected and encouraged, Priority Building Frontage (PBF) requirements have been established. The PBF requirements stipulate how much of a building’s frontage must fall within a prescribed setback zone. The Specific Plan establishes 60% and 80% as the two potential levels of required building frontage in the PBF. The plan defines those streets to which the PBF applies and the requirement of either 60% or 80%. The standards for the building types subject to the PBF establish the setbacks zones and include other design details regarding what else (landscaping, street furniture etc.) should be incorporated into the established setbacks. See Figure 3.2.3 below.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
16
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
17 Parking: Parking maximums are established to encourage the use of alternate forms of mobility and protect atgrade open space and courtyards within each block that could be lost to parking, also minimizing the impact of parking access and driveways on the pedestrian realm.
Required parking ratios are established in the Specific Plan for each building type and are designed to
encourage residents and workers to use transit
alternatives for commuting or local travel within The
Baylands. Below-grade parking structures are preferred
for commercial and high-density residential buildings.
Where parking is provided, EV charging infrastructure
shall be installed in compliance with the most stringent adopted standard in effect at the time parking is
provided. Preferred parking for alternative-fueled
vehicles and carsharing vehicles shall also be provided.
Individual unit garages are only permitted in Low Density Residential zones. Surface parking lots are only permitted in Low Density Commercial, Medium Density
Commercial, Amenities Area, and Sustainable
Infrastructure zones.
Parking Podiums and Parking Liners: Parking podiums
provide large quantities of parking as a base for a larger building. Parking liners wrap around portions of a parking podium along street edges and contain a commercial,
residential, or other active use, screening the street level of the parking structure from pedestrian environments,
such as sidewalks, parks, plazas, etc. Figure 3.2.5. of the Specific Plan indicates where parking liners are required.
Modulation and Articulation
Building modulation and articulation relate a building to the public realm and create a human scale at street level.
These design elements are primarily addressed at the building type level, since design issues vary between land uses and building types and require design-appropriate modulation and articulation strategies. In general, multifamily design standards within the Specific Plan break down the scale of large buildings, the façades of which can extend the length of a single block, and reduce the perceived intensity of the development from surrounding public roads and open areas. Similarly, articulation of façades creates texture and pattern, giving large buildings a relatable scale and character and providing relief from long blank walls. A complete listing of required modulation and articulation standards by building type is included in Section 3.2.
Examples of modulation and articulation standards within the Specific Plan include:
• Continuous residential frontage, including individual and multiple abutting buildings, shall be a maximum of 250 feet in length.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
18 • Building breaks between Multi-Family Mid and Multi-Family Low buildings shall provide the minimum building-to building separation as defined in Setback standards per building type in Section 3.2, Building Type Standards.
• Building breaks between abutting Townhomes and Duplex/Single-Family buildings shall provide a minimum building-to-building separation of 30 feet.
• Commercial buildings shall be a maximum of 300 feet in length. Breaks between commercial buildings shall provide a minimum building-to-building separation of 30 feet.
Additionally, EIR mitigation measure MM AES-1C requires building breaks along the Bayshore Boulevard and Sierra Point Parkway frontages to limit perceived building length along high visibility corridors. These building breaks shall provide a minimum 30-foot-wide break between building masses for residential and commercial buildings along these frontages. Building breaks shall be provided at grade and be open to sky. A minimum of 50 percent of the building break area shall be landscaped. Building breaks may be provided via street, passageway, setback, or courtyard with a minimum depth of 40 feet.
Façade Design
Façade design standards are intended to ensure that ground level design relates the ground floor to adjacent streets and activates the public realm, contributing to The Baylands’ urban, mixed-use neighborhood character.
Building entry standards ensure that entries are intuitively located and easily identifiable from the street. Building entry conditions define the threshold between the public realm of the street and the private realm of the home and contribute to the character of adjacent street or public space. The Specific Plan includes façade design standards for window design (fenestration) and balconies and overhangs. Façade design standards are context sensitive and are defined at the building type level. Façade standards typically address issues such as changes in building materials, colors, textures, and patterns, building planes changes, window framing specifications, and building entry design.
Examples of façade design standards within the Specific Plan include:
• Provide a minimum of three facade treatments in the building. Qualifying changes in façade treatments include:
o Change in material, e.g., brick and metal panels
o Change in color, e.g., two different shades of brick
o Change in texture, e.g., natural stone and polished stone o Change in pattern, e.g., altering the arrangement of composite panels with a mix of horizontal and vertical seams
• Where changes in facade treatment occur, there shall be a change in plane with a minimum depth of 8 inches.
Roof Design
Roof design standards are intended to function similarly to building modulation and articulation standards and break down the scale of large buildings. These standards are intended to ensure a building’s basic roof form or profile employs different colors, materials, or shapes to ensure a level of variety between adjacent buildings and building types, to reduce the perceived intensity of the development. Other roof design standards establish controls for the location and/or height of rooftop decks and structures and sustainability related standards for PV arrays and cool roof strategies.
Examples of façade design standards within the Specific Plan include:
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
19 • No more than 4 adjacent units shall exhibit identical rooflines or identical façade treatments. • Qualifying non-identical rooflines shall exhibit variation in height of minimum 5 feet. • Qualifying non-identical façade treatments shall incorporate different approaches to one or more of the following characteristics:
o Building modulation and articulation
o Color and/or material
o Fenestration type and/or pattern
Active Design Features
Active design features are intended to promote health and wellness by providing opportunities for individuals living and working in the Baylands to integrate physical activity into their daily lives. The Specific Plan requires that the design of Residential Multi-Family High, Mid, and Low and TOD Commercial, Campus Mid-Rise, Low-Rise, and Hospitality incorporate at least 6 of the 11 Active Design features listed in the plan. Some examples of active design features include:
• Locating a main staircase to be visible from the main building lobby. • Installing light fixtures that provide a level of lighting in the staircase(s) at the same level or better than what is provided in the building corridor.
• Provide daylighting at each floor/roof level of the stair(s) using either windows and/or skylights of at least 8 square feet in size.
• Place signage encouraging stair use for health and other benefits at all elevator call areas, next to escalators and outside stairwells on each floor.
• Use inviting sensory stimulation such as artwork and/or music in stairwells.
Other Standards
Additional design standards are included within Chapter 3. They include, but are not limited to:
• Screening Design Standards: These are standards that apply to all infrastructure, utility, or service accessory structures within the Baylands. They are intended to obscure utilities, mechanical systems, and other potentially unattractive urban features from public view. Mitigation measure MM AES-3 specifically addresses visual screening of infrastructure along the north side of Geneva Avenue, requiring that the design of infrastructure facilities between the US 101 freeway and the Geneva Avenue bridge shall be provided with a combination of berms, decorative walls, and landscaping to screen views of infrastructure facilities along the north side of the roadway.
• Open Space: Residential building types include requirements for onsite open space, which can be achieved through private open space, common open space, or a combination thereof. • Signage: Generally, the Specific Plan requires a project-level sign program for new construction as part of the project application, with public realm and wayfinding signage addressed in Chapters 5 and 6. This allows for flexibility and adaptability in signage to better align with proposed developments occurring over the 20-year buildout.
Performance Standards
The Specific Plan includes performance standards to be met addressing a number of design objectives and potential environmental impacts identified in the Final EIR for the project. These standards supplement the building standards and ensure compatibility with environmental, sustainability, and public health objectives; some of these standards come from mitigation measures. Performance standards address:
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
20 • Lighting (3.2.1): standards to minimize project lighting effects and promote a dark sky, while maintaining essential requirements for public safety and comfort. The Specific Plan includes the following types of lighting regulations: Lighting Design Standards for All Development, Lighting Design Standards for All Development in Biological Habitat Areas, Outdoor Lighting Standards (MM AES-4a), Sky Glow Prevention (MM AES-4b), Prevent Daytime Glare (MM AES-5), and Use of Wildlife-Friendly Lighting (MM BIO-3b).
• Bird Safe Building Design (3.3.2): standards for building fenestration, window glazing, and Threat Factor reduce the risk of bird strikes. The Specific Plan includes the following types of bird safe building design regulations: Building Bird Strike Biologist Consultation (MM BIO-3b, BIO-3c, BIO-3d), Bird-Safe Green Roof Requirement, and Bird-Safe Façades (MM BIO-3d).
• Landscaping (3.3.3): water conservation requirements for irrigated landscapes. The Specific Plan includes the following types of landscaping regulations: Compliance with the City’s Water Conservation in Landscaping Ordinance (City of Brisbane Municipal Code Chapter 15.70) and Potable Water Usage. • Noise/Vibration (3.3.4): controls within the Specific Plan that address impacts from railroad and construction related activities. The Specific Plan includes the following types of noise and vibration regulations: Construction Hours along Existing Roadways and for Concrete Pours (MM NOI-1c), Document Measures (Construction Noise Control Plan) to Achieve Noise Performance Standards (MM NOI-1d), Installation of Pile Foundations (MM NOI-1e), Project Design Features (MM NOI-2a), Compliance with Brisbane Municipal Code (MM NOI-2b), Loading Dock Noise (MM NOI-2c), Residential Exposure to Railroad Noise (MM NOI-4a), Hotel Exposure to Railroad Noise (MM NOI-4b), Pre-Construction Assessment to Minimize Structural Pile-Driving Vibration Impacts on Adjacent Historic Buildings and Structures and Vibration Monitoring (MM NOI-5a), Protection of Underground Utilities (MM NOI-5b), Vibration Control (MM NOI-5c), and Exposure to Vibration from Rail (MM NOI-6). • Utility Scale Battery Storage (3.3.4.13): passive design, monitoring, and detection standards related to fire hazard protection.
Allowable Land Uses
Land uses in The Baylands are subject to the use regulations established in this section of the Specific Plan. Each land use category established in the Specific Plan includes a list of uses that are identified as permitted, conditionally permitted, or prohibited as shown in Table 3.4.1 of the Specific Plan (see except of Table 3.4.1 below).
Permitted uses are allowed by right, which means they are not subject to discretionary review. Conditionally permitted uses require discretionary Planning Commission review and approval through consideration of a use permit pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 17.40. The Commission may impose conditions of approval through the use permit process.
The Specific Plan includes a land use category for uses that are permitted on the ground floor only. Ground floor uses are similarly identified as permitted or conditionally permitted. A subset of ground floor uses is “active ground floor” uses, which are intended to activate the streets or public spaces they abut. Figure 3.4.1 identifies locations where ground floor uses are either allowed or permitted.
Table 3.4.1 further identifies prohibited uses with a “—” in the table. Any uses not specifically listed in Table 3.4.1 are prohibited. The Community Development Director shall have the authority to render administrative interpretations that uses not specifically listed in Table 3.4.1 are permitted, based upon the finding that the proposed activity closely resembles a use listed in Table 3.4.1 as permitted or conditional with respect to purpose, type, function, and general manner of operation. The establishment of allowable uses and the Community
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
21 Development Director’s ability to render administrative interpretations related to uses within the Specific Plan is consistent with the City’s Zoning Ordinance.
TABLE 3.4.1 ALLOWABLE USES (EXCERPT OF ONLY RESIDENTIAL USES)
USES RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL OTHER
Key:
P Permitted Use
C Conditional Use
PG Permitted Only as
Ground Floor Use
CG Conditional Ground
Floor Only Use
– Prohibited
* Qualifies as “Active
Ground Floor” Use
High
Density
Residential
Mid
Density
Residential
Low
Density
Residential
High
Density
Commer
cial
Mid
Density
Commer
cial
Low
Density
Commer
cial
Open
Space
Amenities
Area
Sustainable
Infrastructure
Residential Uses
Duplex/Single Family – – P – – – – – –
Multi-Family High P – – – – – – – –
Multi-Family Low – P P – – – – – –
Multi-Family Mid P P – – – – – –
Residential Amenities* P[3] P[3] P[3] – – – – P –
Townhome – – P – – – – – –
[3] Permitted only as an accessory use to serve the primary use of the property.
Interim Uses
In order to comply with the City’s settlement agreement with California High Speed Rail Authority (CAHSRA), and as noted previously, the Sustainability Land Use District was slightly expanded and reconfigured to potentially accommodate an approximately 45-acre HSR LMF.
While the Specific Plan accommodates a future HSR LMF, the Allowable Uses section of the Specific Plan specifically identifies an LMF as a permitted use in the Sustainability Land Use Category (3.4.3); the timing of when such a facility might be constructed in uncertain. Given this uncertainty, the Specific Plan establishes regulations for the interim use of the future LMF site until such time as it is acquired by the CAHSRA. The intent is to allow for temporary uses that would allow this portion of the site to be put to productive use but can be easily terminated and removed and will not require permanent on-site improvements that would preclude or make it materially more difficult for CHSRA to construct the LMF. Any interim uses would need to be compatible with adjacent uses permitted by this Specific Plan. These provisions apply only to the 45-acre area identified in Figure 3.4.2, Interim Use Area, as “LMF.”
If CHSRA formally notifies the City that it has acquired the site, the provisions of the Specific Plan will no longer apply to the state owned 45-acre site. Should CHSRA provide written notice to the City that it no longer needs or otherwise does not intend to pursue acquisition of the 45-acre LMF site within the Baylands, the provisions of the interim use section of the Specific Plan will also no longer apply, at which time future use of the property shall revert to the underlying Sustainable Infrastructure land use standards.
The proposed interim use regulations specifically prohibit the following uses:
• The manufacture, processing, handling, treatment, transportation, recycling, or storage of hazardous, toxic, flammable or explosive materials or wastes in any quantity for which a permit is required from any governmental agency.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
22 • The dumping, processing, sorting, recycling, recovery, or storage of garbage, debris, scrap materials, or similar items; however, processing of construction debris and asphalt generated by demolition activities required for Baylands development and conducted in a manner consistent with the Specific Plan’s approved zero-waste program are not expressly prohibited and may be permitted subject to issuance of an Interim Use Permit.
• Any use that creates unsightly visual impacts or the appearance of blight as seen from any other location within the city, including but not limited to uses such as automotive dismantling and wrecking yards, junk yards, outside storage of used equipment, trailers, or vehicles not being offered for sale, and outside storage of glass, metal, paper, cardboard, or other material collected for recycling or disposal; “Unsightly visual impacts” shall be interpreted consistent with Section 15.01.580 of the City’s Zoning Code (Public nuisance abatement).
• Uses commonly associated with
heavy manufacturing operations,
including but not limited to uses
such as concrete or asphalt batch
plants, foundries and other
activities involving the fabrication
of metal products from raw
materials, processing of chemicals,
and the rendering or refining of oils
or animal materials.
• Commercial parking lots, as defined
in City’s Zoning Code Chapter
17.02. • Habitat restoration or recreational
open space.
• Stormwater detention facility.
• Utility-scale battery storage
facilities.
• Water recycling facility.
• Water storage tank.
• Any other use not described in the
preceding subsections of this
section that is determined to be:
o Potentially obnoxious,
dangerous, or offensive by reason of emission of air pollution, odor, smoke, noise, dust, vibration, glare or heat, or by reason of other impacts or hazards relating to the materials, process, or methods employed by the use.
o Potentially harmful as a result of discharges of any waste material into the ground, or into any sanitary or stormwater sewer system, or into any drainage channel, wetland, the Brisbane Lagoon, or San Francisco Bay.
o Any other use that cannot be easily terminated and removed, thereby making it materially more difficult for the CHSRA to construct an LMF on the site such as but not limited to interfering with future track alignment, access, grading, utilities, or site configuration of the 45-acre area identified in Figure 3.4.2, Interim Use Area, as “LMF”.
FIGURE 3.4.2
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
23 Any use not specifically prohibited above may apply for an interim use permit which is subject to Planning Commission review and approval. The Specific Plan sets forth findings the Planning Commission is required to make in approving an interim use permit. The Specific Plan sets forth additional provisions regarding the IUP application process, mandatory conditions of approval, duration, and extensions.
Existing Use Areas
As previously discussed, the Specific Plan creates an “Existing Use Area” land use category. These sites contain lawfully existing uses within the Specific Plan area. While the Specific Plan will allow such uses to continue over time and establishes development and performance standards common to all existing use areas, such as allowed uses, setbacks, massing, height, landscaping, and parking regulations, there are also provisions that will allow these existing uses to be expanded, subject to the granting of a conditional use permit. The Existing Use Area, as shown on Figure 2.4.1, Existing Use Area, include:
• Recology (Section 3.5.2)
• Golden State Lumber (Section 3.5.3)
• Kinder Morgan Tank Farm (Section 3.5.4)
• Machinery & Equipment Company (Section 3.5.5)
• Bayshore Sanitary District Pump Station (Section 3.5.6) • Bayshore Boulevard Commercial Uses North (Section 3.5.7) • Bayshore Boulevard Commercial Uses South (Section 3.5.8) The table below summarizes the current or historical use for all existing use areas within the plan area, allowable uses, and the approval process that would allow an allowable use to be expanded.
