Daly City City Council
January 10, 2022

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 3: Development Standards and Guidelines 61 Podium Level: The podium level is the portion of the
building above the ground floor and below the skyline
level that provides spatial definition to the adjacent street or public space.

Privately-Owned, Public Open Space: Privately-owned
outdoor space that functions as public space but may
have limited hours of availability.

Public Realm: The public realm is the area outside of
buildings accessible to and visible to the public such as streets, parks, and open spaces.

Streetwall: The streetwall is the continuous façade of a building that establishes the edge of the public realm for a street or public space. The street wall extends from the ground floor up to the top of a podium level.

Skyline Level: The Skyline level is the uppermost occupiable portion of the building above the podium level. The Skyline level contributes to the overall urban form and skyline of the plan area.

Setback: The required minimum distance for the placement of a building measured from a property line, face of curb or another feature.

Streetscape: The visual and experiential character of
street comprised of the travel way, bike facilities, sidewalk, site access, landscape, paving, street furniture, building frontage, open space, views, and other perceptible urban features.

Stepback: Stepback is a horizontal recess applied to the upper floor or floors of a building to reduce shadow area on the adjacent street or open space.

Transparency: Pedestrian level building design that
creates visibility and permeability between the building and the adjacent sidewalk or public space.

62 Chapter 3: Development Standards and Guidelines Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan This page intentionally left blank.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 4: Circulation 63 The Plan Area’s circulation network envisions a comprehensive internal system of “complete streets” that support active transportation for healthy living. These complete streets encourage walking and biking and serve to advance Daly
City’s Vision Zero program to reduce pedestrian fatalities to zero. The Plan Area’s circulation network responds to the illustrative plan (Figure 2.1) which arranges courtyard housing in walkable blocks around tree-lined parks. As part of the design, neighborhood connectivity through the site is provided within a system of calmed low-speed roadways.

These facilities take advantage of and provide access to the surrounding regional roadway, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian systems.

A. CITY AND REGIONAL CONNECTIVITY
Located just over a mile from the Daly City BART Station and adjacent to State Route 1, the project site has remarkable access to the Bay Area’s regional transportation network. The Precise Plan envisions amenities that
complement and provide access to these networks, while
maintaining a compact walkable neighborhood.

4. Circulation

64 Chapter 4: Circulation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Regional Location and Local Context
Direct access to State Route 1 is provided immediately
north of the Plan Area, where residents and visitors can connect to the regional vehicle network. In addition, Interstate 280 is located approximately one-half mile east of the site, with full-movement interchanges provided via Serramonte Boulevard and Hickey Boulevard. From State Route 1 and
Interstate 280, project vehicle trips can access the greater regional roadway networks of the Bay Area.

Locally, the development of the Plan Area will restore northsouth connectivity through the project site for vehicles, pedestrians, and bicycles. This connection will occur via the northward extension of Campus Drive to Serramonte
Boulevard, which is envisioned as a low-speed trafficcalmed street. With this connection, Daly City residents will be able to walk and bike through the site and access the many planned on-site recreation and retail amenities. Traffic calming measures are proposed to minimize cut-through
vehicle traffic.

Transit Routes and Stops
The Plan Area is well served by local and regional transit systems. SamTrans Route 120 provides direct service to
the Colma and Daly City BART Stations with bus stops
conveniently located at the project site’s Serramonte
Boulevard/Campus Drive entrance. This bus route operates on frequent, 15-minute headways during weekday commute hours. In addition, SamTrans Route 121 provides connection to Skyline College. The Plan Area will improve the site’s existing bus stop with new amenities including a shelter and widened/improved sidewalks. From BART,
transit access is provided to the greater Bay Area, including downtown San Francisco, Oakland, and the East Bay. Connections to Caltrain, and eventually California’s high-speed rail, are available at the Millbrae Transit Center just south of the City.

B. MOBILITY NETWORK
The Plan Area’s mobility network provides residents and visitors access and permeability throughout the project site through a system of complete, traffic-calmed streets.

Street Hierarchy
Streets are designed to support both transportation function and adjacent land uses. The Precise Plan identifies the following five street types as shown in Figure 4.1.

1. Boulevard: Serramonte Boulevard is a transit – bike
corridor connecting city neighborhoods to regional
shopping and transit stations.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 4: Circulation 65 Figure 4.1 Street Hierarchy
Street Hierarchy
Figure 4.1

PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL F PARCEL E
Parcel Lines Boulevard Main Street Local Connector Neighborhood Street Access Ways Campus Drive
Entry Drive
West Drive
East Drive
North Drive
St. Francis Blvd.

Callan Blvd.

Serramonte Blvd.

Street Hierarchy
Figure 4.1

PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL F PARCEL E
Parcel Lines Boulevard Main Street Local Connector Neighborhood Street Access Ways Campus Drive
Entry Drive
West Drive
East Drive
North Drive
St. Francis Blvd.

Callan Blvd.

Serramonte Blvd.

66 Chapter 4: Circulation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan

2. Main Street: Entry Drive is a combined Main Street,
which prioritizes pedestrian access in a safe social/
commercial environment and a Residential Street which
prioritizes safe, walkable environment with slow vehicle speeds.

3. Local Connector Street: East Drive and North Drive
are two lane streets that prioritize pedestrians and
cyclists with buffered bike lanes in both directions.

4. Neighborhood Street: West Drive is a two-lane street that prioritizes pedestrians in a safe and inviting environment with low vehicle speeds and sharrows/vehicle lanes.

5. Access Drives: Access Drives are two-way, pedestrianoriented access easements with diagonal back-in, perpendicular and parallel parking designed for pedestrian access to park, daycare, retail, structured parking and hillside open space and recreational trails.

Street Network
Using the street hierarchy described above, vehicular access through the Serramonte Del Rey neighborhood will be
provided through a system of low-speed tree-lined private streets connecting Campus Drive south of the site to Serramonte Boulevard at Entry Drive. A pedestrian paseo and café plaza along Entry Drive will be a “pocket” Main Street with shops spilling outdoors. This tree-lined destination street leads you from Serramonte Boulevard to the Central Green. North Drive, West Drive, East Drive, and West Drive loop around the Central Green and Parcel E and provide
access to the remainder of the residential parcels. A roundabout is proposed at the Plan Area’s southern interface with Campus Drive as it enters the site. This pedestrian- and bicycle-friendly landmark feature will slow vehicle traffic, without requiring a stop, as it enters and exits the project.

Bicycle Network
Daly City has a robust existing bicycle network, and the Plan Area is well located to take advantage of the opportunities it provides. In addition, in February 2020 Daly City approved the Walk Bike Daly City Plan. This plan
includes an extensive network of pedestrian and bicycle improvements throughout the City and around the Plan
Area. Existing bicycle facilities proximate to the Plan Area include Class II on-street bike lanes on Callan Boulevard south of Serramonte Boulevard and a Class III bike route on Callan Boulevard north of Serramonte Boulevard.

Serramonte Boulevard and Hickey Boulevard are Class III bike routes. A Class II on-street bike lane is striped on St.

Francis Boulevard north of Serramonte Boulevard. One of the priority improvements included in the Walk Bike Daly City Plan is the construction of Class IV on-street protected

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 4: Circulation 67 bicycle lanes on Serramonte Boulevard. The Precise Plan modifies the City of Daly City’s conceptual design for
priority pedestrian and bike improvements at the intersection of Serramonte Boulevard and Highway 1 ramps to accommodate a wider Entry Drive and a new westbound
left turn lane from Serramonte Boulevard to Entry Drive.

Within the Plan Area, bicycle facilities will include Class II buffered bike lanes along East Drive and North Drive, and other streets will include Class III bike “sharrows” (bicycle markings on vehicle lanes indicating the lane is for shared use). Along the neighborhood’s eastern side, the trail loop will function as a full Class I off-street bicycle path. With short block lengths, low traffic volumes, and narrow cross sections, the site’s roadways will provide bicyclists with a comfortable on-street experience. For younger and more
recreational riders, the off-street trail provides a safe route from the SamTrans bus stop on Serramonte Boulevard and
Entry Drive to Summit Shasta Charter High School.

Pedestrian Network
Sidewalks will be provided on every street within the Plan Area, with adjacent curbside landscaping. The trail loop will also serve to provide pedestrian access around the site that is separated from vehicles and in a more natural setting. Pedestrian facilities and permeability planned throughout the neighborhood will allow unimpeded
access for visitors and residents walking between the Plan Area’s parks, open spaces, residences, and retail shops.

Street with buffered Class II bike lanes.

68 Chapter 4: Circulation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Figure 4.2 Vehicle Circulation
Vehicular Circulation
Figure 4.1
Street Circulation
Parking Entry
Retail Parking Entry
Campus Drive
STOP

STOP STOP STOP STOP STOP
STOP
STOP

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 4: Circulation 69 Figure 4.3 Bicycle Circulation

PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL F PARCEL E
Existing Bicycle Lanes Shared Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Class II On-Street Buered Bike Lane Class III Facility with Sharrows Class II On-Street Bike Lane
City’s Proposed Bike Lanes per Walk Bike Daly City
Campus Drive
Entry Drive
West Drive
East Drive
North Drive
St. Francis Blvd.

Callan Blvd.

Serramonte Blvd. PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL F PARCEL E
Existing Bicycle Lanes Shared Bicycle and Pedestrian Path Class II On-Street Buered Bike Lane Class III Facility with Sharrows Class II On-Street Bike Lane
City’s Proposed Bike Lanes per Walk Bike Daly City
Campus Drive
Entry Drive
West Drive
East Drive
North Drive
St. Francis Blvd.

Callan Blvd.

Serramonte Blvd.

70 Chapter 4: Circulation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan C. STREET SECTIONS
Entry Drive
Entry Drive connects Serramonte Boulevard to
North Drive. The roadway’s section shown in Figure

4.4 is comprised of 11-foot travel lanes, 10-foot
continuous through/turn lanes, five-foot class II
bike lanes and a six-foot landscape median. On
the westside is a six-foot sidewalk and five-foot
planting strip. On the east side, the sidewalk is
comprised of three zones: a planting and street
furniture zone, and through zone for pedestrians
and a frontage zone for active ground floor uses to
extend onto the sidewalk.

North Drive
North Drive connects East Drive, Entry Drive, and
West Drive. The roadway section in Figure 4.5
shows a two-lane facility, with on-street parking
and a five-foot-wide landscape strip. A Class II
buffered bicycle lane is provided on the segment
between East Drive and Entry Drive, continuing the
facility provided on East Drive. West of Entry Drive,
the roadway section widens, and the on-street
buffered bicycle lane is not provided (this segment
of North Drive is designated as a class III bike
Street Sections
6' 5' 11' 10' 10' 6' 11'
69'
5' 5'

PARCEL A PARCEL B LANDSCAPING SIDEWALK RETAIL/ VEHICLE LANE VEHICLE LANE STREETSCAPE LANDSCAPED MEDIAN CLASS II BIKE LANE CLASS II BIKE LANE VEHICLE LANE VEHICLE LANE N
6' 5' 11' 10' 10' 6' 11'
69'
5' 5'

PARCEL A PARCEL B
Section 1
Entry Drive and Retail Plaza Figure 4.4 Entry Drive and Retail Plaza

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 4: Circulation 71 route). The segment of North Drive east of East Drive is envisioned as a cul-de-sac providing access to Overlook Park and residential parcels. Ninety-degree on-street
parking is proposed on the south side of this cul-de-sac segment.

West Drive
West Drive is envisioned as a narrow two-lane residential roadway providing access to adjacent residential properties. The section in Figure 4.6 includes two 11-foot travel lanes with nine-foot buffered on-street parallel parking on both sides of the roadway. Five-foot-wide tree-lined landscape strips and six-foot-wide sidewalks complete the sections. West Drive completes the western side of the
development’s internal loop roadway network.

East Drive
East Drive is the primary north-south roadway extending through the project site. The roadway extends from the
southern entry roundabout to North Drive. It provides
for two 11-foot-wide travel lanes (one in each direction) with buffered on-street Class II bicycle lanes. Eight-footwide on-street parallel parking, five-foot-wide tree-lined landscape strips, and six-foot-wide sidewalks on each side of the street as shown in Figure 4.7.
11’ 8' 7' 11' 11' 7' 8' 5'
68' SOS L PL BBL VL VL BBL PL L RS N

PARCEL E PARCEL B
11’ 8' 7' 11' 11' 7' 8' 5'
68'

SIDEWALK

OPEN SPACE

PARKING LANE

VEHICLE LANE

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED BIKE LANEBUFFERED BIKE LANE

VEHICLE LANE

LANDSCAPING

RETAIL/STREETSCAPE
N

PARCEL E PARCEL B
Section 2
Plaza/Park Entry at North Drive
Figure 4.5 Plaza/Park Entry at North Drive

72 Chapter 4: Circulation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Figure 4.7 East Campus Drive

PARCEL E

LS S L BPL SVLB SVLB BPL L LS S
10' 6' 5' 9' 11' 11' 9' 5' 6' 10'
62'

LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPING

BUFFERED

SIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED

PARKING LANE

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N
PARCEL E 10' 6' 5' 9' 11' 11' 9' 5' 6' 10'
62'

LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPING

BUFFERED

SIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED

PARKING LANE

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N
14' 6' 5' 8' 7' 11' 11' 7' 8' 5' 6' 14’
74'

LANDSCAPING

SIDEWALKSIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

VEHICLE LANE

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED BIKE LANEBUFFERED BIKE LANE

VEHICLE LANE

LANDSCAPING
PLAZA

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N

PARCEL E PARCEL C
14' 6' 5' 8' 7' 11' 11' 7' 8' 5' 6' 14’
74'

LANDSCAPING

SIDEWALKSIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

VEHICLE LANE

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED BIKE LANEBUFFERED BIKE LANE

VEHICLE LANE

LANDSCAPING
PLAZA

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N

PARCEL E PARCEL C
Section 4
East Campus Drive
on 3
Campus Drive
Street Sections

PARCEL F PARCEL E

LS S L BPL SVLB SVLB BPL L LS S
10' 6' 5' 9' 11' 11' 9' 5' 6' 10'
62'

LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPING

BUFFERED

SIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED

PARKING LANE

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N
PARCEL F PARCEL E 10' 6' 5' 9' 11' 11' 9' 5' 6' 10'
62'

LANDSCAPINGLANDSCAPING

BUFFERED

SIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED

PARKING LANE

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

SHARED VEHICLE

LANE W/ BIKES

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N
14' 6' 5' 8' 7' 11' 11' 7' 8' 5' 6' 14’
74'

LANDSCAPING

SIDEWALKSIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

VEHICLE LANE

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED BIKE LANEBUFFERED BIKE LANE

VEHICLE LANE

LANDSCAPING
PLAZA

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N

PARCEL E PARCEL C
14' 6' 5' 8' 7' 11' 11' 7' 8' 5' 6' 14’
74'

LANDSCAPING

SIDEWALKSIDEWALK

PARKING LANE

VEHICLE LANE

PARKING LANE

BUFFERED BIKE LANEBUFFERED BIKE LANE

VEHICLE LANE

LANDSCAPING
PLAZA

LANDSCAPED

SETBACK
N

PARCEL E PARCEL C
Section 4
East Campus Drive
Section 3
West Campus Drive Figure 4.6 West Campus Drive

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 4: Circulation 73 D. STREET LANDSCAPING
Landscaping plays an important role to provide pedestrian scale, for buffering and screening, to punctuate important connection points and nodes, and to soften the overall experience of moving through and around the site.

Serramonte Del Rey neighborhood entries are punctuated
with enhanced landscape features. Entering the neighborhood from the north on Entry Drive from Serramonte Boulevard, residents and visitors are greeted by a treelined gateway of flowering trees in a planted median and along the sidewalk, while a vibrant public plaza welcomes pedestrians. As mentioned above, the entrance from the
south on West Drive from Campus Drive includes a large, landscaped roundabout, providing a welcoming transition from the surrounding streets and marking the entry into this new neighborhood.

Continuous planter strips separating streets from sidewalks have been provided along all internal streets and drives. Broad canopy trees, low shrubs and groundcovers, and generous sidewalks provide a comfortable and safe
pedestrian environment. Adequate visual clearance shall be provided at all safety vision triangles at intersections and driveways to ensure a clear line of sight for pedestrian and bicycle safety. Driveway entries, curb cuts, and
curb ramps shall be constructed of concrete and shall
match sidewalks to provide a consistent look and feel
for hardscape along vehicular and pedestrian circulation routes. Enhanced finishes and/or striping shall be used for crosswalks.

The 10-foot-wide multi-use trail and six-foot- wide
pedestrian trail together create a 0.6-mile loop around the neighborhood. Trail surfaces shall be asphalt or concrete, provide for adequate clearances along the edges and
overhead, and be suitable for their intended use. Signage, ornamental landscaping, and trees will be provided along the trail system to enhance the user experiences.

74 Chapter 4: Circulation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan This page intentionally left blank.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 75 This section describes the park and open space objectives, neighborhood open spaces of the plan area, and landscape design guidance for public and private park
and open spaces.

A. OBJECTIVES
Precise Plan park and open spaces are designed to improve physical and psychological health, strengthen community relationships, and create an attractive urban setting for family living, in support of the following objectives:
● Create safe, attractive outdoor places for healthy living to foster physical activity, meet resident and visitor
needs for recreation and play for people of all ages, as well as encourage walking and biking.
● Design public places to encourage social interaction
and community life with social gathering places that
are family-oriented, active places.

5. Park and Open Space

76 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan ● Shape environments that visually and physically
connect people to nature, neighborhood parks, green
spaces, and recreational trails.
● Preserve and enhance the aesthetic and ecological
quality of the hillside open space areas and expand the diversity of street trees and park plantings to cultivate an urban forest for the plan area.
● Enhance community sustainability and resilience
through climate-positive environmental design.

B. A DIVERSE URBAN LANDSCAPE
Landscape concepts for the Plan Area are presented in
Figure 5.1. A distinguishing feature of the Precise Plan are the hillsides to the west and east of the plan area which contain numerous trees, all trees planted as part of development of District property. Trees range from young to mature, are in varying health and are densely planted. The intent is to care for the hillside wooded areas to reduce fire hazards, enhance existing vegetation and promote urban
forestry.   A tree succession plan for aging mature trees will guide the replacement of existing trees over time due to age or fire vulnerability.  Removed trees will be replaced with a diverse plant ecology governed by the area’s unique coastal/Mediterranean climate including evergreen and
deciduous species.

The type and arrangement of street trees and park
plantings will contribute to a healthy and attractive urban neighborhood.  The north and south entries to the plan
area will be visible locations of tree plantings selected and arranged to transition from the informality of a forest to a more ordered urban setting.  A diversity of tree species, suitable for the climate and context of the plan area are selected to create identity and sense of place that features the Central Green as a formal center to the neighborhood and Overlook Park as a forest meadow.  Seasonal interest

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 77 Figure 5.1 Urban Forest Concept Plan
Urban Forest Concept Plan
Figure 5.1
St. Francis Blvd.

Callan Blvd.

Serramonte Blvd.

South Entry
Trees provide transition
from urban to forested
North Entry
Trees provide transition from
urban to forested
Overlook Park
Forest meadow character
Central Green
Formal planting with seasonal
color at public gathering place
Access Drives
Formal tree planting with
seasonal color
Streets
Formal tree planting
Streets
Formal tree planting
Public Gathering Places
Spring owers and fall color
Wooded Hillside Area
Manage and enhance the
urban forest
Wooded Hillside Area
Manage and enhance the
urban forest
Access Drives
Formal tree planting with
seasonal color

PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL F
PARCEL E Entry Drive
West Drive
East Drive
North Drive

78 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Central Green Plan
will be created with deciduous trees providing spring
flowers and fall color at public gathering places along Entry Drive, Central Green and access drives.

C. NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS AND OPEN
SPACES
The street and block pattern of residential development is organized around a central neighborhood park – the
Central Green – and is bounded by hillside open space
to the east with Overlook Park and hillside open space to the west. The combination of park and open spaces with
recreational access will offer residents and visitors a diversity of opportunities to connect to nature, restore human well-being, socialize with neighbors, and satisfy needs for outdoor recreation for families and people of all ages.

Central Green is the heart of the neighborhood – a park extending an entire city block greeting residents and
visitors into the site from Entry Drive. Organized by a tree-lined crescent shaped walk, the park features an entry plaza with tree-shaded seating, an open meadow, and
a backdrop of evergreen woodlands with social spaces
nestled under the tree canopy and along the park edges
for community enjoyment. This open lawn is a flexible
open space for recreation and enjoyment of nature to
picnic, walk a dog, or enjoy the sunshine.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 79 Overlook Park Plan Overlook Park Rendering
Overlook Park looking from the Eastside Recreation Trail.

Overlook Park is designed as family-friendly open space.

Gently sloped lawns provide ample space for a wide range of activities: dining and gathering, outdoor fitness classes, community events, and an opportunity to sit and enjoy
the views. A large playground provides inclusive play
opportunities on interpretive play structures for young children, while a small plaza at the park edge provides a connection to the multi-use loop trail and reinforces the viewer’s sense of place. Viewsheds look towards regional landmarks including Daly City, San Bruno Mountain, and
beyond.

80 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Entry Drive Plaza is a “pocket” Main Street with plaza- Entry Drive Plaza Plan width sidewalk space for retail activity to bring life outdoors to the street. The Plaza provides a building frontage zone for access to retail uses and sidewalk seating; a
pedestrian through zone for pedestrian movement; and
a street furniture/curb zone for street furniture, lighting, benches, street trees, bicycle parking, fixed, and movable seating. Together these zones create an attractive and
comfortable setting for neighborhood shopping and
social life. The plaza sidewalk space will have enhanced pavement treatments with color and/or pavers to highlight active public spaces.

Hillside Open Spaces are existing east and west hillsides of the plan area with mature trees planted as part of the landscape development of District property. These areas offer residents an opportunity to connect to the nature and provide a visual screen to the planned development.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 81 South Entrance Open Space on Parcel E is a landscape
area that provides entrance identity to the plan area,
landscape continuity for the “urban forest,” and social space for residents. Enhancement of the South Entrance
Open Space at Parcel E is expected. Examples include
a corner tower element, a sitting area or water feature with unique landscaping and plantings, a winter garden/ indoor social area, a concave building corner referencing the round-about, or a specific design gesture in materials, scale, or massing that specifically enhances the open
space.

Eastside Recreational Trail is a pedestrian-bicycle trail for strolling and recreation extending from Serramonte
Boulevard to the north to the roundabout along Campus
Drive to the south. This 10-foot-wide multi-use trail
provides an off-street connection for pedestrians and
bicyclists to access Overlook Park and access to the
westside hillside open space.

Westside Walking Trail is a six-foot-wide trail around
the west side of Parcel F, weaving along the base of the wooded hillside slope. Together the east and westside
trails create an off-road half-mile loop trail system. This trail system connects each parcel, every street, and all members of the community to direct access to the wooded hillside open space.

South Entrance Open Space Plan

82 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan 0 Scale (Feet)
6 Westside Walking Trail Section
0 Scale (Feet)
6 Eastside Recreational Trail Section

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 83 D. LANDSCAPE DESIGN STANDARDS AND

GUIDELINES
This section establishes the standards and guidelines that apply to public and private open space.

General Standards and Guidelines
D.1.1 Landscape planters within the street right of way shall be a minimum of four feet wide.

D.1.2 Tree wells shall be 4’x 4’ minimum. Tree grates shall be cast iron with a baked oil finish in plaza areas and be an ADA accessible design consistent with the neighborhood.

D.1.3 Where landscape planting is provided under trees, planters shall be 4’ W x 6’ L minimum.

D.1.4 Planted medians shall provide at least five feet
wide planting area in addition to a minimum 12 inches
wide maintenance band at the back of curb consisting of concrete, pavers, or fixed cobbles.

D.1.5 Enhanced pedestrian spaces should be provided
at retail plazas as well as at major and minor lobbies for each residential building. Seating opportunities should be provided at retail, parks, open spaces, adjacent to the trails, and in front of primary building lobbies.

Landscape median planted with trees and shrubs.

Sidewalk with landscape planting provided under trees.

84 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Landscape Materials
Plants
D.2.1 Plant material shall comply with all City and regional guidelines and be comprised of at least 75% drought
tolerant plant species. Planting plans shall comply with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO)
guidelines and the Water Use Classification of Landscape Species (WUCOLS).

D.2.2 Where turf grass is used, low water use hybrids and/ or no mow varieties should be used. A variety of shrubs and ground covers should be used to create layering
around building foundations, keeping shrubs at or below windowsills. Plant selections should be such that sight lines remain open and clear and places of concealment
are not fostered. Where allowed, plants should be used to screen above-ground utilities. Along streets and sidewalks, plant species shall be used that promote a feeling of
separation from vehicular traffic and be appropriate for narrow planters within the public right of way.

D.2.3 Pollinator plants that attract native birds and insects should be used strategically in locations well-suited to attract and sustain native populations. Use of fruiting plant material should occur away from hardscape areas to prevent staining of pavements and to minimize maintenance.

Landscaping and furnishings enhance seating areas next to the sidewalk.

Sidewalk with landscape planter bed and tree grates.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 85 Trees
D.2.4 The project’s wooded hillside perimeter to the west and east shall be cleaned of surface and ladder fuels.

Replacement trees shall include evergreen and deciduous species as described in the Project Tree List below.

D.2.5 Trees within the street right of way, in plazas, and high-visibility open space areas should be provided in
24-inch box size or larger and be secured with tree stakes or below-grade root ball guying systems appropriate for the windy conditions found in Daly City. Above-ground
cabling guying shall not be used in public spaces. Trees shall be pruned up to 6 feet to 8 feet clear off the ground or as required by ADA or City guidelines.

D.2.6 Individual developments within the Plan Area shall use trees that are provided in 15-gallon size or larger, with 24-inch box preferred.

D.2.7 Entries at the north and south shall have unique
tree plantings.

D.2.8 Seasonal interest shall be created with deciduous trees providing spring flowers and fall color.

Project Tree List
D.2.9 The trees used throughout the Plan Area shall be
carefully selected to work within the Urban Forest framework while allowing expression of individual character.

The following list shall be used for specifying tree species on public streets and open spaces.

86 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Table 5.1 - Recommended Tree Species for public streets and open spaces within the Precise Plan Forested Hillsides (Tree Succession Species) Streets & Parks Aesculus californica California Buckeye Acer buergeranum Trident Maple Acer macrophyllum Big Leaf Maple Acer x freemanii ‘Autumn Blaze’ Autumn Blaze Maple Arbutus menziesii Pacific Madrone Acer Macrophyllum Big Leaf Maple Calocedrus decurrens Incense Cedar Arbutus ‘Marina’ Strawberry Tree Ceanothus ‘Ray Hartman’ Wild Lilac Cercis ‘Forest Pansy’ Forest Pansy Rebud Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey Cypress Cercis occidentalis Western Redbud Fremontodendron californicum Fremontia Ginkgo ‘Princeton Sentry Maidenhair Tree Hesperocyparis macrocarpa Monterey Cypress
Hymenosporum flavum Sweetshade
Koelreuteria paniculata ‘Fastigiata’ Goldenrain Tree
Lagunaria pattersonii Primrose Tree
Lophostemon confertus Brisbane Box
Lyonothamnus floribundus Catalina Ironwood
Melaleuca quinquenervia Cajeput Tree
Olea europea ‘Swan Hill’ Fruitless Olive
Pistacia chinensis Chinese Pistache
Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak
Quercus suber Cork Oak
Sequoia sempervirens Coast Redwood
Tristaniopsis laurina ‘Elegant’ Water Gum

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 87 Site Furnishings
D.3.1 Site Furnishings shall be comprised of materials
designed to withstand outdoor conditions.

D.3.2 Short term bicycle parking shall be dispersed
throughout the Plan Area, as required to meet project
requirements, city standards, and bicycle parking standards. Bicycle racks shall be galvanized, vinyl covered, or stainless steel, and meet all City requirements. In groundor surface-mounted attachment is acceptable.

Bicycle parking area. Circular bicycle rack. An integrated group of furnishings including bicycle rack, tree fence, streetlight and bench.

D.3.3 Benches shall be made of metal and/or wood.

Where wood is used, it should be thermally modified, or a suitable hardwood built to withstand weather and heavy
public usage.

D.3.4 Public café tables with chairs should be movable
and provided in a variety of sizes in and around gathering spaces and shall be constructed of materials suitable for outdoor public usage.

88 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan D.3.5 Drinking fountains shall be provided at Overlook
Park, Central Green, and the Recreation Trail. Dog bowl and water bottle filling attachments are recommended.

D.3.6 Within Overlook Park, Applicant shall provide play equipment for children ages two through twelve. All play areas will be designated for children between ages of two to five and for ages five to twelve years old. These structures should offer a variety of stand-alone features and a wide variety of varied physical activities for the children.

The equipment should promote fitness, physical activity, and connection.

Movable outdoor seating provides flexibility.

Seating and landscape along sidewalk.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 89 An attractive playground bordered by landscaping and trees.

Irrigation Systems
D.4.1 Site Irrigation systems shall comply with all local and state requirements, including the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (MWELO).

D.4.2 All irrigation equipment shall be controlled with weather-based controllers located in easily accessible, locked stainless steel pedestal boxes. The equipment
should include flow sensors and automatic shut off valve capability with a wi-fi based alarm system to alert maintenance controller team(s).

D.4.3 Irrigation systems shall provide quick couplers or hose bibbs in lockable wall boxes in all common use
areas.

Soil & Drainage
D.5.1 On-grade planting areas shall be comprised of
amended topsoil import or amended native soil as
required, based on a soil analysis report and soil laboratory recommendations. Excavation, clearing and grubbing, or
soil preparation shall occur within established tree protection zones as per the advice of a landscape architect or arborist.

90 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan D.5.2 Planting areas shall by dressed with a 3-inch layer of mulch or as dictated by local or regional guidelines.

D.5.3 Cast iron or similar drain grates shall be used in turf and pedestrian circulation areas. Landscape planters shall be drained with cast iron, decorative metal, plastic or similar flat or atrium-style grates and factory-fabricated bodies.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 6: Utilities 91 The Plan Area will have utility infrastructure to address stormwater collection, sanitary sewage collection and
water supply and distribution. There will also be systems for power, natural gas and communications, which are
called Dry Utilities. Utility infrastructure systems are described in the following sections.

