Daly City City Council
February 26, 2024

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 79 0 Scale (Feet)
6 Westside Walking Trail Section
0 Scale (Feet)
6 Eastside Recreational Trail Section

80 Chapter 5: Open Space Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan C. PLANTING PLAN
The type and arrangement of street trees and park
plantings will contribute to a healthy and attractive urban neighborhood. 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 tree species list in Table 5.1 shall be used for specifying tree species for parks, streets and open spaces located per the street tree planting plan in the Appendix and as shown in Figure 5.2.

A diversity of tree species, suitable for the climate and context of the plan area are selected to create identity and sense of place. Seasonal interest will be created with deciduous trees providing spring flowers and fall color at public gathering places along Entry Drive, Central Green, and access drives. Continuous planter strips separating streets from sidewalks are along all internal streets and drives, and are planted with broad canopy trees, low
shrubs, and groundcovers.

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. Entering the neighborhood from the north on Entry Drive from Serramonte Boulevard, residents and visitors are greeted by a tree-lined gateway of flowering trees in a planted median and along the sidewalk, while a vibrant public plaza welcomes pedestrians. The south
entrance at Campus Drive features a landscaped roundabout marking the entry into the new neighborhood.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 5: Open Space 81

PARCEL A

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL B

PARCEL F

PARCEL E
KEY/
SYMBOL
TREES

PRELIMINARY PLANT PALETTE

ACER BUERGERIANUM TRIDENT MAPLE CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS WESTERN REBUD PISTACIA CHINENSIS CHINESE

PISTACHE

QUERCUS SUBER CORK OAK

SEQUOIA

SEMPERVIRENS COAST REDWOOD

TRISTANIOPSIS LAURINA WATER GUM

QUERCUS AGRIFOLIA EVERGREEN

OAK TREE

LAGUNARIA PATERSONII NORFOLK ISLAND

HIBISCUS

OLEA EUROPEA
‘SWAN HILL’ OLIVE TREE

MELALEUCA

QUINQUENERVIA SEJEPUT TREE

LYONOTHAMNUS

FLORIBUNDUS

CATALINA

IRONWOOD

LOPHOSTEMON

CONFERTUS BRISBANE BOX

KOELREUTERIA
PANICULATA ‘FASTIGIATA’

GOLDENRAIN
TREE

HYMENOSPORUM

FLAVUM SWEETSHADE
GINKGO ‘PRINCETON
SENTRY

MAIDERNHAIR
TREE

CUPRESSUS

MACROCARPA

MONTEREY

CYPRESS
24” BOX M 10
31 6
14 17
M
M
L
M
M 3
13 16
16 1
L
M
L
L
M 13
34 6
4 10
L
L
M
L
L 2
13 3
13 19
L
L
L
L
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
PER
PLAN
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX
24” BOX

AUTUMN BLAZE

FREEMAN MAPLE

BIG LEAF MAPLE
MARINA

STRAWBERRY
TREE

FOREST PANSY
REBUD

ACER X FREEMANII

AUTUMN BLAZE

ACER MACROPHYLLUM
ARBUTUS ‘MARINA’
CERCIS
‘FOREST PANSY’

BOTANICAL
NAME
COMMON

NAME SIZE SPACING QYT WTR USE
KEY/
SYMBOL
TREES

BOTANICAL
NAME
COMMON

NAME SIZE SPACING QYT WTR USE
KEY/
SYMBOL
TREES

BOTANICAL
NAME
COMMON

NAME SIZE SPACING QYT WTR USE
KEY/
SYMBOL
TREES

BOTANICAL
NAME
COMMON

NAME SIZE SPACING QYT WTR USE
Figure 5.2 Planting Plan

82 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 Species Common Name Species Common Name
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 Cupressus macrocarpa Monterey Cypress Ginkgo ‘Princeton Sentry Maidenhair Tree
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 6: Utilities 83 Plan Area utility infrastructure is for stormwater, sanitary sewage and water supply and distribution. Dry utilities systems are for power, natural gas, and communications.

A. STORMWATER
Existing and planned stormwater system flows are for
the 18.4-acre Plan Area not including Parcel A. Refer to Appendix C for Precise Plan storm water plans.

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. Post school closure uses on the campus include a bus yard, district offices, churches, child day care facilities, a Comcast building, and the recently completed Faculty and Staff housing.

Faculty and Staff Housing (including the apartments, car barn, and surface parking lot located west of the apartments) and the Comcast building will remain operational throughout and after construction of the Precise Plan. The Faculty and Staff Housing was approved separately and
storm water improvements for the building, surface parking lot and area immediately adjacent to the building will not be modified as part of this Precise Plan. The driveway

6. Utilities

84 Chapter 6: Utilities Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan just to the south of the Faculty and Staff Housing will be replaced and is included in the plan.

Existing ground coverage consists of approximately
410,035 sq. ft. impervious and 236,194 sq. ft. pervious surfaces (63.5% 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 two storm drain outfalls located around the perimeter of the project. The first outfall is 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. The second outfall is located near the southeast corner of the plan area and discharges to an existing 27” storm drain main in Callan Boulevard.

Planned System
The Plan Area’s stormwater drainage system generally
maintains existing drainage patterns and replaces the
existing drainage system on site. The system is designed to not increase the peak flow rate of stormwater leaving the site to the City’s storm drainage system during the design rainfall event to a level greater than existing, pre-construction conditions.

The proposed changes in the Plan Area consist of open
space, parks, landscape areas, concrete paths, private
roadways, asphalt drives, asphalt parking lots, and multistory residential buildings.

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 outfalls located near the main vehicular entrance and the southwest
corner of the site.

The proposed ground coverage consists of approximately
516,185 sq. ft. impervious and 130,044 sq. ft. pervious surfaces (79.9% impervious). The Plan Area 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 106,150 sq. ft. and will therefore require stormwater retention.

The Plan Area 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.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 6: Utilities 85 Although the sequence of the development is flexible,
at no time in the development process will the Plan Area increase the peak rate of stormwater runoff leaving the site at any phase of the project to a level greater than pre-construction conditions.

For each phase of development, pre- and post-construction areas of impervious surfaces will be calculated within the phase limits to determine if there will be an increase in the peak runoff rate. If there is a calculated increase in peak runoff rate, a temporary stormwater detention
system such as a detention basin or below-grade
detention pipe would be located within the footprint of undeveloped parcels, to be replaced with the project’s
on-site, below grade stormwater detention system at
Overlook Park. The Overlook Park system is designed
to satisfy detaining peak flows for new development in
excess of existing conditions.

Stormwater Requirements
The Plan Area will not increase the flow or volume leaving the site for the design storm. If a development project proposes to increase the impervious area of a development parcel, stormwater retention will be required to retain the increased flow and volume. Each phase of
development will conform to stormwater treatment
requirements. Stormwater treatment requirements for the buildings will be met on each individual lot. Stormwater treatment requirements for the streets will be met with best management practices (BMPs) located in the private roadways or in temporary stormwater treatment facilities located within the footprint of undeveloped parcels, to be replaced with on-street BMP as streets are built out in the Precise Plan area.

86 Chapter 6: Utilities Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan 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 mains that run through the Plan Area, an 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 Faculty and Staff housing and the existing school site discharge into the main that runs through the Plan Area, 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).

Planned System
The Precise Plan will construct a public sewer system in the private street (to be located in an easement) and an on-site (within each development parcel) sewer system
to connect the buildings to the public sewer system. The planned sewer system will consist of manholes and pipes.

The onsite sewer system consists of pipes, cleanouts,
and manholes. The Plan Area will connect to the 10-inch sanitary sewer main in Serramonte Blvd at Entry Drive and the new sewer connection on Callan Boulevard. Refer to
Appendix C for Precise Plan sewer system plans.

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 Plan area 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.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 6: Utilities 87 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 high school 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 Faculty & Staff Housing project is served from the existing 10-inch main.

Planned System
The Precise Plan will construct a new public water main within a public easement within the new streets and
provide new domestic water, fire water, and irrigation
water services to the proposed buildings. Planned services are to be fed from a portion of the existing 10-inch main constructed as part of the Faculty and Staff Housing and a new 10-inch water main constructed with the new private streets. The on-site (within each development parcel)
domestic water system will consist of service lines from the public main to each building. Refer to Appendix C for Precise Plan water system plans.

D. DRY UTILITIES
Dry utility infrastructure modifications and additions will be required and will be built in phases to accommodate
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 high school building.

Data/Telecom services were also extended to serve the
Faculty & Staff Housing project. A joint trench will be provided in the private streets to extend the utility providers’ infrastructure throughout the development to serve the development parcels. Dry utilities will be coordinated with the appropriate utility provider to establish new
service routes to support the Plan Area. Refer to Appendix C for Precise Plan dry utility plans.

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

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 89 A. MAINTENANCE
Public and private improvements in the Plan Area shall
abide by the maintenance requirements of this section.

Subject to the provisions of any applicable State law, the following shall apply:

A.1.1 Master Association. Prior to the issuance of any
building permit to construct any market-rate residential unit in the project, the Jefferson Union High School District (District) shall form and perpetually maintain a Master Association for the Serramonte Del Rey Neighborhood
(“Master Association”). The Master Association shall be self-governing and govern common areas for the term of
the Precise Plan uses are in operation. The purpose of the Master Association, among other responsibilities, shall be to maintain all common areas within the Precise Plan area in a neat, safe and healthful condition, including the ongoing removal of litter throughout and including streets, parks, and other areas not maintained by individual parcel developers that are not dedicated or otherwise conveyed to a public agency. Until the Master Association is formed, the District is responsible for the foregoing.

A.1.2 Maintenance Plan. A maintenance plan for
roadway, parks, and private utilities shall be submitted by the applicant and approved by the City prior to the
issuance of any building permit to implement the project.

A litter control maintenance plan shall be submitted
that includes provision for on-going letter and garbage control. The maintenance plan shall be incorporated into the CC&R’s in connection with the creation of the Master

7. Implementation

90 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Association at the discretion of the District and recorded at such time.

Minimum Requirements for Trash and Litter Disposal shall be as follows:
● All trash shall be confined in approved receptacles and enclosures. Any building permit application submitted
to the City for review shall be accompanied by a letter from the trash hauler indicating that the proposed
trash receptacles provided in the building for which the permit is sought to meet the hauler’s requirements for
quantity, size, and accessibility.
● All unenclosed materials, equipment and/or supplies
of any kind shall be maintained within approved
enclosure areas. Any stacked or stored items shall not
exceed the height of the enclosure.
● All trash and storage enclosures shall be properly
maintained in accordance with approved plans.
● All waste materials generated by the development,
such as cardboard boxes, skids, garbage, litter, etc.,
must be stored in the enclosure for disposal.
● No waste material shall be visible at any time.
● All enclosures shall be designed to conceal the
contents.
● All enclosures should be kept clean and free of odor.

A.1.3 Maintenance and Repair - Master Association.

The Master Association shall develop a maintenance plan (including a street sweeping, street surface repair and replacement, and garbage disposal plan approved by the
Planning Division and the Department of Public Works) for the upkeep of common areas, private streets, and private infrastructure. The Master Association will be responsible for the maintenance, litter removal and repairs of privately owned, but publicly accessible1 common areas that are
not part of individual parcel development, including
privately owned streets, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, parks, open spaces, trails and paths, utilities and improvements in streets including temporary and permanent storm
water infrastructure, stormwater retention system and
stormwater treatment areas located in park, open space, private streets and accessways, street lighting, landscaping, planter strips, street furniture and the fixtures, furniture and equipment located in the parks. The Master Association is responsible for maintenance of storm water infrastructure in private utility easements on development parcels.
1 References to publicly accessible spaces and infrastructure, as used below, shall refer to spaces and infrastructure that is privately owned, but publicly accessible, to be distinguished from spaces and infrastructure that are dedicated or otherwise conveyed to a public agency, including without limitation the City.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 91 A.1.4 Maintenance and Repair - Parcel Specific
Responsibilities. Parcel Developers or, if the property interests of such Developers are conveyed, their successors in interest, are responsible for the maintenance, replacement, repairs and litter removal for on-site improvements on their respective parcels, including exterior equipment, fixtures, walls, roofs, windows, doors and other architectural, landscaping and publicly accessible common areas on private parcels in a clean, sanitary and attractive condition. The Developer of a parcel shall be responsible for the maintenance, replacement, repairs, and cleaning of improvements on the development parcel, including
private storm water improvements and stormwater treatment areas serving the parcel. This excludes stormwater infrastructure in private utility easements and stormwater retention facilities serving other parcels and the plan area.

A.1.5 Maintenance and Repair – Facilities Owned
by City. The City of Daly City is responsible for the
maintenance and repair of water mains and sewer mains
owned by the City located in water easements and sewer
easements granted to the City.

A.1.6 Maintenance and Repair – Utility Providers. In
any joint trench, public utility easements, maintenance, and repair responsibility for improvements within such
easements is by the specific utility owner that owns or is otherwise legally responsible for such improvements (i.e. PG&E, Comcast, AT&T, others).

A.1.7 Budget. The Master Association shall prepare an annual budget to fund the costs incurred in maintaining the publicly accessible common facilities. The Master Association shall undertake an inventory of publicly accessible common area improvements requiring maintenance, litter removal and repairs, such that each phase of development is adequately budgeted for maintenance and operations of improvements. Landscape maintenance budget shall include consideration of level of maintenance and operation expenses commensurate to the anticipated level of use of park and recreational facilities. The Master Association may employ or contract out to perform maintenance, litter removal and repairs.

B. PHASING
B.1 Timing. The sequence and timeline of development will ultimately depend on market conditions. The pace of development will fluctuate with the regional economy, capital expectations and availability, costs for development and the conditions of the Daly City housing market.

B.2 Public Improvements. For each phase of development
there are corresponding street, park, open space improvements and utilities necessary to support development of individual parcels per Table 7.1 and as shown in Figure 7.1.

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

PARCEL A PARCEL B

PARCEL D

PARCEL C

PARCEL F

PARCEL E
Parcel lines
Easement
Phasing
Figure 7.1
Phase III
St. Fra
n
cis Blvd.

Cal al n
B
vl d.

Access Drive West Access Drive North
Access Drive South
E
ntry
Dr vi e
Serramonte Blvd.

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

PARCEL F
Parcel lines
Easement
Phase III
St. Fra
n
cis
Blvd.

Access D
Parcel lines
Easement
Pha
St. Fra
n
cis
Blvd.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 93 Table 7.1 - Anticipated Phasing of Private Streets and Private and Publicly Accessible Park and Open Space Improvements Required by Development Parcel
Phase Parcels Private Streets and Accessways Private and Publicly Accessible Park and Open Space 1 B
 Entry Drive
 North Drive
 North Access Way
 Entry Drive Plaza
 Overlook Park
 Eastside Recreation Trail within parcel
2 C and C’  East Drive from South Access Way to Campus Drive  South Access Way  Eastside Recreation Trail within parcel D  East Drive from North Access Way to South Access Way  North Access Way  Eastside Recreation Trail within parcel 3 E  West Drive from North Drive to Campus Drive  Central Green  South Point Park
F and F’  West Drive from North Drive to Campus Drive  Westside Walking Trail Notes:

1. The chronology of phasing in Table 7.1 is not intended to be binding, and 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. For the purposes of assessing consistency with the Table 7.1 for conformance review, a reviewer shall assess whether development of a listed parcel includes the streets, park, open space, and utilities needed to support the development of the parcel.

2. Off-site public circulation improvements are to be implemented per Exhibit C Public Circulation Improvements in the Development Agreement, which are: sidewalk and retaining wall improvements along Callan Boulevard within each parcel B, C and D; Serramonte Blvd. and Highway 1 intersection and traffic signal improvements; Serramonte Blvd./Entry Drive intersection pavement reconstruction; contribution to City park, bicycle and pedestrian improvements; and off-site intersection improvements.2

3. Tentative Map lots C’ and Lot F’ are zero-square-foot lots contained within Parcel C and Parcel F respectively. These lots may not be developed until the time a lot line adjustment is approved which creates a lot that is at least 10,000 square feet in area, and which complies with the other objective standards of the Precise Plan. The purpose of lot line adjustments to a zero-square foot lot is to streamline ministerial review to facilitate affordable housing financing and/or the buildout of the plan area consistent with the objective development standards of the Precise Plan. Corresponding street, park, open space and utility improvements for Parcel C and F are required with development of Parcels C’ and F’.

4. See the Tentative Map for utility improvements associated with each parcel. On and off parcel utility improvements in the Precise Plan Area shall be sized to support buildout of the Precise Plan, unless identified as interim and to be replaced when future parcels are built out.

5. The extent of street improvements will vary depending on the sequence of parcel development as follows:
a. If Parcel C is developed first, East Drive shall be constructed from Campus Drive to South Access Way. b. If Parcel D is developed first, East Drive shall be constructed from Campus Drive to North Access Way (with a temporary EVA on South Access Way) or alternatively, Entry Drive, North Drive and North Access Way shall be constructed.
c. If Parcel E is built before Parcels C and D, East Drive and North Drive will be constructed including the roundabout and/or West Drive and North Drive will be constructed including the roundabout. d. If Parcel F is built before Parcels C, D and E, then West Drive and the roundabout will be constructed. e. When the first of either Parcel B or Parcel D is developed, North Access Way from their building to the curb across the access way shall be built such that there is a two-way paved travel way. The subsequent parcel B or D is required to complete the sidewalk, landscaping and storm water treatment facilities between their building and the curb on their side of North Access Way. f. If Parcel C is developed before Parcel D, Parcel C p is required to build South Access Way from their building to the curb across the access way, so there is a two-way paved travel way. Parcel D, when developed, is required to complete the sidewalk, landscaping and storm water treatment facilities between their building and the curb on their side of the South Access Way.
g. Serramonte Boulevard and Highway 1 ramp intersection improvements will be constructed with the first market rate development per the Development Agreement.
h. Bike lanes on Campus Drive to Hickey Blvd will be striped concurrent with the roundabout construction.

6. A Storm Drain Memo shall be submitted for conformance review for each phase in accordance with the Master Plan Drainage Memo. At Building Permit submittal: a Hydrology & Hydraulics report based on final design will be provided with the Building Permit submittal in accordance with the Master Plan Drainage Memo.