EXISTING USE AREA CURRENT USE(S) ALLOWED USES
EXPANSION OF USE
ALLOWED
RECOLOGY Assembly and storage of toter
carts
• Assembly and storage of toter carts
• Heavy equipment repair
• Outdoor storage of waste management
vehicles and equipment; outdoor
storage of materials only in association
with bulk sales
• Solid Waste Management and Organics
reload operations
• Storage, distribution, and sale of lumber
and other building materials and
hardware
Yes; Use Permit
GOLDEN STATE
LUMBER
Storage, distribution, and sale of
lumber and other building
materials and hardware
• Storage, distribution, and sale of lumber
and other building materials and
hardware
Yes; Use Permit
KINDER MORGAN
TANK FARM
Storage and distribution of
petroleum products supporting
regional fuel distribution
operations
• Storage and distribution of petroleum
products in support of regional fuel
distribution operations
Yes; Specific Plan
Amendment
MACHINERY &
EQUIPMENT CO.
Buying, storage, refurbishment,
selling, and distribution of used
industrial equipment for various
industries
• Food Production
• Light Fabrication and Refurbishment
• Media Studio
• Printing
• Warehousing (excluding freight
forwarders)
Yes; Use Permit
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
24 EXISTING USE AREA CURRENT USE(S) ALLOWED USES
EXPANSION OF USE
ALLOWED
• Outdoor Sales and Rental†
• Storage†
BSD PUMP
STATION
Pumping and managing the flow
of sewage within the local
sanitary system
• Public Utility Facilities Yes; Use Permit*
BAYSHORE BLVD.
USES NORTH
A. Silvestri Co. wholesale
distribution of various
construction materials and
supplies
• Food Production
• Light Fabrication
• Media Studios
• Printing
• Retail sales and rental
• Warehousing (excluding freight
forwarders)
Yes; Specific Plan
Amendment
BAYSHORE BLVD.
USES SOUTH
A mix of industrial and
environmental service
operations
• Food Production
• Light Fabrication
• Media Studios
• Printing
• Retail sales and rental
• Warehousing (excluding freight
forwarders)
Yes; Specific Plan
Amendment
* Use may be expanded through approval of a Use Permit, to the extent permitted by applicable state and federal law.
† Use may be permitted through approval of a Use Permit.
Chapter 4 – Sustainability
The Baylands development has been planned as a sustainable community and many of its sustainability features are embedded throughout various chapters of the Specific Plan, from land use and transportation to open space and utilities and infrastructure. The Specific Plan’s Sustainability chapter summarizes the various sustainability features and illustrates the project’s compliance with the requirements of the City’s General Plan to include a sustainability program for new development consistent with the principles of the Sustainability Framework for the Brisbane Baylands Final Report accepted by the City Council on November 5, 2015.
The City’s Sustainability Framework for the Baylands is based on the One Planet Communities framework, “a set of ten principles designed to achieve an ecological footprint based on the resources available on one planet—hence One Planet Living—and includes the social and economic aspects of sustainability as essential elements to achieving and sustaining the environmental outcomes.” The City’s Framework also highlights compliance with the increasingly stringent renewable energy, water, and energy conservation, and other applicable federal and state laws and regulations that will be developed and implemented over time as part of California’s commitment to climate leadership and the protection of the environment and public health.
Specific Plan Table 4.2.1, Summary of One Planet Principles for The Baylands, included below, identifies the ten One Planet Living principles in the Framework along with a summary of how they are implemented for The Baylands.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
25 Category Principle (Framework, P.
8-9)
Baylands Implementation Summary
1. Zero-Carbon
Buildings
Making buildings more
energy efficient and
delivering all energy with
renewable technologies
Carbon emissions reductions are achieved through energy conservation and building efficiency measures and a combination of planning elements, such as transit and pedestrian design features to reduce automobile use, landscaping and lighting designs that reduce energy and water use, and building design standards to reduce energy and water usage.
A minimum of 85,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity annually will be generated by on-site solar panels installed on buildings and in parking areas, and in a 55-acre solar farm to be built within the southeast area of the site.
The Specific Plan also includes five additional sustainable infrastructure areas (along with roof tops and parking lot areas) that
could accommodate additional electricity generation and storage technologies.
Battery storage facilities and equipment installed in buildings and within sustainable infrastructure areas will extend the reliability and resiliency of renewable electricity produced on- and off-site and have independent utility to facilitate the storage of off-site renewable energy produced when generation exceeds demand.
In addition to renewable energy generated on-site, The Baylands will utilize the 100% renewable electricity offered by Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) to the maximum extent allowed by law. The Baylands will feature all-electric residential and commercial buildings and will not extend natural gas service to new development.
2. Zero Waste Reducing waste, reusing
where possible,
and ultimately
sending zero waste to
landfills
As required by City ordinance, construction activities will divert 90% of nonhazardous construction and/or demolition waste from landfills. In addition, 100% of inert solid material associated with excavations and land clearing operations will be recycled and/or salvaged for reuse.
Recology San Francisco and The Baylands will develop and implement a zerowaste program to divert 90% of non-hazardous waste from landfill disposal.
3. Sustainable
Transport
Using low carbon modes
of transport to reduce
emissions and reduce the
need to travel with good
planning
The Baylands includes a mix of commercial, residential, retail, and recreational uses in a transit-served location with a pedestrian-oriented design that creates a network of pedestrian and bicycle routes within the site and connecting to surrounding neighborhoods.
The Baylands also includes electric vehicle (EV) charging infrastructure, shuttle systems, secure bike parking, and other features designed to minimize automobile use and fossil fuel usage.
Shared workspaces will be created to support remote work and reduce the need for off-site travel.
4. Local and
Sustainable
Materials
Using sustainable
healthy products, with low
embodied energy, sourced
locally, made from
renewable or waste
resources
Sustainability measures require compliance with metrics for local and sustainable materials, including use of ultra-low-emitting formaldehyde wood products, recycled content value, and reduced embodied carbon in building materials, along with tracking for both health and embodied carbon.
5. Local and
Sustainable
Food
Choosing low-impact,
local, seasonal, and
organic diets and reducing
food waste
The Baylands will offer a farmers’ market and dedicated space for food trucks to support local food suppliers along with providing educational materials to encourage consumption of local, sustainable, and organic food products. In addition, space will be provided for a small urban farm and/or community garden to grow organic produce as a community amenity.
The Baylands will also work with the City’s Economic Vitality Director and Chamber of Commerce to attract a grocery or supermarket to the Baylands.
6. Sustainable
Water
Using water more
efficiently in buildings,
landscaping, and in the
products we buy, and
addressing local flooding,
as well as wetland and
stormwater pollution
A water recycling facility and recycled water system
will be constructed to provide recycled water for outdoor irrigation and designated indoor (“purple pipe”) uses.
On-site buildings and recreational areas will be provided with appropriate protection against current and future flood risks, including the effects of projected sea-level rise through the Year 2100 (General Plan Policy BL.1 J, Final EIR [2026] EIR Mitigation Measures MM HWQ-3a and MM HWQ3b). Site-specific development projects will be required to detain stormwater such that peak stormwater flows will not increase.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
26 Category Principle (Framework, P.
8-9)
Baylands Implementation Summary
An extensive program of wetlands restoration and enhancement will be undertaken and maintained in perpetuity, providing natural treatment of runoff from the site and habitat benefits. In addition, best management practices will be implemented during construction and subsequent operations to protect water quality.
7. Open Space
and Habitat
Protecting and restoring
biodiversity and natural
habitats through
appropriate land use and
integration into the built
environment
As described in Chapter 05, Conservation and Open Space, The Baylands provides 148.4 acres (27.9% of its land area) for open space, park, trail, wetlands, and similar uses, exceeding the General Plan’s 25% requirement, and also preserves as open space the 121.8-acre lagoon area. The Baylands will provide extensive restoration and enhancement of Visitacion Creek, the north shore of the lagoon, and critical butterfly habitat on Icehouse Hill.
8. Culture and
Heritage
Reviving local identity and
wisdom; supporting and
participating in the arts
The historic Roundhouse will be rehabilitated for community use. A public art program consistent with the City’s program will be established and implemented for The Baylands. In addition, a library will be provided within the Specific Plan area.
9. Economic
Vitality with
Equity and
Ecology
Creating
ecologically based
economies that support
equity and inclusive
communities
Developing this under-utilized, abandoned, and contaminated site into a sustainable new community helps address the area’s acute housing shortage and provides new public parks and other amenities while creating a fiscally positive revenue stream for the City from new commercial and hotel uses.
10. Recreation,
Health,
Safety, and
Happiness
Encouraging active, safe,
meaningful lives to
promote good health and
well-being
The Baylands provides an array of active and passive park areas along with an extensive system of biking and walking paths and trails.
The Baylands will also consult with San Mateo Health Services, non-profit partners, the City’s Economic Vitality Director, and the Chamber of Commerce to attract medical offices, a health clinic, pharmacy, and similar uses to the Specific Plan area.
In regard to energy, a minimum of 85,000 megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity annually will be generated by onsite solar panels installed on buildings and in parking areas, and in a 55-acre solar farm to be built within the southeast area of the site. The Specific Plan also includes five additional sustainable infrastructure areas (along with roof tops and parking lot areas) that could accommodate additional electricity generation and storage technologies. 30 MW of battery-based stationary energy storage systems, equivalent to 44,056 MWh of annual electricity storage, would be installed as part of site-specific development projects within the Specific Plan area.
This storage will extend the reliability and resiliency of renewable electricity produced on- and off-site and have independent utility to facilitate the storage of off-site renewable energy produced when generation exceeds demand. In addition, a 250 MW front-of-the-meter, utility scale battery storage facility, equivalent to 365,000 MWh of annual electricity storage, could be accommodated on site and would serve as a regional grid resource.
In addition to renewable energy generated on-site, the Baylands will utilize the 100% renewable electricity offered by Peninsula Clean Energy (PCE) to the maximum extent allowed by law. The Baylands will feature all electric residential and commercial buildings and will not extend natural gas service to new development. Buildings in Baylands will also be designed to meet LEED Gold and Green Point Rating standards. The Baylands Final EIR conservatively estimates that the project’s energy demand at buildout will be 172,882 (MWh/yr) while on-site generation will be approximately 92,445(MWh/yr).
Based on these figures, the project falls short of meeting the General Plan requirement that “Baylands development shall be designed so as to be energy neutral on an ongoing basis.” Energy neutrality is not defined.
While the concept is important, it is not synonymous with zero carbon, which is intended to achieve the goal of zero carbon emissions. In the case of the Baylands, onsite generation combined with the project’s commitment to utilize 100% renewable energy result in a carbon free energy supply, even if the project does not generate enough renewable energy onsite to fully offset the demand. Staff believes the project’s commitment to renewable energy
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
27 generation, battery storage and efficient building design represents best practice to reduce development-based carbon emissions and complies with the intent of the General Plan policy.
Chapter 5 – Conservation and Open Space
Chapter 5 indicates an accessible and interwoven open space system is central to The Baylands Specific Plan. The network consists of diverse open space types serving the recreational needs of the Brisbane community, creating and enhancing habitat, and improving the quality of hydrologic systems. The open space network provides extensive green space in proximity to The Baylands’ residential areas and businesses and is also connected and accessible to communities surrounding the development. Together, these spaces provide recreational open space, educational opportunities, and stewardship of resources. The open space network includes areas for stormwater drainage and treatment in the form of stormwater detention areas, supported by bioswales, and habitat-rich upland zones.
The west side of the site drains to
central linear parks—Baylands Park,
Sunnydale Park, Roundhouse Park,
and the Ecological Park—all of
which provide additional
stormwater management. The east
side of the site includes freshwater
and tidal wetland areas that are
limited access open space for the
protection of sensitive habitat, but
feature native habitat and spaces
for community education. Upland
native plant communities of San
Bruno Mountain and other diverse
habitat areas are featured at
Icehouse Hill. Figure 5.1.1 (right)
illustrates the site’s open space
network.
This chapter further identifies a
range of wildlife management
practices including habitat
enhancement and buffering, rodent
control, as well potential open
space amenities such as site
furniture, educational signage,
wayfinding signage and public art.
It further provides for future
plantings of the site, including a list
of appropriate plant species by
habitat type, which also considers planting constraints associated with its bayfront location and status as a remediated brownfield.
FIGURE 5.1.1
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
28 Below is a summary of the Specific Plan’s framework of open space; each area listed in the following table is described in greater detail. Figure 5.3.5, Illustrative Concept Diagram, included at the end of this section, provides a visual overview of the conceptual open space framework and key open space elements within The Baylands. Note, this figure and all other images contained within the Specific Plan are illustrative conceptual diagrams; the Specific Plan does not establish a “final” design or program for any of the open space area. • The Baylands includes a connected, accessible open space network serving recreation, habitat, and hydrologic functions.
• Open spaces support stormwater drainage, treatment, and habitat restoration. • West-side drainage flows into linear parks (Baylands Park, Sunnydale Park, Roundhouse Park, Ecological Park).
• East-side open spaces include freshwater and tidal wetlands with limited access for habitat protection. • Icehouse Hill provides upland habitat linked to San Bruno Mountain. • Total open space: 148.4 acres (27.9%), exceeding the 25% General Plan requirement. • Open spaces fall into four types: Urban Plazas, Active Recreation Areas, Community Greens, Ecological Greenspaces.
Open Space Framework Summary Table
OPEN SPACE DESCRIPTION
SIZE
(ACRES) KEY FEATURES
URBAN PLAZA Main public plaza at
Bayshore Caltrain Station.
1.4 Designed for pedestrians, circulation,
seating, and flexible events.
ACTIVE RECREATION –
COMMUNITY FIELD
Major recreation area
near downtown Brisbane.
7.4 Lawn, ballfield, playground, seating,
amenities, parking, multimodal access.
ACTIVE RECREATION –
BAY TRAIL CORRIDOR
North–south trail
connecting Lagoon Road
to CPSRA.
20 Multi-use paths, overlooks, tidal
wetlands, stormwater features; limited
programming.
COMMUNITY GREENS –
BAYLANDS &
SUNNYDALE PARKS
Central linear green
serving Baylands
neighborhoods.
6.6 total
(5.8 + 0.8)
Connects to Visitacion Valley;
coordinated design with adjacent SF
park.
COMMUNITY GREENS –
ROUNDHOUSE PARK
Park centered on historic
Roundhouse.
3.9 Roundhouse included as open space; key
linkage between north/south open space
systems.
ECOLOGICAL
GREENSPACE – LAGOON
PARK & LAGOON
Habitat-focused shoreline
park.
15.4 Tidal flats, marsh, grassland, scrub;
erosion-controlled; no lagoon recreation;
paths + educational areas.
ECOLOGICAL
GREENSPACE –
BAYLANDS PRESERVE
Ecological corridor
between Lagoon Park and
Visitacion Creek.
14.3 Wildlife crossings, buffers, low-impact
trails, screens tank farm.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
29 OPEN SPACE DESCRIPTION
SIZE
(ACRES) KEY FEATURES
ECOLOGICAL
GREENSPACE –
ECOLOGICAL PARK
Naturalized upland habitat
west of Icehouse Hill.
7.3 Grasslands, woodlands, scrub; receives
stormwater via bioswales.
ECOLOGICAL
GREENSPACE –
VISITACION CREEK
Restored riparian and tidal
corridor.
28.8 (by
2100)
Enhanced tidal channels, marsh,
freshwater wetlands, wildlife crossings.
ECOLOGICAL
GREENSPACE –
ICEHOUSE HILL
Only natural-soils area;
upland habitat.
24.3 Grasslands, scrub, seasonal wetlands;
butterfly habitat restoration; requires
Butterfly Protection Plan.
STORMWATER
DETENTION AREA
Primary naturalized
detention basin north of
tank farm.
7.2 Receives Baylands + San Bruno Mountain
runoff; planted edges; water-quality
functions.
GREEN EDGES – WEST
RAIL TRAIL
Buffer and recreational
trail.
8.5 Ecological buffer; connects to Crocker
Trail.
GREEN EDGES – EAST
RAIL GREEN EDGE
Dense vegetated
screening.