A. STORMWATER
The following sections describe the existing and proposed stormwater flows for the 18.4-acre area impacted by the Precise Plan area.

Existing Conditions
The site is bound by Serramonte Boulevard to the north, Callan Boulevard to the east, Campus Drive to the south and residential buildings to the west. The current uses on the campus include a bus yard, district offices, churches, child day care facilities, a Comcast building, and the
Workforce Housing project (currently under construction).

The Workforce Housing project (including the apartment
building, car barn, and surface parking lot located at
the northern portion of the existing campus) and the
Comcast building will remain operational throughout
and after construction of the Precise Plan. The Workforce Housing project is under separate approval and storm
water improvements for the building, surface parking
lot and area immediately adjacent to the building are

6. Utilities

92 Chapter 6: Utilities Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan to remain and are not modified as part of the plan area.

The driveway just to the south of the Workforce Housing project will be replaced and is included in the plan area.

The existing ground coverage consists of approximately
108,830 sq. ft. impervious and 59,440 sq. ft. pervious
(64.7% impervious). Site elevations vary from approximately elevation 495 feet to the west and 480 at the main parking lot near the entrance to the site. Stormwater
onsite is collected in area drains or inlets and conveyed in below grade pipes to the storm drain outfall located in the existing parking lot near the main vehicular entrance at Serramonte Boulevard. The outfall discharges to an
existing 24” storm drain main in Serramonte Boulevard
that flows to the east.

Proposed System
The proposed changes in the plan area consist of open
space, park areas, landscape areas, concrete paths,
private roadways, asphalt drives, asphalt parking lots, and multi-story residential buildings. The project proposes to maintain the existing drainage patterns and replace the existing drainage system.

The proposed ground coverage consists of approximately
120,300 sq. ft. impervious and 47,970 sq. ft. pervious
(71.5% impervious). The project will increase the amount of impervious surface from the existing condition and will require retention to control the peak flow and volume
leaving the site. Overall, the proposed condition will
increase the site’s impervious footprint by approximately 11,470 sq. ft. and will therefore require stormwater retention. The project proposes to satisfy the retention requirement with a Master Plan approach that will allow one parcel to overcompensate and accrue credits that can be applied to other parcels that will have more difficulty meeting the requirement.

The proposed drainage system will consist of area drains, drop inlets, manholes, stormwater treatment areas with
overflow structures, and below grade pipes. The drainage system will convey runoff to the existing outfall located near the main vehicular entrance.

Stormwater Requirements
The project shall not increase the flow or volume leaving the site for the design storm. If a project increases the imperviousness of the site stormwater retention will be required to retain the increased flow and volume.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 6: Utilities 93 B. SANITARY SEWER
Existing Condition
The existing City sewer system in the vicinity of the Plan Area consists of a 10-inch sewer main in Serramonte
Boulevard, 8-inch and 10-inch sewer main that runs
through the district’s property, 8-inch sewer main in
Campus Drive south of the school site, and a 6-inch sewer main in Callan Boulevard. A portion of the existing sewer system that runs through the District’s property connects the 8-inch main in Campus Drive to the 10-inch main in
Serramonte Boulevard. Sewer generated by the Workforce
housing project (currently under construction) and the
existing school site is discharged into the main that runs through the District’s property, which ultimately connects to the 10-inch main in Serramonte Boulevard. Elevations and sizes of the existing system are from field and record data. Rim and Invert elevations are obtained from field data with elevations based on North American Vertical
Datum (NAVD 88).

Proposed System
The project proposes to construct a public sewer system in the private streets (to be located in an easement) and an onsite sewer system to connect the buildings to the
public sewer system. The proposed public sewer system
will consist of manholes and pipes. The onsite sewer
system consists of pipes, cleanouts, and manholes. The
project will connect to the 10-inch sanitary sewer main in Entry Drive and the new sewer connection on Callan
Drive.

Sewage Generation Calculations
The City of Daly City establishes sewage demand
numbers for different types of building uses based on the demands provided in the City’s 2009 Master Sewer Study.

The proposed project will replace the existing buildings, including an existing school building and modular units.

The sewage generation flows from the buildings to be
removed will be applied as a credit to the project. This information will be used by the City to determine the
impacts the proposed project will have on the City’s sewer system and determine if the existing sewer system has
sufficient capacity to serve the project. Despite the credit, the City is anticipated to experience an increase of sewer flows of 173,468 gpd. A detailed sewer study is included in the entitlement documents.

94 Chapter 6: Utilities Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan C. WATER SUPPLY
Existing Condition
The existing City water system in the vicinity of the project consists of a 6-inch AC water main in Serramonte Boulevard and a 10-inch water main in Entry Drive constructed with the previous project. The existing domestic water
system for the school campus is fed by a 3-inch service near the main entrance off Serramonte Boulevard while
the existing fire service for the site is served from an 8-inch line from Callan Boulevard. The existing Jefferson Union High School District Workforce Housing project is fed from the existing 10-inch main.

Proposed System
The proposed project will construct a new public water
main within the new streets and provide new domestic
water, fire water, and irrigation water services to the proposed buildings. All proposed services are anticipated to be fed from a portion of the existing 10-inch main
constructed with the previous project and new 10-inch
water mains constructed with the new private streets. The on-site domestic water system consists of service lines from the public main to each building.

Water Generation Calculations
The City establishes water demand numbers for different types of building uses. A summary of existing demands,
proposed building type, area, and number of units, and
area of irrigated landscape area is included in the entitlement documents. This information will be used by the City to determine the water demand for the proposed
project. The flows generated by the proposed project
and the reduction in flows from the existing building
and landscaping being removed will be used in the City’s model to determine if the City’s water system has enough capacity to serve the project.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 6: Utilities 95 D. DRY UTILITIES
Dry utility infrastructure modifications and additions will be required and will be built out in phases to accommodate and support the development. Utility providers serving the Plan Area include PG&E, Comcast, and AT&T.

PG&E recently installed infrastructure to serve Parcel A and maintains service to the existing Comcast Building
and School Building. Data/Telecom services were also
extended to serve the development at Parcel A.

A joint trench will be provided in the Private Streets to extend the utility providers’ infrastructure throughout the development to serve the Parcels. Dry utilities will be coordinated with the appropriate utility provider to establish new service routes to support the Plan Area.

96 Chapter 6: Utilities Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan This page intentionally left blank.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 97 A. PHASING
The Plan Area is to be built-out in phases over a period anticipated to be eight to twelve years but may be up
to 15 years. Each phase of development includes the
infrastructure necessary to support development, open
space and public improvements associated with specific
parcels as follows and as shown in Figure 7.1:
● Phase I is the development of Parcel B housing, retail, Overlook Park, North Drive, north side of North Access
Way and associated utility improvements.
● Phase II is the development of Parcel C affordable
housing, Head Start, East Drive, south side of North
Access Way, South Access Way and Parcel D housing,
and associated utility improvements.
● Phase III is the development of Parcel E housing and
Central Park together, Parcel F housing, West Drive, and associated utility improvements. Parcel E or Parcel F
may develop independently and in any order.

The number of phases, number of units, and timeline for the project build-out will ultimately depend on market
conditions. The rate of the buildout of housing will fluctuate with the regional economy, capital expectations and availability, costs for development and the conditions of the Daly City housing market.

7. Implementation

98 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Figure 7.1 Phasing

PARCEL B PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL F

PARCEL E
Parcel lines
Easement
Phasing
Figure 7.1
Phase III
St. Francis Blvd.

Callan Blvd.

Access Drive West Access Drive North
Access Drive South
Entry Drive
Serramonte Blvd.

Campus Drive
West Drive
East Drive
North Drive
Phase II
Phase I

PARCEL F
Parcel lines
Easement
Phase III
St. Francis Blvd.

Access Dr
Parcel lines
Easement
Phas
St. Francis Blvd.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 99 B. CONFORMANCE REVIEW
Planning and engineering review and approval of development applications shall be in accordance with the Daly City Municipal Code and the Precise Plan conformance
review process as shown in Figure 7.2: Conformance
Review and Approval Process.

Planning Review
Development applications shall be submitted to the City for Design Review in accordance with Daly City Municipal Code. Planning staff shall review the application for
consistency with the Precise Plan’s goals, development
standards and design guidelines and applicable entitlement documents. The Precise Plan is consistent with and implements the Daly City General Plan.

Land Uses in the Plan Area shall be permitted according to the general category of uses submitted with this
Precise Plan. A use proposed which is not similar in
character to an identified use by general category may
be permitted upon securing a use permit. Changes that
reflect minor differences between the Precise Plan and
construction documents, including modifications in the
location of off-street parking, changes in the phasing of development, the distribution of private open space, the design of private street systems, and building design,
may be approved by the city planner, if in the opinion of the planner, the change is not substantial. The applicant shall provide a narrative describing the requested change, a rationale for why the change is needed and how the
change achieves the design intent of the Precise Plan.

Engineering Review
The applicant shall apply for approval of final subdivision maps and improvement plans per the Precise Plan,
City of Daly City’s Municipal Code and City Engineering Division standards. The development application for
a final subdivision map shall be consistent with the
approved tentative map for horizontal infrastructure,
including utilities, streets, roads, sidewalks, and other improvements, and shall be submitted at the same time
as a development project submittal. Final subdivision
maps and improvement plans may address all or a portion of the Plan Area per the general direction on phasing per Section A above.

100 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Figure 7.2 Conformance Review and Approval Process

CONFORMANCE REVIEW

PERMIT REVIEW
DESIGN
REVIEW

COMMITTEE

BUILDING PERMIT
REVIEW
PERMIT

APPROVAL
PERMIT

APPROVAL

ENGINEERING REVIEW
Building & Landscape
Design Design Review
Document Set
Design Development/
Construction
Document Set
Final Map
Street Improvement
Permit
Public Improvements
Final Map
Open Space Design
Infrastructure Design
Staff checks for
consistency with
Precise Plan,
entitlement
documents and
Affordable Housing
Agreement
Department of Public
Works (DPW ) checks for
conformance with Precise
Plan and City engineering
standards
City
Municipal
Code
Precise
Plan and
Entitlement
Documents

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 101 C. ENTITLEMENT DOCUMENTS
By Resolution No. [ ] the City Council approved text and map amendments to the General Plan to enable high
density residential and mixed-use residential development. By Resolution No. [ ] the City Council approved the update to the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan, which
modified land use designations and created a new street and open space network. The District and the City of Daly City entered into a Development Agreement to secure
vested development rights and terms for an Affordable
Housing Agreement. The City Council approved a Tentative Map indicating the subdivision of the District lands into parcels with infrastructure and open space improvements. The City of Daly City, as the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) prepared the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) to disclose to the City, general public and other agencies the environmental impacts of the project. By Resolution No. [ ] the City certified the EIR for the project, adopted findings, statement of overriding considerations [if needed] and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).

The Precise Plan is consistent with and will implement the MMRP as approved by the City Council.

D. PROCESS FOR AMENDING THE

PRECISE PLAN
An applicant can request an amendment to the Precise
Plan as part of future development application. The applicant shall provide a narrative describing the requested change, a rationale for why the change is needed and
how the change will achieve the design intent of the
Precise Plan. Amending the Precise Plan shall follow the requirements of the City’s Zoning ordinance as of the date of project approval.

E. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY ACT
All proposals for development shall be subject to the
mitigation measures specified in the Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) certified by the City Council as part of this Precise Plan. Subsequent environmental review
of development of Phase I, Phase II, or future phases of development shall be reviewed for compliance with
the EIR and MMRP prepared for this Precise Plan and the California Environmental Quality Act.

102 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan This page intentionally left blank.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Acknowledgements 103
Acknowledgements
Jefferson Union High School
District
Board of Trustees
» Andrew Lie
» Carla Ng-Garrett
» Nick Ochipinti
» Kalimah Salahuddin
» Rosie Tejada
District Staff
» Toni Presta, Superintendent of Schools
» Tina Van Raaphorst, Associate Superintendent of Business Services » April Hawkins, Director of Communications & Staff Housing » Monica Casey, President American
Federation of Teachers (AFT) Local 1481
Brookwood Advisors
» Alan Katz, President
» Bruce Fukuji, Planning Director
» Chris White, Project Director
PlaceWorks
» Bruce Brubaker, Principal-in-Charge
» Janet Chang, Project Manager
» Pranjali Deokule, Project Manager
Seidel Architects
» Alex Seidel, FAIA, Founding Principal
» Paul Dent, Senior Associate
» Michael Rizza, Associate
Jett Landscape Architecture +
Design
» Bruce Jett, Principal
» Jesse Markman, Principal
» Samantha Elms, Landscape Designer
Fehr & Peers Transportation
Planning
» Bill Burton, Senior Associate
BKF Engineers
» Tim Heffernan, Senior Project Manager
Office of the San Mateo County
Counsel
» John D. Nibbelin, Chief Deputy County
Counsel

104 Acknowledgements Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
This page intentionally left blank.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan

ORANGE COUNTY • BAY AREA • SACRAMENTO • CENTRAL COAST • LOS ANGELES • INLAND EMPIRE • SAN DIEGO

DALY CITY INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM

JUHSD COUNCIL COMMITTEE
DATE: July 6, 2021
TO: JUHSD Council Committee
Juslyn Manalo, Mayor
Glenn Sylvester, Councilmember
FROM: Carmelisa Morales, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: General Plan Amendment GPA-04-21-014998
Planned Development PD-04-21-014997
Design Review DR-04-21-015000
Major Subdivision SUB-04-21-014999
699 Serramonte Boulevard – Serramonte Del Rey Campus Redevelopment ______________________________________________________________________________

BACKGROUND
The Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan (PD-31) was approved for the Serramonte Del Rey Campus located at 699 Serramonte Boulevard in Daly City in 1985 and allowed up to 175 residential units and approximately 700,000 square feet (sq. ft.) of office space. An amendment to the Precise Plan (PD-31A) was approved in January 2020 for the northwest section of the site (Parcel A) to allow for the construction of a JUHSD faculty and staff housing project which is currently under construction.

The property currently consists of a main building occupied by JUHSD offices and non-profit organizations, temporary buildings, surface parking, and construction activity for JUHSD faculty and staff housing. There is also a school garden located in the southwest corner of the project site. This garden was started 20 years ago and used by JUHSD for adult education as a demonstration garden. Since the garden is used by JUHSD for educational purposes, members of the public must fill out volunteer and liability forms to use the garden.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Staff has received an application from Jefferson Union High School District (JUHSD) that proposes a new Precise Plan for the campus (see Attachment A – Draft Precise Plan). The proposed Precise Plan would allow for the redevelopment of the campus to include up to 1,235 units of affordable and market-rate rental housing, up to 14,000 sq. ft. of neighborhood-serving retail/commercial uses, and 1,400 sq. ft. allocated for a Head Start childcare facility. The existing garden would be removed, but JUHSD intends to install raised planter beds at their new adult education building located at 123 Edgemont Drive. The site would be divided into seven development parcels and additional street parcels with public access easements. Build-out of the site is anticipated to be over a ten-year period.

JUHSD is also seeking design review approval for the proposed development on Parcel B, which would include a six-story, 201-unit mixed-use building with approximately 345 parking spaces and approximately 8,000 sq. ft. of retail space, a park, play structure, and various amenities for residents (see Attachment B – Parcel B Project Plans). The building would have a maximum height of 74 feet to the top of the parapet (85 feet to the top of the elevator shaft).

GPA-04-21-014998, PD-04-21-014997, DR-04-21-015000, SUB-04-21-014999 June 6, 2021 699 Serramonte Boulevard – Serramonte Del Rey Campus Redevelopment Project Page 2 The proposed project requires an amendment to the General Plan to change the designation to Commercial – Mixed Use (C-MU), a new Planned Development due to the significant changes proposed for the site, Design Review and a Major Subdivision. Design review approval for proposed Parcels C through F would occur as subsequent applications.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
An Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is required for this project. David J. Powers & Associates (DJP&A) has been retained to prepare the EIR. The Notice of Preparation which provides interested parties with the opportunity to provide input regarding the scope and content of the environmental information to be addressed in the EIR was filed with the County and distributed to interested parties on May 6, 2021. Staff received several comments during the 30- day comment period which will be used to develop the scope of the EIR. Staff and DJP&A are currently working with JUHSD to prepare the project description of the EIR and obtain the required information and reports to prepare the EIR. Tribal cultural resources consultation has also started pursuant to the requirements of Senate Bill 18 and Assembly Bill 52.

PRELIMINARY PLAN AND PRECISE PLAN REVIEW
The Preliminary Plan for the proposed project will be scheduled for an upcoming Planning Commission meeting and City Council meeting. At this stage, the Planning Commission and City Council will review the proposed land use, circulation, and overall site design of the proposed project. The Planning Commission may recommend approval, conditional approval, or denial of the Preliminary Plan to the City Council. The Planning Commission’s action will be forwarded to the City Council for approval, conditional approval, or denial.

The project will then move forward to the Precise Plan stage where the applicant will finalize their proposal and make any revisions necessary to address comments from the Planning Commission and City Council. The EIR will also be finalized and circulated pursuant to CEQA.

The final steps of this stage will be a Planning Commission meeting and City Council meeting.

The Planning Commission will make a recommendation on the project and the City Council will make the final determination of approval, conditional approval, or denial of the project.

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
JUHSD also submitted proposed terms for a Development Agreement that will need to be further analyzed by staff and presented to the City Council for approval. The current proposal provides considerations for development phasing, parks and open space requirements, fees, off-site improvements, and most notably affordable housing.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the JUHSD City Council Committee review the information and attachments presented and provide any preliminary comments or concerns.

GPA-04-21-014998, PD-04-21-014997, DR-04-21-015000, SUB-04-21-014999 June 6, 2021 699 Serramonte Boulevard – Serramonte Del Rey Campus Redevelopment Project Page 3 Respectfully submitted,
Carmelisa Morales
Associate Planner
Attachments
Attachment A – Draft Precise Plan
Attachment B – Parcel B Project Plans

bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2600 10th St., Suite 300 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 1140 3rd St. NE, 2nd Floor 234 5th Ave.

Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20002 New York, NY 10001 510.547.9380 530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486 www.bae1.com
Memorandum

To: Tina Van Raaphorst, Associate Superintendent
Jefferson Union High School District
From: David Shiver, Principal
Kathleen Diohep, Vice-President
Date: July 10, 2020
Re: Office Market Assessment and Fiscal Impact Review for Serramonte Del Rey Site, Daly City, California
Introduction and Purpose
BAE Urban Economics, Inc. (“BAE”) has been engaged to prepare an analysis of the office market position for the 22-acre site owned by the Jefferson Union High School District (“JUHSD”) and a review of the fiscal impact of residential development in Daly City, California.

This site, a former high school, is a portion of a larger 50-acre site that was entitled for 500,000 to 700,000 square feet of office space plus residential in 1985 (“the Site”).

BAE is an award-winning urban economics and public-benefit real estate and urban economics consultancy. Since 1986, BAE has completed more than 2,300 projects for clients that include public agencies, non-profit organizations, financial institutions, and private developers throughout the US. BAE has prepared hundreds of market studies, financial feasibility studies, and highest and best use analyses for a variety of commercial, residential, and institutional product types.

This analysis evaluates the site’s potential to attract commercial office use. The analysis utilizes market-based location criteria for office development, set in the geographic and historic context of real estate development in Daly City, San Mateo County, and the San Francisco Bay Area over the past 35 years.

This analysis also presents the results of the fiscal impact analysis of three recently approved residential projects in Daly City to demonstrate the potential for residential development contemplated for the JUHSD site to generate positive fiscal benefits to the City.

2 Key Findings – Market Viability of Office Use
Overview
Based upon a site inspection, neighborhood tour, careful review of market data and evaluation of historic and current office development trends, BAE finds that the JUHSD’s Serramonte Del Rey site is not a competitive location to attract office development. The site has no overall potential for office development whether that is Class A, back office, biotech and/or medical office use undertaken by either commercial developers or corporate end users. This conclusion is based upon the site’s characteristics as well as Daly City’s relative position in the regional economy and San Mateo County office market. Office development has been a permitted use at the site since 1985, yet only one medical office building was built in the ensuing 35 years. If office demand and rents would support developing new buildings, it would have occurred during the multiple real estate market cycles that have occurred since 1985.

BAE based its analysis on real estate market data as of the end of 2019 and market research conducted during February and March of 2020. The economic impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic have been significant and abrupt with short-term reduction of office demand driven by shelter-in-place orders. The long-term impact of the pandemic on the regional office market demand is uncertain and will likely change the regional office market dynamics, both in terms of overall demand and space design, but likely not in a manner that would change the finding that the JUHSD site is not a viable office development location.

JUHSD Site Characteristics
BAE has identified key office location criteria that are used by commercial developers and end users to select sites for office development (see Figure 1, below). These criteria are based upon BAE’s ongoing discussions with commercial developers active in the Peninsula Market and technology company real estate representatives, as well as upon BAE’s recent experience with other commercial projects for public agencies and private parties on the Peninsula. BAE evaluated both the JUHSD site and other alternative locations in the market area against these criteria.

1. Critical Mass. At 22 acres, the site lacks the size to accommodate the scale of office development necessary to establish a new successful employment center with a distinct identity. An example of critical mass is South San Francisco’s 500-acre lifescience district east of Highway 101. This city has continued to strengthen its role as a biotech cluster, adding 1.6 million square feet of new Class A office over the past ten years along with additional new development planned by Genentech, its anchor end user. Other large sites for new office development can be found in San Francisco

3 south of Mission Bay, Redwood City, the Peninsula/Highway 101 Corridor, and potentially elsewhere in Daly City.

Figure 1 Office Location Criteria
Source: BAE, 2020.

2. Walkable to BART/Caltrain. Proximity to public transit, in particular BART and Caltrain, is highly desirable to office tenants. While the site is served by Samtrans bus service, it is over two miles from the Colma BART Station, well beyond the typical half-mile that otherwise, everything else being equal, would make the site attractive as a mixed-use, transit-oriented development that is preferred by office tenants. Reflecting market demand for office space near transit, Daly City’s own Class A office inventory is adjacent or near the Daly City BART Station.

3. Employment Center. Office businesses like to be near other office businesses –this is an agglomeration effect that is seen throughout the Bay Area. The site is not located in a recognized employment center and it is located in a primarily residential neighborhood with multi-family residential developments defining the northern and southern gateways after exiting Highway 1 to reach Serramonte Boulevard. The site is set back approximately 400 feet south of Highway 1 and a half-mile from Interstate 280. An office project here cannot offer visibility and identity that is often desired by corporate end users and/or tenants.

4 4. Highway 101/Caltrain Corridor. Almost all existing, planned, and proposed Class A office space in the Northern San Mateo County market is located along the Highway 101 and Caltrain corridor. As of the end of 2019, seven million square feet of new office projects were under construction along this portion of the corridor along. An additional 30 million square feet are under construction, entitled, or proposed from Hunters Point and Candlestick Point in San Francisco though the corridor to Menlo Park at the southern end of San Mateo County, reflecting its strong gravitational market pull. The Serramonte Del Rey site is at a distinct disadvantage by not being located on this corridor.

5. Authenticity/Placemaking. Commercial office developers and end users increasingly seek locations that offer a sense of urban or small-town authenticity and a mix of uses including office with residential and retail goods and services. The City of Redwood City has successfully leveraged its historic downtown and Caltrain Station to accommodate significant new office (as well as residential) development. The City of San Mateo has successfully guided the redevelopment of the Bay Meadows racetrack as a new attractive location for technology offices, in walkable, transit-oriented locations with new housing. The JUHSD site does not offer the same opportunity for placemaking due to its location away from the BART, or Caltrain stations, or the City’s Top of the Hill commercial district. Daly City itself has opportunities for mixed use office development at its BART Station and other high visibility sites.

6. Tech Company Appeal/Cool Factor. Developers are building office space to meet the changing office needs of employers. Technology and lifescience companies in the Bay Area fiercely compete for skilled labor and tend to cluster to make job changes less costly and disruptive to the employee. To be competitive and attract top talent, employers tend to select facilities that provide a ‘cool factor,’ e.g., unique setting, site design, architecture, and package of amenities that are attractive to the Millennial and Generation Z workforce. The JUHSD site is not well suited to be competitive due to its small size, relatively inferior location, and lack of visibility.

7. No Cap on Office Development. Cities such as San Francisco and Redwood City have adopted legislation that places a cap on office development that serves as a barrier to entry for new office development. The Serramonte Del Rey site has an advantage by its location in Daly City that has no overall city-wide cap of office space. There is no barrier to developing the office space that was entitled for the site in 1985.

8. Rents Justify New Office Construction? Financial feasibility is driven by the relationship between the rents a developer can charge and the cost to develop their office project.

While office rents have been strong enough to justify new construction along the Highway 101/Caltrain corridor and, potentially at Daly City’s BART Station, the

5 locational disadvantages of the Serramonte Del Rey site would likely result in a project not being able to achieve the rents necessary to support project development costs and provide a market rate of return to investors.

Daly City Office Market Trends
Located outside the Highway 101/Caltrain Corridor, the office sector in Daly City has failed to gain traction over the past few decades despite the presence of two BART stations and City efforts and investment to stimulate Class A office development during the longest economic expansion in U.S. history. This finding is based upon the following observations:
 Daly City has only two Class A office buildings that are located at the Daly City BART Station and together they comprise 438,000 square feet. The Redevelopment Agency project, Pacific Plaza development, is an example of modest success of attracting Class A office space after utilizing its redevelopment tools (including site assemblage and subsidies). However, a recent sale of the property in 2018 was for significantly less that its replacement cost which indicates continued weakness in the Class A sector despite adjacency to a BART station.
 Both Class A buildings changed ownership recently and have experienced increasing occupancy and rents as they benefited from their location in proximity to BART.

However, Daly City recently marketed three sites near the Daly City BART station to the commercial developer community; the City has reported that these sites did not receive interest for office use.
(This space intentionally left blank)

6 Key Findings - Fiscal Impact of Alternative Residential Use Overview
BAE reviewed three FIAs for new residential development in Daly City and has made the following findings regarding the direct fiscal impacts:
 The three FIA analyses prepared recently for Daly City projects all indicate that residential development at the scale and density of in-fill development projects, such as what is being considered for the Serramonte Del Rey site, can yield net positive impacts.
 New residential development injects additional retail spending power into the city that can support its existing and expanded retail centers and corridors.  Daly City has well-performing retail centers such as the Westgate Mall and Serramonte Plaza with a wide offering of retail stores that draw shoppers from both inside and outside the city. However, the City’s retail sector faces continued pressure from ecommerce and the uncertain impacts of the current Covid-19 pandemic.  Daly City can support the long-term sustainability of these centers by adding new residents. Each new resident, from which a higher percent of spending can be captured locally, netting more retail sales than under a situation faced by many other cities where new residents chose to go outside the city for a significant portion of their shopping.

Indirect Fiscal Benefit
There is as well an important indirect fiscal benefit associated with new residential development specifically at the Serramonte Del Rey site. JUHSD intends to ground lease the Site for development which will generate an ongoing stream of cash rental payments. This new source of revenue will enhance JUHSD’s operating budget and thus improve the quality of education in Daly City.

Improved school quality has been documented to increase housing values in the community that the schools serve. This, in turn, will increase tax revenues for both JUHSD and Daly City, therefore stimulating a virtuous cycle that improves the quality of City services and school district operations.

7 Site Description and Location
Daly City Location
The Site is located within Daly City, the largest city in San Mateo County with a population of 109,122. The American Community Survey by the Census for 2018, identified 64,871 Daly City residents in the labor force. Of those, almost one third worked in Daly City. The City has a significant retail and commercial tax and employment base with two major shopping centers.

Site Location and Adjacent Uses
Within the Serramonte neighborhood of Daly City, the Site is situated in the northern portion of the Precise Plan area, bounded by Serramonte Boulevard, Callan Boulevard, Hickey Boulevard and St. Francis Boulevard. (See Figure 2 on next page). It has a sloped topography and existing groves of evergreen trees creating a buffer from the neighboring uses. To the east is the Chinese Cemetery, to the north medium density apartment complexes, and to the west, single-family homes. To the south are medium density apartments and medical office uses.

Generally framed by Interstate 280 and State Routes 35 and 1, the Serramonte neighborhood of Daly City was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s as a residential neighborhood with commercial uses near Interstate 280. The Serramonte Plaza shopping center is a successful 1.1 million square foot regional shopping center, which expanded by 250,000 square feet in 2018 and is currently undergoing additional redevelopment. While the Site is within walking distance of the Serramonte Plaza and easily accessed from the neighboring highways, it is over 2 miles from a BART station.
1985 Precise Plan
In 1985, Daly City adopted the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan (“Precise Plan”) that delineated land uses for the 50-acre site owned by JUHSD and ground leased to a real estate developer, Southwest Diversified. The Precise Plan permitted a phased, mixed-use project on the 30 developable acres with between 200 to 575 housing units and between 740,000 and

1.2 million square feet of office space. Several parcels were designated to be either office or residential. Three to twelve story buildings are allowed in the Precise Plan. In January 2020, Daly City revised the Precise Plan to include the JUHSD faculty and staff housing project at the northwest corner of the Serramonte Del Rey site.

Development and Leasing History
The underlying concept when the Precise Plan was adopted in 1985 to create a first-class office park that could attract build-to-suit corporate tenants seeking office space at larger floor plates and lower prices than could be found in San Francisco. An apartment complex, Serramonte Ridge, was developed in 1987 on 9.6 acres and has 396 units in six three-story buildings. One office building of 76,000 square feet, 901 Campus Drive, was built in the Precise Plan area in 1990 on 2.77 acres and is leased for medical uses. The initial developer constructed the apartments and the 901 Campus Drive office building but did not exercise

8 their option to develop the second phase on the northern portion of the site. In the intervening decades, JUHSD closed the high school, moved in its district offices, and leased space to a mix of tenants.

Figure 2: Site Location, Daly City

More recently, 2.7 acres were leased to a charter high school that opened in 2019, on a site designated for office use. Under construction now are 122 units of housing for employees of JUHSD on 3.9 acres at the northwest corner of the plan area.

The analysis below addresses the remaining development capacity of the site identified for as much as 700,000 square feet of office.