7. The Head Start facility may be located on other parcels. 2 Improvements in public right of way to be maintained by the City, with the exception of the Parcel B, C and D sidewalk and retaining wall improvements on Callan Blvd, which will be subject to the City’s standard landscape maintenance agreement, mutually acceptable to the City and applicant’s civil engineers, as addressed in the project’s Development Agreement.

94 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan C. CONFORMANCE REVIEW
C.1.1 Purpose. Conformance Review is the Precise Plan’s ministerial, streamlined process to approve proposed
projects “as-of-right” that demonstrate Plan Consistency with the Precise Plan and Entitlement Documents and
Compliance with the Objective Development Standards
of the Precise Plan, as defined below. Design Review is not required for projects ministerially approved “as-of-right.” C.1.2 Plan Consistency. Plan Consistency is the review
of project submittal documents for conformance to:

1. Precise Plan requirements for the scope and phasing
of park, open space, street, accessway, storm water,
water, wastewater, utility, emergency access, and on
and off-site transportation improvements associated
with each parcel per Precise Plan Figure 7.1 Phasing,
Table 7.1 Development Phasing and Appendix C:

Civil Engineering Exhibits, and

2. Entitlement Document requirements of the Development Agreement, Tentative Map, Conditions of Approval, Inclusionary Housing Agreement and the
Mitigation and Monitoring program.

C.1.3 Compliance with Objective Development
Standards (“Compliance”). Compliance with objective
development standards is the review of project submittal documents for conformance with the Precise Plan’s Objective Development Standards as listed in Section II above.

C.1.4 Variance from Numerical Standards and
Precise Plan. Deviations from the numerical standards
in Section II above may be permitted by up to 20 percent for any parcel, upon approval by the Planning Division.

Deviations from the minimum and maximum densities
prescribed in Table 3.3, the requisite amount of private open space (150 square feet per dwelling unit), and the quantity and general location of common open space
shall not be permitted.

Modification or reconfiguration of the Precise Plan pattern of streets and blocks, shape of open space areas, site
layout, orientation, or location of buildings, architectural or landscape elements may be permitted provided all
other Objective Design Standard can be met. Deviations
from the approved roadway configurations, including
lane provision and width, shall not be permitted unless approved by the Department of Public Works.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 95 C.1.5 Submittal Requirements. Submittal requirements shall include documentation as set forth in the 2023 Daly City Municipal Code Section 17.28.030 C. 2. (a) – (f ), Procedure for Application for Planned Development of the Daly City Zoning Ordinance, and shall include a
completed Conformance Review Check List, as attached
to the Precise Plan as Appendix A, and any additional
information requested by the Planning Manager. Submittal requirements for minor modifications to approved and constructed projects to be per Planning Manager request.

C.1.6 Review Process and Timing.

1. Pre-submittal conference. Upon request of the
Applicant, the Planning Manager shall convene a
pre-submittal conference to review the scope of
the project, submittal requirements, conformance
review process, timeline, and staff availability. It is an opportunity for the Applicant and the design team
to ask technical questions to prepare a submittal. The
Planning Manager, City Engineer, and Development
Coordinating Committee members shall attend upon
request.

2. Submittal. The Applicant shall submit documentation as described under “Submittal Requirements” above.

3. Conformance Review. The Planning Manager,
designated staff or third-party consultants shall
conduct the Conformance Review per the responsibilities described in Table 7.2. The Planning Manager shall coordinate reviewer comments and provide
them to the Applicant no later than 45 business days
after filing a project submittal.3

4. Determination. The Planning Manager shall review
the project submittal and reviewer comments to
determine whether the submittal is plan consistent
and standards compliant and therefore approved
as-of-right.

If the Planning Manager deems a project application
inconsistent with the Precise Plan or Entitlement
Documents, and/or non-compliant with the Objective Development Standards in Section II, prior to a decision to deny approval of the proposed project,
the Planning Manager shall provide the Applicant
with written documentation as to what elements of
the submittal are not in conformance.4
3 Notwithstanding anything in this chapter, to the extent the Permit Streamlining Act or other State Law applies for shorter deadlines, the regulations in such laws shall govern.
4 This process is separate and independent from the Planning Manager’s coordination and provision of any reviewer comments on the Applicant’s initial project submittal, as required under the “Review Process and Timing” section of this Chapter.

96 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan The Applicant can revise the submittal and resubmit.

The Planning Manager, upon receipt of the resubmittal, shall make their determination. Total City Review Time from submittal to determination shall
not exceed 90 business days.5
If the City fails to complete Conformance Review per
the above timing requirements, the submittal shall be
deemed to be conforming with the Precise Plan and
Entitlement Documents, planning review shall be
complete, and requested permits shall be issued.

5. Notification of Determination. The Planning
Manager shall communicate in writing to the Applicant the Planning Manager’s determination.

6. Appeal. A Conformance Review determination may
be appealed within 20 business days to the City
Manager by the Applicant. City Manager shall make
a determination within 20 business days of receipt of
the appeal. The City Manager’s decision on appeal
shall be final and not appealable.
5 For this paragraph, “City Review Time” shall mean the time, measured in business days, taken by the City to review a project submittal and provide comments to the applicant or render a Conformance Review decision.

City Review Time does not include the Applicant’s time from the date of receiving comments to the date of resubmitting a revised project submittal responsive to comments.

Figure 7.2 Conformance Review and Approval Process

PROPOSED PROJECT
Pre-submittal 1 Conference
Documents 2 Submittal
Conformance 3 Review
Plan Consistency
Standards
Compliance
Determination
4 Project Approval
Appeal to City
Manager
Notice of 5 Determination

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 97 C.1.7 Review Criteria. The following criteria shall guide the determination of plan consistency and standards
compliance:
● All Figures in the Precise Plan illustrate the general arrangement and relationships among parcels, buildings, streets, accessways, parks and open spaces, and exact
compliance or conformance is not required so long as
other objective criteria are met.
● The final configuration of parcels, buildings, streets, accessways, parks and open spaces are subject to
refinement, and exact compliance or conformance is
not required so long as other objective criteria are met. ● Consistency and conformance with the Precise Plan
shall be construed rationally and shall accommodate
unforeseen solutions or innovation that can occur
over the extended build-out of the Precise Plan. Notwithstanding the above, no deviations are permitted to minimum residential densities and minimum open
space area requirements.

C.1.8 Standards Interpretation. The nature of the
Objective Standards is such that consistency determinations are ministerial, without the exercise of discretion.

Accordingly, it is not anticipated there will be cause
for interpretation of these standards by the City. In the unforeseen event that interpretation is required, the
Planning Manager shall make any interpretation of the
Precise Plan’s development standards required to evaluate the proposed project and shall inform the reviewer of any interpretations as needed. The Planning Manager shall
include any interpretations as part of its written determination of consistency with the objective development standards of the Precise Plan.

C.1.9 Staffing. The Planning Manager shall check staff
availability prior to the pre-submittal conference to
meet the conformance review timeline. If staffing is not available, the City can designate a third-party consultant to be paid for by the Applicant. Consultants shall have professional planning experience on similar projects. The Applicant shall pay all reasonable staff coordination and third-party consultant costs.

C.1.10 Staff or Consultant Review Responsibilities.

Staff or consultant review responsibilities are per Table 7.2, Reviewer Responsibilities.
● The Planning Manager shall provide oversight and
make all Conformance Review determinations.
● Staff of consultant shall compare the project submittal, Conformance Check List, and applicable plan elements,
standards and requirements of the Precise Plan and the
Entitlement Documents.

98 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Responsibility Reviewer
Plan
Consistency
Standards
Compliance Planning Manager City Engineer
Development
Coordinating Committee6
Housing And Community
Development Manager
Phasing X X
Parks X
Streets X X
Utilities, Off-Site Transportation
Improvements X X X
Development Agreement X X X
Final Map X X

MMRP X X X
Inclusionary Housing
Agreement X X
Tentative Map and
Conditions of Approval X X
Land Use and Urban Design X
New Buildings X
Parks X
Streetscapes X
Table 7.2 - Reviewer Responsibilities
6 Development Coordinating Committee includes Planning Division, Building Division, Engineering Division, Department of Water and Wastewater Resources, North County Fire Authority and other committee members as deemed appropriate by the Planning Manager.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 99 ● Reviewers are to provide written comments on plan
consistency to the Planning Manager. In the case
where the reviewer concludes inconsistency with plan
elements, or non-compliance to objective development standards, the reviewer shall identify specific objective standards to be addressed to achieve a
consistency.
● If requested by the Applicant, the Planning Manager
and any reviewers shall meet with the Applicant to
discuss steps to resolve any comments.

The Planning Manager shall consider the recommendations of the reviewers, and shall make the final determination for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the submittal based on objective criteria as set forth herein.

D. PLAN AMENDMENTS
Amending the Precise Plan shall follow the requirements of the Daly City Municipal Code section 17.28.020 (I) as of the date of approval of the Precise Plan. This Municipal Code section is included as a part of Supporting Documents provided with this Precise Plan.

E. SUBDIVISIONS
The subdivision of parcels shall conform to the requirements of the Precise Plan and the Daly City Municipal Code Title 16 Subdivisions.

F. INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
The following requirements are subject to the terms and exceptions provided in the affordable housing agreement:

F.1 Units Required. Construction of inclusionary units
is required within the Planned Development Zone PD-31
area pursuant to an Affordable Housing Plan.

100 Chapter 7: Implementation Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan F.2 Timing. This Precise Plan authorizes flexibility in timing of construction and geographic distribution of
inclusionary units throughout the PD-31 area to allow for a greater number of inclusionary units and deeper level of affordability than the minimum levels required by the City Ordinance.

F.3 Percentage of Total Residential Units. The Precise
Plan requires, for Parcels B-F, not less than 20 percent of the total number of total residential units completed
at final build-out to be affordable housing, consisting of 13.5% low-income units at no greater than 60% AMI
and 6.5% moderate income units at no greater than
120% AMI. One market rate residential building can be
constructed prior to construction of affordable units. 150 low-income affordable units are planned to be located on Parcel C. The subsequent phases after the first market rate building and the first residential structure built on Parcel C have been constructed can be phased and include unit
counts proposed by the developer in any way such that
the overall percentage of affordable units does not drop below 20% of all constructed residential units at Parcels B-F at any time consisting of 13.5% low-income units and

6.5% moderate income units.

G. 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.

H. ENTITLEMENT DOCUMENTS
The term “Entitlement Documents” shall refer to all the below except the Precise Plan.
● General Plan Amendment. By Resolution No. [], City
Council approved text and map amendments to the
General Plan to enable high density residential and
mixed-use residential development.
● Precise Plan. By Resolution No. [], City Council approved the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan, which modified land use designations and created a new
street and open space network.
● Development Agreement. The District and the City
of Daly City entered into a Development Agreement to
secure vested development rights and terms.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Chapter 7: Implementation 101 ● Affordable Housing Agreement. The District and the City of Daly City entered into an Affordable Housing
Agreement to secure rights and terms for the Project’s
Affordable Housing Plan.
● Tentative Map and Conditions of Approval. The
City Council approved a Tentative Map indicating
the subdivision of the District lands into parcels with infrastructure and open space improvements, including
Conditions of Approval.
● Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.

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, 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.

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

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 103
Appendix A:

Conformance Review Checklist

104 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Land Use and
Urban Design
A 2 See Table 3.1  Permitted Uses
Land Use and
Urban Design
A 3 See Table 3.2 Uses Permitted with a Use Permit
Land Use and
Urban Design
A 4 See Table 3.3 Prohibited Uses
Land Use and
Urban Design
A 5 See Table 3.4 Permitted Density By Parcel
Land Use and
Urban Design
A 5 See Table 3.5 Anticipated Development
Height A 6 See Figure 3.3 Building Heights
Height A 6.1 Ornamental architectural features, such as turrets, parapets, corner towers, or other accentuating features.

Height A 6.2 Mechanical and roof‐mounted elevator core equipment up to a maximum of 18 feet above maximum height,
provided their combined coverage does not exceed 30%
of building roof area. Equipment less than four feet
above maximum height is exempt from the coverage
calculation.

Height A 6.3 Architectural and landscape screening designed to conceal mechanical and roof mounted equipment.

Height A 6.4 Sustainability elements, such as photovoltaic cells, small‐ scale wind turbines suitable for residential
development, storm water catchment / treatment
equipment, solar water heating equipment.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 105
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Height A 6.5 Enclosed amenity spaces to a height of 12 feet where roof is designed as an accessible outdoor common area
if coverage of enclosed amenity space is no more than
30 percent of building roof area.

Building Frontage/
Build‐to‐line
A 7.1 The building frontage on all parcels shall comply with the percentage of building that is required to be aligned along the build‐to‐line, as shown in Figure 3.4.

Building Frontage/
Build‐to‐line
A 7.2 The primary wall of a building shall align with the build‐ to line. The primary wall can be located up to 6 feet
from a build‐to‐line. Ground floor building frontages
may be recessed from the build‐to line.

Building Frontage/
Build‐to‐line
A 7.3 Balconies and other projections above 16’ from ground level may encroach across the build‐to line up to 6 feet, provided such projections meet Building and Fire Codes, and do not interfere with underground infrastructure.

Building Frontage/
Build‐to‐line
A 7.4 Building entry canopies, arcades, and galleries with a height no greater than 16 feet may encroach up to 15
feet across the build‐to‐line.

Building Frontage/
Build‐to‐line
A 7.5 Stairs to podium level courtyards overlooking parks, stoops, and appropriate fencing can encroach up to 10’
on the park side of a build‐to line.

Ground Floor Use A 8 Figure 3.5 Ground Floor Use identifies the location, type and orientation of ground floor uses by parcel for the
Plan Area.

Ground Floor Use A 8.1 Mixed Use. This requires retail, café, and restaurant uses with outdoor dining, building entries, residential lobbies, commercial or community uses that attract
pedestrian activity with physical and visual access to
and from the adjacent sidewalk.

106 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Ground Floor Use A 8.2 Active Residential Use. Ground floors shall have one or more of the following: commercial or community uses;
main building entry, residential lobby, residential
amenity spaces, and individual ground floor residential unit entrances. Ground floor residential unit entrances shall be accessible units at grade or elevated ground
floor units with transitional space such as a stoop or
porch not greater than five feet in height above grade.

Ground Floor Use A 8.3 Residential Use. This requires ground floor residential use, such as residential units without individual unit
entries accessible from the street (which can have a
back porch, garden, or patio), or other residential use, and excludes parking, loading and services areas.

Ground Floor Use A 8.4 Parking, Loading and Service Use. The location for parking, loading and service uses fronting streets, yards and accessways which are not permitted elsewhere.

Ground Flor Use A 8.5 Required Street Frontage. Where Mixed‐Use, Active Residential Use, and Residential Use frontages are
required:
‐ No more than one 24’ wide vehicle access driveway or
two 12’ wide vehicle access driveways are permitted.

Loading docks are not permitted at active ground floor
use frontages.
‐ Blank walls or walls opening to structured parking
areas at the ground floor are limited to 30’ maximum.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 107
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Setbacks A 9 The perimeter of the Plan Area shall have minimum setback dimensions that comply with Table 3.7.

Architectural
Character
B 1.1 Buildings shall be of high quality, contemporary
architectural design. Contemporary architectural design is 21st century design: it reflects current trends in
architecture. Contemporary architectural design does
not adhere to a particular style of set of standards;
rather, it seeks to distinguish itself from the past by incorporating the latest innovations in building
technology and design.

Architectural
Character
B 1.2 Buildings shall not directly reference historic
architectural styles or use materials associated with
specific periods or styles.

Architectural
Character
B 1.3 Building shall not use terracotta tile roofing, mansard roofs, asphalt roof tiles or shingles.

Architectural
Character
B 1.4 Ribbon windows and flat building facades shall not be permitted.

Architectural
Character
B 1.5 Auto‐oriented ground floor building design, such as continuous, open to the street, at grade covered
parking spaces and extended curb cuts, shall not be
permitted.

Proportion B 1.6 The size of the pedestrian, podium and tower levels shall be in proportion to one another.

Proportion B 1.7 Visual discord due to the mixing of too many differently shaped and sized building elements, forms, colors, or
textures, shall not be permitted.

Proportion B 1.8 Random, oversized building elements shall not be permitted.

Pedestrian level
massing
B 2.1 To create a pedestrian level setback for active uses with occupied floor above, pedestrian level façade setbacks
from the build‐to‐line shall not exceed 10 feet.

108 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Pedestrian level
massing
B 2.2 Where Active Uses or Required Building Entry, Lobby or Residential Amenity Space uses are required, the
minimum floor‐to‐floor height for the ground floor shall be no less than 14 feet where there is amenity space.

Podium level
massing
B 2.3 Podium level building massing shapes the spatial
definition of the public realm. Building street walls up to 90 feet are considered the podium level.

Podium level
massing
B 2.4 The first one to three levels of all buildings shall be differentiated from the upper floors to provide a visual support for the floors above. They shall have high
quality materials appropriate for a pedestrian
environment.

Podium level
massing
B 2.5 Stepbacks are required as shown on Figure 3.3, Building Heights. Where required, stepbacks shall be no higher
than 65 feet above grade with the building set back no
less than six feet from the street wall.

Tower level
massing
B 2.6 The tower, or skyline level consists of all building levels above 90 feet from grade. The skyline level contributes to the visual identity of the Plan Area.

Tower level
massing
B 2.7 Tower massing shall extend to ground level to visually anchor the tower to the ground.

Tower level
massing
B 2.8 Towers extending to ground shall be set back 10 feet minimum from the build‐to line.

Tower level
massing
B 2.9 Towers shall be oriented in an east‐west direction to minimize impacts to views from residences along Saint
Francis Boulevard.

Tower level
massing
B 2.1 Each tower shall not exceed a massing envelope of 240 feet long by 150 feet wide, as shown in figure 3.6.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 109
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Tower level
massing
B 2.11 A minimum separation of 60 feet shall be provided between any two towers or portions of skyline level
building massing.

Tower level
massing
B 2.12 Towers are not permitted adjacent to the central open space.