3.5 Native plantings; screens railway and
tank farm.
WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT
& AMENITIES
Site-wide ecological
stewardship.
— Habitat enhancement, rodent control,
invasive species management,
educational signage, wayfinding, public
art.
Urban Plaza
A 1.4-acre urban plaza will be located adjacent to the Bayshore Caltrain station and higher density development.
The plaza prioritizes pedestrians and public amenities, such as seating and gathering areas. The Bayshore Caltrain Station Plaza is complimentary of adjacent architectural cues, considers pedestrian circulation, and adds programmatic value appropriate for its context. The layout flexibly adapts to a host of public activities.
Active Recreation Areas
Supporting physical health and wellness, active recreation open space provides opportunities for outdoor exercise and community sports. These open spaces are easily accessible from adjoining neighborhoods with multi-modal options: bike, walk, public transit, or vehicle. Active recreation spaces provide clear connectivity to adjacent wellness trails, including the Crocker Trail and the Bay Trail. They provide an array of physical activities and play for all ages and abilities. Complementary programs, such as picnic areas, watering stations, seating, restrooms, and shelters would enhance community usability throughout the day. • Community Field: A 7.4-acre active community recreation space is located in the southwestern portion of the site, closest to downtown Brisbane. Potential uses include: flexible recreational lawn, ballfield, picnic and games area, amenity pavilion with restrooms, playground, fitness station(s), buffer plantings, and shade structure(s). Parking is proposed with vehicular access anticipated via the Valley Drive–Bayshore Boulevard intersection. The Community Fields support connections to pedestrian and bicycle trails,
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
30 including the existing Crocker Trail, Icehouse Hill Trail Network, the Tunnel Avenue overpass, and the Ecological Park.
• The Bay Trail will be extended through The Baylands within a 20-acre corridor located along the eastern edge of the Specific Plan area. It will be extended north from its existing terminus at Lagoon Road through The Baylands and connecting to the existing trail segment to the north at the Candlestick Point State Recreation Area in San Francisco. Accessible trailhead connections will be provided at multiple locations throughout the project. Within the 20-acre Bay trail corridor, the following uses are proposed: multi-use pathway(s), overlook(s), tidal wetland(s), trailhead(s), stormwater treatment area(s), and designated crossing(s). Highly programmed areas, such as children’s playgrounds or large public event areas, are not anticipated in this area.
Community Greens
These are centrally located park spaces that support social connectivity within their immediate neighborhood and the City of Brisbane. They provide opportunities for passive recreation. Baylands Park and Sunnydale Park are two centrally located green spaces that combine to create a 6.6-acre linear park. The 5.8-acre Baylands Park, along with the 0.8-acre Sunnydale Park, serves both residential neighborhoods in The Baylands: Bayshore and Roundhouse.
They also serve as a key connector between the adjacent Baylands North development in San Francisco and Roundhouse. The north end of the central green, Sunnydale Park, resides at a nexus of regional commuter circulation to the transit center and pedestrian access from San Francisco’s Baylands North and Visitacion Valley neighborhoods. This park is the northern gateway of the development. Sunnydale Park adjoins a park that will be developed as part of the Baylands North project in San Francisco. The design of these two parks will be coordinated so that they function as a single integrated recreational area.
Roundhouse Park is a multi-purpose component of the open space network. The 3.9-acre open space is located at the southern terminus of Baylands Park, at the westernmost point of The Baylands adjacent to Bayshore Boulevard, and includes the historic Roundhouse. The Baylands will implement the five-stage plan for restoration and adaptive reuse of the historic Roundhouse structure. Because the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the Roundhouse is essential to the character and success of the Roundhouse Park, its footprint is included as part of Roundhouse Park and the Specific Plan’s open space acreage. In addition, the restored Roundhouse is not counted toward The Baylands maximum allowable 6.5 million square feet of commercial development. The park is located at a hinge point between Baylands Park and the Ecological Park and sits at the apex of their tributaries, making Roundhouse Park a key nexus of the open space network, uniting the northern and southern portions of the site.
Ecological Greenspaces
A unique attribute of The Baylands is its relationship to San Bruno Mountain, San Francisco Bay, and the Brisbane Lagoon. To strengthen this relationship, The Baylands landscape encompasses broad hydrologic, topographic, and plant community gradients. A variety of open space uses balance recreational needs of the community with the protection of habitat resources. The Baylands includes the 121.8-acre Brisbane Lagoon that provides habitat value to the open spaces listed below. Due to the proximity to tidal waters, the ecological greenspaces are designed to adapt to sea level rise (SLR) and impacts from 100-year storm events, placing community uses outside of impacted landscapes.
Lagoon Park and Lagoon
The 15.4-acre Lagoon Park is located along the northern edge of the Brisbane Lagoon. The native habitat types at Lagoon Park include:
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
31 • Tidal flats
• Tidal marsh
• Grassland
• Coastal scrub
The existing lagoon edge is composed of mudflats, with a shoreline delineated with riprap. The existing lagoon edge remains largely unaltered. The riprap area will be enhanced by infilling voids with soil, without raising the elevation, and interplanting with tidal wetland vegetation. The north edge of the Lagoon Park area is planned for upper marsh transition and green infrastructure for management of surface stormwater runoff. Due to the potential for erosion along the lagoon shore, erosion control and water pollution control measures are planned, along with an on-going maintenance plan to preserve water and environmental quality. Recreational uses of the lagoon that could produce disruption to existing or proposed tidal plant and animal communities are prohibited. To protect shoreline and nearshore habitat, passive and active recreational use of the lagoon water body shall be prohibited. Overall physical improvements in this area will remain largely naturalized and will also include amenities that provide educational/recreational community spaces and means for accessibility. Community educational/recreational priorities for this space are captured by walking/biking paths, curated access to the waterfront, wildlife habitat (including tidal plantings at the lagoon edge), and spaces for outdoor education, wildlife observation, and water views. All such amenities within Lagoon Park shall be compatible with its habitat functions.
Baylands Preserve
The 14.3-acre Baylands Preserve provides a north–south habitat linkage between the ecological open spaces of Lagoon Park and Visitacion Creek. This open space corridor serves multiple functions, including enhancing habitat connectivity, providing wildlife connectors/crossings, pedestrian circulation, and a green pedestrian and bike connection away from Tunnel Avenue and the Kinder Morgan Tank Farm.
Habitat types in this open space provide continuity and extend a gradient of plant communities of Lagoon Park and Visitacion Creek and shall contain coastal scrub and grassland habitats. Wetland and woodland habitats are allowed, as deemed viable and beneficial, to overall habitat value. Under-road wildlife connectors are proposed at Lagoon Road and Visitacion Creek Road South in the form of a small culvert, sized appropriately for small terrestrial fauna, to increase connections between local and regional habitat patches. Large evergreen shrubs and trees will be placed along Tunnel Avenue to screen views of the tank farm. Proposed land features include buffer plantings and berms to reduce acoustic impact on wildlife, wildlife crossings/culverts, and the central wildlife corridor. Lowimpact trails with trailhead(s) located on the east side of the preserve are proposed to connect pedestrians to Lagoon Park, Visitacion Creek, and the adjacent development. Trails shall be offset or elevated from habitat areas.
Ecological Park
The Ecological Park is the primary naturalized open space in The Baylands’ Icehouse Hill neighborhood. The 7.3- acre park receives seasonal rainwater and surface stormwater runoff that fills dry creek beds and bioswales. This will be directed to stormwater treatment areas within the park to improve water quality. These features are influenced by stormwater and minimal irrigation runoff from responsible irrigation of the adjacent commercial development. General surface stormwater runoff flows south from Roundhouse Park and combines with flows from the subgrade culvert, connecting to the stormwater detention area located north of the tank farm. The Ecological Park will be planted with grasslands, coastal scrub, and woodland.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
32 Visitacion Creek
At 28.8 acres, in year 2100 (accounting for SLR), the Visitacion Creek open space area is part of the connected riparian corridor extending from the railroad right-of-way to the Bay. After Title 27 final landfill closure, on-site wetland creation will be undertaken within Visitacion Creek, featuring an enhanced tidal channel and restored salt marsh, native scrub and grasslands, and freshwater seasonal wetlands. Above Visitacion Creek, freshwater seasonal wetland areas are also established to address remediation impacts. The space allocated for these systems allows the migration of the adjacent tidal wetlands as SLR occurs.
The rehabilitated creek corridor created as part of remediation activities is a significant improvement to the hydrological system and habitat opportunities of The Baylands. Habitat types at Visitacion Creek are open water, tidal flats and marsh, freshwater emergent wetland, and coastal scrub and grasslands. The habitat types at Visitacion Creek are similar to those outlined for Lagoon Park, and additionally, Visitacion Creek includes freshwater emergent wetlands. Under-road wildlife connectors are proposed at Tunnel Avenue and Visitacion Creek Road South to increase connections between local and regional habitat patches. An under-road wildlife connection is provided at Sierra Point Parkway and the Bay Trail via a clear span bridge.
Icehouse Hill
This 24.3-acre park enhances its ecological functions with protection, enhancement, and improvement of existing native grasslands, coastal scrub, and small pockets of seasonal wetlands. Icehouse Hill is outside The Baylands’ project remediation areas and is the only portion of the property with natural soils, which supports its more natural character and habitat value.
Although no sensitive butterfly species are currently present, Icehouse Hill provides habitat patches as well as host and nectar plants for certain species. Habitat improvements on Icehouse Hill include establishing quality patches of nectar and host plants to support the recovery of local butterfly populations and promote connectivity with San Bruno Mountain, since the distance between Icehouse Hill and the easternmost point of San Bruno Mountain lies within the potential dispersal range for Mission blue and Callippe silverspot butterflies. Planting of native butterfly host species is proposed to increase butterfly habitat extent and quality (Final EIR Mitigation Measure MM BIO-1c).
Invasive species management is proposed due to the presence of Eucalyptus sp., fennel, and other non-native species. A preconstruction survey for butterfly larval host plants and special status plants is required prior to trail construction or other ground disturbance activities.
Management plans for Icehouse Hill will include a Butterfly Protection Plan to achieve the following:
• Protect and enhance pollinator habitat on Icehouse Hill, focusing on Callippe silverspot and Mission blue butterflies’ larval host plants;
• Provide habitat capable of supporting Callippe silverspot and Mission blue butterfly use of Icehouse Hill; • Manage invasive scrub/shrub and other invasive species to protect natural habitat areas; • Provide pollinator habitat and connectivity within and among the open spaces within The Baylands, promoting corridors among patches and to/from external habitat; • Trail configurations and any non-pedestrian-path uses (i.e., observation areas, educational areas, overlooks, nature play areas, gardens, and relocation of the Mission Blue Nursery) shall be sited to avoid butterfly host and nectar plants, whether or not they are being used by rare butterflies at the time of the preconstruction surveys;
• Restoration activities that protect and support the survival of listed butterfly species will be identified; and
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
33 • Operational actions to protect and support the survival of listed butterfly species will be identified, including, but not limited to, the fencing of trails or sensitive habitats and/or the creation of buffer areas to minimize the establishment of “informal” trails; providing signage that dogs shall be allowed on Icehouse Hill trails on leash only; providing interpretative signage posted at trailheads and development of a grazing management program, which would include seasonal restrictions on horse grazing on Icehouse Hill.
Stormwater Detention
On-site water detention will be provided within a designated stormwater detention area within The Baylands to provide for regional and site water management and landscape diversity. The primary stormwater detention facility encompasses a 7.2-acre area north of the Kinder Morgan Tank Farm. The stormwater detention area will receive stormwater runoff from within The Baylands and external runoff from San Bruno Mountain and western neighborhoods via the stormwater channel and a renovated culvert. The stormwater detention area incorporates ecological strategies to improve water quality while providing storage of stormwater runoff. The stormwater detention area is to be naturalized, with “soft” planted edges that are harmonious in visual quality to the other ecological areas within The Baylands.
Green edges
Green edges provide critical vegetative screening to improve the visual experience within The Baylands. Green edges support ecological goals, including supporting biodiversity by hosting dominant native plant communities and habitat for insects, small mammals, and reptiles. Two primary green edges are included in the Specific Plan:
1) West Rail Trail; and
2) East Rail Green Edge.
The 8.5-acre West Rail Trail is a green edge located adjacent to the Community Fields and Icehouse Hill. This landscape serves as a buffer between Icehouse Hill and the Caltrain rail line as well as a biological connector. The West Rail Trail connects open space amenities of The Baylands to the Crocker Trail. The design of the West Rail Trail shall avoid encroachments, including landscaping, into the Caltrain right-of-way or the Machinery & Equipment property. The 3.5-acre East Rail Green Edge utilizes dense native plantings that assist in screening of views to the railway and the tank farm.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
34 Figure 5.3.5 Illustrative Concept Diagram
Note, this figure and all other images contained within the Specific Plan are illustrative conceptual diagrams; the Specific Plan does not establish a “final” design or program for any of the open space area.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
35 Chapter 6 – Circulation
The Baylands circulation network is intended to be versatile and flexible to accommodate all types of travel purposes and modes. This chapter characterizes the circulation context, establishes circulation goals, and describes the circulation network for The Baylands both in terms of its function as well as character. The street grid distributes vehicular access and circulation to ensure safe and efficient movement of people and goods into and through the area. The western portion of The Baylands includes a mix of residential and commercial uses and is designed to put people first with walkable neighborhoods, extensive pedestrian and bicycle networks, and improved access to transit.
The chapter establishes standards for The Baylands overall circulation network, including:
• Roadways
• Active Transportation (Pedestrian, Bicycle and MicroMobility, Shared Use Paths) • Transit
• Transportation Demand Management
• Parking and Loading
• Streetscape Design
Roadways
Roadways or streets within The Baylands are classified as shown below:
CLASSIFICATION DESCRIPTION
FREEWAY Limited access, high-speed travel ways included in the State and federal highway systems.
REGIONAL ARTERIAL Major streets that serve regional functions and carry large volumes of traffic generated from outside of Brisbane.
MINOR ARTERIAL Streets that primarily serve traffic through The Baylands and may also provide access to adjacent properties
COLLECTOR Connect arterial and local streets with reduced traffic volumes and may also provide access to adjacent properties. Typically include connections for pedestrians, bicyclists, and shuttle movements.
LOCAL Provide access to individual abutting properties
as their primary function. Focus is on pedestrian
and bicyclist movements and slow speeds.
GREEN SHARED STREET Curbless streets located in residential areas, that prioritize pedestrians and bicycles and are designed for slow speeds and shared use with automobiles.
ACCESS ROAD Prioritize access for parking and service access.
The Baylands street network is shown in Figure 6.3.1 (attached below), and street sections are described and illustrated in Section 6.3.3 of the Specific Plan.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
36 FIGURE 6.3.1. THE BAYLANDS STREET NETWORK, FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATIONS, AND INTERSECTION CONTROLS
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
37 Intersections
Intersections are envisioned as spaces that support multimodal access and community identity. Safety is the primary concern for multi-modal intersection design, as travel speed and visibility vary greatly across modes. In addition to functional design elements, intersections should incorporate placemaking features. Landscaping and traffic calming treatments can help slow vehicle speeds and contribute to sense-of-place. Final design of these elements will be designed to reflect the character and needs of adjacent land uses.
Intersection controls will be utilized to reduce the potential for hazardous conditions. Subject to the approval of the City Engineer, they shall follow guidance based on the functional classification of the intersecting roadways. • Regional Arterials – Traffic signals shall be provided at all intersections of regional arterials (Bayshore Boulevard and Geneva Avenue) with arterials or collectors. All local or green streets shall be stop controlled when intersecting with regional arterials unless left turns are allowed, in which case the intersection shall be signalized such as at the intersection of Geneva Avenue and the Connector Road to Tunnel Avenue.
• Minor Arterials – Roundabouts shall be provided at the intersections of Lagoon Road with Tunnel Avenue and Sierra Point Parkway and at Tunnel Road and the Connector Road to Geneva Avenue. Collectors and local cross streets that intersect with Tunnel Avenue and Sierra Point Parkway shall be stop controlled as traffic volumes are expected to be substantially higher on the minor arterials than cross-streets, unless a traffic engineering study demonstrates that a roundabout, traffic signal, or all-way stop-controlled intersection is warranted.
• Collectors – The intersection of two collectors shall include all-way stop control except for the intersections of Baylands Boulevard/Main Street and Baylands Boulevard/Frontage Road, where a traffic signal shall be installed due to the proximity of major activity generators. Local and green streets shall be stop controlled as side streets when intersecting with collectors, unless a traffic engineering study demonstrates that an all-way stop is warranted.