9 Daly City Office Market
Overall Daly City Office Market
Daly City has an inventory of approximately 1.5 million square feet of office space in 81 office buildings, according to data obtained from the CoStar Group, a national real estate market data provider. The 16 buildings larger than 20,000 square feet. include 1.2 million square feet as shown in Table 1 below. Medical office buildings account for a significant amount of Daly City’s office inventory, including those which are part of the Seton Hospital Campus and the Kaiser Medical Office building at 395 Hickey Blvd, built in 2002. The office building at the site, 901 Campus Drive, a three-story, 75,000 square foot Class B office building, was built in 1990. It is a medical office building anchored by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation and Campus Surgery Center. The building was 80 percent occupied as of the end of 2019. It sold in June 2018 for $30 million, or $395 per square foot, which is significantly less than the replacement cost (currently over $800 or more per square foot for Type I construction) Table 1: Daly City Office Market Characteristics
Source: CoStar, BAE 2020
Note that the 2100 Junipero Serra building, built in 2001, and the Kaiser facility built, in 2002, are the newest office buildings in Daly City. Although Daly City has relatively low office vacancy rates, no new office is proposed as the rents are not high enough to support new construction.

Current proposed projects in Daly City only include very modest amounts of office space included in mixed-use projects. Appendix A provides a discussion of the opportunity sites in Daly City that could be developed for office uses.

Vacancy 3-4-2020 Vacancy 3-4-2020
Sq.ft. # Sq.ft. % Sq.ft. # Sq.ft. %
General Office
Class A 438,173 2 43,280 10% 438,173 2 43,280 10%
Class B 202,477 8 4,861 2% 181,121 5 4,861 3%
Class C 218,517 33 5,062 2% 40,910 2 - 0%
Subtotal 859,167 43 53,203 6% 660,204 9 48,141 7%
Medical Office
Class B 398,494 7 28,487 7% 362,378 4 26,918 7%
Class C 228,116 11 - 0% 176,981 3 - 0%
Subtotal 626,610 18 28,487 5% 539,359 7 26,918 5%
Total 1,485,777 61 81,690 5% 1,199,563 16 75,059 6%
All Buildings Buildings < 20,000 sq.ft.

10 Daly City Class A Office Market
There are two Class A office buildings in Daly City1, both located on Junipero Serra near the Daly City BART Station. The following is a brief summary of these two properties. 2171 Junipero Serra Boulevard, a seven-story, 55,000 square foot building completed 1989 that is one half mile from the Daly City BART station and has visibility from Highway 280 as well as ocean views. It was the first high-rise built in Daly City and, in 1990, the City purchased a 51 percent share of the building to avoid default by the developers. The City held that ownership stake for over a decade. The building traded for $24 million in 2016, a value of $436 per square foot., significantly less than costs of new construction. In 2017, almost 13,000 square feet were vacant, a 23% vacancy rate. The new ownership upgraded the building and substantially increased occupancy. At the present, there are no suites advertised to lease and rental rates are not available.
2001 Junipero Serra Boulevard, a nine-story, 383,000 square foot building that was built in 2001 with direct access to the Daly City BART station. As of March 2020, this building is 91 percent occupied with 43,000 square feet. available for lease at an asking rate of $4.65 per square foot per month on a full-service basis. This building was part of a significant redevelopment project, Pacific Plaza, by the City of Daly City. Pacific Plaza included land acquisition and sale to a developer at a cost less than the City’s cost for the land to create a first-class office building in Daly City.

Situated off Interstate 280 and adjacent to the Daly City BART Station, the building offers large floor plates, views, and 1,753 parking spaces. The multi-tenant building is anchored by the global headquarters of Genesys, a contact center technology provider (with jobs reported in the range of 250 to 499 in Daly City). Other tenants include Kome Japanese Seafood & Grill Buffet, Bank of America, Subway and Satellite Healthcare. This was developed as a mixed-use retail and office investment including a retail and multi-plex movie theater. This property sold in 2018 for $114.5 million, or $299 per square foot. a cost much less than replacement costs (currently over $800 per square foot for Type I construction) reflecting both the need to renovate and the separation of the retail and office projects. This sale also indicates how a Class A office property has struggled in one of the City’s best locations near a BART Station, strongly suggesting that office at the Site would be extremely difficult to realize.

Other Development Trends in Daly City
Daly City is experiencing real estate development in sectors other than office. Retail center expansions and several new hotels have been approved in the last several years. Daly City has also seen a series of residential projects, many with over 300 units, under construction, 1 CoStar shows the Serramonte Business Center, at 455 Hickey Boulevard as Class A. BAE’s assessment is that this building is Class B due to the location and quality of improvements. The building was originally built in 1982 as a single user building for First Nationwide Bank data processing functions which relocated from Daly City in 1990.

11 including the JUHSD project adjacent to the Site and another 2,300 units approved by the City but not yet under construction. Serramonte Plaza received City approvals in 2018 to build 65,000 square feet of medical office buildings as part of master plan upgrade for the entire center. The owner has developed the first phase of its retail expansion and has second phase under development but has not yet moved forward with the office portions of the project. It should be noted that in today’s market, many medical providers prefer locations in shopping centers since they offer access and visibility on high traffic arterials which would give the Serramonte Plaza a decided advantage over the JUHSD site for this use. (This space intentionally left blank)

12 National and Regional Office Trends
Office Trends in the 1980s
During the 1980s, the national trend was for new office development to locate in suburban office parks designed for ease of auto accessibility in contrast to the historic trend to concentrate office development in Central Business District. The preferred suburban location was close to residential neighborhoods with high-end executive housing and direct access to major freeways and highways. Buildings were primarily two to three stories and situated in the center of large surface parking fields. In the Bay Area, large suburban office parks were constructed in Marin County, South San Francisco, Brisbane, Walnut Creek, San Ramon, Pleasanton, Concord, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Redwood City, San Jose, and elsewhere along the Highway 101, Interstate 680, and Interstate 580 corridors.

Even at that time, not all suburban locations were suitable for office development. In an office market study prepared in 1991 for San Mateo County, the City of Daly City, and the San Mateo Transit District as part of the BART Colma Station Specific Plan (adopted in 1994), BAE found that demand for Class A office space in the vicinity of the Colma BART Station would be weak and that land designated for new Class A office space could be undeveloped between ten and twenty years given location factors and then-market conditions2. In fact, the SamTrans Park and Ride site at the Colma Station, entitled in 1993 for over 200,000 square feet of office, remains undeveloped in 2020 and is under consideration for residential uses.

San Francisco, which had previously been the locus of corporate offices, saw increasing rents and new restrictions on office development in the 1980s. Suburban office development followed the labor force as corporations moved out of San Francisco (e.g. Chevron to Bishop Ranch) and new tech companies created identity campuses (e.g. Autodesk in Marin, Sun Microsystems in Menlo Park) in suburban locations. Universities also were a driver of development, in particular Stanford Industrial park which is home to many technology companies.

At the time that the Serramonte Del Rey site was planned as an apartment and office campus, the developer was targeting similar office users to those drawn to the East Bay office parks, however there was no development interest beyond the first medical office building at the Serramonte Del Ray site and Phase II office development never materialized. The project site was not as competitive at attracting office uses as the substantially larger scale sites in the Eastbay with their more favorable development environments, including better weather and better freeway access to a large pool of white-collar and executive labor. During this same period, subsidies were required to develop and sustain the two Class A office projects located near the Daly City BART station in the 1980s.
2 See County of San Mateo, City of Daly City, San Mateo County Transit District, Office Market Feasibility Study: Colma BART Station Specific Plan/EIR, prepared by BAE Urban Economics, October 1991.

13 Current Office Market Trends
Since the 1980s and 1990s, the national office market has undergone a remarkable transformation that has resulted in many suburban office parks struggling to retain tenants and maintain rents commensurate with Class A properties. Driving these changes to the office sector was a shift in corporate location preferences, employee lifestyle preferences, and workspace design. Office workers increasingly demonstrate a preference for workplace locations that offer proximity to public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian access, attractive retail and service offerings, and entertainment options. In response to this shift in preferences among workers, companies are seeking office locations that offer urban-style amenities rather than traditional, auto-oriented suburban office parks that offer fewer transit options and urban lifestyle amenities.

Bay Area Reflects National Office Trends
These trends can be observed in the Bay Area, especially where San Francisco and San Jose have seen intensification of office development in the last decade. Between those two regional centers, new office development is clustering along the Highway 101 and Caltrain corridors from San Francisco’s Mission Bay district to downtown San Jose. The Highway 101 corridor and parallel Caltrain line together have a strong gravitational pull for technology, finance, and life-science businesses. New office deliveries and office properties with the highest rents are typically located in this corridor. Many Peninsula cities have downtown Caltrain stops, have retained their authentic town character and offer retail and service amenities in a walkable setting.

Figure 3 San Francisco Bay Area Office Development Trends Source: BAE, 2020.

14 San Francisco Peninsula/San Mateo County Class A Office Trends

Genentech’s choice of South San Francisco in the 1970s spurred the development of one of the largest office/R&D markets outside of the region’s core cities of San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland. Business location decisions throughout the two most recent economic expansions have transformed the Highway 101 Corridor in San Mateo County with major employment centers emerging with clusters of Class A office and life-science development, in Brisbane, Burlingame, Foster City, San Bruno, San Mateo, and Redwood City. Connecting the San Francisco and San Jose economies, Caltrain stations have emerged as attractive locations for new Class A office and life-science development. Peninsula cities are building up, near transit stations, creating density of jobs and housing opportunities.

The power and pull of this corridor can be seen by looking at existing inventory, recently completed construction, projects currently under construction, and what is now on the drawing boards (e.g., planned and proposed projects):
 Existing Office/R&D Inventory. There currently a base of nearly 24 million square feet of office/R&D space in San Mateo County with 7.2 million square feet of this inventory in North San Mateo County, as shown in Table 2 and Figure 4. Just about 80 percent of North County’s inventory is in South San Francisco.
 Recently Constructed Office/R&D. Over the past nine years, approximately 1.6 million square feet of office/R&D has been constructed in Northern San Mateo County and this figure will rise by another 4.0 million square feet when projects currently under construction are completed, as seen in Table 2 and Figures 4 and 5.  Planned and Proposed Office/R&D. Over 12 million square feet of new Class A office/R&D is planned or proposed in North County, accounting for over half of all planned and proposed projects in San Mateo County (23.2 million square feet).

Looking forward, Hunters Point, Candlestick Park, Brisbane, South San Francisco, and San Carlos each have significant unbuilt, entitled properties for additional office and life-science uses in large scale office park settings that will continue to out-complete locations within Daly City. In total, these sites include 30 million square feet either under construction as of the end of 2019 or in the development pipeline, shown in Figure 6.

15 Table 2 San Francisco Peninsula/San Mateo County Office Market Millions of Building Square Feet
(a) Genetech's proposed master plan change to allow 4 million additional square feet is not included. (b) includes City of Burlingame, City of San Mateo, and the Foster City/Redwood City Shores submarket. (c) Includes City of Menlo Park, City of Redwood City, and the Belmont/San Carlos submarket. (d) San Francisco has approved projects at Candlestick and Hunters Point that allow office and R&D product.

Source: CoStar, local planning departments, BAE 2020.

Figure 4: Existing Class A Office in Northern San Mateo County All Existing Buildings –7 Million Square Feet Built 2010 to 2019 1.6 Million Square Feet Source: CoStar, BAE 2020.

Existing
12/2019
Under
Construction
Planned/
Proposed
Daly City 0.4 - -
Milbrae - 0.2 0.2
San Bruno 0.3 - 2.4
South San Francisco 5.7 3.3 3.0 (a)
Brisbane 0.8 0.6 6.5
North San Mateo County 7.2 4.0 12.2
Central San Mateo County (b) 10.6 1.4 0.6
South San Mateo County (c) 6.1 1.6 11.0

5.7 13.3 23.2
Southern San Francisco (d) 2.8
Total 23.9 7.1 26.6

16 Figure 5: Class A Office Projects Under Construction, Approved and Proposed Northern San Mateo County, 16 Million square feet

Source: CoStar, BAE 2020

17 Figure 6: Class A Office Projects Under Construction, Approved and Proposed San Mateo County, Candlestick, and Hunter’s Point, 30 Million square feet

Source: CoStar, BAE 2020

18 Case Studies – Traditional Suburban vs Suburban TOD and Urban Environments To better understand why the Serramonte Del Rey site has failed to realize the 1985 plan of corporate office campus, BAE reviewed six office development case studies. Three are suburban, single-use office parks built when the 1985 Precise Plan was conceived. In contrast, BAE reviewed three San Mateo County environments that are currently attracting new office development and rapidly urbanizing around transit. Appendix B presents discussion of all six markets and this review substantiates BAE’s assessment that office development is not supported at the Site.

Suburban Environments
The suburban, single use office parks reviewed were Shadelands in Walnut Creek, Marina Village in Alameda, and the Northgate district in San Rafael. Figure 7 summarizes the case studies.

Figure 7 Summary of Traditional Suburban Office Park Case Studies Source: BAE, 2020.

Several key observations can be made from the suburban office park case studies:
 All three suburban office parks had significantly more site acreage than the JUHSD Site, which supported an initial critical mass of office space when developed.  Developers in all three parks developed Class A office space. The market now classifies all but two of the office properties as Class B or Class C, indicating that either the design and functionality of the buildings fell out of favor with tenants or that

19 property owners did not find it financially feasible to reinvest in their properties to maintain a Class A product.
 Office development was automobile centric with surface parking lots located around office buildings. All three have inferior access to public transportation and office employees generally have to drive to patronize retail and services in the area, which is counter to the current national trend of locating new office in urban, transit-oriented locations.
 Rent growth over the past five years has been less than ten percent across the three office parks, a rate of growth that significantly lower than rental increases for properties in stronger markets such as the downtowns of Walnut Creek, Oakland, and San Rafael and the Highway 101 corridor on the Peninsula in San Mateo County.  The three case study office parks did not experience any new office development over close to two business cycles, including the recent 10-year recovery from the Great Recession, reflecting a shift in preference by office tenants to other locations with more amenities and access to public transit and where prevailing rents support new construction which provides highly functional Class A product.  Overall, the 1985 Precise Plan for the Site was formulated to permit an office park with the same locational profile as these traditional suburban office parks that are currently struggling in the market.

(This space intentionally left blank)

20 San Mateo County Suburban TOD and Urban Office Development Three San Mateo County transit-oriented locations were considered as a contrast to the office envisioned with the Serramonte del Rey Precise Plan. These three locations are downtown Redwood City, San Mateo near the Hillsdale and Hayward Park Caltrain Stations, and South San Francisco’s biotech/technology campuses. The success of these markets is summarized in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Summary of Suburban TOD and Urban Office Development Source: BAE, 2020.

BAE’s overall findings related to the review of Suburban TOD and urban office developments in San Mateo County are:
 Competition for workers drives companies to prioritize locating Class A office in urban, transit-oriented locations. Millennial and Generation Z workers do not typically want to drive and prefer public transit or other alternative forms of mobility (walking, biking, and ridesharing).

21  A significant concentration of office space and business activity is needed in one location to create agglomeration economics needed to create an industrial cluster such as bio-tech, which requires much larger land area than the 22 acres available at the JUSHD site.
 New development is occurring at densities significantly above the classic one-to-three story suburban office. Buildings built between 2015 and 2019 have ranged from four to ten stories in height and the proposed projects continue, and in some cases accelerate, the trend to mid-rise buildings. Bay Meadows in San Mateo has termed itself “mid-urban,” a position between central business district urban and a traditional suburban campus.
 Increasing highway congestion has made transit access and neighboring housing a significant priority for businesses.

 Redwood City and the San Mateo locations include significant place-making with significant housing and retail creating a 24-7 destination.

Conclusion Market Feasibility of Class A Office at the Site After review of the overall office development trends, Daly City office building performance, and the recent and planned office development in sites competitive with JUHSD’s Serramonte Del Rey site, BAE concludes that it is not suitable for office development. Since 1985, developers have chosen to invest in other locations including cases where significant entitlement process were required.

Today, office market users seek the following location attributes:
 Walkable to high-performing transit including BART and Caltrain.  Accessible to highways and offering visible locations for branding.  Authentic locations with retail, restaurants, and entertainment fostering an urbane experience.
 Technology and biotech companies tend to cluster together. It takes significant place making, such as the Bay Meadows experience to create a new location.  Locational factors are critical to attracting talent so that companies are willing to pay premium rents for locations that meet their workforce priorities.

As the costs of development are similar across San Francisco Peninsula locations, developers will build where they anticipate the highest rents and the least risk to lease up a project.

Developers, seeking to meet the end user requirements, also seek out either sites that are big enough to create a vibrant mixed-use environment or infill sites situated within an already active business district. As Redwood City’s downtown plan and the Bay Meadows plan

22 demonstrate, cities can create entitlement frameworks to foster office development, yet the underlying economic growth and user location preferences drive the timing. The Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan experience shows that entitling office uses is not sufficient to draw development if the site does not meet current user requirements.

Across the greater market, there are substantial development opportunities that will continue to out compete the JUHSD site, including Daly City sites near or adjacent to the Daly City BART Station, including sites near BART in Daly City.

(This space intentionally left blank)

23 Fiscal Analysis of Alternative Residential Uses

An alternative use for the Site is residential and this section of the report addresses the fiscal impact of residential uses in a setting such as Daly City.

New residential development has traditionally been viewed by many local land use decisionmakers as a fiscal negative (e.g., not generating sufficient new general fund tax revenue to cover incremental costs). However, a growing body of fiscal impact analyses (“FIAs”) for projects in the Bay Area demonstrate that new residential development can have a significant net positive fiscal impact.

Daly City has recently analyzed three office projects for their impact on local tax revenues and service requirements. BAE reviewed these three studies and adjusted to remove any tax revenues from proposed retail to identify the portion of the fiscal impact due to the housing use.

Westlake Shopping Center – 179 Units Rental Housing
The center owner, Kimco Realty Corporation, received entitlements in 2017 to redevelop a portion of the Westlake Shopping Center to mixed use with 35,458 square feet of replacement retail and 179 units of rental apartments. With a 1.95-acre site, this is a density of 92 units per acre. The FIA was prepared by the developer at the request of the City and the FIA indicates a positive fiscal impact to the general fund, totaling approximately $163,900 annually in 2017 dollars from the residential portions of the project, $916 per unit per year.

City Ventures, Serra Station – 75 Townhomes
The second project is a proposed townhome and retail development with a 35,000 square foot retail program at 3301 Junipero Serra Boulevard being undertaken by City Ventures and approved in late 2019. The project, on 3.92 acres, results in a density of 19 units per acre.

The FIA was prepared by Economic Planning Systems, Inc. in 2017 and indicates a positive fiscal impact to the general fund of approximately $164,700 annually from the residential components of the project, $2,196 per unit per year.

Equity Residential, 6401 Mission – 170 units of Rental Housing The City is currently finalizing a project with Equity Residential to build apartments on a 0.36- acre site, at a density of 472 units per acre in a ten-story3. A fiscal study prepared by ALH Urban Economics found a fiscal benefit of the project of $183,400 in 2019 dollars, $1,079 per unit per year.
3 The calculation of density does not include the land area for a garage constructed in an earlier phase that the proposed project will connect to.

24 FIA Implications for New Residential Projects in Daly City  The three FIA analyses prepared recently for Daly City projects all indicate that residential development at the scale and density of in-fill development projects, such as what is being considered for the JUHSD site, can yield net positive impacts.  New residential development injects additional retail spending power into the city that can support its existing and expanded retail centers and corridors.  Daly City has well-performing retail centers such as the Westgate Mall and Serramonte Plaza with a wide offering of retail stores that draw shoppers from both inside and outside the city. However, the City’s retail sector faces continued pressure from ecommerce and the uncertain impacts of the current Covid-19 pandemic.  Daly City can support the long-term sustainability of these centers by adding new residents. Each new resident, from which a higher percent of spending can be captured locally, netting more retail sales than under a situation faced by many other cities where new residents chose to go outside the city for a significant portion of their shopping.

25 APPENDICES
Appendix A: Daly City Office Opportunity Sites
Appendix B: Office Development Case Studies

26 APPENDIX A – DALY CITY OFFICE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES
As has been the case for many years, the incorporated area within the Daly City limits is almost completely built out. According to a vacant land analysis in the City’s Housing Element, as few as 25 acres of privately-owned vacant or underutilized land remain in the City, with most of those being most appropriate for housing uses. BAE sought to identify the potential sites for office development in Daly City likely to be successful in attracting developer interest.

All cities in the San Francisco Bay Area were asked to designate Priority Development Areas (PDAs). These PDAs are transit-oriented, infill development opportunity areas within existing communities that are expected to host the majority of future development. Daly City has two such areas, Bayshore Neighborhood and the Mission BART Corridor, as shown below. Note that the Serramonte Del Rey site is not in a PDA due to its locational attributes.

Figure 9 Daly City Priority Development areas

27 Several sites were transferred to the City from its former redevelopment agency that could offer opportunities for office development that are much closer to BART and better meet the requirements of office users. These include:

Pacific Plaza Phase II and III The Pacific Plaza project is adjacent to Daly City BART. This site is 2.36 acres adjacent to the 2001 Junipero Serra Building. Plans are approved for 270,000 square feet of additional office space and a 200+ room full-service hotel. The City is currently negotiating with developers for these sites for a hotel, an expansion of Duggan Mortuary, and a automobile dealership.

Cow Palace and neighboring sites The City’s General Plan traffic modeling analyzed combining the approximately 70-acre site with 12 acres of adjacent City owned land and 11 acres privately owned property. The City has assumed the ultimate buildout of the three aforementioned properties to include 1,700 new dwelling units in a higher density format and 300,000 square feet of retail/office commercial in a multi-story) format.

SamTrans Park and Ride Lot (3451 Junipero Serra Boulevard). This approximately 12.8-acre site was analyzed as 215,000 square feet of office in the General Plan traffic analysis.

However, it is also under discussion for a residential transit-oriented development, high density project. This property is owned by the San Mateo County Transit District and consists of an existing parking lot that provides daily paid parking for use by patrons to the Colma BART Station.

Daly City BART Station Delong Street Parking Lot (500 John Daly Boulevard). This property is owned by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) and consists of a functioning 263-space parking lot on an 8-acre site just east of the Daly City BART Station. The Daly City BART station area plan envisions residential as the TOD project for this site.

28 APPENDIX B – OFFICE DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES
To assess the Serramonte Del Ray site in the regional context, BAE reviewed the office markets in six other suburban locations to garner insights from both older, traditional suburban office parks and from newer suburban TOD and urban office environments. Three San Francisco Peninsula office markets, competitive with Daly City that have been strongly performing are discussed below. Three San Francisco Bay area suburban office parks, similar to the initial vision of Serramonte Del Rey, that have not been successful are also reviewed.

These cases studies provide perspective to the office development prospects for the subject site potential for a 20+ acre office campus.

Suburban TOD and Urban San Mateo County Class A Office Submarkets

Downtown Redwood City

In 2011, Redwood City adopted the Downtown Precise Plan creating development parameters for 500,000 square feet of new office and 2,500 housing units as well as hotel and retail development. That plan, and the strong economy, has spurred significant office development as shown below. The City first invested in civic improvements to create a new public space, Courtyard Square, and to entitle the plan that allowed for development to proceed. Prior to the implementation of this plan, the last office building built in downtown Redwood City was in 2001. Downtown Redwood City includes historic office and commercial buildings, a theater, and retail offering a walkable, urban experience for downtown office workers.

In 2015, Kilroy Development completed Crossing 900, a two building, 347,000 square foot project on an almost 3-acre site acquired from the City. Box, Inc., a technology company leased the complex. Three additional buildings were completed in 2018, totaling 189,000 square feet and are fully leased. The City is considering recently submitted plans to redevelop Redwood City's Sequoia Station, that include one 17-story office building, three 10-story buildings, two 8-story buildings, and one 7-story building totaling 1,635,000 square feet. If the requisite General Plan and height limit increases are approved, the 17-story building would be the tallest building within Redwood City and the project would more than double the Class A office inventory.

Over the last five years, rents for Class A office space in downtown Redwood City have increased by 42 percent, from $6 monthly per square foot to $8.66. Redwood City now has office rents that can rival Menlo Park as the highest in the County. To note, about 1½ miles from downtown Redwood City, Stanford University has developed the first phase of its 35 acre, Redwood City Campus with four office buildings totaling 570,000 square feet, a 1,057-space parking structure and has plans to grow that facility to 1.5 million square feet and 2,700 employees.

29 Figure 10: Class A Office Redwood City
Bay Meadows and Highway 92 & El Camino This case study focuses on in two areas of San Mateo adjacent to the Hayward Park and Hillsdale Train stations: Bay Meadows and the office parks neighboring the junction of Highway 101 and 92 and El Camino Real. These two neighboring areas represent an interesting comparison. Bay Meadows has been the creation of a new mixed-use district while the area’s older, suburban parks, have transitioned to be more transit and technology tenant focused. The City adopted the San Mateo Rail Corridor Transit Oriented Development Plan in 2005 to guide development in the area and to allow for increased density in a largely built out city. In total, this area now has 2.7 million square feet

30 of Class A office, an increase of 1.1 million square feet since 2015 with an additional 210,000 square feet under construction and 367,000 square feet planned. At the end of 2019, 3.3 percent of the Class A space was vacant.

Bay Meadows - 160+ Acres. The project has been built in phases, with the first phase completed in 2003. The project consists of 82 acres on the former practice track including: an 83,000 square foot neighborhood shopping center anchored by Whole Foods and Crunch fitness, 250,000 square feet of office, 575 apartments, and Franklin Templeton Investments headquarters campus, with 570,000 square feet built by 2003. In 2019, two additional buildings totaling 245,000 square feet completed the build out. When developed in 2001, the Franklin Templeton campus was isolated from other development, as a drive-to, suburban office park.

The second phase of Bay Meadows on 83 acres includes: 1,145 residential units mostly at townhome density, 767,000 square feet of office space, and 93,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. The project includes a private high school that opened in 2014 as one of the first buildings as well as three public parks. The project includes five office buildings, designed for technology companies as single user buildings. Survey Monkey took the first building in 2015. The strong market response to the first buildings at Bay meadows lead the developer to increase the size of the two commercial buildings from 92,000 to 184,000 for Station 1 and 98,000 to 183,000 for Station 5. CoStar reports a monthly asking rent of $6.95 per square foot for the yet to be built Station 5 at Bay Meadows, again reflecting the strong market.

Highway 92 and El Camino. Roughly one million square feet of Class A office was in place in 2003 in the general area near the Hayward Park Caltrain station and the junction of Highway 92 and 101 as well as along El Camino Real. Since 2015, 300,000 square feet have been added and another 400,000 significantly upgraded, resulting in a desirable office location with rents doubling in the last decade. In 2017, Beacon Capital Partners acquired 1825, 1855 and 1875 Grant, mid-rise office buildings built in the mid-1980s and renovated to meet current tenant requirements including adding amenities. While having the visible, auto-oriented location at 101 and 92 and suburban parking area, the property was marketed based on its access to Caltrain. This project, “The Crossroads,” traded in early 2019 for $662 per square foot.

In 2017, Hines completed two new Class A buildings at 400 and 450 Concar totaling 305,000 square feet adding to the existing 200,000 square feet of office in the center. Centrally located near the intersection of U.S. Hwy. 101 and Interstate 92, the highly visible property is directly adjacent to the Hayward Park Caltrain station. In early 2019, 400/450 Concar sold for $1,050 per square foot. Transitioning old commercial centers to apartments has enhanced the creation of a pedestrian scale neighborhood. In 2017, Station Park Green, a TOD project with 35,000 square feet of new retail and 599 rental housing units to the corner of Concar & Delaware replaced former Kmart on the 12-acre site supporting the overall transformation of

31 this area. The City is considering a second 700+ unit residential project on a 14-acre shopping center in this area.

Figure 11: Class A Office San Mateo – Bay Meadows and El Camino & 92 Area

32 South San Francisco, Biotech Cluster. South San Francisco’s transformation to an employment center started earlier than Redwood City or San Mateo. Genetech in 1977 leased former heavy industrial space in South San Francisco and began the process of creating a new industry. The location was near research universities, medical centers, and SFO airport but separate from the residential neighborhoods to allay any concerns about this new industry.

Genetech’s building use is roughly equal parts office space, lab space and manufacturing.

With a series of Master Plans, the City has developed land use controls to foster the growth of Genetech. Genetech has a campus of 4.9 million square feet on over 200 acres and 10,000 employees. Genetech is working with South San Francisco to increase development allowed in their campus to nine million square feet to accommodate an additional 12,000 employees.

Including Genetech, South San Francisco has over 200 biotech companies and over 11.5 million square feet of laboratory, office and manufacturing space already in operation in an area of over 500 acres, as reported by the City. South San Francisco has approved additional three million square feet of lifescience related development that will be built in the next ten years. Recent trends include demolishing older low-rise buildings to build new mid-rise buildings. While not classically transit oriented, this area has ferry access to the East Bay and access to Caltrain and BART. Employers use shuttle buses to access transit and provide commute buses for employees.

REITs are creating new campuses in South San Francisco, investing in the entitlement, infrastructure and beginning construction prior to identifying a tenant. Frequently buildings are leased during construction creating a market dynamic of substantial additions to inventory without increasing vacancy. Additionally, technology companies beyond biotech are choosing South San Francisco, some relocating from San Francisco for lower tax rates and rental rates.

Campuses include amenities to create an attractive work environment and foster social connections.

Key projects include:
 BioMed Realty Trust’s 1.25 million square feet Pacific Gateway campus,  HCP Investment’s 884,000 square feet Britannia Cove campus, under construction  Alexandria’s 291,000 square feet of office/R&D campuses.  Kilroy is constructing 2.5 million square feet of office and open space adjacent to Oyster Point.

South San Francisco differs from Redwood City and San Mateo as it has not included residential uses in the core office parks as the biotech industry preferred separation from residential uses. Instead, South San Francisco has fostered additional housing in its downtown and areas neighboring the Caltrain station, with almost 700 units permitted between 2015 and 2019 and an additional 3,000 housing units in the development pipeline.