Façade modulation B 3.1 Long continuous facades that extend the length of a parcel or city block shall not be permitted. Buildings
over 100 feet in width shall provide vertical breaks in building massing in the form of projections and recesses to reduce the overall scale of the building.

Façade modulation B 3.2 Occupiable projections, such as balconies or bay windows, are permitted to project up to six feet from
building face above streets and open spaces above the
pedestrian level, in accordance with the City’s Building and Fire Codes. The recess or projection shall be a
minimum of 3 feet in depth.

Façade modulation B 3.3 The façade shall be divided into segments of 30 to 60 feet in width, as shown in figure 3.7, using one or more of the design approaches below:
‐Ver�cal shi�s
‐Balconies or bay windows
‐Corner expression
‐Volumetric recesses (including balconies)
‐Volumetric projec�ons
‐Change of Material: to achieve modula�on by a
change of material, the material change must occur for
at least 20% of the façade and must change in plane at
least 18 inches in depth from the facade.

110 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Fenestration B 3.4 Building fenestration shall incorporate recessed and/or projecting window bays, balconies, canopies, and
architectural elements, contrasting surfaces, and/or a
rhythm to the building’s light and shadow.

Fenestration B 3.5 Avoid featureless expanses of fenestration that eliminate a sense of human scale.

Blank facades B 3.6 Ground floor blank facades at building walls facing public spaces or streets greater than 50 feet shall not be permitted.

Blank facades B 3.7 At the ground floor, blank facades longer than 50 feet shall provide landscaping, public art, or architectural relief with design interest to the satisfaction of the
Planning Division.

Ground floor
design
B 3.8 Transparent windows, storefronts, show windows,
building entries, dwelling entries, and/or other active uses shall be placed along street and public open space frontages, as required in the Ground Floor Active
Frontage standards.

Ground floor
design
B 3.9 Doors or sliding windows shall be used by ground‐floor restaurants, eating and beverage services to enable
outdoor dining along sidewalks and plazas.

Entries B 4.1 Buildings shall have identifiable main entrances that are directly visible and accessible from public rights‐of‐way.

An entry canopy, recessed building volume, a sculptural volume, change in scale or identifiable architectural
treatments are acceptable features.

Entries B 4.2 In mixed‐use buildings, residential entries are to be differentiated from commercial entries.

Entries B 4.3 Pedestrian seating and bicycle parking shall be located near building entrances.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 111
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Windows B 4.4 Upper story windows shall provide architectural details, such as sills, or lintels, that recess or project from the facade.

Windows B 4.5 Reflective glazing is not permitted.

Windows B 4.6 Non‐reflective coatings, low‐emissivity glass, external shade devices and other elements shall be used.

Materials and
color
B 5.1 Building materials, colors and finishes shall be
coordinated to create a visually harmonious color
palette appropriate for a family‐oriented residential
neighborhood, consistent with contemporary building
design.

Materials and
color
B 5.2 High quality building materials and architectural detailing, with a preference for natural materials at the ground level, shall be used where people directly
experience buildings.

Materials and
color
B 5.3 Changes in color, texture or materials shall be used to differentiate architectural elements and building
massing.

Materials and
color
B 5.4 Monolithic use of color, where an entire building is one color or tone shall not be permitted.

Materials and
color
B 5.5 Garish, or discordant use of color shall not be
permitted.

112 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Parking ratios C 1.1 The following parking ratios are currently anticipated for Parcels B through F:
‐ The parking ra�o for residen�al units is zero  to 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit .
‐ The Applicant may increase parking above the
foregoing ratio if supported by a parking analysis
prepared by a qualified traffic engineer.
‐ By way of example, at Parcel C, if the parking ra�o for the affordable housing is 0.5 parking space per dwelling unit, such is permissible because it falls within the
foregoing range of parking ratios.  Development of
Parcel C may provide parking at a parking ratio up to 1.5 spaces/unit. To the extent parking is provided, the
parking ratio will be included in the documents
submitted to the City for review and approval of Parcel C.

Parking ratios C 1.2 Parking for pick‐up and drop‐off for the Head Start Program at Parcel C may be accommodated by on‐
street parking marked by appropriate signage, with such signage reserving parking spaces for this use during the appropriate hours.

Parking ratios C 1.3 Overflow parking for Parcel A may be accommodated within the Plan Area with surface parking, on‐street
parking, or within future parking podiums or structures on Parcels B through F. To the extent that Applicant
demonstrates that overflow parking is not needed for a
particular development, it will be eliminated as a
requirement in the future.

Parking ratios C 1.4 Residential parking can be accommodated in mechanical puzzle lifts.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 113
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Parking ratios C 1.5 No more than 10% of residential parking can be tandem, and tandem spaces may only be assigned to
users of the same dwelling unit.  Tandem units may be
designed as either front to rear spaces or mechanical
puzzle lift spaces.

Parking ratios C 1.6 Parking Enforcement: Applicant or a delegee will be responsible for enforcement of any parking rules on
JUHSD property. If private parking restrictions for on‐ street parking are put in place, parking spaces available for public use will be designated to access publicly
accessible parkland, trails, and open space during time periods of private parking restrictions.

Parking ratios C 1.7 One bicycle parking stall per unit shall be provided and accessible from street level, unless otherwise mandated by the building code. Bicycle parking, if in excess of one stall per unit, can be located anywhere on site.

Design of Off‐
street parking and
loading
C 2.1 Parking shall be located behind, within, or under buildings, or within separate structures. Surface parking areas are prohibited between any building and Entry
Drive, North Drive, East Drive and West Drive street
frontages.

114 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Design of Off‐
street parking and
loading
C 2.2 Parking stall and drive aisle dimensions for each parcel may comply with either approach 1 or 2 below, or a
combination of both approaches:
‐ The current City standards for off‐street parking
(including the ratio of standard spaces to compact
spaces) at the time of the Applicant’s submittal for
conformance review, and/or
‐ A “Uni‐stall” standard size parking space which is based upon a stall dimension of 8’–6” x 18’–0”, unless
constrained by a wall on one or both sides, in which
case the minimum stall width will be 9’–0” minimum.

The drive aisle shall maintain a minimum of 24’ clear.

Design of Off‐
street parking and
loading
C 2.3 For mixed‐use projects, shared parking is encouraged to allow uses with different peak hours of operation to
utilize off‐street parking facilities of other buildings in the Precise Plan.

Design of Off‐
street parking and
loading
C 2.4 Loading docks and service areas shall be located at the rear of the development or inside parking structures for parcels deeper than 80 feet, separate from parking
areas. For smaller parcels, loading docks and service
areas must be located on the side street, wherever
possible. Loading zones should not disrupt the flow of
traffic within a given project area.

Design of Off‐
street parking and
loading
C 2.5 Loading docks shall be located on Access Drives North, South, and West. If this is not possible, loading docks may be provided on East, North or West Drive, if
enclosed within a building.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 115
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Vehicle and bicycle
access
C 3.1 Location of vehicular parking entrances shall be as follows:
‐ Parcel A shall be accessed from Access Drive West.
‐ Parcel B shall be accessed from Entry Drive or Access Drive North; or any combination of these.
‐ Parcel C shall be accessed from Access Drive South.
‐ Parcel D shall be accessed from Access Drive North,
Access Drive South; or both.
‐ Parcel E shall be accessed from East Drive or West
Drive; or both.
‐ Parcel F shall be accessed from West Drive or Access
Drive West; or both.

Vehicle and bicycle
access
C 3.2 Vehicular entries shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from intersections and crosswalks except for driveways
located along access ways.

Vehicle and bicycle
access
C 3.3 Bicycle access shall be from street level, and not required through garage entrances. Bicycle storage for
each building shall be accessible from ground level, as close to the driveway entry as practicable, and clearly signed. Bicycles in excess of one per unit can be stored anywhere on site.

Vehicle access
design
C 4.1 Two‐way vehicular entrances designed as a single
driveway shall have a maximum width of 24’.

Vehicle access
design
C 4.2 Where a driveway crosses a sidewalk, clearly demarcate the sidewalk across the entire width of the driveway by using colored paving or materials.

Vehicle access
design
C 4.3 On‐street parking may be provided in the form of
parallel parking or angled parking.

Parking structures C 5.1 Above‐ground garages not screened by residential uses shall include façade treatments or screening.

116 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Parking structures C 5.2 Parking garages shall be lined with ground floor active uses or residential entries where indicated per street
frontage requirements, and designed with building
façades that screen structural elements of the garage
where not required by street frontage requirements.

Parking structures C 5.3 The design of entries to parking garages shall not be more prominent on the building façade than the
primary pedestrian entry.

Parking structures C 5.4 Above‐ground parking garages shall be designed with human scale design elements that complement and do
not contrast with buildings and public spaces of the
Precise Plan.

Parking structures C 5.5 Parcels B, C, D, E, and F may contain above‐ground parking garages.

Parking structures C 5.6 Parking structure lighting shall be designed to avoid direct glare towards adjacent residential buildings.

Bicycle facilities C 6.1 Bicycle parking should be in close proximity to building entrances and bicycle routes for user convenience.

Bicycle facilities C 6.2 Bicycle parking shall accommodate a range of bicycle types, including standard bicycles, E‐bikes, tandem
bicycles, and trailers.

Bicycle facilities C 6.3 On‐street bicycle parking shall be separated from automobile parking by use of a landscaped buffer or
curb.

Bicycle facilities C 6.4 Off‐street bicycle parking shall be in secure locations in each building in the Precise Plan area.

Common open
space
D 2.1 Buildings shall provide spatial enclosure for common open spacesto create privacy, limit views from streets, and wind protection.

Common open
space
D 2.2 Common open space shall be visible and accessible to and from building amenity areas.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 117
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Private open space D 3.1 Private open spaces shall be directly accessible from the unit and large enough to permit outdoor activities with a minimum of five feet width and depth.

Private open space D 3.2 Private open space shall be constructed with high quality durable materials.

Private open space D 3.3 Fencing or screening between ground floor private open spaces shall permit visibility in and out of the open
space for the top 18 inches.

Hillside woodlands E 1.1 A tree succession operations plan for aging mature trees prepared by a qualified arborist will guide the
replacement of existing trees over time due to age or
fire vulnerability.

Landscape design E 1.2 Removed trees shall be replaced with a diverse plant ecology governed by the area’s unique
coastal/Mediterranean climate including evergreen and
deciduous species as recommended by an arborist.

Landscape design E 1.3 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.

Planting E 2.1 Plant material shall be comprised of at least 75% drought tolerant plant species. Planting plans shall
comply with Daly City’s Water Conservation in
Landscaping regulations and the Water Use
Classification of Landscape Species (WUCOLS).

118 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Planting E 2.2 Where turf grass is used, low water use hybrids and/ or no mow varieties shall 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
sightlines remain open and clear, and places of
concealment are not fostered. Plants should be used to
screen above‐ground utilities. Along streets and
sidewalks, plants shall be used in planters within the
right of way to create spatial separation between
sidewalk and vehicular traffic.

Planting E 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.

Planters E 3.1 Landscape planters within any private street shall be a minimum of four feet wide.

Planters E 3.2 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.

Planters E 3.3 Where landscape planting is provided under trees, planters shall be 4’ W x 6’ L minimum.

Planters E 3.4 Planted medians shall provide at least a 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.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 119
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Site irrigation E 4.1 Site Irrigation systems shall comply with all local and state requirements as of time of project approval, and
shall meet the City’s water efficiency regulations.

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

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

Soils and drainage E 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.

Soils and drainage E 5.2 Planting areas shall by dressed with a 3‐inch layer of mulch.

Soils and drainage E 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.

Site furnishings E 6.1 Site furnishings shall be comprised of materials designed to withstand outdoor conditions.

120 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Site furnishings E 6.2 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 ground‐ or surface‐mounted
attachment is acceptable.

Site furnishings E 6.3 Seating shall be provided at retail, parks, open spaces, adjacent to the trails, and in front of primary building lobbies. 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.

Site furnishings E 6.4 Café tables with chairs shall be movable with a variety of sizes for public use in gathering spaces and shall be constructed of materials suitable for outdoor public
usage.

Site furnishings E 6.5 At least one drinking fountain shall be provided at each of the following: Overlook Park, Central Green, and the Recreation Trail. Dog bowl and water bottle filling
attachments are recommended but not required.

Site furnishings E 6.6 Within Overlook Park, Applicant shall provide play equipment for children ages two through twelve. All
play areas will be designated for children between the
ages of two to five and for ages five to twelve years old.

Any community garden shall provide raised beds and a
regular water service connection with water spigot at
100‐foot intervals.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 121
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Trees E 7.1 Trees within the street right of way, in plazas, and high‐ visibility open space areas shall be provided in 24‐inch box size or larger and be secured with at least three 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.

Trees E 7.2 Individual developments within the Plan Area shall use trees that are provided in minimum 15‐gallon size or
larger for no greater than 50 percent of the trees
planted. All other trees shall be box‐specimen.

Trees E 7.3 Entries at the north and south shall have unique tree plantings, and the design of these planting shall be
approved by the Planning Division.

Trees E 7.4 Seasonal interest shall be created with deciduous trees providing spring flowers and fall color.

Trees E 7.5 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.

Trees E 7.6 Enhanced finishes and/or striping shall be used at the master plan entry, at all driveway entries, and at all
crosswalks.

Trails and paths E 8.1 Trail surfaces shall be asphalt or concrete, provide for adequate clearances along the edges and overhead, and
be suitable for their intended use. Refer to trail sections in Chapter 5 for trail dimensions.

122 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Trails and paths E 8.2 Signage, ornamental landscaping, and trees shall be provided along the trail system to enhance user
experience.

Stormwater
management
E 9.1 Project submittals shall comply with the Precise Plan’s phased, performance‐based approach to stormwater
management, consistent with the San Mateo County
Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit, and Daly City’s
municipal code pertaining to stormwater management.

Projects shall minimize the amount of paved area.

Where feasible, paved areas shall include “green”
stormwater collection and treatment, and employ Low
Impact Development (LID) features that minimize
surface water runoff. LID features may include
bioretention systems, swales, green roofs, and
permeable pavers.

Stormwater
management
E 9.2 Stormwater retention features that minimize runoff into streets, parking lots, landscaped areas, and open spaces shall be incorporated, where feasible. Stormwater
retention features include drainage swales and rain
gardens.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.1 Landscaping shall define the edges of paths, plazas, and seating areas.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.2 Trees shall be planted to shade walkways, gathering areas, parking, and other larger expanses of pavement.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.3 Landscaping in setback areas shall create a transition zone between the sidewalk and street‐level residential
units and entries.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.4 Landscaped areas shall be regularly maintained to keep them aesthetically pleasing, and to remove dead and
dying plants.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 123
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.5 Gateway or entry points shall be emphasized with distinctive trees and plants.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.6 Existing trees, to the extent feasible, and healthy, are to be preserved and integrated into site designs.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.7 To reduce water usage, all development shall employ water‐efficient irrigation techniques, including
micro–irrigation, drip systems, and weather‐based
irrigation controllers, instead of conventional sprinklers.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.8 Native, drought‐tolerant, or well‐adapted tree and plant species shall be used.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.9 Seasonal and year‐round flowering shrubs and trees shall be located where they can be most appreciated by
site users and passersby, such as adjacent to walks and open space areas, or as frames for building entrances
and stairs.

Open Space
Landscaping
Standards
E 10.1 All landscaped areas shall be designed by a landscape professional to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.

Signage F 1.1 Signs within the Plan Area shall comply with all regulations stated in the City’s Zoning Ordinance
(Chapter 17.32) unless otherwise specified in the Precise Plan.

Signage F 1.2 Signs shall be made of high‐quality, durable, and environmentally friendly materials.

124 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Signage F 1.3 Multi‐tenant development anchor‐identity signs should be complementary to any Plan Area signage or
established by the Master Developer. Individual
property owners will be allowed to use letter styles, but the overall sign should have one consistent material for letters and background.

Monument &
gateway signage
F 2.1 The Precise Plan shall include up to two freestanding monument/gateway signs: at the Serramonte Boulevard
and Entry Drive intersection and at the West Drive and
Campus Drive intersection, which form major entry
points to the Plan Area.

Monument &
gateway signage
F 2.2 If provided, a single gateway or monument sign at the southern portion of the Plan Area near the round‐about
shall be located at Parcel E and be less than 4 feet high.

The sign shall not obstruct sightlines for drivers to the extent safety is compromised.

Monument &
gateway signage
F 2.3 If provided, a single gateway or monument sign at the northern portion of the Plan Area near the Retail Plaza shall be located at Parcel B. It may either be less than 4 feet high and no longer than 20 feet, or may be a tower structure‐‐either integrated with the Parcel B building corner or separate from the building. If an integrated
towerstructure, the structure shall not project more
than five feet beyond the face of the building in any
direction. If an independent tower structure, it may not be greater than 32 feet in height and not more than 64
sq. ft. in area. The maximum face area of signage of the tower structure shall not exceed 200 sq. ft.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 125
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Monument &
gateway signage
F 2.4 Gateway or monument signs shall not have internal illumination but will be lighted with externally mounted luminaires.

Building signage F 3.1 The physical design of signage shall conform to the architectural detailing of the associated building and
shall be in proportion to the surface onto which such
signage is mounted, as determined by the Planning
Division.

Building signage F 3.2 Signage shall not obstruct architectural details such as recesses, structural bays, or windows.

Building signage F 3.3 Externally illuminated or halo lit signs shall be required.

The use of internally lighted or box type signs are
prohibited. Internally lighted signs measuring 2 sq. ft. or less are allowed.

Building signage F 3.4 No more than three (3) building residential signs shall be provided per building. These shall be limited to
address number, street name, and/or a building name if
desired. If only one is provided, it shall be placed close to the main entry to the building. If signage is provided at more than one location, a minimum of one shall be
placed close to the main entry. The second and third
can be located such that the top of the signage is not
greater than 25’ feet from grade.  The aggregate sign
area shall not exceed 150 sq. ft.

Building signage F 3.5 Durable, vandal‐resistant materials and finishes shall be utilized for address signs.

Building signage F 3.6 Conduit, tubing, or raceways shall be concealed.