• Local Streets – The intersections of two local streets shall be all way stop controlled except for Roundhouse Circle, where all intersecting streets shall be side street stop controlled unless a traffic engineering study demonstrates that an all-way stop is warranted. Green Streets shall be stop controlled when intersecting with a local street.
• Green Streets – Green Streets do not intersect with each other and thus shall follow the guidance listed above.
The Specific Plan includes additional standards and requirements for signalization, striping and other design features, crosswalks, pedestrian and bike crossings, turn pocket design and driveway design. It further specifies potential locations for the installation of roundabouts at intersections on Tunnel Avenue and Sierra Point Parkway.
Active Transportation Network
The Baylands is designed to enable people to be less dependent on cars. The Specific Plan establishes walking and bicycling networks that complement the City’s existing active transportation system, including shared-use paths, bike lanes, and sidewalks. The Baylands ensures pedestrian and bicycling facilities are designed at a human scale, prioritizing user comfort and safety. In accordance with the Brisbane Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, The Baylands pedestrian and bicycle facilities create an internal network and tie to existing local and regional routes.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
38 Pedestrian Circulation
The Baylands Specific Plan intends to create a safe and comfortable experience for pedestrians. This includes creating connections to existing trail networks and downtown Brisbane, and multiple ways for pedestrians to get around. Pedestrian paths, including sidewalks and shared use paths, are a key component to providing healthful experiences within The Baylands. These path systems are intended to engage the community and craft experiences that immerse people in a variety of environmental conditions and in a variety of physical and spatial movements.
The paths will create opportunities for connection with nature to promote physical activity and mental health.
Sidewalks
Sidewalks support many activities—not just walking, but also waiting for a ride, sitting on benches, entering or exiting shops or restaurants, and outdoor dining. They also host landscaping and street trees, trash and recycling bins, and bike racks, transit stops, and other elements that make streets functional, comfortable and inviting. The Baylands Specific Plan adopts this broader understanding and treat sidewalks as a multi-zone, flexible public realm that supports mobility, social activity, and placemaking. This approach ensures that Baylands streets are functional, safe, accessible, and welcoming for people of all ages and abilities. The Specific Plan establishes the following two sidewalk zones:
• The “pedestrian through zone” is a continuous, unobstructed pathway that provides safe, accessible pedestrian travel along the street. The minimum width of the through zone depends on overall width of the sidewalk and level of pedestrian activity. For example, pedestrian activity at schools, community centers, and active retail streets would require a wider through zone. • The “furnishing zone” is the area between the curb and the pedestrian through zone that provides a buffer from street traffic and accommodates street trees, landscaping, seating, transit stops, bike parking, utilities, wayfinding, stormwater management, and similar amenities. The minimum width is established to provide sufficient room for entering or exiting a vehicle or to accommodate landscaping, benches, or other furnishings.
Sidewalks or shared use paths shall be provided adjacent to all roads within The Baylands, enabling pedestrian access throughout. Planted streetscapes and enhanced pedestrian crossings at intersections add additional comfort and safety, with features including curb extensions and leading pedestrian intervals. Curb extensions will be used to extend the sidewalk into the curb lane at intersections and at any mid-block crossings approved by the City Engineer, shortening crossing distances for people walking. In addition to sidewalks along streets, the Specific Plan also establishes design standards for paths in open space areas and shared bike/pedestrian paths separated from roadways. The draft pedestrian network is shown below:
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
39 FIGURE 6.4.1. THE BAYLANDS PEDESTRIAN NETWORK
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
40 Bicycle and Micromobility
This refers to small, fully or partially human-powered vehicles such as bikes, e-bikes, and e-scooters. The Baylands encourages travel by bicycle and micromobility devices by providing a safe and connected network which extends the reach of transit and will invite people of all ages and abilities to move through and within The Baylands. An extensive pedestrian and bicycle network will connect the open space network within The Baylands and external regional trails. Shared use and bike paths will be included in open space areas and located to minimize habitat disturbance and habitat segmentation. Bike racks will be provided near the trail access points and major destinations. A wayfinding signage system is also to be included.
A comprehensive system of north–south and east–west on- and off-street bikeways will be provided to enable people to safely ride bicycles and micro-mobility devices for everyday trips. The Baylands will include a network of protected bikeways that provide physical separation from moving vehicles. This type of bikeway reduces the level of stress and improves comfort for more types of bicyclists and therefore contributes to an increase in bicycle volumes and mode share. Connections are also made to the existing bike network to facilitate trips to downtown Brisbane and adjacent neighborhoods, and to increase connectivity to the Bayshore Caltrain station. The bicycle and micromobility network is shown on the attached Figure 6.4.2.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
41 FIGURE 6.4.2. THE BAYLANDS BICYCLE AND MICRO-MOBILITY NETWORK
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
42 Transit Network
The Baylands is currently served by Caltrain, SamTrans, Muni Bus, Muni light rail, and Commute.org. SamTrans buses, MUNI Bus, and MUNI light rail run on Bayshore Boulevard at the western boundary of The Baylands. Caltrain rail runs through the center of The Baylands, and its Bayshore Station is located within the northern portion of the site, near Beatty Avenue. The Baylands will strengthen connections to the region’s extensive transit network, including connections to the Caltrain station from the east and west and to the Muni station at Sunnydale Avenue and Bayshore Boulevard. The Baylands circulation network accommodates future planned Geneva-Harney Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) along Geneva Avenue.
A new shuttle system will be provided to integrate The Baylands into existing routes that connect Brisbane with regional transit networks. The system will enable residents, workers, and visitors to travel to, from, and within the community car-free. The shuttle service will add fare-free shuttle services to connect people from downtown Brisbane into The Baylands in two phases. (See also Table 6.5.1.) Phase one will include service within the western
side of The Baylands and terminate at the Bayshore
Caltrain Station and Downtown Brisbane. It will
operate weekday during the morning and afternoon
peak commute hours with maximum one-hour
headways within The Baylands to the Caltrain
station. Shuttle routes that serve areas outside of
The Baylands will be point-to-point once exiting the
Specific Plan area in order to efficiently serve
downtown Brisbane. The times of operation of this
shuttle will supplement service in operation for the
existing Brisbane shuttle routes that serve other
parts of Brisbane. Phase one will also introduce an
internal-serving shuttle route that operates
primarily on Baylands Boulevard. This service will connect residents, commuters, and visitors to the most intensive land uses within The Baylands Specific Plan area. This shuttle will operate between the west side of the Bayshore Caltrain Station Plaza and Ecological Park with stops spaced approximately every ¼ mile. Phase two will integrate The Baylands Campus East District, including Lagoon Park. It will terminate on the east side of the Bayshore Caltrain station and Downtown Brisbane, with maximum one-hour headways.
The service plan for the internal-serving Phase one and Phase two routes will also identify on-demand service zones for weekend service. An on-demand strategy allows shuttle operators to scale up as demand shifts and grows. It also illuminates time-of-day and location demands to cost-effectively develop structured routes in the future. Permanent fixed routing would replace on-demand zones when ridership demand exceeds what can be carried in one vehicle, when ridership exceeds eight trips per service hour, or if the trip patterns exhibit clear paths.
SamTrans bus stops within or adjacent to the Specific Plan area shall provide the amenities recommended in the SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan, such as bus shelters, benches, and real-time information. In addition, the following will be provided:
• An ADA accessible paved sidewalk or path to provide access between the bus stop and land uses that generate pedestrian foot traffic.
TABLE 6.5.1 PROPOSED BAYLANDS SHUTTLE ROUTES
Proposed
Baylands
Shuttle
Route
Weekday Service Weekend Service
Phase One:
Brisbane
Downtown
6:00–9:00 a.m.
4:00–6:00 p.m.
1-hour headways
No Service
Phase One:
Internal Only
6:00 a.m.–8:00 p.m.
Max 15-minute
headways
10:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.
On-demand service
(expand to fixed route
if warranted)
Phase Two:
East Side
6:00–9:00 a.m.
4:00–6:00 p.m.
1-hour headways
10:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.
On-demand service
(expand to fixed route
if warranted)
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
43 • High visibility crosswalks within 50 to 200 feet of bus stops across all adjacent roadways. Preferred crosswalk placement is behind the bus stop to avoid conflict between pedestrians and transit buses and allow the transit buses to merge with traffic more easily. • Where transit stops interact with bike lanes on corridors with frequent bus service or higher rates of bicycle use, transit boarding islands shall be provided unless deemed infeasible by the Brisbane City Engineer.
Mobility Hubs
Mobility hubs are places where multiple travel options come together, along with supportive amenities, services, and technology. They are typically located around transit stops and stations with the goal of providing seamless first/last-mile solutions—to deliver commuters from transit stop to destination. Mobility hubs can vary in size and supportive amenities, services, or technology in support of the overall mobility network.
The Baylands includes five mobility hubs, refer to Figure 6.5.1 The Baylands Shuttle Extension and Transit Connections, of the Specific Plan, three of which are located along Baylands Boulevard and will be established concurrent with development of the district they are located within. The first will be at Baylands Boulevard and Sunnydale Avenue near the Caltrain station, the second at Baylands Boulevard and Geneva Avenue, and the third at Baylands Boulevard and Campus Parkway. Two additional mobility hubs will be created as the Campus East District is developed. One is located along East Campus Road and the other along Visitacion Creek South.
Mobility hubs shall include at least two supportive amenities or elements, in addition to shuttle stops and/or transit layover zones and transit shelters with real time arrival information. Such amenities may include:
• Short- and long-term bike parking;
• Bicycle share and/or scooter share parking space;
• Wayfinding;
• Active uses with outdoor seating and/or parklets;
• Car share;
• Passenger pickup/drop-off areas; and/or
• Electric vehicle charging stations.
Transportation Demand Management
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) refers to a package of policies, programs, and services that individually and collectively influence travel and parking demand, typically by improving and expanding non-driving mobility options, while maintaining incentives to increase their use, and reduce vehicle-based trips and parking demand. The Baylands will provide infrastructure and programming that enables people to be less dependent on cars, resulting in an overall TDM program that meets and exceeds the City required measures.
To support the transportation improvements, active transportation infrastructure, and transit services, a TDM program will be submitted to the City for review and approval and ready for implementation prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for residential or nonresidential use covering all land uses within the Specific Plan area, consistent with Municipal Code Chapter 10.52. Table 6.6.1, Transportation Demand Management Measures, presents the TDM measures that The Baylands will implement, including those that are required by Brisbane’s TDM Ordinance, as well as additional measures to be implemented by The Baylands.
Although individual buildings may have designated local TDM coordinators, a single TDM coordinator will be responsible for overseeing all TDM activities within The Baylands, including coordination with individual building
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
44 owners or tenants and the City of Brisbane, C/CAG, Commute.org, and other agencies. The Baylands TDM coordinator will be responsible for demonstrating to the City that individual development sites within the overall Specific Plan are in compliance with applicable TDM requirements. The Baylands Home/Property Owner Association (HOA/POA) shall be responsible for ensuring that active participation in the Certified Development Program is maintained.
Because The Baylands development would occur in increments over a 20-year period, each site-specific development project shall demonstrate compliance with the overall Baylands TDM program during development review. The overall Baylands TDM coordinator shall consolidate TDM compliance documentation for site-specific developments for review by the City of Brisbane. Reporting and monitoring would be administered primarily through project tenant and employee surveys led by The Baylands TDM coordinator, following City, C/CAG, and Commute.org procedures.
The TDM program, which meets and exceeds the City required measures contained within Municipal Code Chapter
10.52, shall at a minimum achieve the following objectives:
• A minimum 30 percent trip reduction below baseline Average Daily Traffic (ADT); • 30 percent below existing (2020) regional baseline per capita VMT for home-based trips by residents of the nine-county Bay Area region for home-based trips by Baylands residents; • 30 percent below existing (2020) regional baseline per capita VMT for home-based trips to work by employees within the nine-county Bay Area region for home-based trips to work by Baylands residents; and
• Off-street parking that does not exceed the maximum allowable off-street parking spaces for all of The Baylands, as presented in Section 6.7, Parking and Loading.
Off-Street Parking
Aside from the parking maximums based on land uses and building types established under Chapter 3, a total maximum parking cap for the entire Baylands is established within the Specific Plan. The parking cap for all of The Baylands is 11,000 off-street parking spaces, inclusive of dedicated spaces for ADA, electric vehicle, car share spaces, and commercial parking facilities. This maximum number of off-street parking spaces is further allocated among the planning districts as shown below:
DISTRICT RESIDEENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
INTENSITY (MAXIMUM)
MAXIMUM OFF STREET
PARKING SPACES
BAYSHORE DISTRICT 980 dwelling units; 900,000* SF commercial 1,150 ROUNDHOUSE DISTRICT 1,220 dwelling units; 200,000 SF commercial 1,200 ICEHOUSE HILL DISTRICT 3,400,000 SF commercial 6,150
CAMPUS EAST DISTRICT 2,500,000 SF commercial 2,465
SUSTAINABLE
INFRASTRUCTURE
NA 35
TOTAL 11,000
* Includes 500,000 SF of hotel use.
Note: District-level parking maximums may be shifted between districts subject to a determination of substantial conformance pursuant to Specific Plan Section 9.3.3, Substantial Conformance Review for Subsequent Minor Modifications of the Specific Plan.
For example, parking at Lagoon Park may exceed 35 spaces (as a part of the Sustainable Infrastructure category), which would shift from other districts.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
45 Research finds that the provision of ample parking is closely tied to high levels of vehicle trips and limiting parking can reduce vehicle use. Setting a supply cap at the district level provides flexibility in accommodating tenant needs and market preferences that may increase the supply needs for some uses and decrease them for others. This also provides flexibility in recognizing that the full effectiveness of a comprehensive TDM package, such as is proposed, will not be realized in the first years of implementation, and that, as such, the land uses developed in early phases of district implementation will require more parking than the same uses in subsequent phases.
A district-based cap, therefore, combines both a commitment to ambitious demand reductions, which must be achieved for the capped supply to support the full development program, and the flexibility to ensure the success of early development phases and the marketing of district residences and commercial spaces.
Baylands parking management includes market-rate parking and unbundled parking, and shared district parking garages. Shared parking allows use by residents, visitors, and workers, rather than providing separate parking areas.
Office and residential parking will be unbundled, which means rented or sold separately from building lease or residential units. Unbundled parking does not apply if parking is designed into a unit (e.g., is an individual garage in a unit). Enforcement of the off-street parking management for residential and commercial development within the development sites shall be enforced by Property Owners Associations (POA) or Homeowners Associations (HOA) through Covenant, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs).
Off-street vehicular parking shall comply with City of Brisbane requirements for clean air vehicles and electric vehicle charging requirements. Clean air vehicles include low-emitting, fuel-efficient, and car/vanpool vehicles.
Clean air vehicle parking will be prioritized for carpool and vanpool vehicles to align with TDM goals. Off-street parking shall include provisions for safe pedestrian movement within and through parking areas to access buildings.
On-street parking will be permitted along the following streets in The Baylands:
• Baylands Boulevard (Main Street to Campus Parkway)
• East Park Street
• West Park Street
• Roundhouse Circle
• Local Streets
Bicycle parking
Bike parking includes both short-term and long-term parking. Short-term bicycle parking is designed for bicycles typically parked for less than four hours in locations that are easily accessible. Long-term bicycle parking is designed for bicycles typically parked for four hours or more and requires more secure parking. The Specific Plan describes types of bicycle parking and includes standards for the number of required bicycle parking spaces and bicycle parking/storage design.
Streetscape Design
Roadways not only safely provide for movement of all modes of travel, but they also serve as distinctive public spaces. This section of the Specific Plan addresses how Baylands streetscapes will look and feel in addition to how they safely accommodate all modes of travel. The Baylands streets are scaled to reflect their use, and streetscape elements like street trees, planted curbside buffers, pedestrian-scale light fixtures, and other furnishings will be designed to add to character and sense of place. These features would primarily be included in the furnishing zone of the sidewalk described previously. Streetscapes also play a vital role in stormwater management, providing
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
46 critical detention and treatment areas in planters and, in some cases, beneath paving systems. Wayfinding and signage are also addressed under this section.
While the Specific Plan provides detailed guidance for streetscape and landscaping features and design, final streetscape designs are heavily influenced by the specific proposed land uses and building design within a block or district. Therefore the Specific Plan does not establish prescriptive streetscape design standards, but instead provides guidance for city staff in reviewing development proposals at the district and block level as they are submitted.