33 Figure 12: Class A Office/Lifescience South San Francisco

34 Traditional Suburban Office Parks

At the regional level, tenant preferences for proximity to transit has resulted in many traditional suburban office parks built in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s (without amenities and a variety of mobility options) now experiencing weak leasing and rents. BAE identified three office parks in the Bay Area that were considered Class A development when constructed and initially leased but now face challenges as less favored business locations:

Shadelands Office Park in Walnut Creek, Northgate District in San Rafael, and Marina Village Office Park in Alameda.

Shadelands Office Park, Walnut Creek. This 240-acre office park with approximately 1.3 million square feet is located off of Ygnacio Valley Road. It is approximately 2.4 miles from the Pleasant Hill/Contra Costa Center BART Station and 3.0 miles from the Walnut Creek BART station. Shadelands Office Park was one of the first Class A suburban office parks developed in the Bay Area with most of its construction occurring in the 1970s and 1980s. Originally, this office park attracted a wide range of businesses and nonprofits: from sole proprietors and small businesses in professional services to large anchor corporations, such as Del Monte Foods whose headquarters is still located in Shadelands.

Over time, the office inventory in this park has become dated and is now largely considered Class B and Class C space. Only one building, 2700 Ygnacio Valley Boulevard, offering 107,146 square feet is identified as Class A and it reports a high vacancy at the end of the fourth quarter 2019 (63.4 percent). One major Shadeland’s tenant, the University of California-managed U.S. Department of Energy’s Joint Genome Institute, left its long-time Shadelands facility at the end of 2019 to move to the Berkeley campus to be near its faculty, scientists, and amenities. The district’s tenant base is largely comprised of firms providing medical services. Overall, the district’s vacancy rate is 12.1 percent which is somewhat higher than the seven to ten percent vacancy rate that typically indicates a balanced relationship of supply and demand. Tenants are attracted to the district for its low rents but rents are not high enough to justify new construction. No new office construction has occurred since 2001.

Over the past five years office rents across all three classes in Shadelands have risen by approximately 6.8 percent between the end of the fourth quarter 2015 and the end of the fourth quarter 2019, compared to an overall rise of 35.9 percent for office in the Downtown Walnut Creek generally4. The last reported rate for the Class A office property at 2700 Ygnacio Valley Boulevard is $2.20 monthly per square foot on a full-service basis. This is in contrast to the reported Class A rental rate of $4.27 monthly per square foot for office in downtown Walnut Creek that has a BART station and retail and service amenities. 4 Note that a meaningful change for Class A office cannot be estimated since there is only one building in the Shadelands inventory.

35 Figure 13: Shadelands Office Park, Walnut Creek

36 Northgate/Civic Center District, San Rafael. This district is north of downtown San Rafael along Highway 101 in central Marin County between the Mall at Northgate/Manual T. Freitas Parkway to the south and Lucas Valley Road to the north. This district is comprised of approximately 731,600 square feet office space on over 80 acres (excluding the Mall at Northgate and other retail properties). Access to this district is primarily by automobile although it served by Marin Transit bus service. There is a newly opened SMART commuter train station 0.4 miles to the south of the Mall at Northgate, but to access that station is poor:
one must walk along Merrydale Road around the Mt. Olivet Cemetery and a public storage facility to reach it. The district’s retail is primarily located within the Mall at Northgate but this center is a traditional mall with surrounding parking fields hampering pedestrian access.

The district was built out primarily in the 1960s and 1970s with additional modest construction in the 1980s. Only one new office complex was built in the 1990s and the threebuilding Vineyard Business Center on Redwood Highway was developed in 2004. CoStar reports only one Class A office property, the 130,000 square foot Regency Center at 100 Smith Ranch Road. Overall the district’s vacancy rate is 6.2 percent which is somewhat lower than the seven to ten percent vacancy rate that typically indicates a balanced relationship of supply and demand. In contrast, Class A buildings in Downtown San Rafael had less than a 3 percent vacancy rate at the end of the fourth quarter of 2019. Tenants are attracted to the Northgate district for its low rents but rents are not high enough to justify new construction.

No new office has occurred since 2004.

Over the past five years office rents across all three classes in the Northgate District have risen by approximately 9.4 percent between the end of the fourth quarter 2015 and the end of the fourth quarter 2019, compared to an overall rise of 17.1 percent for Downtown San Rafael office generally5. The last reported rate for the Class A office property at 100 Smith Ranch Road is $3.25 monthly per square foot on a full-service basis. This is in contrast to the reported Class A rental rate of $4.00 monthly per square foot for offices at the Rafael Town Center in downtown San Rafael that has a highly accessible SMART station and downtown retail and service amenities. Bio-Marin, one of Marin County’s largest private employers, has recently received entitlements to expand its office and labs in downtown with a new 207,000 square foot development. A knowledgeable office property owner contacted by BAE confirmed that tenant prospects prefer a downtown San Rafael location. 5 Again, similar to the Shadelands case study, a meaningful change for Class A office cannot be estimated since there is only one building in this district’s Class A inventory.

37 Figure 14: Northgate District, San Rafael

38 Marina Village Office Park, Alameda. The Marina Village Office Park is located in the City of Alameda across the Oakland estuary from Jack London Square and downtown Oakland. It is situated off of Webster Street at the southern end of the Webster and Posey Tubes that connect Alameda to downtown Oakland. The office park is approximately 1.5 miles east of the Alameda Ferry Terminal that links Alameda and downtown Oakland to San Francisco. While this office park is within a half mile the Capitol Corridor Oakland Station and another ferry terminal at Jack London Square, there is no pedestrian or bike access; bus access takes approximately a half hour compared to eight minutes auto.

Marina Village consists of approximately 1.1 million square feet of office and research space that stands on over 200 acres and includes 32 buildings. This office park was developed starting in 1979 and continuing through the 1990s, with the bulk of space constructed during the 1980s. CoStar does not show any of the office properties as Class A office; all are either Class B or C properties. The overall vacancy rate for the district is 18.1 percent as of the end of the fourth quarter 2019, which is significantly higher than the seven to ten percent vacancy rate that typically indicates a balanced relationship of supply and demand. Tenants are attracted to the district for its low rents and the office park is home to many technology companies that have sought less expensive locations as office rents have risen sharply in San Francisco and Oakland. With an average reported rent at $2.82 monthly per square foot at the end of the fourth quarter 2019, rents are not high enough to justify new construction. No new office has occurred since 2001.

Over the past five years office rents across all three classes in the Marina Village have risen by approximately 7.6 percent between the end of the fourth quarter 2015 and the end of the fourth quarter 2019, compared to an overall rise of 71 percent for all classes of office in downtown Oakland.

39 Figure 15: Marina Village Office Park, Alameda

bae urban economics
Fiscal Impact Analysis and Market Study for the
Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Area
Prepared for Jefferson Union High School District and Brookwood Advisors April 16, 2021

bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2560 9
th St., Suite 211 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 1140 3rd St. NE, 2nd Floor 234 5th Ave.

Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20002 New York, NY 10001 510.547.9380 530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486 www.bae1.com
April 16, 2021
Ms. Tina Van Raaphorst
Associate Superindendent
Jefferson Union High School District
Mr. Chris White
Vice President and Development Manager
Brookwood Advisors
Dear Ms. Van Raaphorst and Mr. White:

BAE Urban Economics, Inc. (“BAE”) is pleased to submit this fiscal impact analysis and market study for the proposed Serramonte Del Rey Project in Daly City. We look forward to any comments that the City of Daly City might have and after their receipt we can issue a final report.

Sincerely,
David Shiver Stephanie Hagar, MCP Chelsea Guerrero, MCP Principal Associate Principal Senior Associate

Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................ i FIA Findings ................................................................................................................................... i Market Study Findings ................................................................................................................. ii FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................... 1 Purpose and Background ............................................................................................................1 Project Development Program ....................................................................................................1 General Fund Fiscal Impacts.......................................................................................................3 Summary of Net Fiscal Impact to the City of Daly City General Fund .................................... 15 North County Fire Authority Fiscal Impacts ............................................................................. 16 MARKET STUDY ....................................................................................................................... 17 Site Description and Location .................................................................................................. 17 Daly City Office Market.............................................................................................................. 19 National and Regional Office Trends ....................................................................................... 21 Bay Area Reflects National Office Trends................................................................................ 22 Conclusion Market Feasibility of Class A Office at the Site .................................................... 30 APPENDIX A – DALY CITY OFFICE DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES ................................ 32 APPENDIX B – OFFICE DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES ........................................................... 34

List of Tables
Table 1: Development Program at Buildout.................................................................................... 2 Table 2: Current Daly City Service Population, 2020 ..................................................................... 3 Table 3: Current (2020) Assessed Value of Project Site................................................................ 5 Table 4: Projected Change in Annual Property Tax Revenue at Buildout and Stabilization ........ 7 Table 5: Projected Change in Annual Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee Revenue at Buildout and Stabilization ................................................................................................................ 8 Table 6: Estimated Annual Taxable Expenditures per Resident.................................................... 9 Table 7: Projected Net Change in Annual General Fund Sales Tax Revenue from Resident and Worker Spending at Buildout and Stabilization............................................................................10 Table 8: Projected Change in Annual Business License Tax Revenue at Buildout and Stabilization.....................................................................................................................................12 Table 9: Projected Change in Annual UUT, Franchise Fee, and Fines Revenues at Buildout and Stabilization.....................................................................................................................................13 Table 10: Summary of Net Change in Annual General Fund Revenues at Buildout and Stabilization.....................................................................................................................................13 Table 11: Daly City General Fund Operating Expenditures, FY 2019-20 Budget.......................14 Table 12: City of Daly City General Fund Expenditure Impacts from the Project........................15 Table 13: Annual Net Fiscal Impact to the City of Daly City General Fund .................................16 Table 14: Daly City Office Market Characteristics ........................................................................19 Table 15 San Francisco Peninsula/San Mateo County Office Market.......................................24

List of Figures
Figure 1: Office Location Criteria ..................................................................................................... iii Figure 2: Site Location, Daly City ...................................................................................................18 Figure 3 San Francisco Bay Area Office Development Trends ...................................................23 Figure 4: Existing Class A Office in Northern San Mateo County.................................................24 Figure 5: Class A Office Projects Under Construction, Approved and Proposed.........................25 Figure 6: Class A Office Projects Under Construction, Approved and Proposed.........................26 Figure 7: Summary of Traditional Suburban Office Park Case Studies......................................27 Figure 8: Summary of Suburban TOD and Urban Office Development......................................29 Figure 9: Daly City Priority Development areas.............................................................................32 Figure 10: Class A Office Redwood City.........................................................................................35 Figure 11: Class A Office San Mateo – Bay Meadows and El Camino & 92 Area ......................37 Figure 12: Class A Office/Life Science South San Francisco ......................................................39 Figure 13: Shadelands Office Park, Walnut Creek .......................................................................41 Figure 14: Northgate District, San Rafael .....................................................................................43 Figure 15: Marina Village Office Park, Alameda ...........................................................................45

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Jefferson Union High School District (“JUHSD”) and Brookwood Advisors engaged BAE to prepare both a fiscal analysis of the JUHSD’s proposed Del Rey Precise Plan at 699 Serramonte Boulevard in the City of Daly City, California (“Project”) and a market study that evaluated the level of market support for office/R&D use which is large component of the current permitted use of a 22-acre site that the JUHSD seeks to change to residential use.

The Project would include construction of up to 1,113 residential units (beyond the 122 units currently under construction) and up to 14,000 square feet of community-serving commercial retail space, with a current assumption being 8,000 square feet of retail in the Project. This report first presents the fiscal impact analysis (“FIA”) and the FIA is followed by the market analysis.

FIA Findings
Selected FIA findings are summarized in the following table. In addition to the base scenario, the FIA also evaluates an alternate program that would rely on bond financing as a funding mechanism, which JUHSD is considering for Parcel B. The physical development program would be consistent between both scenarios, with the difference being that the base case program includes 990 market-rate units and 123 affordable units, while the alternate program includes 780 market-rate units and 123 affordable units along with an additional 210 moderate income units on Parcel B.

As shown below, the FIA estimates that both program scenarios would have a positive net fiscal impact on the City of Daly City’s annual General Fund operating budget. The base case program would result in a net positive fiscal impact of nearly $1.3 million per year once the project achieves stabilized occupancy. This net impact is equal to approximately 1.4 percent of the City’s total 2019/20 Fiscal Year Adopted General Fund budget. The alternate program would result in a net positive annual fiscal impact of approximately $822,200, which equates to approximately 0.9 percent of the 2019/20 Fiscal Year Adopted General Fund operating budget.

Currently, the site generates approximately $365,300 ad valorem property tax revenue towards the General Fund with no prospective additional development viable under the site’s existing permitted uses. 1
1 See the Market Study section of this report for an analysis of the market support for the existing permitted office use.

ii
Selected Net Fiscal Impact Findings for the Project at Buildout

Market Study Findings
Based upon a site inspection, neighborhood tour, careful review of market data and evaluation of historic and current office development trends, BAE finds that the JUHSD’s Serramonte Del Rey site is not a competitive location to attract office development. The site has no overall potential for office development whether that is Class A, back office, biotech and/or medical office use undertaken by either commercial developers or corporate end users. This conclusion is based upon the site’s characteristics as well as Daly City’s relative position in the regional economy and San Mateo County office market. Office development has been a permitted use at the site since 1985, yet only one medical office building was built in the ensuing 35 years. If office demand and rents would support developing new buildings, it would have occurred during the multiple real estate market cycles that have occurred since 1985.

BAE based its analysis on real estate market data as of the end of 2019 and market research conducted during February and March of 2020. The economic impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic have been significant and abrupt with short-term reduction of office demand driven by shelter-in-place orders. The long-term impact of the pandemic on the regional office market demand is uncertain and will likely change the regional office market dynamics, both in terms of overall demand and space design, but likely not in a manner that would change the finding that the JUHSD site is not a viable office development location.

JUHSD Site Characteristics
BAE has identified key office location criteria that are used by commercial developers and end users to select sites for office development (see Figure 1, below). These criteria are based upon BAE’s ongoing discussions with commercial developers active in the Peninsula Market and technology company real estate representatives, as well as upon BAE’s recent experience with other commercial projects for public agencies and private parties on the Peninsula. BAE evaluated both the JUHSD site and other alternative locations in the market area against these criteria.

All figures in 2021 dollars
Base Case Alternate
ANNUAL GENERAL FUND IMPACTS Program Program
New Revenues $2,814,031 $2,338,179
New Expenditures ($1,515,933) ($1,515,933)
Net Fiscal Impact $1,298,098 $822,246
See report for explanation of Project, methodology, and limiting conditions.

Source: BAE, 2021. Page 676 of 783

iii
• Critical Mass. At 22 acres, the site lacks the size to accommodate the scale of office development necessary to establish a new successful employment center with a distinct identity. An example of critical mass is South San Francisco’s 500-acre life science district east of Highway 101. This city has continued to strengthen its role as a biotech cluster, adding 1.6 million square feet of new Class A office over the past ten years along with additional new development planned by Genentech, its anchor end user. Other large sites for new office development can be found in San Francisco south of Mission Bay, Redwood City, the Peninsula/Highway 101 Corridor, and potentially elsewhere in Daly City.

Figure 1: Office Location Criteria
Source: BAE, 2020.
• Walkable to BART/Caltrain. Proximity to public transit, in particular BART and Caltrain, is highly desirable to office tenants. While the site is served by Samtrans bus service, it is over two miles from the Colma BART Station, well beyond the typical half-mile that otherwise, everything else being equal, would make the site attractive as a mixed-use, transit-oriented development that is preferred by office tenants. Reflecting market demand for office space near transit, Daly City’s own Class A office inventory is adjacent or near the Daly City BART Station.

iv
• Employment Center. Office businesses like to be near other office businesses –this is an agglomeration effect that is seen throughout the Bay Area. The site is not located in a recognized employment center and it is located in a primarily residential neighborhood with multi-family residential developments defining the northern and southern gateways after exiting Highway 1 to reach Serramonte Boulevard. The site is set back approximately 400 feet south of Highway 1 and a half-mile from Interstate 280. An office project here cannot offer visibility and identity that is often desired by corporate end users and/or tenants.
• Highway 101/Caltrain Corridor. Almost all existing, planned, and proposed Class A office space in the Northern San Mateo County market is located along the Highway 101 and Caltrain corridor. As of the end of 2019, seven million square feet of new office projects were under construction along this portion of the corridor along. An additional 30 million square feet are under construction, entitled, or proposed from Hunters Point and Candlestick Point in San Francisco though the corridor to Menlo Park at the southern end of San Mateo County, reflecting its strong gravitational market pull. The Serramonte Del Rey site is at a distinct disadvantage by not being located on this corridor.
• Authenticity/Placemaking. Commercial office developers and end users increasingly seek locations that offer a sense of urban or small-town authenticity and a mix of uses including office with residential and retail goods and services. The City of Redwood City has successfully leveraged its historic downtown and Caltrain Station to accommodate significant new office (as well as residential) development. The City of San Mateo has successfully guided the redevelopment of the Bay Meadows racetrack as a new attractive location for technology offices, in walkable, transit-oriented locations with new housing. The JUHSD site does not offer the same opportunity for placemaking due to its location away from the BART, or Caltrain stations, or the City’s Top of the Hill commercial district. Daly City itself has opportunities for mixed use office development at its BART Station and other high visibility sites. • Tech Company Appeal/Cool Factor. Developers are building office space to meet the changing office needs of employers. Technology and life science companies in the Bay Area fiercely compete for skilled labor and tend to cluster to make job changes less costly and disruptive to the employee. To be competitive and attract top talent, employers tend to select facilities that provide a ‘cool factor,’ e.g., unique setting, site design, architecture, and package of amenities that are attractive to the Millennial and Generation Z workforce. The JUHSD site is not well suited to be competitive due to its small size, relatively inferior location, and lack of visibility. • No Cap on Office Development. Cities such as San Francisco and Redwood City have adopted legislation that places a cap on office development that serves as a barrier to

v
entry for new office development. The Serramonte Del Rey site has an advantage by its location in Daly City that has no overall city-wide cap of office space. There is no barrier to developing the office space that was entitled for the site in 1985. • Rents Justify New Office Construction? Financial feasibility is driven by the relationship between the rents a developer can charge and the cost to develop their office project.

While office rents have been strong enough to justify new construction along the Highway 101/Caltrain corridor and, potentially at Daly City’s BART Station, the locational disadvantages of the Serramonte Del Rey site would likely result in a project not being able to achieve the rents necessary to support project development costs and provide a market rate of return to investors.

Daly City Office Market Trends
Located outside the Highway 101/Caltrain Corridor, the office sector in Daly City has failed to gain traction over the past few decades despite the presence of two BART stations and City efforts and investment to stimulate Class A office development during the longest economic expansion in U.S. history. This finding is based upon the following observations:
• Daly City has only two Class A office buildings that are located at the Daly City BART Station and together they comprise 438,000 square feet. The Redevelopment Agency project, Pacific Plaza development, is an example of modest success of attracting Class A office space after utilizing its redevelopment tools (including site assemblage and subsidies). However, a recent sale of the property in 2018 was for significantly less that its replacement cost which indicates continued weakness in the Class A sector despite adjacency to a BART station.
• Both Class A buildings changed ownership recently and have experienced increasing occupancy and rents as they benefited from their location in proximity to BART.

However, Daly City recently marketed three sites near the Daly City BART station to the commercial developer community; the City has reported that these sites did not receive interest for office use.
(This space intentionally left blank)

1 FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
This section of the report presents the FIA for the Project.

Purpose and Background
The Project site is a portion of a larger 50-acre site that was entitled for 500,000 to 700,000 square feet of office space and residential uses in 1985. The project would include the redevelopment of a portion of the larger 50-acre site into multifamily residential and ancillary retail uses with a mix of market rate and affordable housing.

Like most new development, the proposed project is expected to increase demands on local government services and infrastructure and generate new revenues for local government through additional taxes and fees. This FIA provides an analysis of the effects that the proposed project will have on the City of Daly City’s revenues and municipal service costs in order to estimate the net fiscal impact that the proposed project would have on the City’s General Fund. Except as otherwise noted in the text, the annual ongoing fiscal impact of the Project is described in constant 2021 dollars, based on the future point in time when the Project would be fully built out and would have achieved stabilized operations.

Project Development Program
The Project analyzed in this FIA would include construction of 1,113 residential units and 8,000 square feet of community-serving commercial retail space. The Project site currently contains 140,000 square feet of existing office, religious, and educational uses. The existing buildings would be demolished as part of the Project.

Table 1 on the next page summarizes the existing uses on the site and the development program for the proposed Project at full buildout. This analysis evaluates the potential fiscal impacts of two alternative development program scenarios. The total amount of development is the same in each scenario with the differences driven by the affordability mix of the residential units. As shown below, the base case program would consist of 123 affordable units and 990 market rate units. The alternate program would provide an additional 210 moderate income units, resulting in a total of 333 affordable units and 780 market rate units at full buildout.

Table 1 also includes assumptions about the anticipated resident population, employment, and service population associated with the Project. Accepted practice in fiscal impact analysis is to define a City’s service population as all residents plus one third of the workers who work within the City. Calculating service population in this way reflects the fact that employees, who generally spend less time in the community than residents, tend to generate a smaller share of

2 demand for services. As shown, the proposed project is anticipated to accommodate 2,752 new residents and 27 employees at full buildout, or a net increase of 2,705 service population members after accounting for the estimated existing employment on the site (167 employees).

Table 1: Development Program at Buildout

Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Residential Units
Affordable Units 123 333
Studio 0 17
1-Bedroom 55 155
2-Bedroom 62 135
3-Bedroom 6 26
Market Rate Units 990 780
Studio 81 64
1-Bedroom 471 371
2-Bedroom 343 270
3-Bedroom 95 75
Total New Residential Units 1,113 1,113
Commercial Square Feet
New Retail Square Feet 8,000 8,000
Existing Office Square Feet (140,000) (140,000)
Net Change in Commercial Square Feet (132,000) (132,000) Service Population
New Residents (a) 2,752 2,752
New Employees (b) 27 27
New Service Population (c) 2,761 2,761
Existing Employees (Estimate) (167) (167)
Existing Service Population (Estimate) (c) (56) (56)
Net Change in Service Population (c) 2,705 2,705
Notes:
(a) Resident population estimate is based on the average number of residents per unit by unit type:

Studio: 1 resident per unit
1-Bedroom: 2 residents per unit
2-Bedroom: 3 residents per unit
3-Bedroom 4 residents per unit
(b) Employee estimate is based on average employment density:
300 square feet per employee
(c) Service population equals the resident population plus a portion of the employee population to reflect the reduced service demand from commercial uses. To estimate service population, each employee is multiplied by: 1/3 Sources: Brookwood Advisors; BAE, 2021. Page 681 of 783

3 General Fund Fiscal Impacts
This section of the FIA summarizes the projected ongoing annual fiscal impacts from the proposed Project. The analysis is focused on Daly City’s General Fund, as this represents the portion of the City’s budget that finances key public services. To pay for these services, the City’s General Fund is dependent on discretionary revenue sources such as property taxes, sales taxes, transient occupancy taxes, and various local fees and taxes. The following sections detail the scope of the analysis and the underlying methodologies and assumptions used to estimate fiscal impacts from the Project.

Fiscal Impact Analysis Methodology
This FIA uses a variety of methods to estimate the projected change in City revenues and service costs that would be associated with the Project. The cost of providing municipal services is often based on the number of persons served, as are some sources of municipal revenues. In general, as the “service population” increases, there is a need to hire additional public safety and other government employees, as well as a need to increase spending on equipment and supply budgets. Some municipal revenues, such as franchise fees and fines, also generally increase as the service population increases. The analysis therefore relies in large part on an average cost and average revenue approach, based on the City’s current costs and revenues per member of the current service population. This approach is based on the key assumption that future development will generate costs and revenues at the same average rate as the existing service population.

As shown in Table 2, the Daly City’s current daytime population consists of 109,142 residents and 22,350 employees, resulting in a service population of 116,592 (100 percent of residents plus one-third of workers). The fiscal impact analysis uses this service population figure to derive current expenditures and revenues per service population member.

Table 2: Current Daly City Service Population, 2020
Daly City 2020
Residents (a) 109,142
Employment (b) 22,350
Service Population (c) 116,592
Notes:
(a) Estimate per CA Dept. of Finance, 2020.
(b) Estimate per Esri.
(c) Service population equals the resident population
plus a portion of the employment population to reflect
reduced demand from commercial uses. To estimate
service population, each employee is multiplied by:
1/3
Sources: California Dept. of Finance; Esri; BAE, 2021. Page 682 of 783

4 While an average revenue approach is appropriate for some revenue sources, the fiscal analysis presented in this report bases projected revenues from most major sources of revenue on statutory requirements and other factors governing each source of revenue. The projections for property tax, property tax in-lieu of vehicle license fees, and sales tax revenue are based on the specific attributes of the proposed project and factors used to allocate revenues from these sources to the City of Daly City. Additional methodological details and assumptions are provided in the discussions of individual cost and revenue projections below.

All cost and revenue projections are expressed in constant 2021 dollars at a future point in time when the Project would be fully built out.

Projected Annual Revenue Impacts
The following subsections provide an overview of the major City General Fund revenue sources that would be impacted by the Project and the estimated revenue that the proposed project would generate from each source. This section also details the assumptions and methodology used to estimate the revenue impacts associated with the Project.

Property Taxes/Possessory Interest Taxes. The property taxes that accrue to a City are a function of the assessed value of real property and the City’s share of the property tax collected for each parcel. Property in California is subject to a base 1.0 percent property tax rate, which is shared among local jurisdictions including the County, City, and special districts.

The State requires that a portion of property tax revenues also be allocated to countywide Education Revenue Augmentation Funds (“ERAF”) to offset state expenditures on local public schools. In addition to the base 1.0 percent tax rate, additional taxes and special assessments apply to most properties to pay for local voter-approved debt or other special purposes. These additional taxes and charges vary by location and are restricted for specific uses. This analysis evaluates impacts to the City’s General Fund operating budget, which receives a share of the base 1.0 percent property tax but does not receive revenue from additional taxes and special assessments.

Table 3 shows the current taxable assessed value of the Project site net of existing property tax exemptions for the nonprofit owner-occupant and the nonprofit tenants on site. The Project site is owned by the JUHSD, which is exempt from property tax. Many of the existing tenants on the site are nonprofit and governmental entities that also qualify for a property tax exemption, and therefore the space that these tenants occupy does not generate any property tax revenue. However, a small number of tenants on the site are not exempt from property tax liability. For these entities, the County Assessor charges possessory interest tax based on the value of each entity’s interest in the site and the property tax that would typically apply to this value. As shown, the current net taxable assessed value of the Project site totaled $2.0 million as of the 2020-2021 tax year.

5 Table 3: Current (2020) Assessed Value of Project Site The JUHSD plans to retain ownership of the Project site and to pursue development of the proposed Project under long-term ground leases. While JUHSD will continue to receive a property tax exemption for the site, any non-exempt uses on the site, including market-rate residential units, will be responsible for paying possessory interest tax in place of a property tax payment. The annual possessory interest tax revenue that would accrue to the City of Daly City will depend on the value of each non-exempt entity’s interest in the site and the property tax split that typically applies to the Project site.

The San Mateo County Assessor determines the value of a possessory interest using three different metrics: (i) the construction cost approach; (ii) the comparables approach; and (iii) the income approach. The construction cost approach values the possessory interest of new improvements based on the construction cost for new development on a site and adds an estimated land value based on comparable land sales to get to a total value for the site. The comparables approach values the possessory interest based on recent sales of similar developments. The income approach values the possessory interest based on the capitalized value of the income that the property generates. The County Assessor could use a combination of these three metrics to determine the value of the possessory interest for the project site. In some cases, the Assessor applies a discount to the value of the possessory interest of property subject to a ground lease because the land and improvements revert back to the property owner at the end of the ground lease. However, the Assessor would likely not apply a reversion in the case of the proposed Project because the site would be offered under a long-term ground lease.

Taxable
Parcel Number Improvements Land Total Value Exemptions Net Value 091-211-230 $0 $1,285,000 $1,285,000 $0 $1,285,000
Unsecured Bill Number
2020-003502 $197,000 $184,152 $381,152 $0 $381,152
2020-004768 $40,000 $40,000 $80,000 $0 $80,000
2020-010959 $8,000 $8,000 $16,000 $0 $16,000
2020-010960 $123,500 $123,500 $247,000 $0 $247,000
2020-007186 $9,000 $9,000 $18,000 $18,000 $0
2020-014485 $29,000 $29,000 $58,000 $58,000 $0
2020-005766 $15,000 $15,000 $30,000 $30,000 $0
2020-004442 $52,000 $52,000 $104,000 $104,000 $0
2020-005261 $7,500 $7,500 $15,000 $15,000 $0
2020-000934 $12,000 $12,000 $24,000 $24,000 $0
2020-002971 $159,500 $159,500 $319,000 $319,000 $0
Total Net Taxable Value (2020) $2,009,152
Note: Excludes assessments for personal property & fixtures Sources: San Mateo County Treasurer-Tax Collector; BAE, 2021.

Assessed Value, 2020

6 Like privately-owned property, possessory interests in California are subject to a 1.0 percent base tax rate on the assessed value, which is shared among various local jurisdictions and special districts. The specific distribution of the base 1.0 percent base tax depends on the tax rate area (TRA) where the property is located. To estimate future property tax revenues resulting from the Project, this analysis estimates the new assessed value that the County assessor would assign to the property and then applies the applicable tax rate.

BAE used rent estimates provided by the applicant and standard development assumptions to estimate the market value of the market rate residential and commercial components of the Project at full buildout and stabilization, based on a capitalized value approach. This analysis assumes that the affordable residential component of the Project would be exempt from possessory interest tax due to the property tax exemption for affordable housing. The estimated valuation is presented in 2021 dollars and is based on the projected net operating income for each use type, using market rental rates provided by the applicant and standard assumptions regarding occupancy, operating expenses, and cap rates. Based on the assumptions shown in Table 4, the estimated assessed market value is approximately $747.7 million for the base case program and approximately $590.1 million for the alternate program.