Transformers and other equipment for the signage shall
also be concealed.

Storefront signage F 4.1 Signage for multi‐tenant retail buildings shall be developed to minimize potential visual conflict, clutter, and competition.

126 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Storefront signage F 4.2 Maximum size for sign area per retail tenant is 30 sq. ft. on the face of a building. A second sign per retail
tenant, not exceeding 20 sq. ft., may be hung as either a banner or a rigid sign perpendicular to the building face.

Either of these two sign types may be attached to a
building’s architectural canopy.

Storefront signage F 4.3 For ground floor retail uses, hanging or projecting signs should be located near the front entry of a store.

Coordinate with the overall design of the street wall.

Hanging or projecting signs shall meet Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA) clearance requirements.

Storefront signage F 4.4 Ancillary retail space or leasing offices shall be signed in a manner consistent with the storefront signage
standards in this section.

Prohibited signs F See following standards for Prohibited Signs (F.5.1 to F.5.13)
Prohibited signs F 5.1 Signs which rotate, move mechanically or by the wind, flash, blink or reflect light by means of a polished or mirrored surface.

Prohibited signs F 5.2 Open flames, balloons, loudspeakers used to call attention to a product, service, or a property.

Prohibited signs F 5.3 Signs which identify or advertise a product or service not available on the premises.

Prohibited signs F 5.4 Externally illuminated signs where the source of light is directly visible or cause glare or reflections that are a traffic hazard or nuisance.

Prohibited signs F 5.5 Signs which emit or reflect light by means of direct fluorescence, phosphorescence, or “day‐glow” colors.

Prohibited signs F 5.6 Any sign illumination which exhibits undue glare.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix A 127
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Prohibited signs F 5.7 Any sign placed or displayed on vehicles parked primarily for the purpose of displaying the sign. (This does not apply to food trucks that are parked while they provide service.)
Prohibited signs F 5.8 Internally lit signs where the entire face of the sign is illuminated, rather than just the graphics.

Prohibited signs F 5.9 Advertising bench signs, unless required by SamTrans at Serramonte Blvd.

Prohibited signs F 5.1 Off‐site directional signs.

Prohibited signs F 5.11 Roof signs.

Prohibited signs F 5.12 Outdoor advertising billboard signs.

Prohibited signs F 5.13 Abandoned signs.

General lighting
standards
G 1.1 Lighting shall incorporate dark sky principles by shielding fixtures to prevent light from emitting above a 90‐degree angle. Any lighting source located on parking or rooftop parking shall be a full cutoff type.

General lighting
standards
G 1.2 Light shall be designed to minimize glare and light trespass into neighboring buildings and properties.

General lighting
standards
G 1.3 High‐efficiency technology such as LED lighting with advanced controls shall be utilized to minimize energy
consumption.

General lighting
standards
G 1.4 The use of energy–efficient, long‐life LEDs with light color rendered as a warm white (maximum K 3000) is
encouraged.

Street lighting G 2.1 Provide streetlights in general locations shown on Figure 3.8, Lighting Diagram for Locations.

Street lighting G 2.2 Streetlights shall comply with Daly City standards.

Pedestrian lighting G 3.1 Provide pedestrian lighting in general locations shown on Figure 3.8, Lighting Diagram. Additional locations for pedestrian lighting are along pedestrian pathways in
open spaces and in surface parking areas.

128 Appendix A Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan
Conformance Review Checklist Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Topic Section Number Standard
Applicant To Fill
Project Compliance (Yes/No/Not
Applicable)
City Staff Comments
Pedestrian lighting G 3.2 Pedestrian lighting shall not be taller than 25 feet in height.

Pedestrian lighting G 3.3 Pedestrian lighting may be integrated with streetlighting by providing additional luminaires facing the sidewalk
on streetlight poles, installed at a lower height than
street luminaries.

Pedestrian lighting G 3.4 Lighting in surface parking lots and service areas shall be directed away from surrounding buildings and
properties using fixtures that minimize light trespass
and glare.

Low illumination
pedestrian lighting
G 4.1 Commercial grade bollards, step lights, and path lights shall be used as appropriate along pedestrian walkways
and plazas.

Low illumination
pedestrian lighting
G 4.2 Nighttime lighting for recreational uses in parks and public spaces should be unobtrusive and control glare.

Building lights G 5.1 Lighting should be integrated into the design of buildings and building architecture to highlight
significant architectural features such as signs,
entrances, walkways, or storefront displays.

Building lights G 5.2 Building facades may be illuminated using shielded fixtures to highlight architectural features.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix B 129
Appendix B:

Compliance Review - Example Projects

Example Compliant and Non-Compliant Architectural Design 1

URBAN DESIGN STANDARDS
Street Frontage – Mixed-Use Ground Floor Use
Compliant Non-Compliant
Building meets street frontage standards for mixed-use ground floor uses:

A.7.2 Primary elevation aligns with build-to-line
A.7.3 Projections with a height greater than 16 feet can encroach across the build-to-line up to 6 feet.

B.2.2 Ground floor height meets 14-foot minimum
B.3.8 Physical and visual pedestrian access required
Building does not meet street frontage standards for mixed-use ground floor uses:

A.8.5 Exceeds permitted maximum of two 12-foot driveways - loading areas prohibited for active street frontages
B.2.2 Does not meet minimum floor-to-floor ground floor height of 14 feet B.3.8 No physical or visual pedestrian access from sidewalk Street Frontage - Active Residential Ground Floor Use
Compliant Non-Compliant
Building meets street frontage standardsfor active residential ground floor use:

A.7.2 Primary elevation aligns with build-to-line
B.3.8 Residences have physical and visual pedestrian access from sidewalk Building does not meetstreet frontage standardsfor active residential ground floor use:

B.3.8 Lack of ground floor uses with physical and visual pedestrian access from sidewalk 130 Appendix B Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS
Example Compliant and Non-Compliant Architectural Design 2 Building Massing - Pedestrian and Podium Level
Compliant Non-Compliant
Building meets building massing standards for pedestrian and podium levels:

B.2.4 First one to three levels of all buildings shall be differentiated from the upper floors to provide a visual support for the floors above; high quality materials at pedestrian level.

B.2.5 Upper levels of building stepback from lower building wall Building does not meet building massing standards for pedestrian and podium levels:

B.2.4 Lack of differentiation between upper and ground floors B.2.5 No upper level building stepbacks
Building Massing - Tower Level
Compliant Non-Compliant
Building meets building massing standards for towers:

B.2.7 Tower massing extends to ground level
B.2.8 Tower massing extending to the ground is setback minimum 10 feet Building does not meet building massing standards for towers:

B.2.7 Tower extending to the ground is not setback minimum 10 feet Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix B 131

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS
Architectural Character; Massing; Facade Composition;
Example Compliant and Non-Compliant Architectural Design 3 Windows & Doors; Materials & Colors
Compliant Non-Compliant
Building complies with the
following standards:

Architectural Character
B.1.1 Contemporary
architectural design
B.1.2 No reference to historic
styles or materials
B.1.3 Avoids prohibited roof
forms and materials
B.1.4 Avoids ribbon windows
and flat building facades
B.1.5 Avoids auto-oriented
ground floor
B.1.6 Building elements are in
proportion to one another
B.1.7 Avoids visual discord oftoo
many sizes and shapes
B.1.8 Avoidsrandomly sized
building elements
Building Massing
B.2.2 Ground floorstorefronts
floor-to-floor height 14
feet
B.2.4 Ground floor differentiated
from upper floors
B.2.5 Upper levels of building
stepback from building
wall
Facade Composition
B.3.1 No continuous long flat facade
B.3.2 Occupied projections
B.3.3 Facade divided using projecting and
recessed volumes
B.3.4 Fenestration uses projecting bays and
recesses
B.3.5 Avoids featureless fenestration
B.3.6 Avoids blank facades
B.3.8 Transparent storefront windows
B.3.9 Sliding ground floor doors for outdoor
dining
Windows and Doors
B.4.1 Identifiable building entrances
B.4.2 Residential entries differentiated from retail
entries
B.4.4 Upper story windows with detail
B.4.5 No use of reflective glazing
Materials and Colors
B.5.1 Materials and colors coordinated for visual
harmony
B.5.2 High quality materials used at ground floor
B.5.3 Color differentiates architectural elements
B.5.4 No monolithic color
B.5.5 No garish or discordant colors
Building does not comply with the following standards:

Building Massing
B.2.4 Ground floor not differentiated from upper floors Facade Composition
B.3.1 Continuous long flat façade – no building projections or recesses for facade over 100 feet in length
B.3.2 No occupied projections
B.3.3 Facade not divided using projecting or recessed volumes B.3.4 Fenestration is flat, with no visual relief, no contrasting surfaces or use of projecting or recessed planes to create a rhythm of light and shadow
B.3.8 No active ground floor uses
Windows and Doors
B.4.1 Entrances not identifiable or easy to find from sidewalk B.4.4 Upperstory windows have no architectural details that recess or project from facade
Materials and Colors
B.5.2 Color does not differentiate architectural elements B.5.3 Building is a monolithic color
132 Appendix B Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS
Architectural Character; Massing; Facade Composition;
Example Compliant and Non-Compliant Architectural Design 4 Compliant
Windows & Doors; Materials & Colors
Non-Compliant
Building complies with architectural character, massing, facade composition, windows & doors, materials & color standards.

Building does not comply with architectural character (use of historic architectural style) and color standards (monolithic color).

Building complies with architectural character, active ground floor use, building massing, facade composition, window detail, and color standards.

Building does not comply with architectural character (auto-oriented ground floor), no ground floor use, flat building massing, no facade modulation, no identifiable pedestrian entrance.

Building complies with architectural character, massing, facade composition, windows & doors, materials & color standards.

Building does not comply with architectural character (vertical ribbon windows), no active ground floor use, flat building massing, no facade modulation, no clear building entrance, no window detail, monolithic building color.

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Appendix B 133

ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN STANDARDS
Example Compliant and Non-Compliant Architectural Design 5 Parking Structures
Compliant Non-Compliant
Parking structure complies with the following standards:

C.5.1 Above grade parking structure applies screening to minimize visual impact C.5.4 Above grade parking structure designed with human-scale elements that complement and does not contrast with buildings and public spaces
Parking structure does not comply with the following standards:

C.5.1 Above grade parking structure does not apply screening to minimize visual impact
C.5.4 Above grade parking structure does not visually recede, rather it visually contrasts with surrounding buildings and public spaces 134 Appendix B Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan

Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan Acknowledgements 135
Acknowledgements
Jefferson Union High School
District
Board of Trustees
» Andrew Lie, President
» Kalimah Salahuddin, Vice President
» Jerome Gallegos, Trustee
» Sherrett Walker, Trustee
» Rosie Tejada, Clerk
District Staff
» Toni Presta, Superintendent of Schools
» Tina Van Raaphorst, Associate
Superintendent of Business Services
» Austin Worden, Director of
Communications & Staff Housing
» Monica Casey, President American
Federation of Teachers (AFT) Local 1481
Brookwood Equities
» Alan Katz, President
» Bruce Fukuji, Planning Manager
» Chris White, Project Manager
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
Fehr & Peers Transportation
Planning
» Bill Burton, Senior Associate
Jett Landscape Architecture +
Design
» Bruce Jett, Principal
» Jesse Markman, Principal
» Samantha Elms, Landscape Designer
» Rebecca Vanni, Associate
BKF Engineers
» Brian Scott, Principal
» Tim Heffernan, Senior Project Manager
Office of the San Mateo County
Counsel
» John D. Nibbelin, Chief Deputy County
Counsel
» Timothy J. Fox, Lead Deputy County
Attorney

136 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

44 20193818.16

EXHIBIT G
[TENTATIVE MAP]

45 20193818.16

EXHIBIT H
[PLACEHOLDER FOR MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM]

46 20193818.16

EXHIBIT I
[PLACEHOLDER FOR CEQA FINDINGS]

47 20193818.16

EXHIBIT J
[PLACEHOLDER FOR EXISTING ORDINANCES]

48 20193818.16

EXHIBIT K
[PLACEHOLDER FOR ENACTING ORDINANCES]

Unit Type ST/JR-1 ST/JR-2 ST/JR-3 1A 1B 1C-1 1C-2 1D 2A-1 2A-2 2B 2C 2D 2E-1 2E-2 2F 3A 3B Totals Average Area
2nd floor 2 2 11 2 1 14 1 4 2 1 40
3rd floor 2 2 12 2 1 13 1 4 3 1 41
4th floor 2 2 12 2 1 13 1 4 3 1 41
5th floor 2 2 10 2 2 1 9 1 4 2 2 3 1 41
6th floor 2 2 1 9 1 2 1 3 3 4 1 3 2 1 3 38
Totals 10 10 1 54 3 10 5 3 52 4 5 4 3 14 4 1 14 4 201
Residential Public - Retail & Leasing
Standard Accessible
Van
Accessible
EVCS
Accessible Puzzle Lift
Retail
Standard
Retail
Accessible
Retail Van
Accessible

VAN EVCS
Accessible Leasing
Ground Floor 7 5 1 1 286 27 1 1 1 3
Totals 301 33
(1.5 / DU) (4 SPACES PER 1000 SF RENTABLE)

VAN EVCS
Accessible
1 © SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 12" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A0.1

PROJECT INFORMATION
8/25/2023

VICINITY MAP

PROJECT SITE

UNIT TABULATION
Name Area Level
AMENITY 6,620 SF 1ST FLOOR
COMMON - RESIDENTIAL 8,377 SF 1ST FLOOR
PARKING 48,456 SF 1ST FLOOR
RETAIL 6,656 SF 1ST FLOOR
1ST FLOOR 70,109 SF
APARTMENTS 38,287 SF 2ND FLOOR / PODIUM
COMMON - RESIDENTIAL 7,639 SF 2ND FLOOR / PODIUM
2ND FLOOR / PODIUM 45,926 SF
APARTMENTS 39,542 SF 3RD FLOOR
COMMON - RESIDENTIAL 6,729 SF 3RD FLOOR
3RD FLOOR 46,272 SF
APARTMENTS 39,462 SF 4TH FLOOR
COMMON - RESIDENTIAL 6,751 SF 4TH FLOOR
4TH FLOOR 46,213 SF
APARTMENTS 38,239 SF 5TH FLOOR
COMMON - RESIDENTIAL 6,512 SF 5TH FLOOR
5TH FLOOR 44,751 SF
AMENITY 1,216 SF 6TH FLOOR
APARTMENTS 33,165 SF 6TH FLOOR
COMMON - RESIDENTIAL 6,435 SF 6TH FLOOR
6TH FLOOR 40,817 SF
TOTAL GROSS AREA 294,087 SF

GROSS CONSTRUCTION BUILDING AREA SUMMARY
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL TYPE I AREA 70,109 SF
TOTAL TYPE III-A AREA 223,978 SF

SERRAMONTE DEL REY

PARCEL B MULTIFAMILY HOUSING / MIXED USE

DRAWING INDEX

GENERAL
A0.1 PROJECT INFORMATION
CIVIL
C1.1 EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN
C2.1 CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN
C3.1 CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN
C4.1 CONCEPTUAL STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN
C5.1 CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN
C6.1 CONCEPTUAL FIRE ACCESS PLAN

LANDSCAPE
L-1 LANDSCAPE PLAN GROUND FLOOR
L-2 LANDSCAPE PLAN 2ND FLOOR
L-3 LANDSCAPE PLAN 6TH FLOOR
L-4 PRECEDENT IMAGES
L-5 SITE & MATERIAL IMAGES
L-6 PRELIMINARY PLANT PALETTE & NOTES
L-7 PLANTING PLAN GROUND FLOOR
L-8 PLANTING PLAN 2ND FLOOR
L-9 PLANTING PLAN 6TH FLOOR
L-10 SECTION ELEVATIONS
L-11 OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

ARCHITECTURAL
A1.0 SITE PLAN
A2.1 GROUND FLOOR PLAN
A2.2 2ND FLOOR / PODIUM PLAN
A2.3 3RD FLOOR PLAN
A2.4 4TH FLOOR PLAN
A2.5 5TH FLOOR PLAN
A2.6 6TH FLOOR PLAN
A2.7 ROOF PLAN
A3.0 EAST & NORTH ELEVATION
A3.1 SOUTH & WEST ELEVATION
A4.0 BUILDING SECTIONS
A5.0 UNIT PLANS

PARKING SUMMARY

PROJECT INFORMATION
APN: 091-211-230
ZONING: PLANNED DEVELOPMENT

COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE DISTRICT (C-MU)
SETBACKS: REFER TO PRECISE PLAN
TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION: TYPE I (GARAGE / GROUND FLOOR)

TYPE III-A (SUPERSTRUCTURE)
SITE AREA: 185,724 SF (4.26 ACRES)
SITE COVERAGE: 70,109 / 185,724 = 38%
REQUIRED OPEN SPACE: 201 D.U. x 150 SF/DU = 30,150 SF
USEABLE OPEN SPACE PROVIDED: 75,431 SF, S.L.D.

MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT: 87'-0" (PER PRECISE PLAN UPDATE) PROPOSED BUILDING HEIGHT: 86'-6"
RETAIL AREA (RENTABLE) NORTH RETAIL: 3027 SF
SOUTH RETAIL: 2773 SF
TOTAL: 5800 SF
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED: 1 PER D.U. (IN ENCLOSED ROOMS ON GROUND FLOOR, TOTAL 2745 SF)
MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS: REFER TO PRECISE PLAN
RETAIL: 4 SPACES PER 1000 SF (RENTABLE)
RESIDENTIAL: 1.5 SPACES / D.U.