The Specific Plan identifies signature streetscapes with specialized character based on their roadway classification.
The streetscape design section of the document is organized around these classifications, recognizing that the different roadways have different functions and characteristics and the streetscape needs to respond to the roadway context. Signature streetscapes are proposed along the following roadways:
• Regional Arterials
o Bayshore Boulevard (easterly right-of-way outside of northbound travel lanes) o Geneva Avenue
• Minor Arterials
o Sierra Point Parkway
o Tunnel Avenue
• Collectors
o Baylands Boulevard
o Main Street
o Campus Parkway
o Frontage Road
• Local Streets
o East Park Street
o West Park Street
o Roundhouse Circle
Chapter 7 – Infrastructure
This chapter describes the grading, stormwater, potable water, sanitary sewer, recycled water, energy, and telecommunications infrastructure improvements needed for development of The Baylands. To address the General Plan, The Baylands’ earthwork, storm drainage, and site remediation will use current best practices at the time of development to provide a safe and resilient site. Utilities, including water supply, sewage management, and energy systems, incorporate technology and performance monitoring to provide sustainable infrastructure to support safe development of the site. Infrastructure improvements in the public realm, such as streets, open spaces, and other shared areas, are designed in coordination with the site’s grading, utility layouts, lighting, planting, furnishings, habitat considerations, and circulation networks to support the overall character and goals of The Baylands.
Site grading
The Baylands topography varies across the site, with the lowest elevations at Visitacion Creek and the highest at Icehouse Hill. Approximately 2.5 million cubic yards of soil will be moved from the area east of the Caltrain right-ofway to the area west of Caltrain. This volume of soil is necessary to establish finished pad and road elevations, comply with the approved remediation and landfill closure plans, and address settlement, storm events, SLR, and
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
47 flood risks. Site remediation will involve removal and off-site disposal of 12,000 cubic yards of soil from OU-2 and an unspecified amount of soil from OU-SM. Once those contaminated soils are removed from the site, earthwork to create buildings pads is expected to balance within The Baylands with no import or additional export of materials to or from offsite locations.
The Baylands Final EIR identified a number of potential geotechnical-related impacts associated with future development of the Baylands, including:
• Potential seismic-induced settlement of existing fill and native deposits and potential building foundation and slope failures associated with liquefaction;
• Long-term consolidation settlement of the soft and highly compressible Young Bay Mud; and • Ongoing settlement due to the compression/decomposition of the waste layer on the east side To address these geotechnical conditions, geotechnical stability of buildings, and settlement, The Baylands infrastructure shall implement a number of measures identified in the Specific Plan related to ground stabilization, foundation design, and settlement management.
As discussed earlier, this plan does not establish standards for remediation and landfill closure, as these are under the jurisdiction of other regulatory agencies. The grading approaches outlined in those documents is summarized below.
• West of the Caltrain right-of-way (OU-SM and OU-2): Five feet of soil meeting environmental agency approved clean soil standards or hardscape, such as building foundations or asphalt/concrete paved areas, must be placed above any residual legacy conditions as the surface for new building, street, park, and other development uses.
• East of the Caltrain right-of-way: A low permeability landfill cap must be installed over legacy conditions, as specified in the Title 27 Landfill Closure Plan and in accordance with the approved closure plan. • Sitewide: Underground utilities will be placed within “clean soil corridors” that will underlie the width of utility corridors to sufficient depths to prevent exposure to contaminated soils during maintenance and repair activities. Soil corridors will be constructed of material meeting environmental agency-approved soil standards.
Grading Sequence
Grading activities will be phased and start with site preparation, including demolishing existing structures, removing existing underground utilities, and clearing and grubbing the surface soil. Site grading will comply with applicable remediation requirements. To achieve conceptually proposed finished grades east of Caltrain, the mass grading operation is anticipated to involve approximately 4,300,000 cubic yards of cut and approximately 1,800,000 cubic yards of fill. This has a total movement of approximately 2,500,000 cubic yards of soil from the western to the eastern portion of The Baylands.
Upon completion of soil movement from the eastern portion of the site, geotechnical improvements and Title 27 landfill closure implementation will occur on an area-by-area basis. The remaining 1,800,000 cubic yards of soil will be moved and graded in support of the landfill closure process and mass grading on a phased basis. To achieve conceptual proposed finished grades west of Caltrain, the mass grading operation will include approximately 10,000 cubic yards of cut and approximately 2,450,000 million cubic yards of fill. This earthwork results in a total net import of approximately 2,440,000 cubic yards of fill from the east side to west side of the site. Grading operations within the western portion of the site will be carried out in phases. Movement of this soil is proposed
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
48 via hauling by truck or a conveyor system to be constructed over the Caltrain right of way, which requires approval of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Sea Level Rise
The existing site is susceptible to flooding associated with a 100-year storm event. Mitigation or accommodation is required to address flooding based on existing conditions and projected climate change impact of SLR. The Baylands is designed to accommodate projected SLR through a combination of permanent SLR designs and adaptive approaches that allow the infrastructure to be adjusted over time in response to measured SLR. The minimum design elevations for the development areas are informed by the current projected future SLR estimates for San Francisco Bay as defined by State of California Sea-Level Rise Guidance. The Specific Plan includes performance standards for grading to ensure future building elevations will exceed future sea level rise and flood conditions. Planned open space areas must also be designed to avoid future flooding.
Stormwater
Stormwater infrastructure is designed to support protection of the site and surface waters and create a sustainable system of storm and surface water infrastructure to serve The Baylands. The Baylands storm drainage and surface water designs emphasize a combination of built and naturalized stormwater infrastructure including Low Impact Development (LID) techniques and filtration-based stormwater treatment. Visitacion Creek serves as the centerpiece for the on-site portion of the Bayshore basin and includes stormwater detention, created wetlands, and habitat areas. The Specific Plan also includes provisions to manage stormwater and protect surface water quality. The storm drainage system is illustrated below in Figure 7.4.2.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
49 FIGURE 7.4.2. CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
50 Potable Water
The Baylands potable water system is designed to provide, store, and distribute adequate potable water to all planned uses in The Baylands. The Specific Plan identifies a secure supply and presents a system of storage and distribution to meet consumption, fire flow, and adequate water pressure throughout The Baylands. Water conservation and re-use are key measures to support sustainable water in The Baylands. Key measures include:
• Efficient appliance rebates
• Multi-family unit sub metering
• Water-efficient landscaping
• Water-efficient bathroom and kitchen fixtures
• Dual plumbing non-residential buildings for recycled water • Recycled water production from on-site sources
• Recycled water use for irrigation
The City of Brisbane does not have an adequate water supply to support development of the Baylands Specific Plan. As discussed in detail in the Water Supply Assessment prepared for the project (Final EIR Appendix P), water supply for The Baylands is proposed to be provided by the California Water Service Company (Cal Water). Cal Water potable supplies would be delivered via existing turnouts from the SFPUC regional water system. No construction permits for projects within the Baylands can be issued until the City and Cal Water have entered into agreements legally establishing this water supply. The boundaries between Brisbane and Cal Water’s service areas will need to be adjusted as Sierra Point and The Baylands will be incorporated into Cal Water’s service area.
Water Storage and Distribution Facilities
The Specific Plan specifies requirements for onsite water storage and distribution facilities. The use of recycled water is critical to reducing the project’s demand for potable water. The Baylands includes an on-site recycled water system to reduce demand for potable water. The on-site system is supplied by a water recycling facility (WRF). Recycled water generated by the WRF is distributed to uses by way of a separate piping system from the potable water network to prevent unintended use of recycled water and to avoid contamination of the potable water system.
Recycled water in The Baylands will primarily be used to support irrigation of open space areas, rights-of-way, roadside planter areas and landscape water features. In addition to irrigation, recycled water will also be provided to commercial, office, and biotech uses to support industrial cooling, and supply non-residential toilet and urinal flushing and uses as permitted under state regulations. The approximately 1.0 million-gallon-per-day (mgd) WRF is proposed to be constructed within the Baylands east of Tunnel Avenue adjacent to the on-site water tanks. The WRF will be owned and operated by Cal Water and would generate approximately 0.52 million gallon of recycled water per day (mgd) for The Baylands to meet water demands for existing and approved projects, and approximately 0.43 mgd of recycled water for other users in South San Francisco. The Specific Plan includes a figure illustrating how recycled water will be distributed through the Baylands.
Regarding wastewater, the Specific Plan identifies that Bayshore Sanitary District is responsible for the treatment of wastewater generated at the Baylands and includes a figure (Figure 7.7.2 Proposed Wastewater System Improvements) illustrating the wastewater collection system and proposed improvements. The Baylands WRF will generate a recycled water supply by scalping wastewater generated on-site with the ability to harvest from off-site sources where required or permitted if sufficient on-site sewage is not sufficient to run the WRF.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
51 Additional Utility Systems Within the Baylands
The Specific Plan also makes provisions for other required utilities, such as electrical and telecommunications.
Natural gas infrastructure is not proposed to be extended into the site, furthering sustainability goals to reduce fossil fuel usage.
Chapter 8 – Public Facilities Financing
The Baylands is planned to accommodate a variety of retail, commercial offices, research and development uses, institutional facilities, small-scale industry, residential uses, and public open space, as well as supporting infrastructure. This development requires the construction and ongoing maintenance of parks, roads, utilities, and other infrastructure.
General Plan Policies BL.1 D and E state:
Each increment of development shall be provided with appropriate transportation related and other infrastructure, facilities, and site amenities as determined by the City. Such transportation related and other infrastructure, facilities, and site amenities (e.g., parks, open space preservation, habitat enhancement) shall be provided at the developer’s cost.
Baylands development shall be revenue positive to the City on an annual basis where all City costs (e.g., annual operating costs, maintenance and replacement of equipment, facilities, infrastructure, cultural resource and habitat protection and management etc.) are exceeded by project-generated revenues to the City (e.g., to the City’s General Fund, enterprise funds, special funds, etc.) during all phases of development and upon final buildout.
As required by these General Plan policies, the Baylands financing plan will not be permitted to impose any financial costs on Brisbane residents and businesses outside of The Baylands. To comply with these requirements, the funding and financing strategy:
1) includes several different funding sources, including developer funding, public-private partnerships, and other multi-source financing tools working in tandem with developer funding, to access the most costeffective available funding mechanisms that consider changing public and private funding opportunities, as well as changing real estate market conditions; and
2) makes appropriate use of available public financing mechanisms and funding opportunities to support Specific Plan infrastructure and public facilities and assure that implementation of the Specific Plan would not create a financial burden on Brisbane residents, would be revenue positive for the City on an ongoing basis, and would enable development of a feasible project.
The Specific Plan includes an implementation strategy summarizing the specific improvements proposed for The Baylands, potential funding and financing source(s) for construction of each improvement, the entity with responsibility for the operation and maintenance (O&M) of each completed improvement, and the ongoing funding sources for O&M. A financing plan based on the implementation strategy set forth would need to be consistent with General Plan Policies BL.1 D and E.
Specific Plan Section 8.3, Financing Methods and Implementation Requirements, summarizes potential funding and financing tools in more detail, along with the necessary steps for establishing each of the sources of funds. The owner is obligated to construct the required infrastructure and improvements required by this Specific Plan and
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
52 proposes using tax and revenue assessment tools such as a Community Facilities District (CFD), an Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD), and available public financing and funding opportunities.
This Specific Plan requires that issuance of any bond funding or other public financing for infrastructure serving the Baylands Specific Plan place repayment obligations on Baylands owners and occupants and not on residents or taxpayers outside the Specific Plan area. In addition, Baylands development shall be revenue positive to the City on an ongoing basis and not result in a financial burden on Brisbane residents or businesses outside the Specific Plan area. Potential financing methods include:
• Owner Financing;
• Community Facilities Districts;
• Special Assessment Districts; and/or
• Tax Increment Financing/Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts.
There are also a range of state and regional grant programs that components of the project may be eligible for, as identified in the Specific Plan.
Owner Financing
It is expected that the owner of The Baylands (currently Sunquest) and any successors or assigns will initially fund required public facility improvements in its entirety or fund any gap between available grant and public finance funding. The Baylands property owner shall ensure provision of funding for constructing the required infrastructure, including private funding or using tax and revenue assessment tools as discussed below, with any repayment obligations for non-grant public funding repaid by current and future owners and occupants and not residents or taxpayers outside the Specific Plan area.
Community Facilities Districts
Local governments and development applicants across the nation and in California commonly use land-secured financing methods to fund infrastructure or provide services that benefit a particular area. In California, the MelloRoos CFD has been a well-used infrastructure financing tool. State law enables the formation of a CFD by local agencies, with property owner approval, for the purpose of imposing additional special taxes on property located within the boundaries of the CFD. The resulting special tax revenue can be used to fund capital costs or operations and maintenance expenses directly, or it may be used to secure a bond issuance, the proceeds of which are used to fund capital costs. CFDs have become the most common form of land secured financing in California.
State law generally allows CFDs to fund the following types of public improvements proposed in The Baylands:
• Park, recreation, parkway, and open-space facilities; • Water transmission and distribution facilities, telephone lines, facilities for the transmission or distribution of electrical energy, and cable television lines; • Flood and storm protection facilities, including storm drainage and treatment systems; • Work deemed necessary to bring buildings into compliance with seismic safety standards or regulations; • Removal or remedial action for the cleanup of any hazardous substance released or threatened to be released into the environment; and
• Energy efficiency, water conservation and renewable energy improvements.
Services that may be funded through a CFD include:
• Police services
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
53 • Fire protection and suppression services
• Ambulance and paramedic services
• Maintenance of parks, parkways, and open space
• Flood and storm protection services, including
operation and maintenance of storm drainage systems
• Environmental cleanup and remediation services
Special Assessment Districts
An assessment district is similar to a CFD. The Baylands is the geographic area that would benefit from Specific Plan infrastructure and public improvements. As with a CFD, owners pay an additional property tax amount in Special Assessment Districts to pay for particular improvements. These future tax payment obligations create a revenue stream that is used to qualify for, and repay, bonds issued early in the development to pay for infrastructure and other qualified expenses. Special Assessment Districts may be formed to build backbone infrastructure or provide certain public services at The Baylands, including, public roads, streetlights, landscaping, parks, or drainage facilities, as well as many other services authorized by law. Permanent Road Divisions are limited to providing construction and maintenance for road-related items including grading, paving, drainage structures, street lighting, and roadway landscaping. Landscape and Lighting Districts may provide for public lighting and landscaping as well as park and recreation acquisition and maintenance. Because legislation, regulations, financing availability, and other market conditions evolve over time, The Baylands may consist of both a CFD and one or more Special Assessment Districts.
Tax Increment Financing/Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts Tax Increment Financing (TIF) is also available to finance qualified infrastructure projects and activities. Local agencies may establish TIF for a given project for geographic area to capture, and direct to specified future uses, the incremental increases in property tax revenue from approved development. In the absence of TIF, this revenue would accrue to the City’s General Fund (or other property-taxing entity revenue funds).
Chapter 9 – Implementation
This chapter provides an implementation process for the Specific Plan, including timing for completion of remediation and landfill closure, and overall project phasing concepts. The phasing of delivery of open space and public park improvements, roadways, and other infrastructure in relation to specific permitting phases of residential and commercial uses is intended to be regulated via the Development Agreement, which will be considered separately and will define development obligations, public benefits, and other commitments necessary to ensure compatibility with Measure JJ.. In addition, this chapter identifies required approval processes for subdivision and site-specific development within the Specific Plan area.
Phasing
Pre-development grading activities will occur concurrently throughout the Specific Plan area because stockpiled soils that provide the on-site source of fill required to achieve finished grades for development in the western portion of the site need to be moved from atop the former landfill in the eastern portion of the site. Required remediation will also include completion of subsurface clean corridors for the safe installation and maintenance of new wet and dry utilities.
Chapter 9 describes buildout of the Specific Plan occurring over two development phases:
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
54 • Phase I consists of commercial and residential development within the western portion of the site and will progress in stages as site remediation and grading activities are completed. Major site infrastructure such as the solar field, water recycling facility, and constructed wetlands located within the eastern portion of the site are also required to be completed concurrently with Phase I development as these provide needed stormwater treatment, recycled water, and renewable energy generation infrastructure for the Phase I development.
• Phase II development of the Campus East District is the planned final phase of development since it can occur only after export of the existing soil stockpiled within the former landfill to the western portion of the site and completion of Title 27 landfill closure activities. Phase II will also progress in stages as grading and landfill closure activities are completed.