Based on the City’s share of property tax revenues (18 percent) from the project site, the net change in assessed value at buildout and stabilization after accounting for the existing site net taxable value would result in a net increase of approximately $1.4 million in annual possessory interest tax revenue to the City’s General Fund under the base case program. The alternate program would result in a net increase of approximately $1.1 million at buildout and stabilization. The alternate program would generate less possessory interest tax than the base program because the alternate program has a larger share of affordable units, and thus a larger share of units that are exempt from possessory interest tax. (This space intentionally left blank)

7 Table 4: Projected Change in Annual Property Tax Revenue at Buildout and Stabilization
Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee Revenues. Beginning in FY 2005-2006, the State ceased to provide “backfill” funds to counties and cities in the form of Motor Vehicle In-Lieu Fees (VLF) as it had through FY 2004-2005. As a result of the financial restructuring enacted as part of the State’s budget balancing process, counties and cities now receive revenues from the State in the form of what is known as property tax in-lieu of vehicle license fees, or ILVLF. This State-funded revenue source is tied to a city’s total assessed valuation. In FY 2005-2006, former VLF revenues were swapped for ILVLF revenues, which set the local jurisdiction’s ILVLF “base.” The base increases each year thereafter in proportion to the increase in total assessed valuation within the jurisdiction. For example, if total assessed valuation increases by five percent from one year to the next, the ILVLF base and resulting revenues would increase by five percent.

Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Projected New Assessed Value (a) $747,689,432 $590,055,916 Less: Existing Assessed Value ($2,009,152) ($2,009,152) Net Change in Assessed Value $745,680,280 $588,046,764
1% Property Tax Base $7,456,803 $5,880,468
Net Change in City Property Tax Revenue $1,355,883 $1,069,255 Assumptions
Daly City Share of 1% Property Tax in TRA 05-036 18%
Assessed Value Assumptions Base Case Alternate
Market-Rate Residential
Number of Units 990 780
Average Monthly Rent (b) $4,268 $4,268
Vacancy Rate 5% 5%
Average Annual Expense per Unit $13,000 $13,000
NOI (per unit) $35,655 $35,655
Commercial
NNN Rent (per sq. ft. per year) $36.00 $36.00
Vacancy Rate 5% 5%
NOI (per sq. ft.) $34.20 $34.20
Residential NOI $35,298,648 $27,811,056
Residential Capitalization Rate 4.75% 4.75%
Commercial NOI $273,600 $273,600
Commercial Capitalization Rate 6.00% 6.00%
Estimated Market Value $747,689,432 $590,055,916
Notes:
(a) The estimated market value of the Project is based on the projected net operating income for each use type, using current market rents and standard assumptions regarding occupancy, operating expenses, and cap rates. (b) Average market-rate rent based on an assumed rent equal to $5 per square foot per month, based on information provided by the project applicant.

Sources: San Mateo County Treasurer-Tax Collector; Brookwood Group; BAE, 2021. Page 686 of 783

8 As shown in Table 5, in fiscal year 2015-16 the City received approximately $8.6 million in property tax ILVLF revenue. This amounts to approximately $0.84 per $1,000 in assessed value. Given the projected net change in taxable assessed value associated with each scenario shown below, annual General Fund ILVLF revenues would increase by approximately $629,300 under the base case program and approximately $496,300 under the alternate program.

Table 5: Projected Change in Annual Property Tax In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee Revenue at Buildout and Stabilization
Sales Taxes. The Project would generate sales tax revenue for the City of Daly City as new residents and workers make taxable purchases in Daly City. In addition, the new commercial space that is included in the proposed Project would generate City sales tax revenue to the extent that new and existing workers, residents, and other individuals make taxable purchases at businesses that occupy these spaces. Taxable sales in these new commercial spaces would be supported at least in part by spending among the new residents and workers that are associated with the Project, and therefore this analysis does not include an estimate of sales tax revenue from the new commercial space. In other words, the FIA calculates sales tax revenue from new resident and employee spending and does not separately calculate revenues from new commercial space to avoid double counting these revenues. In addition to avoiding double-counting, this approach is more reasonable than estimating taxable sales from new commercial space because the mix of tenants in future commercial spaces is currently unknown and could include a high share of tenants that generate little or no taxable sales.

Taxable transactions that take place in the City of Daly City are subject to a 9.25-percent sales tax. This total includes the statutory 1.0-percent Bradley-Burns sales tax, of which 95 percent (i.e., 0.95 percent of the sale price) accrues to the City of Daly City while the remaining five percent (i.e., 0.05 percent of the sale price) accrues to San Mateo County. Apart from the City’s share of the Bradley-Burns sales tax, all other sales tax revenues from taxable transactions that take place in Daly City accrue to other governmental agencies, including the State of California.

Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Projected Net Change in Assessed Value $745,680,280 $588,046,764 Net Change in ILVLF Revenue $629,281 $496,254
Assumptions
In-Lieu of Vehicle License Fee (ILVLF) Revenue, FY 2015-16 $8,624,640 Total Citywide Assessed Value, FY 2015-16
ILVLF Revenue per $1,000 in Assessed Value $0.84
Sources: San Mateo County Assessor; BAE, 2021.
$10,219,953,118

9 Taxable Sales from Resident Spending. According to data from the California Department of Tax and Fee Administration shown in Table 6, annual taxable retail sales averaged $10,193 per person in Daly City and $15,812 per person in San Mateo County in 2019. Consistent with this data, the analysis assumes that San Mateo County residents, including residents of Daly City, average approximately $15,812 per person in annual taxable purchases. An evaluation of sales leakage by category suggests that Daly City residents generally leave the City to make at least some purchases in most retail categories, likely due to the limited availability of goods in the City in these categories. Consistent with the City’s capture rates, the analysis assumes that Daly will capture little spending in these high leakage categories. To be conservative, the analysis assumes a maximum capture rate of 85 percent of sales in all categories, with a lower capture rate for those categories with an estimated current capture rate under 85 percent. This results in an estimate that new residents will spend approximately $9,637 per person in taxable expenditures in Daly City each year (see Table 6). This amount provides an estimate of annual average taxable expenditures by Daly City residents at outlets located in Daly City, and is lower than the total taxable sales per capita in Daly City because the total City taxable sales figure includes purchases by people who do not live in Daly City.

Table 6: Estimated Annual Taxable Expenditures per Resident

Sales Estimated Estimated
San Mateo Leakage % of Sales New Sales in
Business Category Daly City County (b) in City (c) Daly City (d) Retail and Food Services
Motor Vehicle and Parts Dealers $1,769 $2,581 -31% 69% $1,769 Home Furnishings and Appliance Stores $328 $1,202 -73% 27% $328 Bldg. Matrl. and Garden Equip. & Supplies $597 $1,389 -57% 43% $597 Food and Beverage Stores $721 $941 -23% 77% $721
Gasoline Stations $1,299 $1,525 -15% 85% $1,299
Clothing and Clothing Accessories Stores $1,542 $1,160 33% 85% $986 General Merchandise Stores $938 $1,706 -45% 55% $938
Food Services and Drinking Places $2,339 $3,167 -26% 74% $2,339 Other Retail (e) $661 $2,140 -69% 31% $661
Total $10,193 $15,812 $9,637
Notes:
(a) 2019 data inflated to 2020 dollars. Population estimates from the CA Department of Finance were used to calculate 2019 per capita sales:

Daly City: 109,710
San Mateo County: 774,231
(b) Retail spending by Daly City residents is assumed to be equal to per capita spending paterns in San Mateo Co.

If fewer dollars per capita are spent in Daly City than in San Mateo County, the analysis assumes the difference leaks out to other retailers in the County. A zero percent leakage indicates that Daly City residents can get all their shopping needs met in the City. Negative figures indicate Daly City receives a net injection, i.e. more sales than are likely attributable to just City residents.
(c) Based on data in column (b); estimates the percentage of resident spending within a category that will occur in Daly City. While zero percent leakage indicates residents could meet their shopping needs within the City, shoppers are still likely to seek goods and services outside of Daly City. To be conservative, the maximum capture has been estimated at 85 percent of taxable sales per resident.
(d) Equals (Taxable Sales per Capita in San Mateo County) x (Estimated % of Residents' Sales in City). Estimates assume the City will capture most or all of new residents' retail spending in categories with low/no leakage and little spending in high leakage categories.

Sources: CA State Dept. of Finance; CA Dept. of Tax and Fee Administration; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; BAE, 2021.

Taxable Sales Per Capita

10 Taxable Sales from Worker Spending. To estimate taxable expenditures made by workers, this analysis uses data from the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) survey of office worker spending. The ICSC survey provides estimates of worker spending near work by store category, including both taxable and non-taxable purchases. The taxable expenditure estimate used in this analysis reflects adjustments to the ICSC survey findings to remove a portion of spending at drug and grocery stores, most of which is typically not subject to sales tax under California State law, as well as all spending on services and entertainment, which is generally not taxable. The analysis makes a conservative assumption that Daly City will capture one-half of the estimated total annual worker spending on taxable purchases. This results in an estimate that workers in Daly City spend an average of approximately $3,074 per year on taxable purchases within Daly City.

Net Change in General Fund Sales Tax Revenue from Resident and Worker Spending. Table 7 shows the estimated net change in total taxable sales from resident and worker spending in Daly City that would be attributable to the proposed Project. As shown, new residents in the Project would spend an estimated $26.5 million per year on taxable purchases in Daly City under both program scenarios. Annual taxable expenditures among workers would decrease by approximately $431,400 due to the net loss in on-site employment following demolition of the existing buildings on-site. Based on the resulting net change in annual taxable sales in Daly City (approximately $26.1 million) and the City’s share of sales tax revenue, annual General Fund sales tax revenue would increase by approximately $247,800 at stabilization.

Table 7: Projected Net Change in Annual General Fund Sales Tax Revenue from Resident and Worker Spending at Buildout and Stabilization Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Resident Spending
Net Change in Residents 2,752 2,752
Per Capita Taxable Sales in Daly City (a) $9,637 $9,637 Net Change in Annual Taxable Resident Spending $26,519,719 $26,519,719 Worker Spending
Net Change in Workers (140) (140)
Taxable Sales in Daly City per Worker (b) $3,074 $3,074 Net Change in Annual Taxable Worker Spending ($431,433) ($431,433) Annual Sales Tax Revenue
Net Change in Annual Citywide Taxable Sales $26,088,287 $26,088,287 Daly City Share of Sales Tax Receipts 0.95% 0.95%
Net Change in General Fund Sales Tax Revenue $247,839 $247,839 Notes:
(a) See Table 6.
(b) Based on data from International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC), Office-Worker Retail Spending in a Digital Age, 2012. Spending estimates were adjusted to 2020 dollars and adjusted to remove non-taxable spending on services and entertainment as well as a portion of spending at drug and grocery stores. Figures assume that retail establishments in Daly City capture 50 percent of total employee spending.

Sources: ICSC, 2012; CA Department of Finance; CA Department of Tax and Fee Administration; BAE, 2021. Page 689 of 783

11 Business License Fees. Business license fees are charged to businesses operating in the City at varying rates based on the type of business. Most businesses, including retail outlets and commercial/office rental properties, are charged at a rate of $1.10 per every $1,000 in annual gross receipts. Residential rental properties pay fees equal to $5.50 per every $1,000 in annual gross receipts. Qualifying non-profits are exempt from paying business license taxes.

BAE relied on rental rate data provided by the applicant to estimate the total annual gross receipts from the market-rate rental apartments and commercial property included in the Project. An average sales per square foot assumption was used to estimate the annual gross receipts tax that would be paid by the new retail tenants occupying the new commercial space.

The analysis assumes that existing uses on the project site generate little or no business license tax revenue because the site is owned by a nonprofit entity and most tenants are nonprofit entities. Based on these assumptions shown in Table 8, the base case program is projected to result a net increase of approximately $268,700 in annual business license tax revenue at stabilization. Although the alternate program is expected to generate less business license tax revenue due to the fewer number of market-rate rental units, the projected net change in annual business license tax revenue is still significant, exceeding $212,500 annually at stabilization.
(This space intentionally left blank)

12 Table 8: Projected Change in Annual Business License Tax Revenue at Buildout and Stabilization
Other Revenues. According to the FY 2019-20 Adopted Budget, the City generates approximately six percent of General Fund revenues from Utility User Tax (“UUT”), five percent of General Fund revenues from franchise fees, and four percent of General Fund revenues from fines and forfeitures. All of these revenue sources tend to increase as the City’s service population grows. UUT revenues are generated from the usage of gas, electricity, telephone and cable television services and are primarily dependent on service population. Franchise fees are generally set as a percentage of gross receipts and increase as expenditures on utilities, such as gas and electricity, increase. Fine revenues are primarily collected by the Police Department from parking and traffic citations and would be expected to increase as the residential base of the City grows. As shown in Table 9, General Fund revenues from these three sources combined totaled approximately $13.5 million in FY 2019-20, or $115.44 per member of the service population. Assuming a commensurate increase in the amount of Base Case Alternate
Program Program
New Business License Tax Revenue $268,749 $212,552
Market-Rate Apartments $264,928 $208,731
Commercial Leases $301 $301
New Retail Establishments $3,520 $3,520
Existing Business License Tax Revenue N/A (a) N/A (a)
Net Change in Business License Tax Revenue $268,749 $212,552 Assumptions
Business License Tax Schedule (tax per $1,000 in total gross receipts) General Businesses $1.10
Residential Rental Property $5.50
Commercial/Office Leases $1.10
Base Case Alternate
Est. Total Annual Gross Receipts - Rental Apartments
Number of New Market-Rate Rental Units 990 780
Weighted Average Monthly Rent per Unit (b) $4,268 $4,268 Vacancy Adjustment 5% 5%
Est. Total Annual Gross Receipts from Rental Apartments $48,168,648 $37,951,056 Est. Total Annual Gross Receipts - Commercial Leases
New Commercial Square Feet 8,000 8,000
NNN Rent (per sq. ft. per year) (b) $36.00 $36.00
Vacancy Adjustment 5% 5%
Est. Total Annual Gross Receipts from Commercial Leases $273,600 $273,600 Est. Total Annual Gross Receipts - New Retail Establishments New Commercial Square Feet 8,000 8,000
Annual Sales per Square Feet $400 $400
Est. Total Annual Gross Receipts from New Retail Establishments $3,200,000 $3,200,000 Notes:
(a) This analysis assumes that the project site currently generates little or no business license tax revenue because the site is owned by a nonprofit entity and most tenants are nonprofit entities. (b) Commercial and market-rate apartment rents are based on information provided by the project applicant. Apartment rents assume an average rent equal to $5 per square foot per month.

Sources: City of Daly City; Brookwood Advisors; BAE, 2021. Page 691 of 783

13 revenue collected each year, the Project would generate additional revenues of approximately $312,300 per year at buildout and stabilization under both scenarios.

Table 9: Projected Change in Annual UUT, Franchise Fee, and Fines Revenues at Buildout and Stabilization

Summary of Annually Recurring General Fund Revenues
As shown in Table 10, the base case program would result in a net increase of approximately $2.8 million in annual General Fund revenues to the City of Daly City at buildout and stabilization. The total annual General Fund revenue attributable to the alternate program is estimated to total $2.3 million. Most of these revenues would be from property tax and property tax in lieu of vehicle license fees. Revenues from sales tax, franchise fees, and fines would make up approximately 29 percent of the total under the base case program and approximately 33 percent of the total under the alternate program.

Table 10: Summary of Net Change in Annual General Fund Revenues at Buildout and Stabilization
Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Net Change in Service Population from Project (a) 2,705 2,705 Annual Revenue per Service Population $115.44 $115.44
Net Change in UUT, Franchise Fee, and Fines Revenue $312,280 $312,280 Assumptions FY 2019-20
Annual UUT Revenue $5,753,754
Annual Franchise Fee Revenue $4,236,246
Annual Fines and Forfeitures Revenue $3,468,904
Total Annual Revenue $13,458,904
Citywide Service Population (a) 116,592
Annual Revenue per Service Population $115.44
Note:
(a) Service population equals the resident population plus one-third of the employee population.

Sources: City of Daly City; BAE, 2021.

Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Property Tax $1,355,883 $1,069,255
ILVLF $629,281 $496,254
Sales Tax $247,839 $247,839
Business License $268,749 $212,552
UUT, Franchise Fees, and Fines $312,280 $312,280
Total General Fund Revenue $2,814,031 $2,338,179
Source: BAE, 2021. Page 692 of 783

14 Projected Annual Service Cost Impacts
As the City’s service population increases, the City typically needs to increase General Fund expenditures in order to maintain existing levels of service, with some exceptions for General Fund expenditures that tend to be relatively fixed and do not need to increase to respond to changes in the service population. To estimate the costs that would likely increase as the service population increases, BAE analyzed the City’s budgeted General Fund expenditures from the 2019/2020 Fiscal Year adopted budget. Adjustments were made to deduct the portion of costs that would not be expected to be impacted by the proposed Project. The analysis also accounts for the charges for service and other department revenues that offset variable costs in each department. Table 11 shows the resulting estimated variable costs, net of these adjustments and offsetting revenues. As shown, the City’s net variable costs currently total an estimated $560.37 annually per member of the service population. This means that the City would need to add $560.37 to its annual budget for each new member of the service population (i.e., $560.37 per resident and $186.79 per worker) to maintain current levels of service.

Table 11: Daly City General Fund Operating Expenditures, FY 2019-20 Budget Table 12 applies the current net variable costs per member of the service population to the service population associated with the Project to estimate the General Fund expenditure impacts associated with the Project. The projected expenditures account for increases in ongoing operating costs (e.g., salaries), but do not account for any one-time capital General Fund
FY 2019-20 Less: Net % Variable Net Variable Expenditures General Fund Offsetting Gen. Fund Due to General Fund per Service General Fund Expenditures Revenue (a) Expenditures Growth (b) Expend. (c) Population (d) General Government
City Council $263,230 $0 $263,230 10% $26,323 $0.23
City Clerk $542,879 ($120,025) $422,854 10% $42,285 $0.36 City Attorney $1,115,955 $0 $1,115,955 10% $111,596 $0.96 City Manager $1,881,254 ($164,607) $1,716,647 10% $171,665 $1.47 City Treasurer $48,585 $0 $48,585 10% $4,859 $0.04
Econ. & Community Dev. $4,110,198 ($3,635,564) $474,634 10% $47,463 $0.41 Finance & Admin Svcs $2,605,581 ($17,600) $2,587,981 10% $258,798 $2.22 Fire $21,214,159 ($1,537,497) $19,676,662 95% $18,692,829 $160.33 Human Resources $1,127,030 $0 $1,127,030 10% $112,703 $0.97 Library & Recreation $10,673,211 ($1,680,279) $8,992,932 90% $8,093,639 $69.42 Police $36,873,842 ($554,681) $36,319,161 95% $34,503,203 $295.93 Public Works $4,137,945 ($724,356) $3,413,589 80% $2,730,871 $23.42 Non-Departmental $5,699,001 ($311,553) $5,387,448 10% $538,745 $4.62 Total Expenditures $90,292,870 $81,546,708 $65,334,978 $560.37 Notes:
(a) Some expenditures are directly recovered through charges for services, license fees, and permit fees. (b) Assumes that a percentage of costs will not be impacted by growth; variable costs are assumed to increase as the service population increases.
(c) Expenditures less departmental revenue less fixed costs. (d) Service population equals the resident population plus one-third of the employee population. 2020 Citywide service population: 116,592
Sources: Daly City FY 2019-20 Operating Budget; BAE, 2021. ($8,746,162)

15 improvements that would be necessary to serve the Project. As shown, the base program and alternate program would both increase the City’s total annual General Fund expenditures by approximately $1.5 million, which equates to approximately 1.7 percent of the total FY 2019- 20 Adopted Budget General Fund operating budget. Police Department expenses account for roughly one-half of the total net increase in expenditures associated with the Project. Fire department expenditures account for approximately 29 percent of the total new costs.2 Table 12: City of Daly City General Fund Expenditure Impacts from the Project Summary of Net Fiscal Impact to the City of Daly City General Fund Table 13 summarizes the annual recurring net General Fund fiscal impact of the Project at full build out and stabilized occupancy in 2021 dollars. As shown, both programs would generate a positive net fiscal impact at buildout and stabilization. The base case program would increase the City’s annual General Fund revenues by approximately $2.8 million and increase the City’s annual General Fund expenditures by approximately $1.5 million, resulting in a net positive fiscal impact of almost $1.3 million per year once the project achieves stabilized occupancy. This net impact is equal to approximately 1.4 percent of the City’s total 2019/20 Fiscal Year Adopted General Fund budget. The alternate program would result in a net positive annual fiscal impact of approximately $822,000, which equates to approximately 0.9 percent of the 2019/20 Fiscal Year Adopted General Fund operating budget. The alternate program 2 The following page discusses impacts to the North County Fire Authority in more detail.

General Fund
Expenditures
per Service
General Fund Population (a) Total (b) % of Total Total (b) % of Total General Government
City Council $0.23 $611 0.0% $611 0.0%
City Clerk $0.36 $981 0.1% $981 0.1%
City Attorney $0.96 $2,589 0.2% $2,589 0.2%
City Manager $1.47 $3,983 0.3% $3,983 0.3%
City Treasurer $0.04 $113 0.0% $113 0.0%
Economic & Community Dev. $0.41 $1,101 0.1% $1,101 0.1% Finance & Admin Services $2.22 $6,005 0.4% $6,005 0.4%
Fire $160.33 $433,720 28.6% $433,720 28.6%
Human Resources $0.97 $2,615 0.2% $2,615 0.2%
Library & Recreation $69.42 $187,792 12.4% $187,792 12.4% Police $295.93 $800,559 52.8% $800,559 52.8%
Public Works $23.42 $63,363 4.2% $63,363 4.2%
Non-Departmental $4.62 $12,500 0.8% $12,500 0.8%
Total Expenditures $560.37 $1,515,933 100% $1,515,933 100% Notes:
(a) See Table 11.
(b) Equal to net General Fund operating expenditures per service population multiplied by the net new service population associated with the proposed Project.

Sources: Daly City FY 2019-20 Operating Budget; BAE, 2021.

Base Case Program Alternate Program

16 has a lower net positive fiscal impact only because it provides a larger number of affordable units, which results in a larger share of the units being eligible for a property tax exemption and a business license tax exemption.

Table 13: Annual Net Fiscal Impact to the City of Daly City General Fund North County Fire Authority Fiscal Impacts
The North County Fire Authority is a Joint Powers Authority that was established in 2003 to provide joint management, administration, and training for the fire department personnel in the cities of Brisbane, Daly City, and Pacifica. The Authority was established to provide more efficient and cost-effective fire services to member cities and better utilize available resources.

The range and levels of services provided by the Authority are determined at the local level by each individual member agency. Each City is responsible for providing the financial and other resources needed to provide fire services within its own jurisdiction. Currently there are five fire stations located in the City of Daly City. The project site is located within Station 94’s primary response area. Although the Project is anticipated to increase the demand for fire services in Daly City, the overall fiscal impact to the Authority from the Project would be neutral because the City of Daly City would be responsible for covering any additional costs needed to maintain levels of service. Therefore, the additional cost for fire services due to the Project would be borne by the City, rather than the Fire Authority. As shown in Table 12 of this report, the City’s costs to provide fire services to the Project would total an estimated $435,000 per year, which would be paid to the Fire Authority to offset the additional cost for fire services attributable to the Project.

Base Case Alternate
Program Program
Total General Fund Revenue $2,814,031 $2,338,179
Property Tax $1,355,883 $1,069,255
ILVLF $629,281 $496,254
Sales Tax $247,839 $247,839
Business License $268,749 $212,552
UUT, Franchise Fees, and Fines $312,280 $312,280
Total General Fund Expenditures ($1,515,933) ($1,515,933) General Government ($8,277) ($8,277)
Economic & Community Dev. ($1,101) ($1,101)
Finance & Admin Services ($6,005) ($6,005)
Fire ($433,720) ($433,720)
Human Resources ($2,615) ($2,615)
Library & Recreation ($187,792) ($187,792)
Police ($800,559) ($800,559)
Public Works ($63,363) ($63,363)
Non-Departmental ($12,500) ($12,500)
Net Fiscal Impact $1,298,098 $822,246
Source: BAE, 2021. Page 695 of 783

17 MARKET STUDY
The proposed Project would change the existing permitted office use to a higher number of permitted residential units with limited retail commercial use. This section of the report presents an evaluation of the level of market support for the existing permitted office use since it represents a significant use under the site’s existing entitlements.

Site Description and Location
Daly City Location
The Site is located within Daly City, the largest city in San Mateo County with a population of 109,122. The American Community Survey by the Census for 2018, identified 64,871 Daly City residents in the labor force. Of those, almost one third worked in Daly City. The City has a significant retail and commercial tax and employment base with two major shopping centers.

Site Location and Adjacent Uses
Within the Serramonte neighborhood of Daly City, the Site is situated in the northern portion of the Precise Plan area, bounded by Serramonte Boulevard, Callan Boulevard, Hickey Boulevard and St. Francis Boulevard. (See Figure 2 on next page). It has a sloped topography and existing groves of evergreen trees creating a buffer from the neighboring uses. To the east is the Chinese Cemetery, to the north medium density apartment complexes, and to the west, single-family homes. To the south are medium density apartments and medical office uses.

Generally framed by Interstate 280 and State Routes 35 and 1, the Serramonte neighborhood of Daly City was developed in the late 1960s and early 1970s as a residential neighborhood with commercial uses near Interstate 280. The Serramonte Plaza shopping center is a successful 1.1 million square foot regional shopping center, which expanded by 250,000 square feet in 2018 and is currently undergoing additional redevelopment. While the Site is within walking distance of the Serramonte Plaza and easily accessed from the neighboring highways, it is over 2 miles from a BART station.
1985 Precise Plan
In 1985, Daly City adopted the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan (“Precise Plan”) that delineated land uses for the 50-acre site owned by JUHSD and ground leased to a real estate developer, Southwest Diversified. The Precise Plan permitted a phased, mixed-use project on the 30 developable acres with between 200 to 575 housing units and between 740,000 and

1.2 million square feet of office space. Several parcels were designated to be either office or residential. Three to twelve story buildings are allowed in the Precise Plan. In January 2020, Daly City revised the Precise Plan to include the JUHSD faculty and staff housing project at the northwest corner of the Serramonte Del Rey site.

18 Development and Leasing History
The underlying concept when the Precise Plan was adopted in 1985 to create a first-class office park that could attract build-to-suit corporate tenants seeking office space at larger floor plates and lower prices than could be found in San Francisco. An apartment complex, Serramonte Ridge, was developed in 1987 on 9.6 acres and has 396 units in six three-story buildings. One office building of 76,000 square feet, 901 Campus Drive, was built in the Precise Plan area in 1990 on 2.77 acres and is leased for medical uses. The initial developer constructed the apartments and the 901 Campus Drive office building but did not exercise their option to develop the second phase on the northern portion of the site. In the intervening decades, JUHSD closed the high school, moved in its district offices, and leased space to a mix of tenants.

Figure 2: Site Location, Daly City

More recently, 2.7 acres were leased to a charter high school that opened in 2019, on a site designated for office use. Under construction now are 122 units of housing for employees of JUHSD on 3.9 acres at the northwest corner of the plan area.

19 The analysis below addresses the remaining development capacity of the site identified for as much as 700,000 square feet of office.

Daly City Office Market
Overall Daly City Office Market
Daly City has an inventory of approximately 1.5 million square feet of office space in 81 office buildings, according to data obtained from the CoStar Group, a national real estate market data provider. The 16 buildings larger than 20,000 square feet. include 1.2 million square feet as shown in Table 14 below. Medical office buildings account for a significant amount of Daly City’s office inventory, including those which are part of the Seton Hospital Campus and the Kaiser Medical Office building at 395 Hickey Blvd, built in 2002. The office building at the site, 901 Campus Drive, a three-story, 75,000 square foot Class B office building, was built in 1990. It is a medical office building anchored by the Palo Alto Medical Foundation and Campus Surgery Center. The building was 80 percent occupied as of the end of 2019. It sold in June 2018 for $30 million, or $395 per square foot, which is significantly less than the replacement cost (currently over $800 or more per square foot for Type I construction) Table 14: Daly City Office Market Characteristics
Source: CoStar, BAE 2020
Note that the 2100 Junipero Serra building, built in 2001, and the Kaiser facility built, in 2002, are the newest office buildings in Daly City. Although Daly City has relatively low office vacancy rates, no new office is proposed as the rents are not high enough to support new construction.

Current proposed projects in Daly City only include very modest amounts of office space included in mixed-use projects. Appendix A provides a discussion of the opportunity sites in Daly City that could be developed for office uses.

Vacancy 3-4-2020 Vacancy 3-4-2020
Sq.ft. # Sq.ft. % Sq.ft. # Sq.ft. %
General Office
Class A 438,173 2 43,280 10% 438,173 2 43,280 10%
Class B 202,477 8 4,861 2% 181,121 5 4,861 3%
Class C 218,517 33 5,062 2% 40,910 2 - 0%
Subtotal 859,167 43 53,203 6% 660,204 9 48,141 7%
Medical Office
Class B 398,494 7 28,487 7% 362,378 4 26,918 7%
Class C 228,116 11 - 0% 176,981 3 - 0%
Subtotal 626,610 18 28,487 5% 539,359 7 26,918 5%
Total 1,485,777 61 81,690 5% 1,199,563 16 75,059 6%
All Buildings Buildings < 20,000 sq.ft.

20 Daly City Class A Office Market
There are two Class A office buildings in Daly City3, both located on Junipero Serra near the Daly City BART Station. The following is a brief summary of these two properties. 2171 Junipero Serra Boulevard, a seven-story, 55,000 square foot building completed 1989 that is one half mile from the Daly City BART station and has visibility from Highway 280 as well as ocean views. It was the first high-rise built in Daly City and, in 1990, the City purchased a 51 percent share of the building to avoid default by the developers. The City held that ownership stake for over a decade. The building traded for $24 million in 2016, a value of $436 per square foot., significantly less than costs of new construction. In 2017, almost 13,000 square feet were vacant, a 23% vacancy rate. The new ownership upgraded the building and substantially increased occupancy. At the present, there are no suites advertised to lease and rental rates are not available.
2001 Junipero Serra Boulevard, a nine-story, 383,000 square foot building that was built in 2001 with direct access to the Daly City BART station. As of March 2020, this building is 91 percent occupied with 43,000 square feet. available for lease at an asking rate of $4.65 per square foot per month on a full-service basis. This building was part of a significant redevelopment project, Pacific Plaza, by the City of Daly City. Pacific Plaza included land acquisition and sale to a developer at a cost less than the City’s cost for the land to create a first-class office building in Daly City.