Name Area Level
BALCONY 155.6 SF 2ND FLOOR / PODIUM
BALCONY 348.4 SF 2ND FLOOR / PODIUM
2ND FLOOR / PODIUM 504.0 SF
BALCONY 155.6 SF 3RD FLOOR
BALCONY 348.4 SF 3RD FLOOR
3RD FLOOR 504.0 SF
BALCONY 129.5 SF 5TH FLOOR
BALCONY 129.7 SF 5TH FLOOR
BALCONY 129.8 SF 5TH FLOOR
BALCONY 129.8 SF 5TH FLOOR
BALCONY 129.8 SF 5TH FLOOR
BALCONY 130.1 SF 5TH FLOOR
5TH FLOOR 778.8 SF
Grand total 1,786.8 SF

PRIVATE BALCONY SUMMARY
(NOTE: GROSS AREA IS NOT EQUAL TO BUILDING AREA FOR

CITY PLANNING PURPOSES)
(SEE LANDSCAPE DRAWINGS FOR FULL OPEN SPACE SUMMARY)
TOTAL

C1.1

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B
DALY CITY, CA 8/25/2023

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B
DALY CITY, CA 8/25/2023
C2.1

CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B
DALY CITY, CA 8/25/2023
C3.1

CONCEPTUAL GRADING PLAN

C4.1

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B
DALY CITY, CA 8/25/2023

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B
DALY CITY, CA 8/25/2023
C5.1

CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B
DALY CITY, CA 8/25/2023
C6.1

CONCEPTUAL FIRE ACCESS PLAN

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-1
08/25/2023

LANDSCAPE PLAN -

GROUND FLOOR
LEGEND

ENHANCED PAVING, TYP

INCLUSIVE PLAYGROUND WITH STRUCTURES FOR
AGES 2-5 & 5-12

OVERLOOK

RESIDENTIAL TERRACE

REFER TO CIVIL PLANS FOR LIMIT OF WORK AND

PHASING FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS

COMMUNITY GARDEN
4 3
2 1
1 4

OVERLOOK
PARK
6 5
3 5
2 6
C
A
B

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-2
08/25/2023

LANDSCAPE PLAN -
2ND FLOOR

RAISED PLANTER, TYP
(INCLUDES STORMWATER TREATMENT AREAS)

LOW GREENROOF PLANTING, TYP

SYNTHETIC TURF, TYP

RAISED GARDEN PLANTERS, TYP

OUTDOOR KITCHEN & COUNTER SEATING, TYP

COMMUNITY TABLE

LOUNGE FURNITURE & UMBRELLA, TYP

PLANTER, TYP

STRING LIGHTING
SPA

SPA ENCLOSURE
OUTDOOR GAMES; CORN-HOLE, PADDLE BALL

FIREPIT
4 3
2 1
5 6
7 8
9 10
LEGEND
11 12
13 1
2 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 13

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-3
08/25/2023

LANDSCAPE PLAN -
6TH FLOOR

OUTDOOR KITCHEN WITH BBQ, TRASH &

RECYCLE RECEPTACLE

FIRE PIT & LOUNGE SEATING

TABLES & CHAIRS, TYP

ARBOR, TYP

COMMUNITY TABLE

OVERLOOK COUNTER

PLANTER, TYP
4 3
2 1
5 6
7 LEGEND
1 2
4 3
5 6
7

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-4
08/25/2023

PRECEDENT IMAGES

OVERLOOK COUNTER AT ROOF TERRACE

COMMUNITY GARDEN

FIREPIT AT COURTYARD ARBOR AT ROOF TERRACE INCLUSIVE PLAYGROUND AT OVERLOOK PARK

LAWN AREA AT OVERLOOK PARK STRING LIGHTS AT COURTYARD

RAISED PLANTERS

OUTDOOR GAMES AT COURTYARD

BIKE RACKS

OUTDOOR KITCHEN & COUNTER SEATING AT COURTYARD

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-5
08/25/2023

SITE & MATERIAL IMAGES

STANDARD CONCRETE ENHANCED PAVING PLAY AREA RESILIENT SURFACING DECOMPOSED GRANITE PAVING AT

COURTYARD RAISED PLANTERS

SYNTHETIC TURF AT COURTYARD LAWN AT OVERLOOK PARK
42” HIGH METAL ENCLOSURE FENCE

AROUND PLAY AREA

RAISED PLANTERS AT COURTYARD BOARD FORM CONCRETE WALL AT OVERLOOK PARK RETAINING WALL AT OVERLOOK PARK BUILT-IN-BENCH AT RETAIL PLAZA

LED PARKING & ROAD LIGHT FIXTURE PEDESTRIAN LIGHT FIXTURE BOLLARD LIGHT AT RETAIL PLAZA RECESSED WALL LIGHT STRING LIGHTS AT COURTYARD PAVING

LIGHTING

WALLS AND FENCING

POLE HEIGHT
(20’- 25’)

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-6
08/25/2023
GENERAL PLANTING AND IRRIGATION NOTES:

1. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PLANS SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CRITERIA OF THE

CALIFORNIA MODEL WATER EFFICIENCY ORDINANCE AND APPLY THOSE CRITERIA FOR

THE EFFICIENT USE OF WATER IN THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN PLAN AND COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE CITY CODES, ORDINANCES AND PRECISE PLAN REQUIREMENTS.

2. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PLANS SHALL CONFORM WITH TIER 2 LANDSCAPE PROJECT REQUIREMENTS. WATER USE EFFICIENCY CHECKLIST AND WATER USE

CALCULATIONS TO BE PROVIDED WITH DETAILED LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION DESIGN DRAWINGS FOR BUILDING PERMIT.

3. ALL PLANTING AREAS SHALL BE TOP-DRESSED WITH A MINIMUM 3” LAYER OF

ORGANIC, UN-DYED MULCH RECYCLED FROM LOCAL ORGANIC MATERIALS SUCH AS TREE TRIMMINGS, PLANT, OR CLEAN WOOD WASTE ON EXPOSED SURFACES.

4. IRRIGATION SYSTEM IS TO BE A FULLY AUTOMATIC WEATHER-BASED SYSTEM USING LOW FLOW DRIP AND BUBBLER SYSTEM.

5. STREET TREES SHALL BE TIED INTO IRRIGATION SYSTEM.

6. AT LEAST EIGHTY PERCENT OF THE PLANTS IN LANDSCAPE AREA SHALL BE NATIVE PLANTS OR LOW-WATER USING PLANTS.

7. LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION SHALL COMPLY WITH CHAPTER 17.41 WATER CONSERVATION IN LANDSCAPING.

ACCENT/SMALL TREES HILLSIDE SUCCESSION AREA

MEDIUM AND SMALL SHRUBS ACCENT PLANTING

ACCENT PLANTING GROUNDCOVER
C3 STORMWATER PLANTING
• ACER PALMATUM - JAPANESE MAPLE
• *CERCIS OCCIDENTALIS - WESTERN REDBUD
• PISTACIA CHINENSIS - CHINESE PISTACHE
• LAGUNARIA PATERSONIA - NORFOLK ISLAND HIBISCUS
• QUERCUS SUBER - CORK OAK

ACCENT/SMALL TREES

PARK TREES
• ALOE DISTANS
• AEONIUM CANARIENSE - HOUSELEEK
• AJUGA REPTENS - BLUE BUGLE
• *CEANOTHUS - CALIFORNIA LILAC
• THYMUS - THYME

GROUNDCOVER
• AGAVE ATTENUATA - FOX TAIL AGAVE
• ANIGOZANTHOS - KANGAROO PAW
• CLIVIA MINIATA - KAFFIR LILY
• LIBERTIA PEREGRINANS - ORANGE LIBERTIA
• *SALVIA GREGGII - AUTUMN SAGE
• SENECIO VITALIS - NARROW LEAF CHALKSTICKS

ACCENT PLANTINGS
• ACER BUERGERIANUM - TRINDENT MAPLE
• ARBUTUS ‘MARINA’- STRAWBERRY TREE
• HYMENOSPORUM FLAVUM - SWEETSHADE
• MELALEUCA QUINQUENERVIA - SEJPUT TREE
• OLEA EUROPAEA ‘SWAN HILL’ - OLIVE TREE
• TRISTANIOPSIS LAURINA - WATER GUM

STREET TREES - COORDINATE WITH CITY ARBORIST
• *CALAMAGROSTIS FOLIOSA - MENDOCINO REED GRASS
• *EPILOBIUM CANUM ‘CATALINA’ - CALIFORNIA FUCHSIA
• HELICTOTRICHON SEMPERVIRENS - BLUE OAT GRASS
• RIBES SANGUINEUM - PINK FLOWERED CURRENT
• *ROSMARINUS OFFICINALIS - ROSEMARY
• PITTOSPORUM CRASSIFOLIUM - KARO
• POLYSTICHUM MUNITUM - WESTERN SWORD FERN

MEDIUM AND SMALL SHRUBS

PRELIMINARY PLANT PALETTE
• *ACHILLEA MILLEFOLIUM - YARROW
• CHONDROPETALUM TECTORUM - CAPE RUSH
• *ERIOGONUM LATIFOLIUM - COAST BUCKWHEAT
• LOMANDRA LONGIFOLIA - DWARF MAT RUSH
• *PENSTEMON ‘MARGARITA BOP’ - BEARD TONGUE
• CERCIS CANADENSIS ‘FOREST PANSY
• AESCULUS CALIFORNICA - CALIFORNIA BUCKEYE
• ACER MACROPHYLLUM - BIG LEAF MAPLE
• ARBUTUS MENZIESII - PACIFIC MADRONE
• CALOCEDRUS DECURRENS - INCENSE CEDAR
• CENAOTHUS ‘RAY HARTMAN’ - WILD LILAC
• HESPEROCYPARIS MAROCARPA - MONTEREY CYPRESS
• FREMONTODENDRON CALIFORNICUM - FREMONTIA
C3 STORMWATER PLANTING

HILLSIDE SUCCESSION AREA

STREET TREES PARK TREES

PRELIMINARY PLANT

PALETTE & NOTES
NOTE:
* DENOTES BUTTERFLY OR HUMMINGBIRD GARDEN SPECIES

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
TR
UP
DN
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-7
08/25/2023
SEE SHEET L-8 FOR FULL PLANTING PLAN PALETTE

PLANTING PLAN - GROUND
FLOOR

HILLSIDE TO BE CLEANED OF SURFACE AND
LADDER FUELS. TREE SUCCESSION PLAN

WILL REPLACE EXISTING TREES RESULTING

FROM CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY OR DUE TO

SENESCENCE OR REMOVAL FOR SAFETY AND

WILL INCLUDE A DIVERSE PLANT ECOLOGY

INCLUDING EVERGREEN AND DECIDUOUS
SPECIES APPROPRIATE FOR DALY CITY.

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
TR
UP
DN
‘ ’
TR
UP
DN
‘ ’
‘ ’
TR
UP
DN
‘ ’
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-8
08/25/2023
PLANTING PLAN - 2ND
FLOOR

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-9
08/25/2023
SEE SHEET L-8 FOR FULL PLANTING PLAN PALETTE

SEE ENLARGEMENT PLAN
PLANTING PLAN - 6TH
FLOOR

TS PO
P
O
T
S
STOP
P
O
T
S
S
T
O
P
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD

CALLAN BOULEVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
ABC
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-10
08/25/2023

SECTION ELEVATIONS

TS PO
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
TS PO
STOP

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE

EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK
27'-6"
21'-0"
39'-6"
33'-6"LINE OF GARAGE BELOW 26'-1"
34'-0"

LOADING ZONE

RESIDENT PARKING

RETAIL PARKING
RETAIL

RETAIL LOBBY AMENITY AMENITY

BIKE PARKING

NORTH ACCESS WAY

HILLSIDE AREA
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2021
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2021. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
4/21/2021
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2018
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2018.

JUHSD PRECISE PLAN
DALY CITY, CA.

A1.0
Precise Plan
9/23/2019
0' 30' 60' 120'
L-11
08/25/2023

OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM

NORTH ACCESS WAY

SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

KEY NAME AREA LEVEL
PEDESTRIAN STREETSCAPE 6,505 SF GROUND FLOOR
RETAIL PLAZA 6,965 SF GROUND FLOOR
LANDSCAPE (<10%) 5,390 SF GROUND FLOOR
COURTYARD & TERRACE 24,360 SF GROUND/2ND
*PRIVATE BALCONIES OR DECKS 2,585 SF ALL LEVELS
ROOF TERRACE 1,346 SF 6TH FLOOR
SUBTOTAL 47,151 SF
PARK(<10%) 22,295 SF GROUND FLOOR
RECREATION TRAIL 5,985 SF GROUND FLOOR
SUBTOTAL 28,280 SF
TOTAL 75,431 SF
*SEE ARCHITECTURE DRAWINGS FOR PRIVATE BALCONY & DECK AREAS

USEABLE OPEN SPACE SUMMARY

30 20
10 HB
30 20
10 HB
30 20
10 HB
STOP
POTS
STOP
POTS
STOP
STOP
STOP

7.00 SERRAMONTE BOULEVARD
CALLAN
BO
U
L
EVARD

ENTRY DRIVE

NORTH DRIVE EAST DRIVE
TO HIGHWAY 1

OVERLOOK PARK HILLSIDE AREA

COMMUNITY
GARDEN

PLAYGROUND
RETAIL
BIKE
GARAGE
ENTRY

RETAIL BIKE ENTRY
LOBBY

AMENITY

AMENITY

TERRACE

PARKING GARAGE
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1" = 30'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A1.0

SITE PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 15' 60' 30'

S
T
O
P
S
T
O
P
A4.0
1 A4.0
1 RES. TRASH

CLUB ROOM

NORTH LOBBY

SOUTH RETAIL
A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
STAIR
A4.0
B2
A

FITNESS

NORTH RETAIL
DN
23'-0"
EXIT
EXIT
34 SPACES 22 SPACES
34 SPACES
34 SPACES
24'-0"
23'-5"
34 SPACES
34 SPACES
22 SPACES
1 2
ACC
3 4
ELEC.

MAIL
VAN
ELEC.
22 SPACES 34 SPACES
5 6
7 8
9 10
STAIR

BICYCLE STORAGE

BICYCLE STORAGE LEASING LOBBY
25'-8 7/8"
16 ACC
17 18 19 20 21
21 RETAIL SPACES
22 23 24 25 26 27
3027 SF
2773 SF
UP
DN
11 12
UP

RETAIL TRASH
7'-9" HI.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
UP
27'-1 3/4"
36'-8 3/8"
28 29
127 RESIDENTIAL SPACES
301 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL SPACES
174 RESIDENTIAL SPACES
13 14 15
31 32 33
16 SPACES
DN
DN
9'-0" 8'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 5'-0" 9'-0" 9'-0" 5'-0" 9'-0"
24'-0"
24'-0"
24'-0"
GARAGE
ENTRY

NORTH DRIVE

ENTRY DRIVE
9'-0" 5'-0" 12'-0"

VAN VAN VAN
5'-0" 12'-0"
9'-0" 8'-0" 9'-0"
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.1

GROUND FLOOR PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1A UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2B
UNIT 1A
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1A UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 3B
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1C-2
UNIT JR-1
UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 3A UNITJR-1
TR
A4.0
1 A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
A4.0
2 UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1

SEATING AREA
UP
DN
IDF

COURTYARD
ELEV.

LOBBY
DN
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.2
2ND FLOOR / PODIUM PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1A
UNIT 2B
UNIT 1A
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A
UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1A UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 3B
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1A UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1C-2
UNIT JR-1
UNIT 2E-1
UNIT JR-1 UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 3A
A4.0
1 A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
A4.0
2 UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1
STAIR
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1A
ELEV.

LOBBY
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.3
3RD FLOOR PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1A
UNIT 2B
UNIT 1A
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1A UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
JR 1BR
UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 3B
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 1C-2
UNIT JR-1
UNIT 2E-1
UNIT JR-1 UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 1A
A4.0
1 A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
A4.0
2 UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1
STAIR
UNIT 2A-1
0"
ELEV.

LOBBY
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.4
4TH FLOOR PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A
UNIT 2C UNIT 2C UNIT 1B
UNIT 2B
UNIT 1A
UNIT 3A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A
UNIT 2E-2
UNIT 2C UNIT 2C UNIT 2E-2
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT JR-2
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 3B
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1 UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1C-2
UNIT JR-1
UNIT 2E-1
UNIT JR-1 UNIT 2E-1
UNIT 1A
A4.0
1 A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
A4.0
2 UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 3A
STAIR
3'-0"
UNIT 1A
UNIT 1B
ELEV.

LOBBY
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.5
5TH FLOOR PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

T R
UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A
UNIT 2A-2 UNIT 2D UNIT 1B UNIT 2B
UNIT JR-3
UNIT 3A UNIT 1A UNIT 1A

AMENITY

ROOF TERRACE
UNIT 2D UNIT 2D
UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 2F
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 1A UNIT 1A UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-2 UNIT 2A-2
UNIT JR-1
UNIT 2E-2
UNIT 2E-2 UNIT JR-1
A4.0
1 A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
A4.0
2 UNIT 1C-1
UNIT 2A-1
UNIT 3A
UNIT 2A-2 UNIT 1C-2
UNIT 2A-1
STAIR
UNIT 1A
UNIT JR-2
UNIT 1A
STAIR
UNIT 1D
UNIT 1D
UNIT 1D
ELEV.

LOBBY
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.6
6TH FLOOR PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

A3.1
1 A3.1 2
A3.0
2 1 A3.0
STAIR
STAIR
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A2.7

ROOF PLAN
8/25/2023
TRUE
NORTH
0' 8' 16' 32'

PLASTER 3
ALUM. PANEL

TILE CLADDING
WD. TRELLIS
PTD. MTL. SUNSHADE

VINYL WINDOW
PLASTER 3
COMPOSITE WD. SIDING
NORTH

ACCESS WAY
BOARD FORMED CONCRETE WD. GRAIN ALUMINUM BATTENS PT. MTL. RAILING ALUM. PANEL COMPOSITE WD. SIDING
PLASTER 1
PLASTER 3

BOARD FORMED CONCRETE

STONE CLADDING

CEMENTITIOUS PANELS

PLASTER FRAME
PTD. MTL. SUNSHADES

ENTRY DRIVE
PTD. MTL. ALUM.

STOREFRONT
WD. GRAIN ALUMINUM BATTENS

VINYL WINDOWS
PLASTER 3
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A3.0

EAST & NORTH ELEVATION
8/25/2023
A3.0 1/16" = 1'-0"
1 EAST ELEVATION (OVERLOOK PARK)
A3.0 1/16" = 1'-0"
2 NORTH ELEVATION (SERRAMONTE BLVD.)