The Specific Plan outlines the proposed timing relationships between land development, infrastructure and roadway construction, and open space improvements for both Phase I and Phase II, which will be further defined in the Development Agreement. The specific timing of each district will depend on several factors, including market conditions. Phase I development will proceed as grading and remediation for each district is completed. Phase II development will proceed as landfill closure construction is completed and remaining stockpile soils are relocated on an incremental basis.
Required site remediation applies to the area west of Caltrain, and Title 27 landfill closure activities apply to the area east of Caltrain. In the western portion of the site, remediation requirements for two areas (OU-SM and OU-2) are set forth in Remedial Action Plans (RAPs) approved by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control and the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board, respectively. Within the western portion of the Baylands, site remediation for each land use district is required to be certified as complete by the appropriate state regulatory agency prior to issuance of a permit for infrastructure or building construction within that district.
Within the eastern portion of the Baylands, Title 27 final landfill closure of a block is required to be certified as complete by the appropriate regulatory agencies prior to issuance of a permit for infrastructure or building construction within that block.
Subsequent City Approval Processes
A development agreement is currently being negotiated between the City and the property owner for The Baylands. This contractual agreement establishes additional detail regarding project phasing and timing, financing, community benefits, and other project elements. Once a development agreement is recorded, it runs with the property and will remain in force and effect if the property is sold in the future.
Physical construction activities at The Baylands require the following subsequent City of Brisbane (“City”) approvals, each of which is required to be consistent with The Baylands Specific Plan, Development Agreement, and Brisbane Municipal Code.
1. Grading permits are required for earth movement, both for grading activities during remediation and landfill closure construction activities, and for development-related fill and compaction activities. Grading permits required for The Baylands shall be processed under Section 15.01.080, except that approval of this Specific Plan serves as the Planning Commission approval required under Section 15.01.081.
2. Subdivision and/or parcel maps are to be submitted and approved to establish individual parcels within the Specific Plan area. The following maps may be processed in sequence or concurrently:
a. Map(s) to Create District Boundaries. A subdivision and/or parcel map (tentative and final) shall be approved to establish the boundaries of each district (e.g., Bayshore, Roundhouse, Icehouse Hill, Campus East, Sustainability), as well as individual parcels for major roadway rights-of-way
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
55 forming boundaries between districts (e.g., Geneva Avenue, Main Street, Tunnel Avenue, Lagoon Road, Sierra Point Parkway), and open space areas not within a specific district (e.g., Visitacion Creek, Lagoon Park, etc.). If a single map is not submitted for the entirety of The Baylands, two separate tentative maps may be submitted, one each for the entirety of the western portion and eastern portions of The Baylands consistent with project phasing set forth in Section 9.2, Phasing, of the Specific Plan.
b. Map(s) to Blocks within a District. Prior to or concurrent with the approval of the first site specific development project within a district, a subdivision and/or parcel map (tentative and final) shall be approved to establish parcels for all individual blocks, park and open space areas, and rightsof-way for local streets for the given district. A condition of approval shall be placed on all such tentative maps that requires preparation and approval of a Development Allocation Plan for each district prior to recording of a final map.
3. Map(s) to Divide Block(s) into Individual Parcels (Optional): Prior to or concurrent with the approval of subsequent site-specific development projects within a block, a subdivision and/or parcel map (tentative and final) may be approved to establish individual parcels within a given block.
4. Brisbane Parks and Recreation Commission approval prior to the start of construction for site-specific improvement plans for each park, open space area and trail, as well as development within the Amenities Area.
5. Master plans for informational and wayfinding signage consistent with the provisions of Section 5.5, for parks, open space, and trail informational and wayfinding signage, and Section 6.9, for streetscape informational and wayfinding signage.
6. Interim Uses within the 45-Acre Footprint for the potential HSR LMF (Section 3.4.3).
7. Expansion of existing structures or uses within Existing Use Areas set forth in Section 2.7.
8. Conditional Uses (Table 3.4.1) require approval of a conditional use permit pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 17.40.
9. Permitted residential and nonresidential uses require approval of a Housing Development Permit pursuant to the Housing Accountability Act or Design Permit approval pursuant to Municipal Code Chapter 17.42, respectively.
10. All construction, unless exempted, requires a building permit pursuant to BMC Chapter 15.04 and the latest versions of the California Building Code at the time of permit application.
All of the above subdivision and/or parcel maps shall be reviewed by City staff for consistency with the Subdivision Map Act, City land division requirements, and the Specific Plan and may include minor modifications to the various provisions and figures of the Specific Plan.
Development Allocation Process
Because development in the Specific Plan area will occur over an approximately 20-year period during which market conditions will evolve, the Specific Plan establishes a process for allocating the maximum allowable districtlevel development to individual blocks within the district. The intent is:
1. to maintain flexibility while ensuring that site specific development projects do not use up the entirety of a district’s maximum allowable development prior to buildout, leaving no remaining development capacity for remaining portions of a district or the Specific Plan as a whole; and
2. to support implementation of applicable mitigation measures addressing development density and building heights in certain portions of the Specific Plan area. Administrative approvals and allocation
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 7
56 adjustments authorized under this section shall also be subject to the substantial conformance and modification procedures established in this plan.
Concurrent with the required tentative maps previously referenced establishing parcels for the blocks and roadways in each district, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Director a development allocation for the entirety of that district, including:
1. A development allocation table for the district reflecting dwelling units and commercial square footage, as well as identifying building types by block;
2. Block plan and vehicular access plan figures for the district; and
3. A written narrative demonstrating the consistency of the development and building type allocation for the district with the applicable district, block and design standards established in Chapters 2 and 3 of this Specific Plan.
The development allocation shall identify, by block, where Active Ground Floor uses are required or permitted and demonstrate that such uses are compliant with those provisions of the Specific Plan. To the extent permitted pursuant to state housing law, the Community Development Director may require additional documentation to determine consistency with the above requirements and may apply conditions as deemed necessary to ensure consistency with such requirements.
This chapter of the Specific Plan also sets forth procedures to amend the approved block allocations as well as modify block allocations of units and commercial square footage, as well as appeal procedures and requirements for site specific development projects to comply with Specific Plan provisions. It also sets forth requirements for sign programs and procedures for minor modifications to the approved Specific Plan.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
Attachment 8: Detailed Bayshore Mobility Plan analysis
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
1 Bayshore Mobility Plan
Background
The Bayshore Mobility Plan is the culminating effort of study by the City of Brisbane and traffic consultants Fehr & Peers to address the obligations of General Plan Policy C.1 and its implementing programs which call for the City to study improvements to Bayshore Boulevard that would address the effects of regional-through traffic within Brisbane and enhance mobility for Brisbane residents and businesses. Because the majority of vehicles along Bayshore Boulevard represent regional through trips with no origin or destination in Brisbane, increasing the capacity of Bayshore Boulevard (e.g., widening the corridor) to try to accommodate future traffic increases would add more vehicles to the roadway, as drivers seek to avoid congestion on the US 101 freeway, and would not improve traffic flow on Bayshore Boulevard.
General Plan Circulation Element Policy Direction
In January 2020, the City of Brisbane adopted General Plan Amendment GP-1-19 as a follow-up to General Plan Amendment GP-1-18 and Measure JJ. GP-1-19 states in part, that:
“Bayshore Boulevard functions primarily as a regional roadway through the City of Brisbane. Peak hour congestion along Highway 101 causes traffic to be diverted from the freeway onto Bayshore Boulevard through the City of Brisbane as motorists attempt to avoid congested freeway traffic.
Depending on the time of day and location, regional through traffic makes up 60 to 80 percent of traffic on Bayshore Boulevard. On a daily basis, only 10 to 15 percent of all trips on Bayshore Boulevard are generated from Brisbane’s residential neighborhoods and 15 to 20 percent are generated by Brisbane’s employment centers. The majority of traffic on Bayshore Boulevard within Brisbane is between San Francisco and cities to the south, with a smaller amount (approximately 15 percent of all trips) traveling between Daly City and the cities to the south.
A principal challenge for the City is maintaining vehicular mobility for Brisbane residents and businesses along Bayshore Boulevard. As large-scale developments occur in cities to the north and south of Brisbane, regional-through traffic and congestion on Bayshore Boulevard is projected to increase. It is also important that Bayshore Boulevard provides safe access and egress for sites located along its frontage while maintaining its ability to move vehicles through the City. Another issue is providing for safe and comfortable access for bicyclists and pedestrians”.
In response to these issues, General Plan Policy C.1 was adopted and calls for the City’s roadway system to be designed “to emphasize mobility for Brisbane residents and businesses, accommodate bicycle and pedestrian in addition to vehicular movement, and provide for comfortable and safe travel within the community to shopping, employment, and recreation, as well as to transit and the Highway 101 freeway.” To implement this policy, General Plan Program C.1.b calls for development of plans for Bayshore Boulevard “that address the effects of regional through traffic within Brisbane and enhances mobility for Brisbane residents and businesses through a combination of roadway and intersection, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facility improvements that would not cause a substantial increase in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) on Bayshore Boulevard or other routes through the City.”
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
2 To implement General Plan Policy C.1 and Program C.1.b, and to address these issues, the City has taken the following actions:
1) The City completed the Complete Streets Safety Assessment by the Safe Transportation Research and Education Center (“SafeTREC”) at the University of California, Berkeley, in 2022 for the segment of Bayshore Boulevard between San Bruno Avenue and Old County Road. The final recommendations of the study proposed a road diet along this section of the corridor, reducing the number of through lanes along Bayshore Boulevard from four (two in each direction) to two (one in each direction) and providing a separated multi-use path along the west side of the roadway, among other improvements. This 2022 study was reviewed by the Complete Streets Safety Committee in February 2024. The City Council reviewed portions of the study in October 2023.
2) The City reviewed design plans for the Geneva Avenue and Sierra Point Parkway extensions proposed as a part of the Brisbane Baylands Specific Plan to determine compliance with Program C.1.b. The Specific Plan Draft EIR documents show how the proposed roadway extensions would create new multimodal thoroughfares for local and regional travelers that would reduce the demand for regional vehicle travel on Bayshore Boulevard.
3) The City developed the Bayshore Mobility Plan, presented as Appendix F to Draft EIR Appendix F.1, to implement General Plan Policy C.1 and address the policy considerations outlined in Program C.1.b. The Bayshore Mobility Plan builds on the City’s 2022 Complete Streets Safety Assessment and expands its recommended road diet, multi-use path along the west side of Bayshore Boulevard, and other improvements north from Old County Road to Geneva Avenue.
Plan Goals
The Bayshore Mobility Plan seeks to enhance mobility for Brisbane residents by:
• Enhancing connectivity for residents and land uses abutting Bayshore Boulevard, such as the Sierra Point Mobile Home Park on the westside of Bayshore Boulevard just north of San Bruno Avenue. • Reducing the prominence of regional through-traffic along Bayshore Boulevard, making it more of a local street serving Brisbane residents.
• Redesigning Bayshore Boulevard as a multi-modal corridor to increase the level of comfort and safety for all roadway users, including automobiles, emergency response vehicles, transit vehicles, trucks, bicycles, and pedestrians in accordance with General Plan Policy C.1 to “provide for comfortable and safe travel within the community to shopping, employment, and recreation, as well as to transit” and the recommendations of the 2022 Complete Streets Safety Assessment. • Increase connectivity between the Baylands and the existing City of Brisbane for people traveling along and crossing Bayshore Boulevard.
• Improve the look of the corridor, providing opportunities for landscaping, gateway features, wayfinding, and other features that increase the prominence of the roadway as a local route for Baylands residents rather than a regional cut-through route.
Design Features
The table below summarizes proposed design features along the entirety of Bayshore Boulevard within Brisbane.
The primary feature of the plan is to reduce the number of travel lanes along Bayshore Boulevard from four lanes (two in each direction) to two lanes (one in each direction) south of Geneva Avenue, along with providing a
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
3 median, turn pockets, and a multi-use pathway and bicycle facilities along the entirety of the corridor within the City of Brisbane.
DESIGN FEATURE DESCRIPTION
GEOMETRIC DESIGN • Road diet to reduce travel lanes along Bayshore Boulevard from four lanes (two in each direction) to two lanes (one in each direction) south of Geneva Avenue with a median and turn pockets along the entire length of the corridor within Brisbane; • Addition of Class I multi-use pathway, with a minimum width of 12 feet and preferred width of 16 feet for a sidewalk level facility; • Signage and striping recommendations from the Local Roadway Safety Plan; • Improved lighting, including pedestrian-scale lighting along sidewalks and multi-use path;
• Speed feedback/warning signs.
TRAFFIC SIGNAL
CONSIDERATIONS
• Signal coordination to allow vehicles to maintain speeds at the posted speed limit; • Protected left turn phasing at all intersections;
• Leading pedestrian intervals at crosswalk locations;
• Prohibit right turns on red.
EMERGENCY ACCESS
AND OPERATIONS
• Traffic signal priority/emergency vehicle pre-emption, median breaks, and queue jumps at intersections to allow emergency vehicles to pass stopped traffic between intersections.
TRANSIT ACCESS AND
OPERATIONS
• Traffic signal priority for transit vehicles;
• Bus boarding islands, 12-foot minimum bus pull out areas, and queue jumps.
By removing a travel lane in each direction (i.e., “road diet”), the Bayshore Mobility Plan aims to address the following” emphasis areas” identified in C/CAG’s Local Roadway Safety Plan:
• Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety
• Nighttime/Low Light Safety
• Motor Vehicle Speed Related Crashes
• High Speed Roadways
Reducing the number of lanes along Bayshore Boulevard would reduce the design speed to 35 miles per hour, consistent with other arterials in the Baylands Specific Plan area, and would also reduce the risk of fatal or severe collisions and the desirability of the corridor for regional through traffic.
The Mobility Plan would also:
1) reduce the number of lane changes motorists would be required to make when turning onto or from Bayshore Boulevard; and
2) slow down the speed of vehicles turning onto local streets, minimizing potential points of conflict, and improving traffic flow and the overall safety of the corridor.
Removing one travel lane in each direction would allow the area currently within the right-of-way to become available for construction of a multi-use Class I path along the west (southbound) side of the corridor to physically separate cyclists and pedestrians from vehicular traffic, thereby reducing the level of traffic stress, providing a safer environment for active transportation, and promoting walking and cycling as viable modes of travel for individuals of all ages and abilities. The existing northbound bicycle lane will remain along Bayshore Boulevard for bicyclists who are comfortable riding adjacent to busy travel lanes, with a wide striped buffer zone to delineate separate spaces for bicyclists and motorists.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
4 The Mobility Plan would remove channelized turn lanes that are not required by geometric design and reconfigure those that are required for larger vehicles (such as a truck or fire engine) to make a turn. As a result, potential conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians would be minimized, creating a safer and more accessible environment for all road users. Where free right-turn lanes are to remain, they would be designed to slow vehicle speeds making the turn.
Safety Features
The Bayshore Mobility Plan proposes standard safety improvements at all signalized intersections, including protected turn phasing, improved signage, enhanced pedestrian and bicycle crossings, and signal synchronization for a 35-mph design speed. Existing traffic signals would be retimed to reflect the new configuration and equipped with emergency and transit signal priority to give these vehicles precedence when approaching intersections.
Bayshore Boulevard’s recent signal upgrades can support the features identified in the Mobility Plan, as well as future Intelligent Transportation Systems.
The Plan prioritizes emergency vehicle access by providing multiple ways for emergency responders to bypass congestion on Bayshore Boulevard. To support emergency access at intersections, each traffic signal would incorporate pre-emption technology that allows emergency vehicles to trigger a green light, clearing queues and creating space for drivers to pull over. Each signalized intersection would also include bus/emergency vehicle queue space on the right (shared with right-turn pockets where appropriate), providing additional room for emergency vehicles to pass where requested by City of Brisbane emergency service providers and approved by the City Engineer.
The center median and multi-use path would include breaks approximately every 250 feet to allow emergency vehicles to navigate around bottlenecks by using the multi-use path or the opposite travel direction for short distances. Medians and pathway buffers would be designed and landscaped to maintain clear sight lines.
Northbound emergency vehicles could bypass queues by using the buffered bike lane when vehicles pull over or by crossing into the southbound lane at median breaks. Southbound emergency vehicles could use short segments of the multi-use path or the northbound travel lane. The 16- to 18-foot-wide multi-use path would provide sufficient width for these short-distance maneuvers.