Situated off Interstate 280 and adjacent to the Daly City BART Station, the building offers large floor plates, views, and 1,753 parking spaces. The multi-tenant building is anchored by the global headquarters of Genesys, a contact center technology provider (with jobs reported in the range of 250 to 499 in Daly City). Other tenants include Kome Japanese Seafood & Grill Buffet, Bank of America, Subway and Satellite Healthcare. This was developed as a mixed-use retail and office investment including a retail and multi-plex movie theater. This property sold in 2018 for $114.5 million, or $299 per square foot. a cost much less than replacement costs (currently over $800 per square foot for Type I construction) reflecting both the need to renovate and the separation of the retail and office projects. This sale also indicates how a Class A office property has struggled in one of the City’s best locations near a BART Station, strongly suggesting that office at the Site would be extremely difficult to realize.

Other Development Trends in Daly City
Daly City is experiencing real estate development in sectors other than office. Retail center expansions and several new hotels have been approved in the last several years. Daly City 3 CoStar shows the Serramonte Business Center, at 455 Hickey Boulevard as Class A. BAE’s assessment is that this building is Class B due to the location and quality of improvements. The building was originally built in 1982 as a single user building for First Nationwide Bank data processing functions which relocated from Daly City in 1990.

21 has also seen a series of residential projects, many with over 300 units, under construction, including the JUHSD project adjacent to the Site and another 2,300 units approved by the City but not yet under construction. Serramonte Plaza received City approvals in 2018 to build 65,000 square feet of medical office buildings as part of master plan upgrade for the entire center. The owner has developed the first phase of its retail expansion and has second phase under development but has not yet moved forward with the office portions of the project. It should be noted that in today’s market, many medical providers prefer locations in shopping centers since they offer access and visibility on high traffic arterials which would give the Serramonte Plaza a decided advantage over the JUHSD site for this use.

National and Regional Office Trends
Office Trends in the 1980s
During the 1980s, the national trend was for new office development to locate in suburban office parks designed for ease of auto accessibility in contrast to the historic trend to concentrate office development in Central Business District. The preferred suburban location was close to residential neighborhoods with high-end executive housing and direct access to major freeways and highways. Buildings were primarily two to three stories and situated in the center of large surface parking fields. In the Bay Area, large suburban office parks were constructed in Marin County, South San Francisco, Brisbane, Walnut Creek, San Ramon, Pleasanton, Concord, Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Redwood City, San Jose, and elsewhere along the Highway 101, Interstate 680, and Interstate 580 corridors.

Even at that time, not all suburban locations were suitable for office development. In an office market study prepared in 1991 for San Mateo County, the City of Daly City, and the San Mateo Transit District as part of the BART Colma Station Specific Plan (adopted in 1994), BAE found that demand for Class A office space in the vicinity of the Colma BART Station would be weak and that land designated for new Class A office space could be undeveloped between ten and twenty years given location factors and then-market conditions4. In fact, the SamTrans Park and Ride site at the Colma Station, entitled in 1993 for over 200,000 square feet of office, remains undeveloped in 2020 and is under consideration for residential uses.

San Francisco, which had previously been the locus of corporate offices, saw increasing rents and new restrictions on office development in the 1980s. Suburban office development followed the labor force as corporations moved out of San Francisco (e.g. Chevron to Bishop Ranch) and new tech companies created identity campuses (e.g. Autodesk in Marin, Sun Microsystems in Menlo Park) in suburban locations. Universities also were a driver of 4 See County of San Mateo, City of Daly City, San Mateo County Transit District, Office Market Feasibility Study:

Colma BART Station Specific Plan/EIR, prepared by BAE Urban Economics, October 1991.

22 development, in particular Stanford Industrial park which is home to many technology companies.

At the time that the Serramonte Del Rey site was planned as an apartment and office campus, the developer was targeting similar office users to those drawn to the East Bay office parks, however there was no development interest beyond the first medical office building at the Serramonte Del Ray site and Phase II office development never materialized. The project site was not as competitive at attracting office uses as the substantially larger scale sites in the Eastbay with their more favorable development environments, including better weather and better freeway access to a large pool of white-collar and executive labor. During this same period, subsidies were required to develop and sustain the two Class A office projects located near the Daly City BART station in the 1980s.

Current Office Market Trends
Since the 1980s and 1990s, the national office market has undergone a remarkable transformation that has resulted in many suburban office parks struggling to retain tenants and maintain rents commensurate with Class A properties. Driving these changes to the office sector was a shift in corporate location preferences, employee lifestyle preferences, and workspace design. Office workers increasingly demonstrate a preference for workplace locations that offer proximity to public transportation, bicycle and pedestrian access, attractive retail and service offerings, and entertainment options. In response to this shift in preferences among workers, companies are seeking office locations that offer urban-style amenities rather than traditional, auto-oriented suburban office parks that offer fewer transit options and urban lifestyle amenities.

Bay Area Reflects National Office Trends
These trends can be observed in the Bay Area, especially where San Francisco and San Jose have seen intensification of office development in the last decade. Between those two regional centers, new office development is clustering along the Highway 101 and Caltrain corridors from San Francisco’s Mission Bay district to downtown San Jose. The Highway 101 corridor and parallel Caltrain line together have a strong gravitational pull for technology, finance, and life-science businesses. New office deliveries and office properties with the highest rents are typically located in this corridor. Many Peninsula cities have downtown Caltrain stops, have retained their authentic town character and offer retail and service amenities in a walkable setting.

San Francisco Peninsula/San Mateo County Class A Office Trends Genentech’s choice of South San Francisco in the 1970s spurred the development of one of the largest office/R&D markets outside of the region’s core cities of San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland. Business location decisions throughout the recent economic expansion have transformed the Highway 101 corridor in San Mateo County with major employment centers

23 emerging with clusters of Class A office and life-science development, in Brisbane, Burlingame, Foster City, San Bruno, San Mateo, and Redwood City.

Figure 3 San Francisco Bay Area Office Development Trends Source: BAE, 2020.

Table 2, on the next page, summarizes the Class A office market in San Mateo County and the southern portions of San Francisco. Figure 4 shows the seven million square feet of Class A space existing in Northern San Mateo County. The strength of South San Francisco’s growth is shown in the fact that in the past ten years, all of new Class A office and life-science space constructed in Northern San Mateo County has been in South San Francisco. Figure 5 shows the 16 million of additional projects are under construction, entitled and proposed along the Highway 101 corridor in Northern San Mateo county.

Connecting the San Francisco and San Jose economies, Caltrain stations have emerged as attractive locations for new Class A office and life-science development. Peninsula cities are building up, near transit stations, creating density of jobs and housing opportunities. Looking forward, Hunters Point, Candlestick Park, Brisbane, South San Francisco, and San Carlos each have significant unbuilt, entitled properties for additional office and life-science uses in large scale office park settings that will continue to out-complete locations within Daly City. In total, these sites include 30 million square feet either under construction as of the end of 2019 or in the development pipeline, shown in Figure 6.

24 Table 15 San Francisco Peninsula/San Mateo County Office Market Millions of Building Square Feet
(a) Genetech's proposed master plan change to allow 4 million additional square feet is not included. (b) includes City of Burlingame, City of San Mateo, and the Foster City/Redwood City Shores submarket. (c) Includes City of Menlo Park, City of Redwood City, and the Belmont/San Carlos submarket. (d) San Francisco has approved projects at Candlestick and Hunters Point that allow office and R&D product.

Source: CoStar, local planning departments, BAE 2020.

Figure 4: Existing Class A Office in Northern San Mateo County All Existing Buildings –7 Million Square Feet Built 2010 to 2019 1.6 Million Square Feet Source: CoStar, BAE 2020.

Existing
12/2019
Under
Construction
Planned/
Proposed
Daly City 0.4 - -
Milbrae - 0.2 0.2
San Bruno 0.3 - 2.4
South San Francisco 5.7 3.3 3.0 (a)
Brisbane 0.8 0.6 6.5
North San Mateo County 7.2 4.0 12.2
Central San Mateo County (b) 10.6 1.4 0.6
South San Mateo County (c) 6.1 1.6 11.0

13.3 5.7 23.2
Southern San Francisco (d) 2.8
Total 23.9 7.1 26.6 Page 703 of 783

25 Figure 5: Class A Office Projects Under Construction, Approved and Proposed Northern San Mateo County, 16 Million square feet

Source: CoStar, BAE 2020

26 Figure 6: Class A Office Projects Under Construction, Approved and Proposed San Mateo County, Candlestick, and Hunter’s Point, 30 Million square feet

Source: CoStar, BAE 2020

27 Case Studies – Traditional Suburban vs Suburban TOD and Urban Environments To better understand why the Serramonte Del Rey site has failed to realize the 1985 plan of corporate office campus, BAE reviewed six office development case studies. Three are suburban, single-use office parks built when the 1985 Precise Plan was conceived. In contrast, BAE reviewed three San Mateo County environments that are currently attracting new office development and rapidly urbanizing around transit. Appendix B presents discussion of all six markets and this review substantiates BAE’s assessment that office development is not supported at the Site.

Suburban Environments
The suburban, single use office parks reviewed were Shadelands in Walnut Creek, Marina Village in Alameda, and the Northgate district in San Rafael. Figure 7 summarizes the case studies.

Figure 7: Summary of Traditional Suburban Office Park Case Studies Source: BAE, 2020.

Several key observations can be made from the suburban office park case studies:
• All three suburban office parks had significantly more site acreage than the JUHSD Site, which supported an initial critical mass of office space when developed. • Developers in all three parks developed Class A office space. The market now classifies all but two of the office properties as Class B or Class C, indicating that either the design and functionality of the buildings fell out of favor with tenants or that

28 property owners did not find it financially feasible to reinvest in their properties to maintain a Class A product.
• Office development was automobile centric with surface parking lots located around office buildings. All three have inferior access to public transportation and office employees generally have to drive to patronize retail and services in the area, which is counter to the current national trend of locating new office in urban, transit-oriented locations.
• Rent growth over the past five years has been less than ten percent across the three office parks, a rate of growth that significantly lower than rental increases for properties in stronger markets such as the downtowns of Walnut Creek, Oakland, and San Rafael and the Highway 101 corridor on the Peninsula in San Mateo County. • The three case study office parks did not experience any new office development over close to two business cycles, including the recent 10-year recovery from the Great Recession, reflecting a shift in preference by office tenants to other locations with more amenities and access to public transit and where prevailing rents support new construction which provides highly functional Class A product. • Overall, the 1985 Precise Plan for the Site was formulated to permit an office park with the same locational profile as these traditional suburban office parks that are currently struggling in the market.

(This space intentionally left blank)

29 San Mateo County Suburban TOD and Urban Office Development Three San Mateo County transit-oriented locations were considered as a contrast to the office envisioned with the Serramonte del Rey Precise Plan. These three locations are downtown Redwood City, San Mateo near the Hillsdale and Hayward Park Caltrain Stations, and South San Francisco’s biotech/technology campuses. The success of these markets is summarized in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Summary of Suburban TOD and Urban Office Development Source: BAE, 2020.

BAE’s overall findings related to the review of Suburban TOD and urban office developments in San Mateo County are:
• Competition for workers drives companies to prioritize locating Class A office in urban, transit-oriented locations. Millennial and Generation Z workers do not typically want to drive and prefer public transit or other alternative forms of mobility (walking, biking, and ridesharing).

30 • A significant concentration of office space and business activity is needed in one location to create agglomeration economics needed to create an industrial cluster such as bio-tech, which requires much larger land area than the 22 acres available at the JUSHD site.
• New development is occurring at densities significantly above the classic one-to-three story suburban office. Buildings built between 2015 and 2019 have ranged from four to ten stories in height and the proposed projects continue, and in some cases accelerate, the trend to mid-rise buildings. Bay Meadows in San Mateo has termed itself “mid-urban,” a position between central business district urban and a traditional suburban campus.
• Increasing highway congestion has made transit access and neighboring housing a significant priority for businesses.
• Redwood City and the San Mateo locations include significant place-making with significant housing and retail creating a 24-7 destination.

Conclusion Market Feasibility of Class A Office at the Site After review of the overall office development trends, Daly City office building performance, and the recent and planned office development in sites competitive with JUHSD’s Serramonte Del Rey site, BAE concludes that it is not suitable for office development. Since 1985, developers have chosen to invest in other locations including cases where significant entitlement process were required.

Today, office market users seek the following location attributes:
• Walkable to high-performing transit including BART and Caltrain. • Accessible to highways and offering visible locations for branding. • Authentic locations with retail, restaurants, and entertainment fostering an urbane experience.
• Technology and biotech companies tend to cluster together. It takes significant place making, such as the Bay Meadows experience to create a new location. • Locational factors are critical to attracting talent so that companies are willing to pay premium rents for locations that meet their workforce priorities.

As the costs of development are similar across San Francisco Peninsula locations, developers will build where they anticipate the highest rents and the least risk to lease up a project.

Developers, seeking to meet the end user requirements, also seek out either sites that are big

31 enough to create a vibrant mixed-use environment or infill sites situated within an already active business district. As Redwood City’s downtown plan and the Bay Meadows plan demonstrate, cities can create entitlement frameworks to foster office development, yet the underlying economic growth and user location preferences drive the timing. The Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan experience shows that entitling office uses is not sufficient to draw development if the site does not meet current user requirements.

Across the greater market, there are substantial development opportunities that will continue to out compete the JUHSD site, including Daly City sites near or adjacent to the Daly City BART Station, including sites near BART in Daly City.

32 APPENDIX A – DALY CITY OFFICE

DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITY SITES
As has been the case for many years, the incorporated area within the Daly City limits is almost completely built out. According to a vacant land analysis in the City’s Housing Element, as few as 25 acres of privately-owned vacant or underutilized land remain in the City, with most of those being most appropriate for housing uses. BAE sought to identify the potential sites for office development in Daly City likely to be successful in attracting developer interest.

All cities in the San Francisco Bay Area were asked to designate Priority Development Areas (PDAs). These PDAs are transit-oriented, infill development opportunity areas within existing communities that are expected to host the majority of future development. Daly City has two such areas, Bayshore Neighborhood and the Mission BART Corridor, as shown below. Note that the Serramonte Del Rey site is not in a PDA due to its locational attributes.

Figure 9: Daly City Priority Development areas

33 Several sites were transferred to the City from its former redevelopment agency that could offer opportunities for office development that are much closer to BART and better meet the requirements of office users. These include:

Pacific Plaza Phase II and III. The Pacific Plaza project is adjacent to Daly City BART. This site is 2.36 acres adjacent to the 2001 Junipero Serra Building. Plans are approved for 270,000 square feet of additional office space and a 200+ room full-service hotel. The City is currently negotiating with developers for these sites for a hotel, an expansion of Duggan Mortuary, and a automobile dealership.

Cow Palace and neighboring sites. The City’s General Plan traffic modeling analyzed combining the approximately 70-acre site with 12 acres of adjacent City owned land and 11 acres privately owned property. The City has assumed the ultimate buildout of the three aforementioned properties to include 1,700 new dwelling units in a higher density format and 300,000 square feet of retail/office commercial in a multi-story) format.

SamTrans Park and Ride Lot (3451 Junipero Serra Boulevard). This approximately 12.8-acre site was analyzed as 215,000 square feet of office in the General Plan traffic analysis.

However, it is also under discussion for a residential transit-oriented development, high density project. This property is owned by the San Mateo County Transit District and consists of an existing parking lot that provides daily paid parking for use by patrons to the Colma BART Station.

Daly City BART Station Delong Street Parking Lot (500 John Daly Boulevard). This property is owned by the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) and consists of a functioning 263-space parking lot on an 8-acre site just east of the Daly City BART Station. The Daly City BART station area plan envisions residential as the TOD project for this site.

34 APPENDIX B – OFFICE DEVELOPMENT CASE

STUDIES
To assess the Serramonte Del Ray site in the regional context, BAE reviewed the office markets in six other suburban locations to garner insights from both older, traditional suburban office parks and from newer suburban TOD and urban office environments. Three San Francisco Peninsula office markets, competitive with Daly City that have been strongly performing are discussed below. Three San Francisco Bay area suburban office parks, similar to the initial vision of Serramonte Del Rey, that have not been successful are also reviewed.

These cases studies provide perspective to the office development prospects for the subject site potential for a 20+ acre office campus.

Suburban TOD and Urban San Mateo County Class A Office Submarkets

Downtown Redwood City
In 2011, Redwood City adopted the Downtown Precise Plan creating development parameters for 500,000 square feet of new office and 2,500 housing units as well as hotel and retail development. That plan, and the strong economy, has spurred significant office development as shown below. The City first invested in civic improvements to create a new public space, Courtyard Square, and to entitle the plan that allowed for development to proceed. Prior to the implementation of this plan, the last office building built in downtown Redwood City was in 2001. Downtown Redwood City includes historic office and commercial buildings, a theater, and retail offering a walkable, urban experience for downtown office workers.

In 2015, Kilroy Development completed Crossing 900, a two building, 347,000 square foot project on an almost 3-acre site acquired from the City. Box, Inc., a technology company leased the complex. Three additional buildings were completed in 2018, totaling 189,000 square feet and are fully leased. The City is considering recently submitted plans to redevelop Redwood City's Sequoia Station, that include one 17-story office building, three 10-story buildings, two 8-story buildings, and one 7-story building totaling 1,635,000 square feet. If the requisite General Plan and height limit increases are approved, the 17-story building would be the tallest building within Redwood City and the project would more than double the Class A office inventory.

Over the last five years, rents for Class A office space in downtown Redwood City have increased by 42 percent, from $6 monthly per square foot to $8.66. Redwood City now has office rents that can rival Menlo Park as the highest in the County. To note, about 1½ miles from downtown Redwood City, Stanford University has developed the first phase of its 35 acre, Redwood City Campus with four office buildings totaling 570,000 square feet, a 1,057-space parking structure and has plans to grow that facility to 1.5 million square feet and 2,700 employees.

35 Figure 10: Class A Office Redwood City
Bay Meadows and Highway 92 & El Camino This case study focuses on in two areas of San Mateo adjacent to the Hayward Park and Hillsdale Train stations: Bay Meadows and the office parks neighboring the junction of Highway 101 and 92 and El Camino Real. These two neighboring areas represent an interesting comparison. Bay Meadows has been the creation of a new mixed-use district while the area’s older, suburban parks, have transitioned to be more transit and technology tenant focused. The City adopted the San Mateo Rail Corridor Redwood City, CA
No Class
42% chan
72% of C
536,000 s
Office Market Performance Metrics
Office Class A Summary, Q4 2019 Redwood City Downtown Average Office Class A Rents (PSF), 2015 - 2019 Number of Buildings 8 Year Redwood City Downtown
Inventory (sf) 744,361 2015 (Q4) (a) $6.09
Vacant (sf) 0 2016 (Q4) $7.12
Vacancy Rate 0.0% 2017 (Q4) $7.68
Avg Gross Asking Rent (psf) (a) $8.66 2018 (Q4) $8.49
2019 (Q4) $8.66
Under Construction, Q4 2019
Buildings Under Construction 3 % Change 2015-2019 42.2% Under Construction Inventory (sf) 178,268
Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020.

New Deliveries (sf), Q1 2015 - Q4 2019 536,485
Note:
(a) Asking rents reflect direct gross leases. 4Q2015 rent is a sublease rent, as there were not direct leases, that quarter Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020.

District Description
Key Trends

0.7 million sq. ft. office inventory
No Class Vacancy as of 4Q2019
$8.66 monthly/ per sq. ft. Class A Rent
42% change in rents 2015-2019
72% of Class is new since 2015
536,000 sq.ft.

Downtown Redwood City is
between El Camino and 101
and includes the San Mateo
County offices. Redwood
City Caltrain Station offers
access to San Francisco and
San Jose. 2011 Precise Plan
guides development.

36 Transit Oriented Development Plan in 2005 to guide development in the area and to allow for increased density in a largely built out city. In total, this area now has 2.7 million square feet of Class A office, an increase of 1.1 million square feet since 2015 with an additional 210,000 square feet under construction and 367,000 square feet planned. At the end of 2019, 3.3 percent of the Class A space was vacant.

Bay Meadows - 160+ Acres. The project has been built in phases, with the first phase completed in 2003. The project consists of 82 acres on the former practice track including: an 83,000 square foot neighborhood shopping center anchored by Whole Foods and Crunch fitness, 250,000 square feet of office, 575 apartments, and Franklin Templeton Investments headquarters campus, with 570,000 square feet built by 2003. In 2019, two additional buildings totaling 245,000 square feet completed the build out. When developed in 2001, the Franklin Templeton campus was isolated from other development, as a drive-to, suburban office park.

The second phase of Bay Meadows on 83 acres includes: 1,145 residential units mostly at townhome density, 767,000 square feet of office space, and 93,000 square feet of retail and restaurant space. The project includes a private high school that opened in 2014 as one of the first buildings as well as three public parks. The project includes five office buildings, designed for technology companies as single user buildings. Survey Monkey took the first building in 2015. The strong market response to the first buildings at Bay meadows lead the developer to increase the size of the two commercial buildings from 92,000 to 184,000 for Station 1 and 98,000 to 183,000 for Station 5. CoStar reports a monthly asking rent of $6.95 per square foot for the yet to be built Station 5 at Bay Meadows, again reflecting the strong market.

Highway 92 and El Camino. Roughly one million square feet of Class A office was in place in 2003 in the general area near the Hayward Park Caltrain station and the junction of Highway 92 and 101 as well as along El Camino Real. Since 2015, 300,000 square feet have been added and another 400,000 significantly upgraded, resulting in a desirable office location with rents doubling in the last decade. In 2017, Beacon Capital Partners acquired 1825, 1855 and 1875 Grant, mid-rise office buildings built in the mid-1980s and renovated to meet current tenant requirements including adding amenities. While having the visible, auto-oriented location at 101 and 92 and suburban parking area, the property was marketed based on its access to Caltrain. This project, “The Crossroads,” traded in early 2019 for $662 per square foot.

In 2017, Hines completed two new Class A buildings at 400 and 450 Concar totaling 305,000 square feet adding to the existing 200,000 square feet of office in the center. Centrally located near the intersection of U.S. Hwy. 101 and Interstate 92, the highly visible property is directly adjacent to the Hayward Park Caltrain station. In early 2019, 400/450 Concar sold for $1,050 per square foot. Transitioning old commercial centers to apartments has enhanced the creation of a pedestrian scale neighborhood. In 2017, Station Park Green, a TOD project

37 with 35,000 square feet of new retail and 599 rental housing units to the corner of Concar & Delaware replaced former Kmart on the 12-acre site supporting the overall transformation of this area. The City is considering a second 700+ unit residential project on a 14-acre shopping center in this area.

Figure 11: Class A Office San Mateo – Bay Meadows and El Camino & 92 Area San Mateo, CA -- Bay Meadows and El Camino & 92
Key Trends

2.7 million sq

5.9% change
40% of Class

1.1 million sq
Office Market Performance Metrics
Office Class A Summary, Q4 2019 Average Office Class A Rents (PSF), 2015 - 2019 Bay Meadows/
El Caminio & 92 Year
Bay Meadows/
El Caminio & 92
Number of Buildings 21 2015 (Q4) $5.07
Inventory (sf) 2,667,704 2016 (Q4) $4.62
Vacant (sf) 88,121 2017 (Q4) $5.21
Vacancy Rate 3.3% 2018 (Q4) $5.18
Avg Gross Asking Rent (psf) (a) $5.37 2019 (Q4) $5.37
Under Construction, Q4 2019 % Change 2015-2019 5.9%
Buildings Under Construction 4
Under Construction Inventory (sf) 209,860 Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020.

New Deliveries (sf), Q1 2015 - Q4 2019 1,122,745
Note:
(a) Asking rents reflect direct gross leases. CoStar data is not complete on rents for the newly constructed buildings. (b) CoStar data increased to include the full Franklin Templeton office campus of over 750,000 sq. ft.

Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020.

Market Description
Key Trends

2.7 million sq. ft. office inventory

3.3% Class A Vacancy as of 4Q2019
$8.66 monthly/ per sq. ft. Class A Rent

5.9% change in rents 2015-2019
40% of Class A is new since 2015

1.1 million sq.ft. built since 2015
Proximity to the Hayward Park and
Hillsdale Caltrain stations has fostered
office development. Bay Meadows
project has created new office complex
with significant amenties and access to
Caltrain as well as housing and retail.

Office parks along 92 have seen
renovation and new buildings with the
addition of TOD housing. Franklin Templeton HQ

38 South San Francisco, Biotech Cluster. South San Francisco’s transformation to an employment center started earlier than Redwood City or San Mateo. Genetech in 1977 leased former heavy industrial space in South San Francisco and began the process of creating a new industry. The location was near research universities, medical centers, and SFO airport but separate from the residential neighborhoods to allay any concerns about this new industry.

Genetech’s building use is roughly equal parts office space, lab space and manufacturing.

With a series of Master Plans, the City has developed land use controls to foster the growth of Genetech. Genetech has a campus of 4.9 million square feet on over 200 acres and 10,000 employees. Genetech is working with South San Francisco to increase development allowed in their campus to nine million square feet to accommodate an additional 12,000 employees.

Including Genetech, South San Francisco has over 200 biotech companies and over 11.5 million square feet of laboratory, office and manufacturing space already in operation in an area of over 500 acres, as reported by the City. South San Francisco has approved additional three million square feet of life science related development that will be built in the next ten years. Recent trends include demolishing older low-rise buildings to build new mid-rise buildings. While not classically transit oriented, this area has ferry access to the East Bay and access to Caltrain and BART. Employers use shuttle buses to access transit and provide commute buses for employees.

REITs are creating new campuses in South San Francisco, investing in the entitlement, infrastructure and beginning construction prior to identifying a tenant. Frequently buildings are leased during construction creating a market dynamic of substantial additions to inventory without increasing vacancy. Additionally, technology companies beyond biotech are choosing South San Francisco, some relocating from San Francisco for lower tax rates and rental rates.

Campuses include amenities to create an attractive work environment and foster social connections.

Key projects include:
• BioMed Realty Trust’s 1.25 million square feet Pacific Gateway campus, • HCP Investment’s 884,000 square feet Britannia Cove campus, under construction • Alexandria’s 291,000 square feet of office/R&D campuses. • Kilroy is constructing 2.5 million square feet of office and open space adjacent to Oyster Point.

South San Francisco differs from Redwood City and San Mateo as it has not included residential uses in the core office parks as the biotech industry preferred separation from residential uses. Instead, South San Francisco has fostered additional housing in its downtown and areas neighboring the Caltrain station, with almost 700 units permitted between 2015 and 2019 and an additional 3,000 housing units in the development pipeline.

39 Figure 12: Class A Office/Life Science South San Francisco

South San Francisco, CA Market Description
Key Trends

5.8 million sq. ft. office inventory

4.9% Vacancy as of 4Q2019
26% increase in office rents
42% change in R&D rents
51% of Class is new since 2015
Over 500 acres with 15 campus
for biotech/life science and
technology companies. Newer
developments are mid-rise
construction included two
building on the west side of
101. 3 million square feet is
under construction and another
3 million is proposed.

Office Class A Summary, Q4 2019 (a) South San Francisco Average Office Class A Rents (PSF), 2015 - 2019 (b) Number of Buildings 33 Class A
Inventory (sf) 5,688,694 Year Office -- FS R&D -- NNN
Vacant (sf) 271,162 2015 (Q4) $3.56 $3.50
Vacancy Rate 4.8% 2016 (Q4) $4.32 $2.75
2017 (Q4) $5.35 $4.59
2018 (Q4) $5.07 $5.34
Under Construction, Q4 2019 2019 (Q4) $4.50 $4.99
Buildings Under Construction 7
Under Construction Inventory (sf) 2,977,728 % Change 2015-2019 26.4% 42.6% New Deliveries (sf), Q1 2015 - Q4 2019 1,611,768
(a) Includes Class A office buildings larger than 50,000 square feet. Biotech business are also in Class B and C buildings and R&D/industrial space; thus other metrics of the overall size of the biotech sector are larger for South San Francisco. (b) Rents are as reported by Colliers as the CoStar database did not include sufficient information.

Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020. Page 718 of 783

40 Traditional Suburban Office Parks

At the regional level, tenant preferences for proximity to transit has resulted in many traditional suburban office parks built in the 1970s, 1980s, and 1990s (without amenities and a variety of mobility options) now experiencing weak leasing and rents. BAE identified three office parks in the Bay Area that were considered Class A development when constructed and initially leased but now face challenges as less favored business locations:

Shadelands Office Park in Walnut Creek, Northgate District in San Rafael, and Marina Village Office Park in Alameda.

Shadelands Office Park, Walnut Creek. This 240-acre office park with approximately 1.3 million square feet is located off of Ygnacio Valley Road. It is approximately 2.4 miles from the Pleasant Hill/Contra Costa Center BART Station and 3.0 miles from the Walnut Creek BART station. Shadelands Office Park was one of the first Class A suburban office parks developed in the Bay Area with most of its construction occurring in the 1970s and 1980s. Originally, this office park attracted a wide range of businesses and nonprofits: from sole proprietors and small businesses in professional services to large anchor corporations, such as Del Monte Foods whose headquarters is still located in Shadelands.

Over time, the office inventory in this park has become dated and is now largely considered Class B and Class C space. Only one building, 2700 Ygnacio Valley Boulevard, offering 107,146 square feet is identified as Class A and it reports a high vacancy at the end of the fourth quarter 2019 (63.4 percent). One major Shadeland’s tenant, the University of California-managed U.S. Department of Energy’s Joint Genome Institute, left its long-time Shadelands facility at the end of 2019 to move to the Berkeley campus to be near its faculty, scientists, and amenities. The district’s tenant base is largely comprised of firms providing medical services. Overall, the district’s vacancy rate is 12.1 percent which is somewhat higher than the seven to ten percent vacancy rate that typically indicates a balanced relationship of supply and demand. Tenants are attracted to the district for its low rents but rents are not high enough to justify new construction. No new office construction has occurred since 2001.