VINYL WINDOW
PLASTER 1
ALUM. PANEL
PLASTER 3
PLASTER 2
PTD. MTL. FASCIA

CEMENTITIOUS SIDING
PLASTER 3

CORTEN PANELS
PLASTER 2
PTD. STEEL
PLASTER 3
PTD. MTL. RAILING

JULIET BALCONY
WD. TRELLIS
COMPOSITE WD. SIDING
WD. TRELLIS

TILE CLADDING
PLASTER 3

ENTRY DRIVE
PREFINISHED ALUM.

STOREFRONT
PTD. MTL. CANOPY WITH SIGNAGE

OVERLOOK PARK
73'-6" TO TOP OF PARAPET
EL. 481.0'
AVG. GRADE ELEVATION
ALUM. PANEL
PLASTER 3
PTD. MTL. SUNSHADE
PTD. MTL RAILING
PTD. MTL. TRELLIS

STONE CLADDING
PLASTER 3

CEMENTITIOUS PANEL

CORTEN PANEL
COMPOSITE WD. SIDING PTD. MTL. SUNSHADE
ALUM. PANEL

TILE CLADDING

NORTH DRIVE
SERRAMONTE BLVD.
73'-6" TO TOP OF PARAPET
EL. 481.0'
AVG. GRADE ELEVATION

RETAIL SIGNAGE / BANNERS
PTD. MTL. CANOPY WITH SIGNAGE
PREFINISHED ALUM. STOREFRONT
PLASTER 1
© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A3.1

SOUTH & WEST ELEVATION
8/25/2023
A3.1 1/16" = 1'-0"
1 SOUTH ELEVATION (NORTH DRIVE)
A3.1 1/16" = 1'-0"
2 WEST ELEVATION (ENTRY DRIVE)

ENTRY DRIVE

TERRACE

OVERLOOK PARK

RETAIL PARKING

PARKING PIT BEYOND

RESIDENTIAL
481.0'
(AVG. GRADE ELEVATION)
73'-6" TO TOP OF PARAPET
PODIUM
80'-6" TO TOP OF PARAPET
86'-6" TO TOP OF PENTHOUSE

RESIDENTIAL

COURTYARD

PARKING

AMENITY

NORTH DRIVE
73'-6" TO TOP OF PARAPET
481.0' (AVG. GRADE ELEVATION) 76'-6" TO TOP OF PENTHOUSE © SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/16" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A4.0

BUILDING SECTIONS
8/25/2023
A4.0 1/16" = 1'-0"
1 EAST - WEST SECTION (FACING NORTH)
A4.0 1/16" = 1'-0"
B 2 NORTH - SOUTH SECTION (FACING EAST)

© SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INC, 2023
No Copies, transmissions, reproductions, or electronic manipulation of any portion of these drawings in whole or in part are to be made without the express permission of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All design indicated within these drawings are property of SEIDEL ARCHITECTS INCORPORATED. All copyrights reserved © 2023. 1/8" = 1'-0"

SERRAMONTE DEL REY, PARCEL B

DALY CITY, CA
A5.0

UNIT PLANS
8/25/2023
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
1 UNIT ST/JR-1
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
2 UNIT ST/JR-2
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
3 UNIT 1A
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
4 UNIT 1B
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
5 UNIT 1C
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
6 UNIT 2A-1
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
8 UNIT 2B
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
9 UNIT 2C
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
10 UNIT 2D
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
11 UNIT 2E
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
12 UNIT 3A
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
13 UNIT 3B
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
7 UNIT 2A-2
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
14 UNIT 2F
A5.0 1/8" = 1'-0"
15 UNIT 1D
539 SF
607 SF
745 SF
649 SF
750 SF
691 SF
1080 SF
0' 4' 8' 16'
1007 SF
1171 SF
931 SF
890 SF
1159 SF
1242 SF
1350 SF
1505 SF

1 DRAFT - PLANNED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONE PD-31B

SERRAMONTE DEL REY PRECISE PLAN
The purpose and intent of these Planned Development Standards is to replace the oning regulations contained in Planned Development Zoning District PD-31 for that portion of Planned Development PD-31 identified in the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan (Attachment “A”) and replace PD-31A in its entirety with revised regulations, which shall be known as Planned Development Zoning District PD-31B.

I. GENERAL

1. When these Planned Development standards conflict with other sections of the Zoning Ordinance, these standards shall prevail only to the extent of the conflict. Where these planned development standards do not provide regulations, the Zoning Ordinance1 shall apply as to the most similar land use or standard.

2. The contents of the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan dated September 1, 2023 (Attachment "A”) are hereby incorporated by reference. When these Planned Development standards conflict with Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan, these standards shall prevail only to the extent of the conflict.

II. OBJECTIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. LAND USE
A.1 Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted by right as part of Planned Development Zone PD-31:

1. RESIDENTIAL USES
Accessory dwelling units as permitted by the California Government Code Apartment buildings meeting the density prescription contained herein Townhouses2
1 The Zoning Ordinance provisions that apply shall be those consistent with the Development Agreement, including without limitation its covenants concerning vested rights and, notwithstanding anything provision herein, nothing in the PD-31 zoning is intended to supersede the Development Agreement.
2 Three story walk-up apartment townhouses are permitted as part of a multi-family residential of at least four stories on any parcel. Up to 15 walk-up apartment townhouses are permitted on a single parcel, not to exceed a maximum number of 40 walkup apartment townhouses for the plan area.

2 Live work dwelling units3

2. COMMERCIAL USES4,5, 6
Athletic clubs and health studios
Assembly uses, including churches, lodges, and social and meeting halls Business and trade schools
Childcare facilities, day care centers, and play gyms
Food sales on a temporary basis, including farmer’s markets and food truck sales where such uses are conducted on hardscape surfaces and do not displace any existing parking space
Offices use including professional office, medical and dental office, and medical clinics Veterinarian offices
Personal service uses, including nail and hair salons, massage businesses where employees are licensed by the State of California
Restaurants that do not provide a drive-through window
Retail uses, including retail sales of beer, wine, and distilled spirits. where less than 50 percent of the store stock retail value is such products Seasonal temporary uses (e.g. Christmas store)

3. COMMUNITY SERVICE USES4
Community center
Library

4. PUBLIC UTILITY AND PUBLIC SERVICE USES7
3 Live-work units combine residential and non-residential uses. Live-work units require business owner occupancy of the unit and that no less than 50 percent of the floor area is workspace. Live-above is permitted, where residential living space is above the workspace, including a separation between the two uses, so that the commercial section can be independently leased out for limited use. Occupants of a live-work unit are required to maintain either a Daly City business license, or a Home Occupation Permit per City code requirements, and as permitted by San Mateo County, such as a microenterprise home kitchen operation.

Live-work uses are not included in retail/commercial floor area limits. 4 The uses prescribed in this list shall be permitted when proposed within a building containing residential uses that meet the density prescription identified in this ordinance. They shall not be permitted in freestanding buildings. 5 Other commercial uses not listed here can be permitted at discretion of the Planning Manager. 6 When a use is not specifically listed, it shall be assumed that when the unlisted use is similar to or less objectionable than a permitted use, such use shall be permitted in the district to the same requirements of the most similarly listed use. Otherwise, the use shall be presumed to be not allowed.
7 The uses prescribed in this list shall be permitted when proposed on parcels containing residential uses that meet the density prescription identified in this ordinance. They shall not be permitted unless proposed in conjunction with residential buildings.

3 Pumping stations
Public utility buildings
Wireless communications facilities in accordance with the regulations specified in Chapter

17.39 of the Municipal Ordinance
A.2 Use Permits
The following uses are permitted with a Use Permit in PD 31 zone:

At the Community Garden at Overlook Park on Parcel B, a Use Permit is required to replace the Community Garden with park and open space uses, including active and passive recreation, landscaping and structures incidental to such use. The City shall issue a use permit if the applicant demonstrates substantial evidence the Community Garden is not being substantially utilized, is being misused by any members of the community, or has otherwise become infeasible to operate.

A.3 Prohibited Uses
The following uses are not permitted with a Use Permit in PD-31 zone:

1. RESIDENTIAL USES
Single-family attached or detached residential uses, and other similar uses, that do not meet the density prescription contained herein

2. COMMERCIAL USES
Retailers where more than 10 percent of the retail value of the store stock are firearms, such as handguns and long guns, in an open shopping format, or firearm parts, or any business that engages in the repair of firearms and/or firearm parts.

Retail sales where 50 percent or more of the store stock retail value is products that are beer, wine, and distilled spirits.

Retailer ales where 50 percent or more of the store stock retail value is products containing tobacco, electronic cigarettes, personal vaporizers, or electronic nicotine delivery systems
Vehicle or equipment rental and vehicle storage
Car wash and detailing shops
Manufacturing uses
Restaurants and any other uses providing a drive-through window Service stations, including operational and physical expansions thereto.

4 A.4 Development Density
A.4.1 Residential
a. Maximum residential units permitted on each parcel are shown in Table 3.3 Permitted Residential Density by Parcel. The sum of the total residential units developed on all parcels A-F shall not exceed 1,235 units. Any two of parcels D, E and F may be developed with high-rise buildings up to 14 stories up to parcel maximums. There is no maximum residential density in dwelling units/acre. b. Minimum residential density for any parcel shall be 45 dwelling units/acre and minimum density for the Precise Plan area overall shall be no less than 60 dwelling units per acre.
c. Minimum lot size shall be 10,000 square feet, Minimum lot width shall be 25 feet. d. For the purpose of calculating minimum residential density, land area shall include the building and covered parking area of a parcel not including park, open space, private streets, private accessways, paths and trails, setbacks and hillsides with slopes greater than three percent.

A.4.2 Commercial
a. Parcels may provide retail/commercial square footage on the ground floor up to the maximum in Table 3.3, however the total retail/commercial square footage for the overall buildout of the Plan Area is limited to 14,000 sq.ft.

Table 3.3 Permitted Density by Parcel

PARCEL NUMBER MAXIMUM

RESIDENTIAL UNITS

MAXIMUM RETAIL -

COMMERCIAL

SQUARE FOOTAGE

MINIMUM

RESIDENTIAL

DENSITY OR UNITS
Parcel A 122 0 122
Parcel B 210 6,000 sq.ft. 45 DU/AC per parcel
60 DU/AC per plan area
Parcel C 152 8,000 sq.ft.* 45 DU/AC per parcel
60 DU/AC per plan area
Parcel D 270 8,000 sq.ft. 45 DU/AC per parcel
60 DU/AC per plan area

5 Parcel E 330 8,000 sq.ft. 45 DU/AC per parcel
60 DU/AC per plan area
Parcel F 400 8,000 sq.ft. 45 DU/AC per parcel
60 DU/AC per plan area
*Parcel C is permitted to build up to 2,800 sq. ft of daycare center facilities within its allotment of retail/commercial square footage.

A.5 Building Height
Permitted building height for the Plan Area is shown in Figure 3.3 Building Heights. For Parcels A, B, C, D, E and F, the height limit for a podium shall be 90 feet, and for Parcels D, E and F the height limit for a tower shall be 150 feet. Buildings can be any height up to these limits, provided the project meets the minimum density standard set forth herein. Townhouses shall be constructed with a minimum three-story building height. Multi-family building shall be constructed with a predominant building height of a four-story minimum.. Stepbacks are required at 65 feet in height, with locations as shown on Figure 3.3 Building Heights. Exceptions to the height limit are:

A.5.1 Ornamental architectural features, such as turrets, parapets, corner towers, or other accentuating features.

A.5.2 Mechanical and roof-mounted elevator core equipment up to a maximum of 18 feet above maximum height, provided their combined coverage does not exceed 30% of building roof area. Equipment less than four feet above maximum height is exempt from the coverage calculation.

A.5.3 Architectural and landscape screening designed to conceal mechanical and roof mounted equipment.

A.5.4 Sustainability elements, such as photovoltaic cells, small-scale wind turbines suitable for residential development, storm water catchment / treatment equipment, solar water heating equipment.

A.5.5 Enclosed amenity spaces to a height of 12 feet where roof is designed as an accessible outdoor common area if coverage of enclosed amenity space is no more than 30 percent of building roof area.

6 A.6 Street Frontage
The Precise Plan utilizes build-to lines to define urban street and park frontages for buildings.

Figure 3.4 Street Frontages indicates the location and percentage of building walls required to be located at a build-to line. A build-to line sets the location of the primary building wall. Table 3.4 Location of Build-to Line for Parcels specifies the distance in feet of the build-to line from a parcel boundary. Together, these standards set the location and street wall for buildings throughout the neighborhood.

Table 3.4: Location of Build-to-Line for Parcels

PARCEL FRONTAGE BUILD-TO LINE
Parcel A Entry Drive
Access Drive West
N/A
N/A
Parcel B Entry Drive
North Drive/Access Drive North
Varies from 7.5 feet to 28 feet from north to south
43 feet
Parcel C East Drive
Access Drive South
2 feet
25 feet 9 inches
Parcel D
East Drive
Access Drive North
Access Drive South
6 feet
40 feet
40 feet

7 Parcel E
East Drive
West Drive
West Drive (southside)
Central Green
14 feet
10 feet
15 feet (setback measured from Public Access
Easement)
10 feet (setback measured from Public Access
Easement)
Parcel F West Drive
Access Drive West
10 feet
40 feet
Building frontage standards are:

A.6.1 The building frontage on all parcels shall comply with the percentage of building that is required to be aligned along the build-to-line, as shown in Figure 3.4.

A.6.2 The primary wall of a building shall align with the build-to line. The primary wall can be located up to 6 feet from a build-to-line. Ground floor building frontages may be recessed from the build-to line.

A.6.3 Balconies and other projections above 16’ from ground level may encroach across the build-to line up to 6 feet, provided such projections meeting Building and Fire Codes, and do not interfere with underground infrastructure.

8 A.6.4 Building entry canopies, arcades, and galleries are permitted to encroach up to 15 feet across the build-to-line.

A.6.5 Stairs to podium level courtyards overlooking parks, stoops, and appropriate fencing can encroach up to 10’ on the park side of a build-to line.

A.7 Ground Floor Use
The distribution of ground floor uses is essential to creating an active pedestrian environment.

Figure 3.5 Ground Floor Use identifies the location, type and orientation of ground floor uses by parcel for the Plan Area. Five types of ground floor uses are defined as follows:

A.7.1 Mixed- Use. This requires a ground floor use of one or more of: retail, café, restaurant uses with outdoor dining, building entries, residential lobbies, commercial, or community uses that attract pedestrian activity with physical access and visibility to and from the adjacent sidewalk.

A.7.2 Active Residential Use. Ground floors shall have one or more of the following:
commercial or community uses; main building entry, residential lobby, residential amenity spaces, and individual ground floor residential unit entrances. Ground floor residential unit entrances shall be accessible units at grade or elevated ground floor units with transitional space such as a stoop or porch not greater than five feet in height above grade.

A.7.3 Residential Use. This requires ground floor residential use, such as residential units without individual unit entries accessible from the street (which can have a back porch, garden, or patio), or other residential use, and excludes parking, loading and services areas.

A.7.4 Parking, Loading and Service Use. The location for parking, loading and service uses fronting streets, yards and accessways.

A.7.5 Required Street Frontages. Where Mixed-Use, Active Residential Use, and Residential Use frontages are required:
• No more than one 24’ wide vehicle access driveway or two 12’ wide vehicle access driveways are permitted. Loading docks are not permitted at active ground floor use frontages.
• Blank walls are limited to a length of 30’ maximum. Walls opening to structured parking areas at the ground floor are limited to 60’ maximum.

9 A.8 Setbacks
The perimeter of the Plan Area shall have the following setbacks along neighboring properties or street right-of-way. These are minimum setback dimensions. For build-to lines, see Table

3.4. Table 3.5: Setbacks

LOCATION SETBACK
North Perimeter Property Line 20 feet from Serramonte Boulevard East Perimeter Property Line 75 feet from Callan Boulevard

10 South Perimeter Property Line
Parcel C: 7.5 feet
Parcel E: 10 feet from pedestrian public access easement Parcel F: 40 feet
West Perimeter Property Line 30 feet
Within a parcel Minimum separation between buildings shall comply with local and state building codes.

Side yard 6 feet up to 90 feet in height, 10 feet above 90 feet in height.

B. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN
Buildings conforming to the architectural design standards will visually and functionally fit and contribute to the pedestrian-oriented urban realm of the Plan Area. Architectural design standards define the architectural character, form and function of buildings including building massing, façade composition, architectural details, materials, color, and sustainability features.

B.1 Architectural Character
Architectural character is the appearance of a building created by its form, function, construction technology and visual features.

B.1.1 Buildings shall be of high quality, contemporary architectural design. Contemporary architectural design is 21st century design: it reflects current trends in architecture.

Contemporary architectural design does not adhere to a particular style of set of standards; rather, it seeks to distinguish itself from the past by incorporating the latest innovations in building technology and design.

B.1.2 Buildings shall not directly reference historic architectural styles or use materials associated with specific periods or styles.

B.1.3 Building shall not use terracotta tile roofing, mansard roofs, asphalt roof tiles or shingles.

B.1.4 Ribbon windows and flat building facades shall not be permitted.

B.1.5 Auto-oriented ground floor building design, such as continuous, open to the street, at grade covered parking spaces and extended curb cuts, shall not be permitted.

Proportion
Proportion is the correspondence of the size of building elements to human scale, to each other and to the whole building, thus creating a balanced, harmonious composition of elements that achieve a visually coherent architectural aesthetic related to scale of human experience.

11 B.1.6 The size of the pedestrian, podium, and tower levels shall be in proportion to one another.

B.1.7 Visual discord due to the mixing of too many differently shaped and sized building elements, forms, colors, or textures, shall not be permitted.

B.1.8 Random, oversized building elements shall not be permitted.

B.2 Building Massing
Building massing is the three-dimensional configuration of a building’s size and shape.

Vertically organized massing standards for pedestrian, podium and skyline levels are:

Pedestrian Level
B.2.1 To create a pedestrian level setback for active uses with occupied floor above, pedestrian level façade setbacks from the build-to-line shall not exceed 10 feet.