The Plan also provides transit signal priority to enhance transit reliability by extending green lights or shortening red lights when a bus approaches. This reduces delays at intersections, minimizes passenger wait times, and improves schedule adherence. Bus stops along Bayshore Boulevard would include dedicated loading zones on bus boarding islands. On the west (southbound) side, these islands would be adjacent to the multi-use path, while on the east (northbound) side, they would also provide separation between bicyclists and traffic. All bus stops would be located on the far side of intersections in bus pull-out areas, except where land use or pedestrian considerations necessitate a near-side stop.
Bus queue jump lanes would provide buses with a short merge transition and a “head start” when reentering traffic, improving run times and overall reliability. SamTrans bus stops along Bayshore Boulevard would include amenities consistent with the SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan, such as shelters, benches, and real-time information.
Draft EIR Comments on the Mobility Plan
Comments received on the Draft EIR raised a wide range of concerns regarding the proposed Bayshore Mobility Plan. Many comments raised concerns about traffic congestion, particularly skepticism about the proposed road
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
5 diet that would reduce travel lanes. Other comments expressed concern that this change could worsen congestion or emergency access and evacuation on Bayshore Boulevard and surrounding streets.
Pedestrian and bicycle safety was another prominent topic. Commenters called for continuous sidewalks along the full length of Bayshore Boulevard and other traffic-calming features to improve safety for pedestrians. Several comments requested pedestrian bridges across Bayshore Boulevard, particularly to provide safe school access and to separate children from vehicle traffic. Other comments also expressed general concern for the safety of school children. Evacuation safety was also mentioned in multiple comments, with concerns that narrowed roadway configuration could impede emergency egress.
Response to Comments
The Final EIR contains responses to all comments made related to the Mobility Plan. Below is an overall summary of responses, generally organized by the following topic or area of concern:
• Existing Regional Travel Patterns;
• Future Traffic Conditions and Regional Growth;
• Need for a Reduced-Speed, Two-Lane Configuration;
• Projected Reductions in Regional Cut-Through Traffic; • Local Access and Intersection Operations;
• No-Project Scenario;
• Existing Safety Deficiencies Identified in Regional Plans; • Multimodal Improvements Under the Mobility Plan;
• Pedestrian Crossing Strategy and Rationale Against Bridges; • Emergency Access and Evacuation Features; and
• Safety Consequences Without the Mobility Plan.
Existing Regional Travel Patterns
The primary rationale for implementing changes to Bayshore Boulevard is to reduce its attractiveness for regional traffic seeking to avoid congestion on US 101 while redesigning the roadway to better serve Brisbane residents. As documented in Draft EIR Section 4.8.2.c, Existing Vehicular Traffic and Travel Patterns, and in the Existing Traffic Conditions Memo (Appendix A to Draft EIR Appendix F.1), Bayshore Boulevard currently functions primarily as a regional through route. Specifically:
• Approximately two-thirds to three-quarters of existing weekday travel and over 80 percent of weekend trips are regional through trips with no origin or destination in Brisbane. • Between 33 and 36 percent of all trips are between San Francisco and cities to the south, representing the highest-volume regional trip type during peak hours.
• 17 percent of trips are between Daly City and cities to the south. • Only one-quarter to one-third of total trips begin or end within Brisbane, and fewer than three percent originate within the Baylands site.
Future Traffic Conditions and Regional Growth
The Bayshore Mobility Plan describes how Bayshore Boulevard could accommodate existing local travel and trips generated by the Baylands development. However, growth in regional traffic on US 101 would cause drivers to use available capacity on Bayshore Boulevard under all future scenarios, regardless of whether the roadway includes four lanes or two lanes. As shown in Appendix D to Draft EIR Appendix F.1, although today’s PM peak volumes are higher than AM volumes due to congestion on US 101, regional traffic growth would result in similar AM and PM
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
6 volumes in future years. A comparable pattern is expected on Tunnel Avenue, which serves as a parallel route through Brisbane. These conditions reflect increased commute demand to job centers in San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties that will exceed US 101’s future peak-hour capacity.
Need for a Reduced-Speed, Two-Lane Configuration
The analysis of the Bayshore Mobility Plan demonstrates that reducing the roadway’s regional prominence requires reducing travel speeds and overall utility for regional travelers compared with US 101. The plan would lower the design speed from 45 mph to 35 mph and implement design changes—such as reducing lanes and lane widths— consistent with other arterials in the Baylands Specific Plan area. The two-lane configuration would extend the cross-section north of Tunnel Avenue to match the two-lane layout recommended south of Tunnel Avenue in the 2022 Complete Streets Safety Assessment. A consistent two-lane cross-section throughout Brisbane would help shift Bayshore Boulevard from a high-speed, multi-lane regional route to a local roadway with slower speeds, reducing its attractiveness as a bypass route. Alternatives that preserved the four-lane configuration north of Tunnel Avenue or failed to address Bayshore Boulevard’s regional role would not achieve the desired goals.
Projected Reductions in Regional Cut-Through Traffic
The Conceptual Design Recommendations memorandum indicates that the Bayshore Mobility Plan would reduce regional traffic volumes on Bayshore Boulevard by approximately 40 percent, with regional drivers shifting primarily to US 101. Because there are no viable local parallel routes for regional traffic, the plan would not substantially change travel patterns on local streets west of Bayshore Boulevard. The Geneva Avenue and Sierra Point Parkway extensions proposed by the Specific Plan would also help reduce demand on Bayshore Boulevard and Tunnel Avenue by providing additional direct connections to US 101, consistent with General Plan Program C.1.b.
Local Access and Intersection Operations
The plan was also evaluated for its effects on local access. The Conceptual Design Recommendations memorandum shows that the Bayshore Mobility Plan would substantially improve access for people walking, bicycling, and using transit, while vehicular access would remain similar to today. Although regional traffic growth would result in additional turn delays under all future scenarios, the plan’s reduction in regional cut-through traffic would benefit local drivers. Some intersections with multiple existing left-turn lanes, such as Guadalupe Canyon Parkway and Valley Drive, may experience longer queues because all left-turning vehicles would merge into a single lane. The City would need to monitor traffic conditions and adjust signal timing to maintain local access.
No-Project Scenario
Without the Bayshore Mobility Plan, regional traffic would continue to grow, exceeding the capacity of the existing four-lane configuration. Bayshore Boulevard would retain its role as a high-speed, multi-lane bypass for US 101, contrary to General Plan Program C.1.b.
Existing Safety Deficiencies Identified in Regional Plans The Draft EIR evaluates the Baylands Specific Plan's consistency with the General Plan and identifies existing deficiencies in Bayshore Boulevard’s configuration and safety performance. Numerous regional and local plans identify Bayshore Boulevard as a high-stress corridor for people walking and bicycling. C/CAG’s 2021 San Mateo County Comprehensive Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan classifies the corridor as high-stress due to high speeds and lack of protected facilities. Every intersection along Bayshore Boulevard was identified as a priority location for safety improvements in C/CAG’s 2024 Countywide Local Roadway Safety Plan. These documents recommend engineering countermeasures that the Bayshore Mobility Plan incorporates, including its proposed road diet. The 2022 Safe Routes to School High Injury Network Report also identifies Bayshore Boulevard as one of three corridors in Brisbane with high pedestrian and bicycle collision rates.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 8
7 Multimodal Improvements Under the Mobility Plan
Both the Baylands Specific Plan and the Bayshore Mobility Plan include substantial multimodal improvements. The Specific Plan provides ADA-compliant sidewalks along the project frontage, while the Bayshore Mobility Plan adds a continuous Class I multi-use path on the west side of Bayshore Boulevard from Geneva Avenue to San Bruno Avenue. Additional improvements include enhanced lighting, street trees, and bus stop upgrades consistent with the SamTrans Bus Stop Improvement Plan. All intersections would receive pedestrian-leading intervals, protected phasing, high-visibility crosswalks, advance stop bars, curb extensions, and transit signal priority. These improvements would eliminate existing multimodal network gaps and improve safety and comfort for all users.
The Bayshore Mobility Plan addresses existing safety concerns by reducing vehicle speeds, redesigning intersections to manage conflicts, and providing physical separation between people walking or bicycling and people driving. These design changes would also accommodate increased multimodal travel generated by the Baylands Specific Plan.
Pedestrian Crossing Strategy and Rationale Against Bridges Pedestrian bridges over Bayshore Boulevard are not recommended under the Bayshore Mobility Plan. Bridges are often inconvenient for daily use, especially for people with mobility challenges, and are costly to construct and maintain. Studies show that pedestrians frequently avoid bridges due to added distance, inconvenience, and perceived safety concerns. In some cases, bridges can create safety issues by isolating pedestrians and reducing visibility. Instead, the Bayshore Mobility Plan relies on proven safety strategies—reduced speeds, shorter crossings, and protected phasing. For example, at Main Street, the crossing distance under the Mobility Plan would be reduced to approximately 36 feet (two through lanes and one left-turn lane), compared to more than 80 feet today with the four-lane configuration and slip lane. Tighter turning radii at intersections would slow turning vehicles and improve yielding behavior.
Emergency Access and Evacuation Features
The Draft EIR also evaluates emergency access and evacuation conditions. The Bayshore Mobility Plan includes traffic signal pre-emption and queue jump features that allow emergency vehicles to bypass queues at intersections. Breaks in the median and multi-use path would provide additional opportunities to bypass congestion. These intelligent transportation features would also help facilitate evacuation by maintaining flow on Bayshore Boulevard during emergency events.
Safety Consequences Without the Mobility Plan
Without implementation of the Bayshore Mobility Plan, existing safety issues would persist and worsen as traffic volumes grow. High speeds on a four-lane roadway with long distances between signals would continue, creating challenging conditions for people walking and bicycling—particularly school-aged children. For instance, the crosswalk at Main Street would remain more than 80 feet long under existing conditions, significantly increasing exposure to turning vehicles compared with the shorter 36-foot crossing proposed under the Mobility Plan.
ATTACHMENT 1
2021-ER-1/2021-SP-1/2021-RZ-3/2021-GPA-2
ATTACHMENT 9
Attachment 9: List of property owners within the Baylands Specific Plan Area Property Owners
511 TUNNEL AVENUE LLC
BAYSHORE SANITARY DISTRICT
BRISBANE PROPERTIES
BROOKS MICHELE DAY
BULLOCK JOSEPH J III TR
CALLAN MATTHEW C
CAREY HELEN J TR
CAREY HELEN J TR ET AL EST OF
CITY OF BRISBANE
DENNIS EDWARD J
DENNIS LETA M
DOTY DENNIS C
EARTHSQUEAK LLC
GALLAGHER CONAL
HOLDINGS 22 LLC ET AL
L & C DIVERSIFIED LLC
M&E BRISBANE
MORTIMER JULIE D C
OVERTON DEBRA L TR
OYSTER POINT PROPERTIES INC
PANONTIN IVANA TR
PHILOMENA LLC
PRESCOTT NADINE E ET AL
RECOLOGY PROPERTIES INC
REY GERTRUDE S
SANITARY FILL COMPANY
SCHMITZ STEVEN J TR
SFPP
SIERRA HOTEL MANAGEMENT CORP
SILVESTRI ALFEO & PAOLA
SILVESTRI PAOLA TR ET AL
STATE OF CALIF
SUNTEX PROPERTIES INC
TAMU LUKE AMUKHALE
TUNTEX (USA) INC
TUNTEX U S A INC
WALTERS LOTTIE M
ATTACHMENT 1
City Council Staff Report
Meeting Date: September 3, 2026
From: Maz Bozorginia, Public Works Director
Subject: Consider Approval of an Amendment to a
Reimbursement Agreement with Parties who
Constructed San Francisco Avenue Extension
Recommendation
Staff recommend the City Council consider approving the First Amendment to the Reimbursement Agreement and authorize the City Manager to execute the document on behalf of the City.
Background
The owners of the properties at 90 Santa Clara Street and 29 San Francisco Avenue submitted plans in the early 2000s to construct new single-family dwellings. As a condition of approval, the Department of Public Works required the streets to be widened to connect with San Francisco Avenue. The required street improvements were driven by development conditions, including access and safety considerations consistent with applicable fire and roadway standards at the time.
The completed road widening also benefits an adjacent undeveloped property, which will not be required to construct similar improvements when it develops. Therefore, the owners entered into a Reimbursement Agreement with the City to establish a mechanism for recovering a proportionate share of improvement costs from future benefiting development within a 20-year term.
The original Reimbursement Agreement was recorded on June 19, 2007, and an Addendum to the Agreement was recorded on January 9, 2008.
Reimbursement agreements of this type are a common mechanism used by local agencies when public improvements are constructed by one property owner but provide a benefit to other parcels. Similar agreements have been utilized in Brisbane, including examples such as Kings Road and San Diego Court. Historically, these agreements have included terms ranging from 20 to 25 years, and the duration of such agreements is ultimately at the discretion of the City Council.
The First Amendment to the Reimbursement Agreement was presented to the City Council on July 17, 2025. At that meeting, the City Council continued the item to a future date to allow for additional consideration of the request, including questions related to precedent, typical duration, and the City’s authority to extend the term.
The term of the Reimbursement Agreement is set to expire on May 9, 2027. Since that time, the parties have continued operating under the terms of the agreement while pursuing an extension.
Discussion
The reimbursement obligation established under the Agreement runs with the benefiting property and is not tied to an individual property owner. As such, any future development of the benefiting parcel would be subject to the reimbursement provisions of the Agreement.
Because the remaining benefiting property has not yet developed, the parties who funded the roadway extension have requested that the City extend the term of the agreement. The City has the authority to establish and amend the terms of such agreements, and the proposed extension is intended to preserve the original cost-sharing framework established at the time the improvements were constructed.
Staff finds the requested extension to be reasonable and equitable, as it maintains the original intent that benefiting properties share in the cost of required public improvements while allowing additional time for that participation to occur.
The proposed First Amendment does not modify the reimbursement methodology or cost allocation. It would only extend the duration of the agreement under the existing terms to expire on May 9, 2037, to allow additional time for the remaining benefiting property to develop and participate in the cost sharing.
Fiscal Impact
None to the City as a result of approving this amendment.
Attachments
1. Recorded Reimbursement Agreement_2007
2. Draft First Amendment
City Manager Approval
Jeremy Dennis, City
Manager
08/26/2026
Recording requested by and
After recording, return to:
City of Brisbane
50 Park Place
Brisbane, CA 94005
No fee required: Government Code,
Section 27383
FIRST AMENDMENT TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
AND ADDENDUM TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT
This First Amendment to Reimbursement Agreement and Addendum to Reimbursement Agreement (“First Amendment”) is made September , 2026 between the City of Brisbane, a Municipal Corporation (“City”) and Hamdi A. Nijem, Hana H. Nijem, Maher H. Nijem, and Rabah M. Nijem (collectively, the “Owners”). The Owners are sometimes each referred to individually by name in this First Amendment.
Recitals
A. Owners are the owners of certain real property in the City of Brisbane, County of San Mateo, California, commonly known as 29 San Francisco Avenue (APN 007-241-010), as more particularly described as “Parcel 1” in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Parcel 1”).
B. Hamdi A. Nijem and Hana H. Nijem are the owners of certain real property in the City of Brisbane, County of San Mateo, California, commonly known as 90 Santa Clara Street (APN 007-233-220), as more particularly described as “Parcel 2” in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Parcel 2”).
C. Parcel 1 and Parcel 2 shall be collectively referred to herein as “the Properties”.
D. In 2007, Owners submitted applications to the City to develop single family residences on the Properties, and as a condition for approval of such development, the City required Owners to widen and extend certain portions of Santa Clara Street and San Francisco Avenue between the Properties (the “Street Improvements”).
E. As a result of the Street Improvements, the City determined the owner of the property located at 80 Santa Clara Street (APN 007-233-230) as more particularly described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (“Benefitted Property”), would benefit from the Street Improvements because development of such Benefitted Property would otherwise be subject to a similar condition of approval requiring the owner of the Benefitted Property to widen the adjoining street but for the completion of the Street Improvements by the Owners.
F. City and Owners entered into that certain Reimbursement Agreement dated October 3, 2005, and recorded on October 26, 2005 as Instrument Number 2005-187366 in the
Official Records of San Mateo County (“Official Records”), as superseded in its entirety by that certain Reimbursement Agreement by and between the City and Owners dated May 9, 2007, and recorded on June 19, 2007 as Instrument Number 2007-093855 in the Official Records (collectively, the “Reimbursement Agreement”), for the purpose of allocating a proportionate share of the cost of the Street Improvements between the Owners and the owner of the Benefitted Property, and providing for reimbursement to the Owners of such proportionate share from the owner of the Benefitted Property should development of the Benefitted Property occur during the term of the Reimbursement Agreement.