Over the past five years office rents across all three classes in Shadelands have risen by approximately 6.8 percent between the end of the fourth quarter 2015 and the end of the fourth quarter 2019, compared to an overall rise of 35.9 percent for office in the Downtown Walnut Creek generally5. The last reported rate for the Class A office property at 2700 Ygnacio Valley Boulevard is $2.20 monthly per square foot on a full-service basis. This is in contrast to the reported Class A rental rate of $4.27 monthly per square foot for office in downtown Walnut Creek that has a BART station and retail and service amenities. 5 Note that a meaningful change for Class A office cannot be estimated since there is only one building in the Shadelands inventory.

41 Figure 13: Shadelands Office Park, Walnut Creek

Shadelands Business Park, Walnut Creek
District Description Key Trends
Shadelands Business Park is located in the 1.3 million sq. ft. office inventory northwestern part of Walnut Creek. It is approximately 12.1% vacancy rate

2.4 miles from the Pleasant Hill/Contra Costa Center $2.03 monthly/ per sq. ft. asking rent - All classes BART and approximately 3 miles from the Walnut Creek 6.8% change in rents 2015-2019 BART. No new construction since 2001
Shadelands Business Park, Walnut Creek
Summary, Q4 2019 Class A Classes A, B, C
Number of Buildings 1 45
Inventory (sf) 107,146 1,322,739
Vacant (sf) 67,940 159,797
Vacancy Rate 63.4% 12.1%
Avg Gross Asking Rent (psf) (a) - $2.03
Note:
(a) Asking rents reflect direct gross leases.

Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020.

Office Building Class
Average Office Rents (PSF), 2015 - 2019
Year Class A Classes A, B, C
2015 (Q4) $1.85 $1.90
2016 (Q4) $2.25 $2.01
2017 (Q4) $2.25 $2.10
2018 (Q4) $2.20 $2.07
2019 (Q4) - $2.03
% Change
2015-19 NA 6.8%
Sources: CoStar, 2020; BAE, 2020.

Shadelands Business Park

42 Northgate/Civic Center District, San Rafael. This district is north of downtown San Rafael along Highway 101 in central Marin County between the Mall at Northgate/Manual T. Freitas Parkway to the south and Lucas Valley Road to the north. This district is comprised of approximately 731,600 square feet office space on over 80 acres (excluding the Mall at Northgate and other retail properties). Access to this district is primarily by automobile although it served by Marin Transit bus service. There is a newly opened SMART commuter train station 0.4 miles to the south of the Mall at Northgate, but to access that station is poor:
one must walk along Merrydale Road around the Mt. Olivet Cemetery and a public storage facility to reach it. The district’s retail is primarily located within the Mall at Northgate but this center is a traditional mall with surrounding parking fields hampering pedestrian access.

The district was built out primarily in the 1960s and 1970s with additional modest construction in the 1980s. Only one new office complex was built in the 1990s and the threebuilding Vineyard Business Center on Redwood Highway was developed in 2004. CoStar reports only one Class A office property, the 130,000 square foot Regency Center at 100 Smith Ranch Road. Overall the district’s vacancy rate is 6.2 percent which is somewhat lower than the seven to ten percent vacancy rate that typically indicates a balanced relationship of supply and demand. In contrast, Class A buildings in Downtown San Rafael had less than a 3 percent vacancy rate at the end of the fourth quarter of 2019. Tenants are attracted to the Northgate district for its low rents but rents are not high enough to justify new construction.

No new office has occurred since 2004.

Over the past five years office rents across all three classes in the Northgate District have risen by approximately 9.4 percent between the end of the fourth quarter 2015 and the end of the fourth quarter 2019, compared to an overall rise of 17.1 percent for Downtown San Rafael office generally6. The last reported rate for the Class A office property at 100 Smith Ranch Road is $3.25 monthly per square foot on a full-service basis. This is in contrast to the reported Class A rental rate of $4.00 monthly per square foot for offices at the Rafael Town Center in downtown San Rafael that has a highly accessible SMART station and downtown retail and service amenities. Bio-Marin, one of Marin County’s largest private employers, has recently received entitlements to expand its office and labs in downtown with a new 207,000 square foot development. A knowledgeable office property owner contacted by BAE confirmed that tenant prospects prefer a downtown San Rafael location. 6 Again, similar to the Shadelands case study, a meaningful change for Class A office cannot be estimated since there is only one building in this district’s Class A inventory.

43 Figure 14: Northgate District, San Rafael

44 Marina Village Office Park, Alameda. The Marina Village Office Park is located in the City of Alameda across the Oakland estuary from Jack London Square and downtown Oakland. It is situated off of Webster Street at the southern end of the Webster and Posey Tubes that connect Alameda to downtown Oakland. The office park is approximately 1.5 miles east of the Alameda Ferry Terminal that links Alameda and downtown Oakland to San Francisco. While this office park is within a half mile the Capitol Corridor Oakland Station and another ferry terminal at Jack London Square, there is no pedestrian or bike access; bus access takes approximately a half hour compared to eight minutes auto.

Marina Village consists of approximately 1.1 million square feet of office and research space that stands on over 200 acres and includes 32 buildings. This office park was developed starting in 1979 and continuing through the 1990s, with the bulk of space constructed during the 1980s. CoStar does not show any of the office properties as Class A office; all are either Class B or C properties. The overall vacancy rate for the district is 18.1 percent as of the end of the fourth quarter 2019, which is significantly higher than the seven to ten percent vacancy rate that typically indicates a balanced relationship of supply and demand. Tenants are attracted to the district for its low rents and the office park is home to many technology companies that have sought less expensive locations as office rents have risen sharply in San Francisco and Oakland. With an average reported rent at $2.82 monthly per square foot at the end of the fourth quarter 2019, rents are not high enough to justify new construction. No new office has occurred since 2001.

Over the past five years office rents across all three classes in the Marina Village have risen by approximately 7.6 percent between the end of the fourth quarter 2015 and the end of the fourth quarter 2019, compared to an overall rise of 71 percent for all classes of office in downtown Oakland.

45 Figure 15: Marina Village Office Park, Alameda

City Council Meeting Agenda Report Item # _____
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
Subject: Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street Recommended Action
Approve the Use Permit, subject to the Findings and Conditions as outlined herein.

Planning Commission Discussion
On December 7, 2021, the Planning Commission voted 4-0-1 (Commissioner Crump absent) to recommend that the City Council approve Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101. Planning Commission discussion topics are identified in bold highlighting in this staff report. Since the Planning Commission reviewed the project, the applicant has requested, and staff has agreed, to amend the Condition of Approval to remove requirements related to pedestrian street lighting, tree grates, and painting transformers and other electrical equipment. Staff has agreed to the removal of these requirements to achieve consistency with the public improvements recently required of other developments in the area and because on-site parking lot luminaries should be sufficient to light the City sidewalk. The Public Works Department has is also recommending removal of Condition of Approval #20 because the traffic memo has been found acceptable.

Background
The applicant, Dan Tealdi, requests approval to construct a 32-post charging station for Tesla electric vehicles at the northwest corner of Bryant Street and Washington (see Attachment A –Site Location).

In 2015, the applicant received approval to construct a 27-unit mixed-use apartment building on the

0.35-acre site, but the project was never built. At the time, the applicant amended the Sullivan Corridor Specific Plan designation for the parcel from Residential Retail Commercial (C-R/R) to Retail and Office Commercial (C-R/O), to permit the apartment project at the proposed density. The applicant has indicted that he now believes the approved project is not feasible to build. Staff has determined that the proposed charging facility requires a use permit.  Commission Villanueva asked if the property needs to be rezoned to allow the charging station. Staff responded that it does not.

Project Overview
The proposed project is a 32-post electric vehicle “supercharger” facility intended for Tesla electric vehicles only. The facility would occupy the entire 0.35-acre property and vehicular access to the site would be provided at Bryant Street (no Washington Avenue access is provided). Vehicles would access the site via the more northerly Bryant Street curb-cut on the site and exit the curb cut closer to the Washington/Bryant intersection.

City Council Agenda Report Page 2 of 7
Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street January 10, 2022 Physically, the facility would consist of a parking lot with 32 charging spaces (two spaces would meet accessibility requirements), a charging post for each space, electric cabinets, a transformer, parking lot lighting, and landscaping (see Attachment B – Project Plans). There are no structures proposed.

Tesla vehicles would access the site 24-hours per day, 365 days per year. To provide an understanding of the way the charging facility could impact adjacent streets, the City required a traffic analysis as part of the use permit submittal (see Attachment C – Traffic Study). According to the study, “Superchargers are designed for long distance travelers to charge their vehicles quickly. Depending on vehicle models, the next supercharger station on the travel route, and demand and utilization of the supercharger station, the Tesla user interface or app recommends which station to use and the charging time at the station. Typical charging time ranges from 15 to 25 minutes. Superchargers are designed for fast charging and, therefore, should only be used for as long as it takes to charge a vehicle. To increase supercharger availability, if a vehicle parks at a supercharger after a charging session is complete, idle fees are charged to the fully charged vehicle.” Because the Tesla user interface inside the vehicle would tell the driver the number of open superchargers at a particular station and direct the driver to the next available station if the Bryant location was full, the traffic study has determined that the project would not cause an adverse effect on traffic operations at the adjacent intersections.

Sullivan Corridor Specific Plan
The proposed charging facility is in the Sullivan Corridor Specific Plan Area. The Specific Plan was adopted in October 1998 as a means to plan for the expansion of the Daly City Civic Center and to revitalize the commercial areas with the plan’s geographic area. As such, the plan articulates development parameters, including land uses and development intensities, for the plan area. As discussed previously, the City Council approved an amendment to the Specific Plan designation for the property in 2015 from Residential Retail Commercial (C-R/R) to the Retail and Office Commercial (C-R/O).

Although the Specific Plan does not identify the proposed use, staff has determined that because similar automotive uses are allowed, e.g., drive-through facilities and automotive dealerships, the proposed use is also permissible. Because these automotive uses require a use permit, a use permit is also required for the proposed charging facility.

Use Permit
The applicant is required to obtain a use permit under the Sullivan Corridor Specific Plan to operate the proposed charging facility. The use permit provides the City Council the ability to determine whether a particular land use proposal would be suitable to existing and planned adjacent land uses.

The proposed electric vehicle charging facility would likely draw vehicles from Interstate 280 and other parts of Daly City via Junipero Serra Boulevard and Washington Boulevard east of the project site. As the facility is situated on the corner of Bryant Street and Washington Avenue, vehicular travel through the adjacent neighborhood is not required. While adjacent residential uses exist across

City Council Agenda Report Page 3 of 7
Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street January 10, 2022 Bryant Street and Washington Avenue, immediately adjacent parcels contain non-residential uses – a church to the west and pet hospital to the north.

Because the proposed parking lot involves zero-emission vehicles, the odor, exhaust, and noise normally associated with a parking lot for automobiles would not be present. It is anticipated that most of the drivers arriving at the site for vehicle charging would sit in their car while charging or visit nearby restaurants on Sullivan Avenue. Staff has identified light and glare as a potential impact and has required that the applicant provide shielded luminaires that prevents light from directly shining on adjacent property.
 Commissioner Proaño asked if the proposed supercharger was like a gasoline station and would be the time a vehicle necessary for a vehicle to receive a full charge Tessa Sanchez, representing Tesla, applicant responded that the charger is similar to a gasoline station and that the time required to recharge depends on the type of vehicle, but generally between 15 to 45 minutes.
 Commissioner Proaño asked about the potential for lighting impacts on adjacent residents.

Staff responded that a Condition of Approval had been added to address the potential for glare on adjacent residents.
 Commissioner Proaño asked if the supercharger provided bathroom facilities. Staff responded that it would not provide bathrooms and that none of the charging stations in Daly City, Tesla and non-Tesla, provided bathrooms.
 Commissioner Satorre asked about the potential for fire associated with the charging station and how safety would be monitored on the site. Jia Liu, representing Tesla, responded that Tesla provides 800 numbers for users of the facility and that the service functioned similar to a 911 service in terms of staffing reliability.  An adjacent resident asked about the impact to her health of the electromagnetic field and home prices associated with the facility. Staff responded that there were no known impacts associated with the electromagnetic fields from charging stations and that there were no analyses that had been conducted with regard to the impact on adjacent home prices.

Regional Housing Need Allocation
The City Council should note that the subject site is currently identified as a potential housing site in the City’s Housing Element, providing 27 housing units meeting the City’s current Regional Housing Need Allocation (RHNA) of 1,350 units for the 2014-2022 planning period. Although the subject site was (and still is) zoned for non-residential land uses, it was included in the RHNA because the property owner had expressed an interest in constructing housing on the site and received an entitlement to do so. After three time-extensions, the property owner has indicated the site is not market-suitable for housing construction. The City will therefore no longer consider the site toward meeting the upcoming RHNA and no further time extensions of the 2015 project will be recommended for approval. The City Council should also be aware that the City has approved at

City Council Agenda Report Page 4 of 7
Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street January 10, 2022 least two other residential projects that ameliorate the loss of the subject site as a potential housing site – the JESD and JUHSD staff housing developments, providing 56 and 122 residential units, respectively.

Environmental Assessment
The Planning Commission has reviewed the proposal under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project, as conditioned, will not result in significant adverse environmental impacts and is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332: In-Fill Development Projects.

Findings
The Planning Commission has found that, as conditioned, the proposed Use Permit UPR-06-21- 015101 would comply with Title 17 (Zoning) of the Daly City Municipal Code. Approval of the proposed project would not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of persons residing in or working in the neighborhood, or be injurious or detrimental to the property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the city. The Planning Commission recommends that the City Council adopt the following findings:

1. In accordance with Title 17 of the Daly City Municipal Code, as well as applicable State zoning enabling legislation, the City Council conducted a public hearing on January 10, 2022; notice of said hearing was by newspaper publication on December 16, 2022, posting and first class mailing to property owners within 300 feet;

2. The proposed vehicle charging facility is in the Sullivan Corridor Specific Plan Area and is designated Retail and Office Commercial (C-R/O) by the Specific Plan, a designation which requires a use permit for automotive related uses. For this reason, a use permit is required for the subject use;

3. The City Council has determined that the proposed use is appropriate at the subject location because it involves zero-emission vehicles and the odor, exhaust, and noise normally associated with a parking lot for automobiles would not be present;

4. The City Council furthermore anticipates that most of the drivers arriving at the site for vehicle charging would sit in their car while charging or visit nearby restaurants on Sullivan Avenue, and so those accessing the site to charge their vehicles do not pose a detrimental impact to neighboring properties;

5. The City Council has identified light and glare as a potential impact and has required that the applicant provide shielded luminaires that prevents light from directly shining on adjacent property;

6. Although the subject site is included in the City’s Regional Housing Need Allocation, the property owner has indicated the site is not market suitable for housing construction. The City has furthermore approved at least two other residential projects that ameliorate the loss

City Council Agenda Report Page 5 of 7
Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street January 10, 2022 of the subject site as a potential housing site – the JESD and JUHSD staff housing developments, providing 56 and 122 residential units, respectively;

7. The City Council has reviewed the proposal under the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project, as conditioned, will not result in significant adverse environmental impacts and is categorically exempt from environmental review pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15332: In-Fill Development Projects; and

8. The project will minimize the risk to existing public improvements and adjacent private property by providing controlled stormwater runoff from the site to City facilities in full compliance with Order R-2 NPDES Permit No. CAS612008 and Order No. 2010-0014- DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002, the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.

Conditions of Approval
The Planning Commission recommends approval of Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 based on the following conditions as specified by each Department and Division. These conditions need to be complied with prior to, or as part of, any building permit for the proposed improvements.

A. DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
General

1. The project shall be valid only in conjunction with detailed plans submitted with this project.

Any modifications required, due to the Conditions of Approval, and minor changes to the plan, must be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division prior to the change. Major site or architectural modifications shall be treated as an amendment and shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission and City Council.

2. The approvals granted herein shall be valid for a period of one year. If building permits have not been issued within this timeframe, the applicant shall apply for a time extension.

Site Design

3. The applicants shall fully improve and landscape the public right-of-way. This shall include installing decorative landscaped planters behind the sidewalk, installing decorative pedestrian-oriented street-lights, and providing street trees along the entirety of the Bryant Street and Washington Avenue.

4. Pedestrian-oriented street-lights shall be the same design or closely similar to those installed in front of the apartment building at 165 Pierce Street.

City Council Agenda Report Page 6 of 7
Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street January 10, 2022

5. Street trees shall be installed twenty feet on center, sized as 15-gallon minimum, receive triple staking at installation, and receive establishment irrigation. The tree staking and establishment irrigation shall be identified in building plans submitted for a building permit.

6. All street trees shall receive decorative tree grates of the same design or closely similar to those installed in front of the apartment building at 165 Pierce Street, as approved by the Planning and Engineering Divisions.

7. Backflow preventers shall be concealed and/or screened from public view to the satisfaction of the Daly City Community and Economic Development Director prior to issuance of building permit.

8. All luminaires installed on the project site shall receive shielding prevents glare onto adjacent property. A manufacturer specification for these luminaires and proposed shielding shall be included in the building permit submittal.

9. The applicant shall provide a trash receptacle on the site that is emptied on a regular basis.

10. All electrical cabinets and transformers shall be painted dark brown or other color approved by the Planning Division.

Stormwater Treatment

11. The applicant shall develop and submit a stormwater management plan that illustrates full compliance with Section C.3 of Order R-2-2009-0074 NPDES Permit No. CAS612008. The project must comply with Order No. 2010-0014-DWQ, NPDES No. CAS000002, the statewide National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit.

12. The applicant shall receive approval of the stormwater management plan from a third-party reviewer appointed by the City prior to building permit submittal. The applicant shall pay the entire cost of the third-party reviewer, beginning with a $10,000 deposit from which the Planning Division may draw to pay for the costs from the third-party review and associated inspections.

13. All stormwater treatment facilities shall be inspected during construction to ensure eventual compliance with the stormwater management plan. The applicant shall pay the entire cost of these inspections.

14. The applicant shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure long-term maintenance and servicing by the Property Owner of stormwater site design and treatment control measures according the approved Maintenance Plan.

15. The applicant shall arrange and pay for final inspection of installed treatment measure by municipality’s Special Inspector within 45 days of installation or project construction completion, whichever comes first.

City Council Agenda Report Page 7 of 7
Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101 — Tesla Supercharger at 1590 Bryant Street January 10, 2022 Site Maintenance

16. The site shall be maintained in a safe, sanitary, and litter free condition at all times.

17. Doors to the trash enclosure area shall be kept closed except when necessary to dispose of trash or to store material to be recycled.

18. All sidewalks, walkways, driveways, parking lot facilities, and easements within and adjacent to the property, including weeds. The requirement shall not apply to adjacent State-owned highway.

19. Garbage storage areas are to be kept sanitary and free of litter and debris.

B. ENGINEERING DIVISION

20. The number of proposed charging stations for the project is subject to change based on the finding of the approved traffic study; the project shall not result in any negative impacts to the City’s street system.

Recommendations
Based on the findings enumerated above, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council:

1. Adopt the Findings as outlined herein;

2. Affirm the Environmental Assessment; and

3. Use Permit UPR-06-21-015101, subject to the Conditions of Approved outlined herein.

Staff is available to provide any additional information desired by the Planning Commissioners.

Respectfully submitted,
Michael Van Lonkhuysen Tatum Mothershead
Planning Manager Director of Economic and Community
Development
Attachments
Attachment A – Site Location
Attachment B – Project Plans
Attachment C – Traffic Study

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING

ONLY NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING

TESLA SUPERCHARGER DALY CITY, CA
32 SUPERCHARGERS
APN: 006-345-070

PROJECT TEAM
ELECTRICAL ENGINEER OF RECORD:

RYAN FLORES
TESLA, INC.
47700 KATO RD,
FREMONT, CA 94538
(650) 645-2845
[email protected]
ARCHITECT OF RECORD:

CHRIS MARESCA
TESLA, INC.
2204 ALBATROSS ST.

SAN DIEGO, CA 92101
P:(619) 764-8142
[email protected]
PROJECT DESIGNER:

JUAN CARLOS KARAM
TESLA, INC.
3500 DEER CREEK RD.

PALO ALTO, CA 94304
(650) 681-5000
[email protected]

APPLICABLE CODES
2019 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA ELECTRICAL CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE
2019 CALIFORNIA ENERGY CODE

DESIGN CRITERIA SHEET INDEX
TRT: 14228

SYSTEM SUMMARY
N
S
W E

AC ALTERNATING CURRENT

ADA AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES
ACT

ESS ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM

BLDG BUILDING

CLR CLEAR

CONC CONCRETE

COMM COMMUNICATION

DC DIRECT CURRENT

DIA DIAMETER

DIST DISTANCE

EQ EQUAL

EGC EQUIPMENT GROUNDING

CONDUCTOR
(E) EXISTING
EA. EACH

EMT ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING

EV ELECTRIC VEHICLE

GAB GRADED AGGREGATE BASE

GALV GALVANIZED

GEC GROUNDING ELECTRODE

CONDUCTOR

GND GROUND

HVAC HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR

CONDITIONING

I CURRENT

IMP CURRENT AT MAX POWER

INV INVERTER

ISC SHORT CIRCUIT CURRENT

KVA KILOVOLT AMPERE

KW KILOWATT

KWH KILOWATT-HOUR

LV LOW-VOLTAGE

MAX MAXIMUM

MIN MINIMUM

MV MEDIUM-VOLTAGE
(N) NEW

NEC NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE

NIC NOT IN CONTRACT

NRTL NATIONALLY-RECOGNIZED

TESTING LABORATORY

NTS NOT TO SCALE

OC ON CENTER

PCC POINT OF COMMON COUPLING

PL PROPERTY LINES

PLC POWER LINE COMMUNICATION

PV PHOTOVOLTAIC

PP POWERPACK

PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE

RSD RAPID SHUTDOWN

SCH SCHEDULE
SQ. IN. SQUARE INCHES

SS STAINLESS STEEL

SSD SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS

STC STANDARD TESTING

CONDITIONS

TYP TYPICAL

UON UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED

VIF VERIFY IN FIELD
W WATT

ABBREVIATIONS PROJECT SCOPE

1. WIND DESIGN
- DESIGN WIND SPEED = 91 MPH
(ULTIMATE)
- RISK CATEGORY = II
- WIND EXPOSURE = C

2. SEISMIC DESIGN
- RISK CATEGORY = II
- SEISMIC IMPORTANCE FACTOR = 1.0
- SITE CLASS = D
- Ss = 2.22 / S1 = 0.925
- Sds 1.776, Sd1 = 1.048
- SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORY = E
- BASIC SEISMIC-FORCE-RESISTING
SYSTEM = NON-STRUCTURAL

COMPONENT
- R = 2.5 / a_p = 1.0

SITE LAYOUT AERIAL MAP

REFERENCED DOCUMENTS

SUPERCHARGER INSTALLATION MANUAL

SUPERCHARGER POST INSTALLATION
MANUAL

TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY

UTILITY DESIGN

MEGAPACK INSTALLATION MANUAL
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER OF RECORD:

YOO JIN KIM
TESLA, INC.
1216 STEALTH STREET,
LIVERMORE, CA 94551
P:(925)292-2724, M:(949)285-6177
[email protected]
SHEET # SHEET TITLE
G-001 COVER PAGE
G-002 NOTES
G-101 DEMO PLAN
E-101 SITE PLAN
E-201 SINGLE LINE DIAGRAM

SUPERCHARGER SYSTEM

SUMMARY

EQUIPMENT QTY
V3 SUPERCHARGER CABINETS 8
V3 SUPERCHARGER POSTS 32
UTILITY TRANSFORMER 1
SWITCHBOARD 1
LIGHT FIXTURES 6

INSTALLATION OF SUPERCHARGERS

AND ASSOCIATED AC AND DC
EQUIPMENT.

INSTALLATION OF CONCRETE
EQUIPMENT PADS.

INSTALLATION OF NEW PARKING

STRIPING, SIGNAGE AND ADA ACCESS
FEATURES.

ASPHALT OVERLAY FOR PROPOSED EV
ADA STALLS.

INSTALLATION OF NEW LED LIGHTING.

INSTALLATION OF ENERGY STORAGE

SYSTEM EQUIPMENT PAD &
ASSOCIATED CONDUIT.
(UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT)

BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE

SYSTEM (BESS)

SYSTEM TOTALS
POWER RATING 1341 KW

ENERGY RATING
2682
KWH

BATTERY (LITHIUM)
MEGAPACK TYPE 2 HR
DAY 1 QTY 1
OUTPUT RATING 1287 KVA

AREA OF WORK

DESIGN CRITERIA SYSTEM SUMMARY SHEET INDEX
N
S
W E

PROJECT SCOPE

AREA OF WORK
1" 1 0 2"

PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL

H G F E D C B A
1 2
3 4
5 6 DATE NO. REVISION
ORIGINAL SIZE 24"X36"
SHEET SIZE ARCH "D"
3500 DEER CREEK RD.

PALO ALTO, CA 94304
(650) 681-5000
N
S
W E TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 1590 BRYANT ST DALY CITY, CA 94015

COVER PAGE
G-001
REV: 0 CD50
PLOT DATE: 6/2/2021 10:16 AM BCAMPOS
JB-94015375-00 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 32 SUPERCHARGERS

ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL STATE AND LOCAL CODES AND ANY OTHER

REGULATING AUTHORITIES WHICH HAVE AUTHORITY OVER ANY PORTION OF THE WORK.

PRIOR TO COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORK, THE CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY

EXISTING CONDITIONS AND NOTIFY THE DESIGN PROFESSIONAL IN RESPONSIBLE CHARGE FROM TESLA OF ANY DISCREPANCIES. ANY WORK PERFORMED IN

CONFLICT WITH THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS SHALL BE CORRECTED AT THE SUBCONTRACTORS SOLE EXPENSE.

SUBCONTRACTOR INITIATED CHANGES SHALL BE SUBMITTED IN WRITING TO TESLA FOR APPROVAL BEFORE MAKING ANY CHANGES. DEVIATION FROM PLANS BEFORE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM TESLA PLACES LIABILITY ON THE SUBCONTRACTOR.

ALL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE MOUNTED AS SHOWN. WHERE DETAILS ARE NOT PROVIDED, CONTRACTOR SHALL USE STANDARD CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES.

ALL SURFACES SHALL BE PATCHED AND PAINTED AROUND NEW DEVICES AND EQUIPMENT TO MATCH EXISTING FINISHES.

ANY METAL SHAVINGS FROM SITE WORK SHALL BE CLEANED FROM ALL SURFACES

WHERE OXIDIZED OR CONDUCTIVE METAL SHAVINGS MY CAUSE RUST, ELECTRICAL SHORT CIRCUITS, OR OTHER DAMAGE.

APPROVALS FROM BUILDING INSPECTORS SHALL NOT CONSTITUTE AUTHORITY TO DEVIATE FROM THE DRAWINGS.

NEW PAVEMENT INSTALLED AS PART OF THIS PROJECT SHALL MATCH EXISTING PAVEMENT SECTION. ASPHALT AND GAB DEPTHS SHALL BE MAINTAINED.

GENERAL NOTES SUPERCHARGER NOTES

1. NEUTRAL MUST BE INCLUDED FOR PROPER OPERATION OF TESLA SUPERCHARGERS.

2. ALL CONDUIT FURNISHED AND INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR. ALL WIRING FURNISHED BY TESLA AND INSTALLED BY CONTRACTOR.

3. ALL BUSHINGS AND WIRING INTERNAL OF PROPOSED SERVICE EQUIPMENT PROVIDED BY MANUFACTURER. ANY MODIFICATIONS SHALL REQUIRE ENGINEERING APPROVAL PRIOR TO ANY CHANGES BEING MADE.

4. ALL ALUMINUM(AI) CONDUCTORS TO RECEIVE ANTI-OXIDATION COATING DURING INSTALLATION. ALL OTHER CONDUCTORS ARE COPPER UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

5. THE FOLLOWING CHARGING CABINETS AND THE CHARGING POSTS USED ON THIS PROJECT COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING STANDARDS: · IEC 61851-23: 2014 / EN 61851-23: 2014 · UL 2202: 2009(R2012) · CAN CSA C22.2 NO. 107.1-01(R2011)

6. THE AFOREMENTIONED STANDARDS IDENTIFY THE REQUIREMENTS MET BY THE EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: · PROTECTION AGAINST ELECTRIC SHOCK · OVERLOAD AND SHORT CIRCUIT PROTECTION · FAULT PROTECTION · DEGREES OF PROTECTION AGAINST ACCESS TO HAZARDOUS LIVE PARTS · THE INTERNAL COMPONENTS OF THE SYSTEM ARE PROPRIETARY.

ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING ACTUAL INTERNAL PROTECTIVE
DEVICES MUST BE COORDINATED DIRECTLY WITH TESLA.

7. TESLA SUPERCHARGER SIGNAL WIRING RATED 1000V AND USED FOR POWER LIMITED CLASS 1 CIRCUITS SHALL BE PERMITTED TO RUN IN

CONDUITS, CABLE TRAYS, WIRE WAYS, OR RACEWAYS ALONG WITH ASSOCIATED DC CONDUCTORS AS ALLOWED PER NEC 725.48(B)(1) AND 620.36.

8. SUPERCHARGER CABINET AC CONDUCTORS SIZED UNDER ENGINEERING SUPERVISION USING THERMAL MODELING SOFTWARE. SPECIFICATIONS ABOUT THE TRENCHING REQUIREMENTS ARE SHOWN IN E-501

9. FOR DC RUNS IN EXCESS OF 330 FEET, CONTACT TESLA.

10. UNDERGROUND CONDUITS SHALL BE SCHEDULE 40 PVC. THE

ABOVEGROUND PORTION OF AN UNDERGROUND/ABOVEGROUND
TRANSITION SHALL BE SCHEDULE 80 PVC.

11. ABOVEGROUND CONDUITS EXPOSED TO VEHICULAR OR EQUIVALENT PHYSICAL DAMAGE SHALL BE RMC. ABOVEGROUND CONDUITS NOT

EXPOSED TO VEHICULAR OR EQUIVALENT DAMAGE SHALL BE PERMITTED TO BE EMT.