B.2.2 Where Active Uses or Required Building Entry, Lobby or Residential Amenity Space uses are required, the minimum floor-to-floor height for the ground floor shall be no less than 14 feet where there is amenity space.

Podium Level
Podium level building massing shapes the spatial definition of the public realm. Building street walls up to 90 feet are considered the podium level.

B.2.3 The first one to three levels of all buildings shall be differentiated from the upper floors to provide a visual support for the floors above. They shall have high quality materials appropriate for a pedestrian environment.

B.2.4 Stepbacks are required as shown on Figure 3.3, Building Heights. Where required, stepbacks shall be no higher than 65 feet above grade with the building set back no less than six feet from the street wall.

Tower Level
The tower, or skyline level consists of all building levels above 90 feet from grade. The skyline level contributes to the visual identity of the Plan Area.

B.2.5 Tower massing shall extend to ground level to visually anchor the tower to the ground.

B.2.6 Towers extending to ground shall be set back 10 feet minimum from the build-to line.

B.2.7 Towers shall be oriented in an east-west direction to minimize impacts to views from residences along Saint Francis Boulevard.

12 B.2.8 Each tower shall not exceed a massing envelope of 240 feet long by 150 feet wide.

B.2.9 A minimum separation of 60 feet shall be provided between any two towers or portions of skyline level building massing.

B.2.10 Towers are not permitted adjacent to the central open space.

B.3 Façade Composition
Façade composition is the organization of horizontal massing of the overall shape of a building to be relation to human scale experience.

Façade Modulation
B.3.1 Long continuous facades that extend the length of a parcel or city block shall not be permitted. Buildings over 100 feet in width shall provide vertical breaks in building massing in the form of projections and recesses to reduce the overall scale of the building.

B.3.2 Occupiable projections, such as balconies or bay windows, are permitted to project up to six feet from building face above streets and open spaces above the pedestrian level, in accordance with the City’s building and fire codes. The recess or projection shall be a minimum of 3 feet in depth..

B.3.3 The façade shall be divided into segments of 30 to 60 feet in width using one or more of the design approaches below:
o Vertical shifts
o Balconies or bay windows
o Corner expression
o Volumetric recesses (including balconies)
o Volumetric projections
o Change of Material: to achieve modulation by a change of material, the material change must occur for at least 20% of the façade and must change in plane at least 18 inches in depth from the facade.

Fenestration
Fenestration is the arrangement of the location, grouping and scale of windows and doors as part of the wall system that comprises the façade of a building.

B.3.4 Building fenestration shall incorporate recessed and/or projecting window bays, balconies, canopies, and architectural elements, contrasting surfaces, and/or a rhythm to the building’s light and shadow.

13 B.3.5 Avoid featureless expanses of fenestration that eliminate a sense of human scale.

Blank Facades
A blank façade is a building wall without any windows or doors, and is a featureless expanse with no variation in plane in terms of horizontal and vertical projections, openings or change in materials.

B.3.6 Ground floor blank facades at building walls facing public spaces or streets greater than 50 feet are not be permitted.

B.3.7 At the ground floor, blank facades longer than 50 feet shall provide landscaping, public art or architectural relief with design interest to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.

Ground Floor Design
B.3.8 Transparent windows, storefronts, show windows, building entries, dwelling entries, and/or other active uses shall be placed along street and public open space frontages, as required in the Ground Floor Active Frontage standards.

B.3.9 Doors or sliding windows shall be used by ground-floor restaurants, eating and beverage services to enable outdoor dining along sidewalks and plazas.

Windows and Doors
The selection, design and proportion of windows and doors highly influence the appearance of a building.

Entries
B.4.1 Buildings shall have identifiable main entrances that are directly visible and accessible from public rights-of-way. An entry canopy, recessed building volume, a sculptural volume, change in scale or identifiable architectural treatments are acceptable features.

B.4.2 In mixed-use buildings, residential entries are to be differentiated from commercial entries.

B.4.3 Pedestrian seating and bicycle parking shall be located near building entrances.

Windows
B.4.4 Upper story windows shall provide architectural details, such as sills, or lintels, that recess or project from the facade.

B.4.5 Reflective glazing is not permitted.

14 B.4.6 Non-reflective coatings, low-emissivity glass, external shade devices and other elements shall be used.

Materials and Color
Materials and color play a powerful role in creating the visual experience of a building. For the exterior of buildings:

B.5.1 Building materials, colors and finishes shall be coordinated to create a visually harmonious color palette appropriate for a family-oriented residential neighborhood, consistent with contemporary building design.

B. 5.2 High quality building materials and architectural detailing, with a preference for natural materials at the ground level, shall be used where people directly experience buildings.

B.5.3 Changes in color, texture or materials shall be used to differentiate architectural elements and building massing.

B.5.4 Avoid monolithic use of color, where an entire building is one color or tone.

B.5.5 Avoid garish, or discordant use of color.

C. PARKING AND LOADING
C.1 Parking Ratios6
C.1.1 The following parking ratios are currently anticipated for Parcels B through F:
• The parking ratio for residential units is zero7 to 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit8. • The Applicant may increase parking above the foregoing ratio if supported by a parking analysis prepared by a qualified traffic engineer. 9 6 The City finds that all parking standards that differ from the Daly City municipal code are designed and necessary to maintain the unity or livability of the Project.
7 Per AB-2097, cities can no longer impose minimum parking requirements on new developments within a half-mile of major public transit stops, for which the Serramonte Del Rey Neighborhood qualifies. The state legislation does not prevent property owners from building parking and JUHSD anticipates providing the appropriate amount of parking that balances the supply and demand generated for the proposed project, based upon JUHSD analysis. These regulations shall explicitly not require a maximum number of parking spaces for any use.
8This may vary, based on AB-2097, see C.1.3.
9 Parking ratios are based on current conditions and assumptions. The City and JUHSD acknowledge that future parking demand will be in considerable flux over the lifetime of the Development Agreement, and may increase or decrease significantly. The intent of this approach is to provide adequate parking within the Precise Plan area based on demand as determined by a parking analysis study provided at the Applicant’s discretion that will be based on objective analysis by a qualified traffic engineer demonstrating reductions to parking impacts to on-street parking in the surrounding neighborhood.

15 • By way of example, at Parcel C, if the parking ratio for the affordable housing is 0.5 parking space per dwelling unit, such is permissible because it falls within the foregoing range of parking ratios. Development of Parcel C may provide parking at a parking ratio up to 1.5 spaces/unit, To the extent parking is provided, the parking ratio will be included in the documents submitted to the City for review and approval of Parcel C.

C.1.2 Parking for pick-up and drop-off for the Head Start Program at Parcel C may be accommodated by on-street parking marked by appropriate signage, with such signage reserving parking spaces for this use during the appropriate hours.

C.1.3 Overflow parking for Parcel A may be accommodated within the Plan Area with surface parking, on-street parking, or within future parking podiums or structures on Parcels B through F. To the extent that JUHSD demonstrates that overflow parking is not needed for a particular development, it will be eliminated as a requirement in the future.

C.1.4 Residential parking can be accommodated in mechanical puzzle lifts.

C.1.5 No more that 10% of residential parking can be tandem, and tandem spaces may only be assigned to users of the same dwelling unit. Tandem units may be designed as either front to rear spaces or mechanical puzzle lift spaces.

C.1.6 Parking Enforcement: JUHSD or a delegee will be responsible for enforcement of any parking rules on JUHSD property. If private parking restrictions for on-street parking are put in place, parking spaces available for public use will be designated to access publicly accessible parkland, trails, and open space during time periods of private parking restrictions.

C.1.7 One bicycle parking stall per unit shall be provided and accessible from street level, unless otherwise mandated by the building code. Bicycle parking, if in excess of one stall per unit, can be located anywhere on site.

C.2 Design of Off-Street Parking and Loading
C.2.1 Parking shall be located behind, within, or under buildings, or within separate structures.

Surface parking areas are prohibited between any building and Entry Drive, North Drive, East Drive and West Drive street frontages.

C.2.2 Parking stall and drive aisle dimensions for each parcel may comply with either approach below, or a combination of both approaches:
• The current City standards for off-street parking (including the ratio of standard spaces to compact spaces) at the time of the Applicant’s submittal for conformance review, and/or

16 • A “Uni-stall” standard size parking space which is based upon a stall dimension of 8’–6” x 18’–0”, unless constrained by a wall on one or both sides, in which case the minimum stall width will be 9’–0” minimum. The drive aisle shall maintain a minimum of 24’ clear.

C.2.3 For mixed-use projects, shared parking is encouraged to allow uses with different peak hours of operation to utilize off-street parking facilities of other buildings in the Precise Plan.

C.2.4 Loading docks and service areas shall be located at the rear of the development or inside parking structures for parcels deeper than 80 feet, separate from parking areas. For smaller parcels, loading docks and service areas must be located on the side street, wherever possible. Loading zones should not disrupt the flow of traffic within a given project area.

C.2.5 Loading docks shall be located on Access Drives North, South, and West. If this is not possible, loading docks may be provided on East, North or West Drive, if enclosed within a building.

C.3 Vehicle and Bicycle Access
C.3.1 Location of vehicular parking entrances shall be as follows:
• Parcel A shall be accessed from Access Drive West.
• Parcel B shall be accessed from Entry Drive or Access Drive North; or any combination of these.
• Parcel C shall be accessed from Access Drive South, or any combination of these. • Parcel D shall be accessed from Access Drive North, Access Drive South; or both. • Parcel E shall be accessed from East Drive or West Drive; or both. • Parcel F shall be accessed from West Drive or Access Drive West; or both.

C.3.2 Vehicular entries shall be located a minimum of 100 feet from intersections and crosswalks except for driveways located along access ways.

C.3.3 Bicycle access shall be from street level, and not required through garage entrances.

Bicycle storage for each building shall be accessible from ground level, as close to the driveway entry as practicable, and clearly signed. Bicycles in excess of one per unit can be stored anywhere on site.

C.4 Vehicle Access Design
C.4.1 Two-way vehicular entrances designed as a single driveway shall have a maximum width of 24’.

17 C.4.2 Where a driveway crosses a sidewalk, clearly demarcate the sidewalk across the entire width of the driveway by using colored paving or materials.

C.4.3 On-street parking may be provided in the form of parallel parking or angled parking.

C.5 Parking Structures
Parking for mixed-use and residential buildings can be in underground, partially above-ground, or above-ground garages.

C.5.1 Above-ground garages not screened by residential uses shall include façade treatments or screening.

C.5.2 Parking garages shall be lined with ground floor active uses or residential entries where indicated per street frontage requirements, and designed with building façades that screen structural elements of the garage where not required by street frontage requirements.

C.5.3 The design of entries to parking garages shall not be more prominent on the building façade than the primary pedestrian entry.

C.5.4 Above-ground parking garages shall be designed with human scale design elements that complement and do not contrast with buildings and public spaces of the Precise Plan.

C.5.5 Parcels B, C, D, E, and F may contain above-ground parking garages.

C.5.6 Parking structure lighting shall be designed to avoid direct glare towards adjacent residential buildings.

C.6 Bicycle Facilities
C.6.1 Bicycle parking should be near building entrances and bicycle routes for user convenience.

C.6.2 Bicycle parking shall accommodate a range of bicycle types, including standard bicycles, E-bikes, tandem bicycles, and trailers.

C.6.3 On-street bicycle parking shall be separated from automobile parking by use of a landscaped buffer or curb.

C.6.4 Off-street bicycle parking shall be in secure locations in each building in the Precise Plan area.

18 D. OPEN SPACE
Open Space Requirement
Projects within the Plan Area shall provide a minimum of 150 sq. ft. of open space per dwelling unit10. The requirement for open space is to be met parcel-by-parcel through a combination of the following:
• Publicly accessible private open space, which are public spaces, such as park, trails, and open space areas, which are publicly accessible to residents, visitors, and public. Such spaces may have limited hours of availability.
• Private open space such as balconies, patios, or other open spaces for the exclusive use of an individual unit.
• Common open space such as communal open spaces or recreational areas with access limited to tenants of a residential or mixed-use development. Examples include at grade open space or plazas, podium level courtyards, rooftop terraces, and similar areas that can provide communal amenities, such as swimming pools, play areas, and cabanas.

Allocation of open space can be off-site of the specific parcel and within the Plan Area, including the areas designated by easement, such as allocation to Overlook Park, Central Green, South Point Park and the Recreation Trail at parcels B, C and D.

The Recreation Trail, Overlook Park, Central Green, and South Point Park will be counted towards satisfaction of the Open Space requirements for individual parcels as designated by the JUHSD. The allotted Open Space will be assigned to a specific parcel at the time the parcel is submitted for conformance review. The Community Garden to be constructed as part of Overlook Park shall be constructed with the parcel B development.

The open space at the Retail Plaza at Entry Drive is allocated to Parcel B exclusively.

Land that does not meet the City’s gradient criteria for usable space (e.g., excessive slopes in the Hillside Area) will not be counted toward satisfaction of open space required for any parcel.

D.1 Common Open Space
D.1.1 Buildings shall provide spatial enclosure for common open spaces to create privacy, limit views from streets, and wind protection.

D.1.2 Common open space shall be visible and accessible to and from building amenity areas. 10Per Daly City zoning code section 17.38.020 requirement for 150 sq. ft. of usable open space.

19 D.2 Private Open Space
D.2.1 Private open spaces shall be directly accessible from the unit and large enough to permit outdoor activities with a minimum of five feet width and depth.

D.2.2 Private open space shall be constructed with high quality durable materials.

D.2.3 Fencing or screening between ground floor private open spaces shall permit visibility in and out of the open space for the top 18 inches.

E. LANDSCAPE DESIGN
E.1 Hillside Woodlands
To care for the hillside wooded areas to reduce fire hazards, enhance existing vegetation and promote urban forestry, the Precise Plan requires:

E.1.1 A tree succession operations plan for aging mature trees prepared by a qualified arborist will guide the replacement of existing trees over time due to age or fire vulnerability.

E.1.2 Removed trees shall be replaced with a diverse plant ecology governed by the area’s unique coastal/Mediterranean climate including evergreen and deciduous species as recommended by an arborist.

E.1.3 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.

E.2 Planting
E.2.1 Plant material shall be comprised of at least 75% drought tolerant plant species. Planting plans shall comply with Daly City’s Water Conservation in Landscaping regulations and the Water Use Classification of Landscape Species (WUCOLS).

E.2.2 Where turf grass is used, low water use hybrids and/ or no mow varieties shall 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 sightlines remain open and clear, and places of concealment are not fostered. Plants should be used to screen above-ground utilities. Along streets and sidewalks, plants shall be used in planters within the right of way to create spatial separation between sidewalk and vehicular traffic.

E.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

20 material should occur away from hardscape areas to prevent staining of pavements and to minimize maintenance.

E.3 Planters
E.3.1 Landscape planters within any private street shall be a minimum of four feet wide.

E.3.2 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.

E.3.3 Where landscape planting is provided under trees, planters shall be 4’ W x 6’ L minimum.

E.3.4 Planted medians shall provide at least a 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.

E.4 Site Irrigation
E.4.1 Site Irrigation systems shall comply with all local and state requirements as of time of project approval, and shall meet the City’s water efficiency regulations.

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

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

E.5 Soil & Drainage
E.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.

E.5.2 Planting areas shall by dressed with a 3-inch layer of mulch.

E.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.

21 E.6 Site Furnishings
E.6.1 Site furnishings shall be comprised of materials designed to withstand outdoor conditions.

E.6.2 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 ground- or surface-mounted attachment is acceptable.

E.6.3 Seating shall be provided at retail, parks, open spaces, adjacent to the trails, and in front of primary building lobbies. 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.

E.6.4 Café tables with chairs shall be movable with a variety of sizes for public use in gathering spaces and shall be constructed of materials suitable for outdoor public usage.

E.6.5 At least one drinking fountain shall be provided at each of the following: Overlook Park, Central Green, and the Recreation Trail. Dog bowl and water bottle filling attachments are recommended but not required.

E.6.6 Within Overlook Park, Applicant shall provide play equipment for children ages two through twelve. Play areas will be designated for children between the ages of two to five and for ages five to twelve years old.

Any community garden shall provide raised beds and a regular water service connection with water spigot at 100-foot intervals.

E.7 Trees
E.7.1 Trees within the street right of way, in plazas, and high-visibility open space areas shall be provided in 24-inch box size or larger and be secured with at least three 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.

E.7.2 Individual developments within the Plan Area shall use trees that are provided in minimum 15-gallon size or larger for no greater than 50 percent of the trees planted. All other trees shall be box-specimen.

E.7.3 Entries at the north and south shall have unique tree plantings, and the design of these planting shall be approved by the Planning Division.

22 E.7.4 Seasonal interest shall be created with deciduous trees providing spring flowers and fall color.

E.7.5 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.

E.7.6 Enhanced finishes and/or striping shall be used at the master plan entry, at all driveway entries, and at all crosswalks.

E.8 Trail and Paths
E.8.1 Trail surfaces shall be asphalt or concrete, provide for adequate clearances along the edges and overhead, and be suitable for their intended use. Refer to trail sections in Chapter 5 for trail dimensions.

E.8.2 Signage, ornamental landscaping, and trees shall be provided along the trail system to enhance user experience.

E.9 Stormwater Management
E.9.1 Project submittals shall comply with the Precise Plan’s phased, performance-based approach to stormwater management, consistent with the San Mateo County Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit, and Daly City’s municipal code pertaining to stormwater management. Projects shall minimize the amount of paved area. Where feasible, paved areas shall include “green” stormwater collection and treatment, and employ Low Impact Development (LID) features that minimize surface water runoff. LID features may include bioretention systems, swales, green roofs, and permeable pavers.

E.9.2 Stormwater retention features that minimize runoff into streets, parking lots, landscaped areas, and open spaces shall be incorporated, where feasible. Stormwater retention features include drainage swales and rain gardens.

E.10 Open Space Landscaping Standards
E.10.1 Landscaping shall define the edges of paths, plazas, and seating areas.

E.10.2 Trees shall be planted to shade walkways, gathering areas, parking, and other larger expanses of pavement.

E.10.3 Landscaping in setback areas shall create a transition zone between the sidewalk and street-level residential units and entries.