G. Section 5 of the Reimbursement Agreement provides that the term of the Reimbursement Agreement shall expire twenty years from May 9, 2007.
H. Following the construction of the Street Improvements, the City and Owners entered into that certain Addendum to Reimbursement Agreement dated December 3, 2007, and recorded as Instrument No. 2008-002538 in the Official Records (the “Addendum”), for the purposes of (i) the City’s certification of the total cost of the Street Improvements in the amount of Four Hundred Thirty-Nine Thousand Three Hundred Forty-Four and 25/100 Dollars ($439,344.25) (the “Final Improvement Cost”), and (ii) the City’s determination that 66.7% of the Final Improvement Cost, equivalent to Two Hundred Ninety-Three Thousand Forty-Two and 61/100 Dollars ($293,042.61), was to be allocated to Owners and the remaining 33.3% of the Final Improvement Cost, equivalent to One Hundred Forty-Six Thousand Three Hundred One and 64/100 Dollars ($146,301.64), was to be allocated to the owner of the Benefitted Property. The Reimbursement Agreement and the Addendum shall be collectively referred to herein as the “Agreement.”
I. The Benefitted Property has not been developed, and it is not certain when such development will occur.
J. Owners have requested that the term of the Agreement be extended for an additional ten (10) years so that Owners may be reimbursed pursuant to the Agreement in the event that the owner of the Benefitted Property submits an application to develop the same before May 9, 2037.
K. It is fair and equitable to Owners to extend the Agreement as requested.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows:
1. Extension of Term. The term of the Agreement is hereby extended by ten (10) years and shall continue until 11:59pm on May 8, 2037, unless otherwise extended or terminated pursuant to the provisions of the Agreement.
2. Agreement in Full Force and Effect. All terms, conditions, and requirements of the Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect, except as modified by this First Amendment.
[Signatures on next page]
IN WITNESS THEREOF, the parties have executed this First Amendment on the date first written above.
CITY OF BRISBANE OWNERS
_____________________________ ____________________________ Jeremy Dennis, City Manager Hamdi A. Nijem
___________________________
Hana H. Nijem
___________________________
Maher H. Nijem
___________________________
Rabah M. Nijem
Approved as to form:
_____________________________
Samantha Zutler, City Attorney
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Descriptions of the Properties
PARCEL 1:
Owner: MAHER H NIJEM, RABAH M NIJEM, HAMDI A NIJEM, and HANA HNIJEM Property: 29 San Francisco Avenue; Assessor's Parcel No.007-241-010 All that certain land situated in the State of California, County of San Mateo, City of Brisbane, described as follows:
LOTS 31 AND 32, IN BLOCK 38 AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED "AMENDED MAP OF SUBDIVISION ONE, TWO AND THREE” OF THE CITY OF
VISITACION, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP DATED OCTOBER 14, 1908, AND RECORDED IN BOOK 6 OF MAPS AT PAGE 45 RECORDS OF
SAN MATEO COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA
PARCEL 2:
Owner: HAMDI A NIJEM and HANA H NIJEM
Property: 90 Santa Clara Street; Assessor's Parcel No.007-233-220 All that certain land situated in the State of California, County of San Mateo, City of Brisbane, described as follows:
LOTS 23 AND 24 IN BLOCK 38, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED "AMENDED MAP OF SUBDIVISION ONE, TWO AND THREE” OF THE CITY OF
VISITACION, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP DATED OCTOBER 14, 1908, AND RECORDED IN BOOK 6 OF MAPS AT PAGE 45 RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
EXHIBIT “B”
Legal Description of the Benefitted Property
Owner: THO A LY and NANCY LY TRINH
Property: 80 Santa Clara Street; Assessor’s Parcel No. 007-233-230 All that certain land situated in the State of California, County of San Mateo, City of Brisbane, described as follows:
LOTS 25 AND 26 IN BLOCK 38, AS SHOWN ON THAT CERTAIN MAP ENTITLED “AMENDED MAP OF SUBDIVISION ONE, TWO AND THREE” OF
THE CITY OF VISITACION, COUNTY OF SAN MATEO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP DATED OCTOBER 14, 1908, AND RECORDED IN BOOK 6 OF MAPS AT PAGE 45 RECORDS OF SAN MATEO COUNTY, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA
CITY of BRISBANE
Council Subcommittee Update
From July 11th, 2026, to August 28th, 2026
1. Report Out on Subcommittees/Committees
A. SPP Parks & Open Space Subcommittee 7/13 Kern, Lentz The subcommittee received an update on the Parcel R Park Development Project and provided feedback on two design and project delivery considerations to guide the next phase of project development.
The first consideration was turf selection. Staff discussed the long-term costs and maintenance considerations associated with natural grass versus artificial turf. Over a 30-year period, the costs of the two options are anticipated to be relatively comparable. However, concerns were raised regarding the ongoing maintenance requirements associated with natural grass, including the potential for geese to occupy and impact the area.
The second consideration was the project delivery method. The subcommittee discussed the City’s traditional Design-Bid-Build approach, in which the project design is completed before construction is competitively bid. An alternative Design-Build delivery method was also discussed, which would allow the design and construction teams to work collaboratively throughout the final design and construction phases. The subcommittee provided feedback on both considerations to assist staff in determining the appropriate approach for the next phase of the Parcel R Park Development Project.
Next Steps 1: Staff will follow up to confirm that Letter of Intent with HealthPeak has been met.
Next Steps 2: Public Works Director to meet with the Public Art Advisory Committee to discuss art component opportunities to the project.
Next Steps 3: The Subcommittee will meet again in September.
To view the agenda packet online:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6928/files/agenda/10453 B. Beautification Subcommittee 7/13 Davis, Kern
The subcommittee received two staff reports regarding beautification and landscape maintenance of City-owned areas. The first report addressed larger or more difficult-to-reach areas that would continue to be maintained by the City and its landscaping contractor. The second report addressed a proposed Adopt-a-Spot program for smaller, more manageable areas that could be maintained by volunteer residents and community groups.
The subcommittee discussed refining the scope of work for the City’s landscaping contractor and Public Works teams to go beyond weed removal and incorporate low-maintenance landscaping options, including native plants where appropriate. Priority areas identified for potential improvements
included the entrance to town, areas along Bayshore Boulevard, and Visitacion Avenue, with particular attention to the Teen Center site. The planting of trees could also be considered on a site-by-site basis based on location, maintenance needs, and suitability. Staff indicated that work could potentially begin as early as October.
The subcommittee discussed examples of Adopt-a-Spot programs in nearby communities and the logistics of establishing a similar program in Brisbane. Potential locations discussed included the new artful stairway at San Benito Avenue and Alvarado Street, areas along Visitacion Avenue, the Bank of America site, and the “corner” of Old County Road where a native planting area already exists. The Subcommittee also discussed allowing residents and volunteers to propose locations for adoption.
Activities under the program would not be limited to planting. Volunteers could also assist with general upkeep and beautification, such as sweeping and maintaining the new stairway and other adopted areas.
The subcommittee emphasized the importance of establishing a clear process for the program, including an application process, volunteer orientation and training, site planning, coordination with the City, and ongoing monitoring. Members also discussed opportunities to involve local schools, the Youth Advisory Committee, and local businesses in the program.
Public comments included the importance of using native plants, questions regarding the ongoing upkeep and maintenance of public spaces, and comments concerning the vitality, appearance, and overall beautification of Visitacion Avenue.
Next Steps 1: Staff to proceed with exploring options for dense ground cover or mulch, to prevent weed growth, and hardscaping. Representative from Fire to be included in a future meeting.
Next Steps 2: Staff to research and suggest 3-5 potential pilot spots. Will present at next meeting with a map and corresponding pictures.
To view the agenda packet online:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6910/files/agenda/10447 C. Sea Level Rise Subcommittee 7/15 Lentz, Mackin
The subcommittee received an update on the Brisbane Lagoon Watershed Sea Level Rise Adaptation Plan project and discussed the remaining project schedule and next steps. The project remains on schedule and is transitioning from the evaluation phase into preparation of the Draft Adaptation Strategies Document. Robin Lee from Schaaf & Wheeler presented the latest work completed to date and the anticipated project schedule. The study not only calculated sea level rise, but also runoff, siltation and increased precipitation. The subcommittee discussed reaching out again to neighboring property owners who may be affected by the lagoon rising and touched on OneShoreline’s study and the Regional Shoreline Adaptation Plan (RSAP).
To view the agenda packet and presentation online:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6935/files/agenda/10454 D. Planning Issues Subcommittee 7/21 Kern, Mackin
The subcommittee received a report on data centers and provided direction to staff regarding whether to return to the Planning Issues Subcommittee for further study of this issue or to proceed to Council
with a potential ordinance regulating data centers. Some policy considerations for local government include questions around land use regulation, electricity rates, water use, air and noise pollution, economic development and community investment. The City could also implement a temporary moratorium on data centers, while it continues to study the issue.
Under California Government Code § 65858, cities can adopt an interim urgency zoning ordinance to halt specific projects if there is an immediate threat to public health, safety, or welfare. The initial temporary moratorium lasts for 45 days and requires a four-fifths or two-thirds supermajority vote by the city council. Cities can extend the 45-day ban for an additional 10 to 22 months (up to two years total) after holding a public hearing and issuing a formal report. There are currently no planning applications for a data center in Brisbane.
The subcommittee discussed health and noise concerns, as well as energy and water consumption.
Public comment and written correspondence voiced similar concerns.
Next steps #1: The subcommittee directed staff to explore additional data center information and will reconvene at another Planning Issues Subcommittee at the end of August.
To view the agenda packet online:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6912/files/agenda/11476 E. Brisbane School District & City 2x2 8/13 5pm Davis, Lentz The subcommittee met with Brisbane School District Board President Duffy, Vice-President Oquendo, and Superintendent Milliken to share updates and review the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City and the School District.
City staff provided updates on the progress of the Baylands Specific Plan and discussed the possibility of establishing a high school at the Baylands. Staff also provided updates on the City’s after-school program, which currently serves approximately 140 students, traffic safety measures around Brisbane Elementary School (BES), and the status of the preschool program. President Duffy requested that the City consider installing lighting between the middle school and the pool to improve visibility and safety in the area. Duffy also requested that the School District be invited to participate in future Childcare Ad Hoc Committee discussions.
School District representatives provided updates regarding the anticipated introduction of Transitional Kindergarten (T-K) at BES in Fall 2028, the Expanded Learning Opportunity Plan (ELOP), and other curriculum changes.
Due to time constraints, City and School District staff were asked to continue working collaboratively to review and refine the MOU. The School District also requested that the City and District explore options for sharing an online scheduling calendar for use of the middle school gym and field, noting that scheduling conflicts and coordination issues have occurred.
Next Steps #1: Staff was directed to finalize the MOU and continue discussion on lighting on Solano Street.
To view the agenda packet online:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6956/files/agenda/11501
F. Housing Subcommittee 8/20 Davis, Lentz
The subcommittee met with HEART to continue discussions regarding anti-displacement strategies, a proposed local preference policy for affordable housing units, and a potential multi-jurisdictional loan program for affordable accessory dwelling units (ADUs).
Staff presented proposed local preference and tenant protection policies intended to prevent displacement, strengthen renter stability, and support the City’s long-term housing goals consistent with the City of Brisbane Housing Element and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission’s (MTC) Transit-Oriented Communities (TOC) Program. Participation in the MTC TOC Incentive Program could provide the City with approximately $1 million to $2 million from the $45 million grant pool available through the OBAG 4 funding cycle to support transportation-related needs.
Staff incorporated comments provided by the subcommittee at its March 17, 2026, meeting and requested additional feedback. The Subcommittee provided further input regarding the proposed policies and eligibility criteria.
State law allows jurisdictions to establish local preference policies for affordable housing. Due to high demand, affordable housing properties typically use a lottery system to determine eligibility and placement. A local preference policy allows a jurisdiction to establish a higher priority for certain households participating in the lottery, such as households that live or work within the jurisdiction.
The City of Brisbane currently has local preference provisions incorporated into individual affordable housing agreements; however, the City does not currently have a citywide local preference policy.
The subcommittee discussed applicable State and Federal requirements that would need to be considered in developing a local preference policy. Staff highlighted Government Code Section 7061, the Local Tenant Preferences to Prevent Displacement Act, which authorizes local tenant preferences in certain developments financed through low-income housing tax credits or tax-exempt bonds.
The subcommittee discussed potential eligibility criteria for local preferences, including whether priority should be given to individuals who currently live in Brisbane, work in Brisbane, or are former Brisbane residents. Members provided suggestions regarding how these criteria could be structured and applied.
The subcommittee also discussed the potential for the City to participate in a multi-jurisdictional Affordable ADU Loan Program. The proposed program would assist homeowners with constructing or legalizing an accessory dwelling unit by providing low-interest incentive loans, fee waivers, technical assistance, and access to a registry of vetted design-build teams. Following discussion, the Subcommittee recommended that a non-binding Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) be developed for consideration and discussion by the City Council.
Next steps #1: Staff will bring the items to council in the Fall.
To view the agenda and packet online, please visit:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6933/files/agenda/11516 G. Beautification Subcommittee 8/20 Davis, Kern
The Subcommittee met to discuss the proposed Adopt-a-Spot Program. Staff presented a framework for a one-year volunteer program designed to engage community members in the ongoing maintenance and beautification of designated City locations. Eligible activities would include planting,
litter removal, and weeding. More complex projects, such as tree removal and irrigation system installation, would be excluded from the program.
The proposed program would include an application process, GIS mapping of potential sites, volunteer orientation, and training. Volunteers would be responsible for regularly maintaining their adopted locations in accordance with City guidelines. The City would be responsible for site approval, conducting volunteer orientation, establishing approved plant lists, and monitoring the adopted locations. Coordination between volunteers and City staff would be required regarding appropriate plant species and watering guidelines.
Subcommittee members, including Park & Recreation Commissioner Trudi Davis, Public Art Advisory Committee Member Camille Salmon, Open Space & Ecology Committee Vice-Chair Mary Rogers, and Complete Streets & Safety Committee Member Cristian Cabrera, discussed potential locations for the program and considerations for selecting appropriate sites. Members emphasized the importance of using native plant species whenever feasible, recommended approximately five to seven volunteers per adopted location, and expressed concern regarding locations without an existing water source.
The Adopt-a-Spot Program is proposed to begin as a one-year pilot, with the option to continue and expand the program following an evaluation of its effectiveness.
Next Steps #1: Staff will return to the subcommittee with the suggestions given.
To view the agenda and packet online, please visit:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6938/files/agenda/11518 H. Planning Issues Subcommittee 8/25 Kern, Mackin
The subcommittee received a staff report on data center development in response to questions raised during its July 21, 2026, meeting and provided guidance on next steps. Staff presented information regarding the development of data centers in California and the potential impacts on cities, including an overview of the City’s current regulations and land use policies governing data centers. The report also provided additional information regarding potential environmental and construction impacts, as well as economic development considerations.
The subcommittee reviewed potential actions for further consideration, including additional evaluation of the processes associated with implementing a moratorium or other regulatory approaches, such as a potential ban for City Council consideration. The subcommittee also considered forwarding the matter to the City Council for review without a formal recommendation.
Following discussion and public input, the subcommittee recommended forwarding the consideration of a moratorium to the City Council for further discussion and evaluation of whether a moratorium or another regulatory approach would be more appropriate. If the City Council provides direction to pursue a moratorium, the matter will be brought forward at the next regularly scheduled City Council meeting in October. If the Council adopts an interim moratorium ordinance by a four-fifths vote, staff will work with the Planning Commission and Subcommittee during the subsequent 45-day period to further evaluate the issue and develop appropriate recommendations. If additional time is necessary, the City Council may extend the moratorium for up to 10 months and 15 days by a four-fifths vote.
Thereafter, the interim ordinance may be extended for an additional year upon a subsequent fourfifths vote of the City Council.
Next Steps #1: Staff will define what a data center is considered – size of operation and/or energy needs.
Next Steps #2: This will be brought to council on September 17th for discussion on next steps.
To view the agenda and packet online, please visit:
https://brisbaneca.portal.civicclerk.com/event/6958/files
2. Upcoming Subcommittees:
Bayshore School District & City 2x2 9/1 5:30pm Davis, Lentz Subcommittee
Infrastructure Subcommittee 9/2 2:30pm Lentz, O’Connell
3. Proposed Subcommittees:
Does any councilmember wish to propose any items for a subcommittee to discuss?