12. IF APPROVED BY TESLA CONSTRUCTION MANAGER, ALTERNATIVE

CONDUIT MATERIALS SUCH AS FLEXIBLE OR FIBERGLASS ARE PERMISSIBLE

IF INSTALLED PER MANUFACTURER INSTALLATION GUIDELINES AND LOCAL CODES.

13. WIRE SPLICES ARE NOT PERMITTED TO EXTEND WIRE RUN LENGTH.

CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR RERUNNING FULL LENGTH OF WIRE IF RUN LENGTH IS MISCALCULATED.

14. SPECIAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED FOR ALL POST-INSTALLED CONCRETE

ANCHORS

UTILITY PG&E

CATEGORY ITEMS TESLA UTILITY

PRIMARY

PRIMARY TRENCHING X

INSTALL PRIMARY CONDUIT X

INSTALL PULL ROPE X

INSTALL PRIMARY FEEDERS X

PROVIDE PRIMARY FEEDERS X

PROVIDE ROAD CUTS / ROAD BORES X

PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT X

TRANSFORMER

INSTALL TRANSFORMER PAD X

PROVIDE TRANSFORMER X

INSTALL TRANSFORMER X

INSTALL CONNECTIONS - PRIMARY X

INSTALL CONNECTIONS - SECD X

SWITCHBOARD

PROVIDE METER X

INSTALL METER X

LAND SECONDARY FEEDERS X

SECONDARY

SECONDARY TRENCHING X

INSTALL SECONDARY CONDUIT X

INSTALL PULL ROPE X

INSTALL SECONDARY FEEDERS X

PROVIDE SECONDARY FEEDERS X

PROVIDE ROAD CUTS / ROAD BORES X

PAVEMENT REPLACEMENT X

SCOPE OF WORK

GENERAL NOTES

1. ALL ELECTRICAL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH THE NATIONAL ELECTRIC CODE AS AMENDED BY APPLICABLE STATE AND LOCAL CODES.

2. ALL WIRING SHALL BE MANAGED IN A PROFESSIONAL, WORKMAN-LIKE

MANNER AND MUST BE SUPPORTED, SECURED, AND PROTECTED TO PREVENT DAMAGE.

3. AC CIRCUIT CONDUCTORS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED BY PHASE AND SYSTEM PER ART 210.5 OR 215.12. UNLESS OTHERWISE REQUIRED BY ART 210.5(1) OR AHJ, COLOR-CODING OF POWER CONDUCTORS SHALL BE AS FOLLOWS:

CONDUCTOR 277/480V 120/208V

PHASE A BROWN BLACK

PHASE B ORANGE RED

PHASE C YELLOW BLUE

NEUTRAL GRAY WHITE

4. DC CIRCUIT CONDUCTORS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED PER ART 210.5 OR 215.12:

CONDUCTOR STD COLOR ALT COLOR
DC+ RED RED-STRIPED

DC- BLACK BLACK-STRIPED

5. TERMINATIONS OF AC, DC, AND COMMUNICATIONS CONDUCTORS SHALL BE

PROFESSIONALLY AND LEGIBLY LABELED WITH CIRCUIT SCHEDULE IDENTIFIER, CONDUCTOR SIZE (AS APPLICABLE) AND TERMINATION TORQUE.

6. ALL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE LISTED BY A NRTL IN COMPLIANCE WITH ART 110.3.

WHERE EXISTING NRTL LISTING CANNOT BE MAINTAINED, ENGINEERING

APPROVAL SHALL BE OBTAINED PRIOR TO EQUIPMENT MODIFICATION, AND THE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE RELISTED BY A SUITABLE NRTL.

7. UNDERGROUND CONDUCTORS & CABLES TO BE INSTALLED IN CONDUIT UON.

8. ALL WIRES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH STRAIN RELIEF AT ALL ENTRY INTO BOXES AS REQUIRED BY NRTL LISTING.

9. REFER TO MANUFACTURER'S CURRENT PLANNING AND INSTALLATION MANUAL FOR TORQUE SPECS FOR ALL BOLTS AND TERMINAL CONNECTIONS.

10. ALL CONDUCTOR TERMINATIONS ON BUSSING OR TRANSFORMER SPADES SHALL BE MADE WITH HIGH-PRESS CRIMP LUGS UON.

11. ALL TERMINATIONS OF ALUMINUM CONDUCTORS SHALL BE PROPERLY INSTALLED WITH BEST PRACTICES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: · USE OF TERMINATION EQUIPMENT RATED FOR ALUMINUM AT THE CONDUCTOR TEMPERATURE, CURRENT, AND VOLTAGE · ALLOWANCE FOR MOVEMENT DUE TO THERMAL EXPANSION/CONTRACTION · PROPER COATING OF EXPOSED ALUMINUM WITH ANTI-OXIDIZATION COMPOUND · USE OF CALIBRATED DEVICES TO TORQUE AND MARK TERMINALS TO

REQUIRED SETTINGS

12. DUCT SEAL COMPOUND SHALL BE APPLIED WHEREVER CONDUITS TRANSITION INDOOR/OUTDOOR OR UNDERGROUND/ABOVEGROUND. REFER TO EQUIPMENT NOTES FOR ADDITIONAL DUCT SEAL REQUIREMENTS.

13. BELL ENDS SHALL BE INSTALLED WHEREVER CONDUIT ENTERS EQUIPMENT

FROM UNDERGROUND AND WHEREVER POTENTIAL FOR DAMAGE TO
CONDUCTORS IS PRESENT AT ANY POINT. BELL ENDS SHALL NOT PREVENT THE USE OF GROUNDING FITTINGS OR COUPLERS WHEN REQUIRED.

14. ALL STUB-UPS WITHIN FLOOR-MOUNTED EQUIPMENT SHALL BE 3-5" ABOVE FINISHED GRADE.

15. ALL CONDUITS EXPOSED TO VEHICULAR OR EQUIVALENT PHYSICAL DAMAGE SHALL BE RIGID GALVANIZED STEEL.

16. GROUND LUGS SHALL BE RATED FOR THEIR ENVIRONMENT AND CONDITION OF USE.

ELECTRICAL NOTES

SITE LEGEND
(E) ACCESSIBLE PARKING
SPACE
(E) LIGHT POLE
(E) FIRE HYDRANT GE
SS
SDT
TV?W
GV
HB
IVW
WRT
CO
(E) STORM MANHOLE
(E) GUY WIRE - ELECTRIC
(E) HOSE BIB
(E) GAS VALVE
(E) IRRIGATION VALVE
(E) WATER VALVE
(E) SPRINKLER HEAD
(E) WATER RISER
(E) SPRINKLER HEAD
(E) CLEANOUT
(E) ELECTRIC MANHOLE
(E) GAS MANHOLE
(E) SANITARY SEWER

MANHOLE
(E) TELEPHONE MANHOLE
(E) TELEVISION MANHOLE
(E) UNKNOWN MANHOLE
(E) POTABLE WATER

MANHOLE
(E) UTILITY POLE -

ELECTRIC
(E) UTILITY POLE -

TELEPHONE
(E) GUY WIRE
(E) TREE

UE UNDERGROUND

ELECTRIC LINE

ST UNDERGROUND

STORM DRAIN LINE

WL UNDERGROUND

WATER LINE

UG UNDERGROUND GAS
LINE

OE OVERHEAD ELECTRIC
LINE

OT OVERHEAD

TELEPHONE LINE

SS UNDERGROUND

SANITARY SEWER LINE
(E) SIGN
1" 1 0 2"
PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL H G F E D C B A 123456 DATE NO. REVISION ORIGINAL SIZE 24"X36"
SHEET SIZE ARCH "D"
3500 DEER CREEK RD.

PALO ALTO, CA 94304
(650) 681-5000 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 1590 BRYANT ST DALY CITY, CA 94015 NOTES
G-002
REV: 0 CD50
PLOT DATE: 6/2/2021 10:16 AM BCAMPOS
JB-94015375-00 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 32 SUPERCHARGERS

(E) PROPERTY LINE
(E) UTILITY POLE
(E) UTILITY POLE WIRE ANCHOR

WASHINGTON ST BRYANT ST

PORTION OF (E) CURB TO BE

REMOVED FOR (N)
DRIVEWAY ENTRY. REF.

E-101 FOR EXTENTS
(E) WOOD FENCE TO BE REMOVED, TYP.
(E) BUILDING
(E) LANDSCAPING AREA TO

BE REMOVED AND REPLACED
WITH (N) ASPHALT PAVING.

SEE E-101 FOR EXTENTS
(E) IRRIGATION CONTROL VALVE TO BE

RELOCATED
(E) BLOCK RETAINING WALL
(E) CHAIN LINK GATE TO BE REMOVED

PORTION OF (E) SIDEWALK

TO BE DEMOLISHED FOR

INSTALLATION OF (N) ENTRY
RAMPS

DEMOLITION PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
N
S
E W

ANY (E) OBJECT TO BE

DEMOLISHED

SITE LEGEND

ANY (E) ELEMENT TO BE

REMOVED

THE CONTRACTOR SHALL REFER TO THE

TRENCHING DETAILS ON THE ELECTRICAL
DETAILS SHEET.

THE LIMITS OF ASPHALT REMOVAL ARE

SHOWN AS FOR INFORMATION ONLY AND

IT SHALL BE UP TO THE CONTRACTOR TO
DETERMINE THE EXACT LIMITS.

NOTES

HARDSCAPED AREA

TO BE MODIFIED
(E) PROPERTY LINE
0 1' 4' 8' 16'
1" 1 0 2"

PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL

H G F E D C B A
1 2
3 4
5 6 DATE NO. REVISION
ORIGINAL SIZE 24"X36"
SHEET SIZE ARCH "D"
3500 DEER CREEK RD.

PALO ALTO, CA 94304
(650) 681-5000 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 1590 BRYANT ST DALY CITY, CA 94015

DEMO PLAN
G-101
REV: 0 CD50
PLOT DATE: 6/2/2021 10:17 AM BCAMPOS
JB-94015375-00 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 32 SUPERCHARGERS

EV CHARGING
ONLY

EV CHARGING
ONLY
NO

PARKING
NO

PARKING
1B 1A 2C 2B 2A 1D 1C
2D 3A 3B 3C 3D 4A 4B
6A 5D 5C 5B 5A 4D 4C
6B 6C 6D 7A 7B 7C 7D 8A 8B 8C 8D
SPR-4
SPR-3
SPR-2
SPR-1
XR-1
SB-1
TSC
MP-1
LGT-2
LGT-3
LGT-4
LGT-5
LGT-6
(E) PROPERTY LINE
(E) BUILDING
(E) UTILITY POLE
(E) UTILITY POLE WIRE ANCHOR
(N) 4’’ WHITE PARKING STRIPING, TYP.
(N) WHEEL STOP, TYP. 32, PER ARCHITECTURAL
(N) CONCRETE BOLLARD, TYP. 12,

PER STRUCTURAL
(N) REMOVABLE BOLLARD TYP. 6,

PER STRUCTURAL
(N) 4’’ WIDE WHITE STRIPING WITH 4’’
WIDE WHITE CROSS STRIPING @36’’ O.C.
(N) ACCESSIBLE AISLE, TYP.
(N) ACCESSIBLE EV STALLS,

PER ARCHITECTURAL

DIMENSIONS TYPICAL

FOR THIS ROW
18'
TYP.
5' 12' 5' 9'-6"
10'
TYP.
17'
TYP.

WASHINGTON ST
17'
TYP.
10'
TYP.

DIMENSIONS TYPICAL FOR THESE ROWS
17'
TYP.
10'
TYP. DIMENSIONS TYPICAL FOR THIS ROW
(E) BLOCK RETAINING
WALL
24'

DRIVE AISLE
24'

DRIVE AISLE
26'

DRIVE AISLE
4'x4' CLEAR SPACE FOR FUTURE GROUNDING
TRANSFORMER W/ 5" CONDUIT STUB-UP,

INSTALLATION UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT

BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM
· EQUIPMENT PAD & ASSOCIATED
CONDUIT PART OF THIS PERMIT, REF.

ELECTRICAL & STRUCTURAL.
· 2,682 kWh LITHIUM BATTERY ENERGY
STORAGE SYSTEM "MEGAPACK"

EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION UNDER

SEPARATE PERMIT
(N)ASPHALT PAVING OF ALL

STALLS AND DRIVE AISLES
(N) DOUBLE TESLA EV PARKING SIGN, POLE
MOUNT, TYP. 6, PER ARCHITECTURAL
(N) SINGLE TESLA EV PARKING SIGN,
POLE-MOUNTED, TYP. 18, PER ARCHITECHTURAL
SPR-8
SPR-7
SPR-6
SPR-5
24'
(N) UTILITY BUS DUCT
20'
(N) DRIVEWAY ENTRANCE, TYP. 2. BRYANT ST
24'
(N) UTILITY REMOVABLE BOLLARD, TYP. 3,
PER DOCUMENT 045292 FIGURE 14
(N) 5" CONDUIT FOR FUTURE GROUNDING

TRANSFORMER, STUB UP AND CAP
(N) BIOTREATMENT AREA AND CURB, TYP., PER CIVIL
26'-1"
TYP.
(N) TESLA EV PARKING SIGN, LIGHT-POLE
MOUNT, TYP. 3, PER ARCHITECHTURAL
(N) LANDSCAPING AREA
AND CURB, TYP., PER CIVIL
(N) LANDSCAPING AREA
AND CURB, TYP., PER CIVIL
119'-7"
(N) TRASH BIN, TYP. 2, PER

ARCHITECTURAL
(N) TREE, TYP. 4, LGT-1

PER CIVIL

ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN
1/8" = 1'-0"
N
S
W E

SITE LEGEND
(N) CONDUIT ROUTE,

SHOWN FOR

DIAGRAMMATIC
PURPOSES ONLY.
(N) POLE-MOUNTED LIGHT

FIXTURE
(N) SIGN

EQUIPMENT TAGS
SB-# SWITCHBOARD
SPR-# SUPERCHARGER

CABINET
#X

SUPERCHARGER
POST
XR-#

TRANSFORMER
(PROVIDED BY UTILITY

PER UTILITY DESIGN)
(N) CONCRETE BOLLARD
(N) REMOVABLE BOLLARD

SUPERCHARGER

CABINET

CHARGE POST
5'
FRONT
1'-6'"
5"
FROM PAD EDGE 3' ON
ALL SIDES AND 8' FROM

FRONT (VERIFY WITH

UTILITY STANDARDS)

DEDICATED ACCESSIBLE
VAN

ACCESSIBLE
(N) BIOTREATMENT AREA,

PER CIVIL
(N) SHRUBS, PER

LANDSCAPING

MINIMUM SERVICE

CLEARANCES

TRANSFORMER

PARKING SIGNS

EXISTING STANDARD STALLS

UTILIZED AS A RESULT OF THIS

PROJECT
0 PROPOSED TESLA STALLS 32
PROPOSED STANDARD STALLS 0
AB1100 EV VAN CREDIT 1
NET STALL COUNT 33

PARKING STALL SCHEDULE
0 1' 4' 8' 16'

TESLA SITE

CONTROLLER
TSC
MP-# MEGAPACK
LGT-# LIGHT
(E) SIGN
NOTES:

1. UTILITY EQUIPMENT/FOUNDATION DIMENSIONS AND

LOCATIONS PER UTILITY CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY
AGAINST EXECUTED UTILITY DESIGN.

2. UTILITY BOLLARDS PER UTILITY REQUIREMENTS

CONTRACTOR TO VERIFY AND COORDINATE WITH
UTILITY ON LOCATION, QUANTITY, AND SPECS.
(N) CURB, PER CIVIL
(N) TREE, PER

LANDSCAPING
1" 1 0 2"

PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL

H G F E D C B A
1 2
3 4
5 6 DATE NO. REVISION
ORIGINAL SIZE 24"X36"
SHEET SIZE ARCH "D"
3500 DEER CREEK RD.

PALO ALTO, CA 94304
(650) 681-5000 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 1590 BRYANT ST DALY CITY, CA 94015

SITE PLAN
E-101
REV: 0 CD50
PLOT DATE: 6/2/2021 10:17 AM BCAMPOS
JB-94015375-00 TESLA SUPERCHARGER_DALY CITY, CA 32 SUPERCHARGERS

CHARGING STALLS SCHEDULE

SUPERCHARGER

CABINET
POST
TAG

SIGN TYPE
1 1A DEDICATED
1B ACCESSIBLE &

DEDICATED
1C DEDICATED
1D DEDICATED
2 2A DEDICATED
2B DEDICATED
2C DEDICATED
2D DEDICATED
3 3A DEDICATED
3B DEDICATED
3C DEDICATED
3D DEDICATED
4 4A DEDICATED
4B DEDICATED
4C DEDICATED
4D DEDICATED
5 5A DEDICATED
5B DEDICATED
5C DEDICATED
5D DEDICATED
6 6A DEDICATED
6B DEDICATED
6C DEDICATED
6D DEDICATED
7 7A DEDICATED
7B DEDICATED
7C DEDICATED
7D DEDICATED
8 8A DEDICATED
8B DEDICATED
8C DEDICATED
8D DEDICATED

NO PARKING EV CHARGING ONLY PARKING NO EV CHARGING ONLY EX TC 186.7± EX FL 186.2± EX TC 185.12± EX FL 184.66± CONFORM EX TC 182.0± EX FL 181.5± x ES 186.6±
x ES 182.1±
x ES 187.3±
x ES 189.4±
x ES 188.8±

EX TC 189.3± EX FL 189.9± EX TC 187.9± EX FL 187.5± EX TC 187.1± EX FL 186.7± ES 183.50± CONFORM FS 186.17± CONFORM FS 185.16± CONFORM FL 182.69 TC 184.90 1.8% AC 184.50 EX TC 183.40 EX FL 183.00± CONFORM EX TC 182.26± EX FL 181.83± CONFORM ES 182.38± CONFORM FS 183.28 LIP 182.77 TC 184.90 AC 183.80

0.9% FS 183.43 LIP 182.97 FL 182.83 FS 183.52 TVC 185.35 AC 184.05 TC 185.35 AC 184.85 TC 184.90 AC 184.40 TVC 184.90 AC 184.40 TVC 189.30 ~ HP AC 188.80 ~ HP TVC 186.90~HP
AC 186.40~HP TVC 186.90 AC 186.40 TVC 188.57 AC 188.07 TVC 188.27 AC 187.77 TVC 187.58 AC 187.08 TVC 187.51 AC 187.01 TVC 187.55 AC 187.05 TVC 187.44 AC 186.94 TVC 187.40 AC 186.90 TVC 187.31 AC 186.81 TVC 186.99 AC 186.49 TDC 187.85 AC 187.85 TDC 187.70 AC 187.70 TVC 188.72 AC 188.22 AC 188.04 ~HP x
AC 186.96 x 1.5%

1.5%
x FG 185.32 FG 183.82 x
x FG 183.82
x FG 183.82
x FG 185.32 SDCB RIM 186.32 INV 183.41 ~ 6" OUT (N) SDCB RIM 184.77 INV 182.25~ 6" OUT SDCO RIM 185.00 INV 182.18 ~ 6" IN (E) INV 181.62 ~ 6" THRU SDCB RIM 184.32 INV 181.80 ~ 6" OUT SDCO RIM 184.15 INV 181.78 ~ 6" THRU EX LIP 184.54± EX AC 184.54± CONFORM EX LIP 185.58± EX AC 185.58± CONFORM EX SDMH BREAK AND ENTER RIM 187.24± EX INV 181.12± IN (SW) 15" RCP INV 181.02 IN (NW) 6" RCP EX INV 180.94± IN (SE) 15" RCP EX INV 180.84± OUT (E) 15" RCP 1.5% 1.5%

6.0% GB
GB

GB GB GB
GB
GB

1.5%

1.5%

1.5%

1.5%

1.5%

EX TC 186.07±

EX FL 185.59± CONFORM FS 185.22 FL 184.72 FS 185.30 FL 185.49 FS 185.99 FS 186.07 FS 186.30 FS 185.52 SDCO RIM 186.30 INV 183.36 ~ 6" IN (S) INV 181.40 ~ 6" THRU TVC 185.97~HP AC 185.47~HP TC 185.90 AC 185.40 1.5% 20% 1.5% 20% 20% 20% ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGER SEE ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN (TYP)

STORMWATER

BIOTREATMENT (TYP)

GUY WIRE TO BE

RELOCATED BY

CONTRACTOR PA PA PA PA ELECTROLIER (TYP) SEE ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN 6"SD
6"SD
6"SD x FG 184.27 EX 15"SD
EX 15"SD
EX 15"SD

PROPERTY LINE

ROADWAY CENTERLINE EX FH PROTECT IN PLACE

EXISTING WALL AND

FENCE TO REMAIN
33'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.005
45'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.005
76~6" RCP @ 0.005
DALY CITY STD S-3
COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY DALY CITY STD S-3 COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY BOLLARD BY OTHERS, TYPICAL TRANSFORMER BY OTHERS, TYPICAL SUPERCHARGER CABINETS BY OTHERS SUPERCHARGER CABINETS BY OTHERS BATTERY ENERGY STORAGE SYSTEM BY OTHERS 5'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.01 7'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.01 2'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.01 x FG 184.27 ES 188.08± CONFORM ES 187.98± CONFORM ES 187.76± CONFORM ES 187.65± CONFORM

REE IN GNE L
NA
ROF
E
SIO
P

DERETSI GER
CA

L I FORN I A
OF
ETATS
CIVI L No. 68876
MART I N L . DEFORGE DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO: CAD DWG FILE: CHECKED BY: DESIGNED BY: DATE: SCALE: C HMH NO DATE DESCRIPTION S:\PROJECTS\599400\LD\GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN\PLOT DRAWINGS\599400GP02.DWG 599400GP02.DWG C-101 PLOTTED: 5/28/2021 1:05 PM Land Use Entitlements Land Planning Landscape Architecture Civil Engineering Utility Design Land Surveying Stormwater Compliance 1570 Oakland Road (408) 487-2200 San Jose, CA 95131 HMHca.com 1590 BRYANT STREET

GRADING PLAN
DALY CITY, CALIFORNIA 3500 DEER CREEK RD. PALO ALTO, CA 94304 (650) 681-5000 5994.00 RCHBC MAY 27, 2021 1 INCH = 10 FEET 0 5 10 20 GRADING LEGEND: REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR TREE REMOVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES SAW CUT LINE ALL CURBS TO BE 6" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED PROPOSED TREE (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE NEW ASPHALT SEE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR ADA PARKING AND ADA PARKING SIGN DETAIL GRADING PLAN GRADE BREAK LINE BIOTREATMENT AREA WASHINGTON STREET

BRYANT STREET EX BUILDING ADJACENT PROPERTY NEW CONCRETE FL FLOW LINE FS FINISHED SURFACE PERFORATED PIPE STORM DRAIN LINE STORM DRAIN LINE EX OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL LINE EX OVERHEAD TELEPHONE LINE EX WATER LINE FH FIRE HYDRANT FG FINISHED GROUND EX EXISTING ES EXISTING SURFACE AC ASPHALT CONCRETE HP HIGH POINT INV INVERT PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE SDCB STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN SDCO STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE TC TOP OF CURB TVC TOP OF VERTICAL CURB

NO PARKING EV CHARGING ONLY PARKING NO EV CHARGING ONLY DMA 1 SDCB RIM 186.32 INV 183.41 ~ 6" OUT (N) SDCB RIM 184.77 INV 182.25~ 6" OUT SDCO RIM 185.00 INV 182.18 ~ 6" IN (E) INV 181.62 ~ 6" THRU SDCB RIM 184.32 INV 181.80 ~ 6" OUT SDCO RIM 184.15 INV 181.78 ~ 6" THRU SDCO RIM 186.30 INV 183.36 ~ 6" IN (S) INV 181.40 ~ 6" THRU 6"SD
6"SD
6"SD EX 15"SD
EX 15"SD
EX 15"SD
33'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.005
45'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.005
76~6" RCP @ 0.005
5'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.01
7'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.01
2'~6" SDR-26 PVC @ 0.01 DMA 2 DMA 3 TCM 1 TCM 2 SELF-TREATING TCM 3 LANDSCAPE AREA SELF-TREATING LANDSCAPE AREA SELF-TREATING LANDSCAPE AREA PROPERTY LINE

REE IN GNE L
NA
ROF
E
SIO
P

DERETSI GER
CA

L I FORN I A
OF
ETATS
CIVI L No. 68876
MART I N L . DEFORGE DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO: CAD DWG FILE: CHECKED BY: DESIGNED BY: DATE: SCALE: C HMH NO DATE DESCRIPTION S:\PROJECTS\599400\LD\GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN\PLOT DRAWINGS\599400GP03 SW.DWG 599400GP03 SW.DWG C-102 PLOTTED: 5/28/2021 12:39 PM Land Use Entitlements Land Planning Landscape Architecture Civil Engineering Utility Design Land Surveying Stormwater Compliance 1570 Oakland Road (408) 487-2200 San Jose, CA 95131 HMHca.com 1590 BRYANT STREET

GRADING PLAN
DALY CITY, CALIFORNIA 3500 DEER CREEK RD. PALO ALTO, CA 94304 (650) 681-5000 5994.00 RCHBC MAY 27, 2021 STORMWATER CONTROL PLAN WASHINGTON STREET BRYANT STREET EX BUILDING ADJACENT PROPERTY 1 INCH = 10 FEET 0 5 10 20 REFER TO LANDSCAPE PLANS FOR TREE REMOVAL AND MITIGATION MEASURES SAW CUT LINE ALL CURBS TO BE 6" UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED PROPOSED TREE (SEE LANDSCAPE PLANS) DIRECTION OF SURFACE DRAINAGE GRADE BREAK LINE FL FLOW LINE FS FINISHED SURFACE STORM DRAIN LINE EX OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL LINE EX OVERHEAD TELEPHONE LINE EX WATER LINE FH FIRE HYDRANT FG FINISHED GROUND EX EXISTING ES EXISTING SURFACE AC ASPHALT CONCRETE HP HIGH POINT INV INVERT PVC POLYVINYL CHLORIDE PIPE RCP REINFORCED CONCRETE PIPE SDCB STORM DRAIN CATCH BASIN SDCO STORM DRAIN CLEANOUT SDMH STORM DRAIN MANHOLE TC TOP OF CURB TVC TOP OF VERTICAL CURB LEGEND: BIOTREATMENT AREA DMA # DRAINAGE MANAGEMENT AREA TCM TREATMENT CONTROL MEASURE

REE IN GNE
L NA ROFE SIO P DERETSI GER CAL I FORN I A OF ETATS CIVI L No. 68876 MART I N L . DEFORGE DRAWN BY: PROJECT NO: CAD DWG FILE: CHECKED BY: DESIGNED BY: DATE: SCALE: C HMH NO DATE DESCRIPTION S:\PROJECTS\599400\LD\GRADING AND DRAINAGE PLAN\PLOT DRAWINGS\599400GP03 SW.DWG 599400GP03 SW.DWG C-103 PLOTTED: 5/28/2021 12:42 PM Land Use Entitlements Land Planning Landscape Architecture Civil Engineering Utility Design Land Surveying Stormwater Compliance 1570 Oakland Road (408) 487-2200 San Jose, CA 95131 HMHca.com 1590 BRYANT STREET

GRADING PLAN
DALY CITY, CALIFORNIA 3500 DEER CREEK RD. PALO ALTO, CA 94304 (650) 681-5000 5994.00 RCHBC MAY 27, 2021 STORMWATER CALCULATIONS *OR APPROVED EQUAL











!"#$%&&'
(
"
)
*%+$
(*,
-
./0

1%2234#,
52#!67"
1"$%4,73!%(4#%#
%#89
5%
#4##

:%$5 #5 %$2
%

1!"%

,7"
#"#!",$#"2#!#%2237%#
"%
%$5""2#!77"
1"$%
",73!%("#%#
$3%#
%#89
5%
#4##
:%$5 #5 %$2
%;"<(,=1!
7>3#77""#
$7#!"#$3%#
%##!
#!?"#3
2#!
5%
#
4##@A%"!
(#
4##
#"3#
?#!B",73!%(";"<(,=1!"#%#
?,$

7%#C!,"@D
%5"7?EF33""##!"#?,$
7

%#?
?%5"

5%
#4##?#!#!",#!

?%5$#
#(!#+,#
$5
1!"#%223"#,
5"#%#"#!!3$#7"#!%#?,$
(
%#
5#!"##!,(!,##!
%5
G73#
,#$H%#
2#!",73!%("#%#
%

7%E!,"2,"2#!"#%"

3,
#"
3$$3#
%##!G"#
(",73!%("#%#
$3%#
%##!4%
#4!77
( 
#
:%$5
#5%77G%#$5$"",#!2#!7>3#"#;"<(,=

%"

#!#7(
%#
"#%#"%

#"3#
$$2"3%
%$5""?%"3

,3#
%#
#?"#,
5 #"3#
";4,$$%
F
,@A%"!
(#
4##%

5%
#4##@A%"!
(#
4##=
%
>%3
###!"#2#!67%E!,#

#257#
#%$%
"#%2237%#
%$223#"
",$#
(2#!#7"(
%#
5#!7>3#
IJ
KLMN-
J0OPM
1"$%",73!%("%
"(

2$
(
"#%
3#%$"#3!%(#!!3$"Q,3E$5
:7

(
!3$
$"#!
G#",73!%("#%#

#!#%$,#%

%

%

,#$H%#
2#!",73!%("#%#
#!1"$%,"
#2%3%773

"?!3!"#%#
#
,"%

#!3!%(
(#%#"#%#
1573%$3!%(
(#%
("28#8
,#"
4,73!%("%
"(

22%"#3!%(
(%

#!2"!,$

$5,"
2%"$
(%"#
#%E"#3!%(%!3$1
3%"",73!%(%%$%$#52%!3$7%E"%#%
",73!%(%2#%3!%(
("""
"37$#
$2"%3!%(
##!2,$$53!%(

!3$R
$2"
$5%77$5?!
%",73!%("#%#
"%#8S3%7%3#5R
$2"

,$?!
#!"#%#
"%#S3%7%3#5
R

#%$%
3#!$%
#2,";1T=3!%("#573%$%#1"$%",73!%("#%#

#!4%
<%
3"3
%5F%?!3!%77$"
+7%E%

22+7%E%#"#3!%(
(!3$"1T
?,$
%77$
%##!77"
"#%#