E.10.4 Landscaped areas shall be regularly maintained to keep them aesthetically pleasing, and to remove dead and dying plants.

23 E.10.5 Gateway or entry points shall be emphasized with distinctive trees and plants.

E.10.6 Existing trees, to the extent feasible, and healthy, are to be preserved and integrated into site designs.

E.10.7 To reduce water usage, all development shall employ water-efficient irrigation techniques, including micro–irrigation, drip systems, and weather-based irrigation controllers, instead of conventional sprinklers.

E.10.8 Native, drought-tolerant, or well-adapted tree and plant species shall be used.

E.10.9 Seasonal and year-round flowering shrubs and trees shall be located where they can be most appreciated by site users and passersby, such as adjacent to walks and open space areas, or as frames for building entrances and stairs.

E.10.10 All landscaped areas shall be designed by a landscape professional to the satisfaction of the Planning Division.

F. SIGNAGE
Where this section does not set standards, the Applicant and City staff shall use the Daly City Municipal Code. City review and approval of wayfinding signage shall be part of Conformance Review Where there is a conflict with the Daly City sign ordinance, this Precise Plan governs.

F.1 Signage Standards
F.1.1 Signs within the Plan Area shall comply with all regulations stated in the City’s Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 17.32) unless otherwise specified in the Precise Plan.

F.1.2 Signs shall be made of high-quality, durable, and environmentally friendly materials.

F.1.3 Multi-tenant development anchor-identity signs should be complementary to any Plan Area signage or established by the Master Developer. Individual property owners will be allowed to use letter styles, but the overall sign should have one consistent material for letters and background.

F.2 Monument/Gateway Signage
F.2.1 The Precise Plan shall include up to two freestanding monument/gateway signs: at the Serramonte Boulevard and Entry Drive intersection and at the West Drive and Campus Drive intersection, which form major entry points to the Plan Area.

F.2.2 If provided, a single gateway or monument sign at the southern portion of the Plan Area near the round‐about shall be located at Parcel E and be less than 4 feet high. The sign shall not obstruct sightlines for drivers to the extent safety is compromised.

24 F.2.3 If provided, a single gateway or monument sign at the northern portion of the Plan Area near the Retail Plaza shall be located at Parcel B. It may either be less than 4 feet high and no longer than 20 feet, or may be a tower structure‐‐either integrated with the Parcel B building corner or separate from the building. If an integrated tower structure, the structure shall not project more than five feet beyond the face of the building in any direction. If an independent tower structure, it may not be greater than 32 feet in height and not more than 64 sq. ft. in area. The maximum face area of signage of the tower structure shall not exceed 200 sq. ft.

F.2.4 Gateway or monument signs shall not have internal illumination but will be lighted with externally mounted luminaires.

F.3 Building Signage
F.3.1 The physical design of signage shall conform to the architectural detailing of the associated building and shall be in proportion to the surface onto which such signage is mounted, as determined by the Planning Division.

F.3.2 Signage shall not obstruct architectural details such as recesses, structural bays, or windows.

F.3.3 Externally illuminated or halo lit signsshall be required. The use of internally lighted or box type signs are prohibited. Internally lighted signs measuring 2 sq. ft. or less are allowed.

F.3.4 No more than three (3) building residential signs shall be provided per building. These shall be limited to address number, street name, and/or a building name if desired. If only one is provided, it shall be placed close to the main entry to the building. If signage is provided at more than one location, a minimum of one shall be placed close to the main entry. The second and third can be located such that the top of the signage is not greater than 25’ feet from grade. The aggregate sign area shall not exceed 150 sq. ft.

F.3.5 Durable, vandal-resistant materials and finishes shall be utilized for address signs.

F.3.6 Conduit, tubing, or raceways shall be concealed. Transformers and other equipment for the signage shall also be concealed.

F.4 Storefront Signage
F.4.1 Signage for multi‐tenant retail buildings shall be developed to minimize potential visual conflict, clutter, and competition.

F.4.2 Maximum size for sign area per retail tenant is 30 sq. ft. on the face of a building. A second sign per retail tenant, not exceeding 20 sq. ft., may be hung as either a banner or a

25 rigid sign perpendicular to the building face. Either of these two sign types may be attached to a building’s architectural canopy.

F.4.3 For ground floor retail uses, hanging or projecting signs should be located near the front entry of a store. Coordinate with the overall design of the street wall. Hanging or projecting signs shall meet Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) clearance requirements.

F.4.4 Ancillary retail space or leasing offices shall be signed in a manner consistent with the storefront signage standards in this section.

F.5 Prohibited Signs
Prohibited signs include:

F.5.1. Signs which rotate, move mechanically or by the wind, flash, blink or reflect light by means of a polished or mirrored surface.

F.5.2 Open flames, balloons, loudspeakers used to call attention to a product, service, or a property.

F.5.3 Signs which identify or advertise a product or service not available on the premises.

F.5.4 Externally illuminated signs where the source of light is directly visible or cause glare or reflections that are a traffic hazard or nuisance.

F.5.5 Signs which emit or reflect light by means of direct fluorescence, phosphorescence, or “day‐glow” colors.

F.5.6 Any sign illumination which exhibits undue glare.

F.5.7 Any sign placed or displayed on vehicles parked primarily for the purpose of displaying the sign. (This does not apply to food trucks that are parked while they provide service.) F.5.8 Internally lit signs where the entire face of the sign is illuminated, rather than just the graphics.

F.5.9 Advertising bench signs, unless required by SamTrans at Serramonte Blvd.

F.5.10 Off‐site directional signs.

F.5.11 Roof signs.

F.5.12 Outdoor advertising billboard signs.

F.5.13 Abandoned signs.

26 G. LIGHTING
See Figure 3.8 Lighting Diagram. A uniform lighting approach will contribute to overall community aesthetic and ensure safety for walkways, bikeways, and roadways11.

G.1 General Lighting Standards
G.1.1 Lighting shall incorporate dark sky principles by shielding fixtures to prevent light from emitting above a 90-degree angle. Any lighting source located on parking or rooftop parking shall be a full cutoff type.

G.1.2 Light shall be designed to minimize glare and light trespass into neighboring buildings and properties.

G.1.3 High-efficiency technology such as LED lighting with advanced controls shall be utilized to minimize energy consumption.

G.1.4 The use of energy–efficient, long-life LEDs with light color rendered as a warm white (maximum K 3000) is encouraged.

G.2 Street Lighting
G.2.1 Provide streetlights in general locations shown on Figure 3.8, Lighting Diagram for Locations.

G.2.2 Streetlights shall comply with Daly City standards.

G.3 Pedestrian Lighting
G.3.1 Provide pedestrian lighting in general locations shown on Figure 3.8, Lighting Diagram.

Additional locations for pedestrian lighting are along pedestrian pathways in open spaces and in surface parking areas.

G.3.2 Pedestrian lighting shall not be taller than 25 feet in height.

G.3.3 Pedestrian lighting may be integrated with streetlighting by providing additional luminaires facing the sidewalk on streetlight poles, installed at a lower height than street luminaries.

G.3.4 Lighting in surface parking lots and service areas shall be directed away from surrounding buildings and properties using fixtures that minimize light trespass and glare. 11For Parcel A, no additional lighting is required to what is installed.

27 G.4 Lower Illumination Pedestrian Lighting
G.4.1 Commercial grade bollards, step lights, and path lights shall be used as appropriate along pedestrian walkways and plazas.

G.4.2 Nighttime lighting for recreational uses in parks and public spaces should be unobtrusive and control glare.

G.5 Building Lights
G.5.1 Lighting should be integrated into the design of buildings and building architecture to highlight significant architectural features such as signs, entrances, walkways, or storefront displays.

G.5.2 Building facades may be illuminated using shielded fixtures to highlight architectural features.

H.1 Definitions
Active Ground Floor Use: Active ground floor uses are land uses that generate pedestrian activity at the interior and exterior of buildings at the ground floor at streets and public spaces.

Active uses can be retail, commercial, educational, artistic, institutional or community uses such as a community room or daycare.

Amenity Space: Residential amenity space may include co-working space, health, and wellness, grab and go snack items, pet amenities and other shared or community uses that can be visible to the street.

Building Envelope: The building envelope defines the spatial area within which permitted density can be configured. The Precise Plan defines the allowable building envelope horizontally by block size and required street frontage and vertically by building height, massing, and guidance for pedestrian, podium, and skyline levels of architectural design.

Build-to Line: The build-to line for a parcel is the line where the façade of the building, or the podium street wall, is located, parallel to and measured perpendicular from the property line.

Corner Expression: Corner expression is accentuating building massing at the joining of two facades with a projected, recessed, or vertical change in building massing.

Face of Curb: The face of curb is the vertical sloping surface of the side of a roadway curb, not including bulb-outs, curb extensions, curb-cuts, or pull-outs for drop off and loading zones.

Height: The height for a building is calculated from the building’s Average Finished Grade to the top of the parapet at the building’s primary roof. The Average Finished Grade is the average

28 of the high and low elevations at the building’s exterior adjacent to North Drive, West Drive, East Drive, or Entry Drive, or the three access drives leading from East Drive or West Drive.

Massing: Massing is the three-dimensional bulk of a building in terms of general shape, form, height, width, and depth.

Pedestrian Level: Pedestrian level is the design of the ground floor public experience shaped by active ground floor use, diversity of use, and street frontage design.

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.

Primary Building Wall: The primary building wall is the building façade. Window or wall recesses or projections are not counted as primary building wall or façade of the building.

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

Property Line locations: Property line locations to measure Build-to lines are measured from the face-of-curb for publicly accessible private streets, a designated property line along an access drive, or back of sidewalk along public streets.

Public Realm: The public realm is exterior urban space shaped by buildings comprised of publicly accessible streets, parks, open spaces, pathways, and civic facilities.

Street Wall: The street wall is the continuous façade of a building that establishes the edge of the public realm for a street or public space.

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 character of a 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.

29 Vertical Shift: Vertical shift is variation in the roof line or vertical massing of the building or building elements.

III. IMPLEMENTATION
I. MAINTENANCE
Subject to the provisions of any applicable State law, the following shall apply:

I.1.1 Master Association. Prior to the issuance of any building permit to construct any market-rate residential unit in the project, the Jefferson Union High School District (District) shall formand perpetually maintain a Master Association for the Serramonte Del Rey Neighborhood (“Master Association”). The Master Association shall be selfgoverning and govern common areas for the term of the Precise Plan uses are in operation. The purpose of the Master Association, among other responsibilities, shall be to maintain all common areas within the Precise Plan area including streets, parks, and other areas not maintained by individual parcel developers that are not dedicated or otherwise conveyed to a public agency in a neat, safe and healthful condition, including the ongoing removal of litter throughout. Until the Master Association is formed, the District is responsible for the foregoing.

I.1.2 Maintenance Plan. A maintenance plan for roadway, park, and utility maintenance shall be submitted by the applicant and approved by the City prior to the issuance of any building permit to implement the project. A litter control maintenance plan shall be submitted that includes provision for on-goingletter and garbage control. The maintenance plan shall be incorporated into the CC&R’s in connection with the creation of the Master Association at the discretion of the District and recorded at such time.

Minimum Requirements for Trash and Litter Disposal shall be as follows:
• All trash shall be confined in approved receptacles and enclosures. Any building permit application submitted to the City for review shall be accompanied by a letter from the trash hauler indicating that the proposed trash receptacles provided in the building for which the permit is sought to meet the hauler’s requirements for quantity, size, and accessibility.
• All unenclosed materials, equipment and/or supplies of any kind shall be maintained within approved enclosure areas. Any stacked or stored items shall not exceed the height of the enclosure.
• All trash and storage enclosures shall be properly maintained in accordance with approved plans.
• All waste materials generated by the development, such as cardboard boxes, skids, garbage, litter, etc., must be stored in the enclosure for disposal. • No waste material shall be visible at any time.
• All enclosures shall be designed to conceal the contents.

30 • All enclosures should be kept clean and free of odor.

I.1.3 Maintenance and Repair - Master Association. The Master Association shall develop a maintenance plan (including a street sweeping, street surface repair and replacement, and garbage disposal plan approved by the Planning Division and theDepartment of Public Works) for the upkeep of common areas, private streets, and infrastructure. The Master Association will be responsible for the maintenance, litter removal and repairs of publicly accessible common areas that are not part of individual parcel development, including streets, sidewalks, bicycle lanes, parks, open spaces, trails and paths, utilities and improvements in streets including temporary and permanent storm water features, street lighting, landscaping, planter strips, street furniture and the fixtures, furniture and equipment located in the parks.

I.1.4 Maintenance and Repair - Parcel Specific Responsibilities. Parcel Developers or, if the property interests of such Developers are conveyed, their successors in interest, are responsible the maintenance, replacement, repairs and litter removal for on-site improvements on their respective parcels, including exterior equipment, fixtures, walls, roofs, windows, doors and other architectural, landscaping and publicly accessible common areas on private parcels in a clean, sanitary and attractive condition. The Developer of a parcel shall be responsible for the maintenance, replacement, repairs and cleaning of improvements within exclusive easements on their parcel.

I.1.5 Budget. The Master Association shall prepare an annual budget to fund the costs incurred in maintaining the publicly accessible common facilities. The Master Association shall undertake an inventory of publicly accessible common area improvements requiring maintenance, litter removal and repairs, such that each phase of development is adequately budgeted for maintenance and operations of improvements. Landscape maintenance budget shall include consideration of level of maintenance and operation expenses commensurate to the anticipated level of use of park and recreational facilities.

The Master Association may employ or contract out to perform maintenance, litter removal and repairs..

31 J. PHASING
J.1 Timing. The sequence and timeline of development will ultimately depend on market conditions. The pace of development will fluctuate with the regional economy, capital expectations and availability, costs for development and the conditions of the Daly City housing market.

J.2 Public Improvements. For each phase of development there are corresponding street, park, open space improvements and utilities necessary to support development of individual parcels per Table 7.1 and as shown in Figure 7.1.

Table 7.1: Parcel Phasing and Public Improvements

PHASE PARCEL STREETS PARKS AND

OPEN SPACE
1 B
• Entry Drive
• North Drive
• North Access Way
• Callan Boulevard improvements within
parcel
• Entry Drive Plaza
• Overlook Park
• Eastside Recreation Trail
within parcel
2 C
• South Access Way
• Callan Boulevard improvements within
parcel
• If Parcel C before Parcel D: East Drive
from Campus Drive to South Access
Way
• Eastside Recreation Trail
within parcel
D
• East Drive from North Access Way to
South Access Way
• North Access Way
• South Access Way
• Callan Boulevard improvements within
parcel
• Eastside Recreation Trail
within parcel
3 E • West Drive from North Drive to
Campus Drive
• Central Green
• South Point Park
F • West Drive from North Drive to
Campus Drive • Westside Walking Trail
Notes:

1. If Parcel E is built before Parcels C and D, then East Drive and North Drive will be constructed including the roundabout.

2. If Parcel F is built before Parcels C. D and E, then West Drive and the roundabout will be constructed.

3. Serramonte Boulevard and Highway 1 ramp intersection improvements will be constructed with the first market rate development per the Development Agreement.

4. Bike lanes on Campus Drive to Hickey Blvd will be constructed concurrent with the roundabout.

32 5. See Development Agreement for timing of additional off-site improvements.

6. A Storm Drain Memo shall be submitted for conformance review for each phase in accordance with the Master Plan Drainage Memo. At Building Permit submittal: a Hydrology & Hydraulics report based on final design will be provided with the Building Permit submittal in accordance with the Master Plan Drainage Memo.

7. The first parcel of Parcel B and Parcel D to develop is required to build North Access Way from their building to the curb across the access way, so there is a two-way paved travel way. The subsequent parcel is required to complete the sidewalk, landscaping and storm water treatment facilities between their building and the curb on their side of the North Access Way.

8. The first parcel of Parcel C and Parcel D to develop is required to build South Access Way from their building to the curb across the access way, so there is a two-way paved travel way. The subsequent parcel is required to complete the sidewalk, landscaping and storm water treatment facilities between their building and the curb on their side of the South Access Way.

9. The Head Start facility may be located on other parcels.

10. See the Tentative Map for utility improvements associated with each parcel. On and off parcel utility improvements in the Precise Plan Area shall be sized to support buildout of the Precise Plan.

11. The chronology of phasing in Table 7.1 is not intended to be binding, and 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. For the purposes of assessing consistency with the Table 7.1 for conformance review, a reviewer shall assess whether development of a listed parcel includes the streets, park, open space utilities needed to support the development of the parcel and future phases of development.

K. CONFORMANCE REVIEW
K.1.1 Purpose. Conformance Review is the Precise Plan’s ministerial, streamlined process to approve proposed projects “as-of-right” that demonstrate Plan Consistency with the Precise Plan and Entitlement Documents and Compliance with the Objective Development Standards of the Precise Plan, as defined below. Design Review is not required for projects ministerially approved “as-of-right.” K.1.2 Plan Consistency. Plan Consistency is the review of project submittal documents for conformance to:

1. Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan (Attachment “A”) requirements for the scope and phasing of park, open space, street, accessway, storm water, water, wastewater, utility, emergency access, and on and off-site transportation improvements associated with each parcel per Precise Plan Figure 7.1 Phasing, Table 7.1 Development Phasing and Appendix C: Civil Engineering Exhibits, and

2. Entitlement Document requirements of the Development Agreement, Tentative Map, Conditions of Approval, Inclusionary Housing Agreement and the Mitigation and Monitoring program.

K.1.3 Compliance with Objective Development Standards ("Compliance"). Compliance with objective development standards is the review of project submittal documents for

33 conformance with the Precise Plan’s Objective Development Standards as listed in Section II above.

K.1.4 Variance from Numerical Standards and Precise Plan.

Deviations from the numerical standards in Section II above may be permitted by up to 20 percent for any parcel, upon approval by the Planning Division. Deviations from the minimum and maximum densities prescribed in Table 3.3, the requisite amount of private open space (150 square feet per dwelling unit), and the quantity and general location of common open space shall not be permitted.

Modification or reconfiguation of the Precise Plan pattern of streets and blocks, shape of open space areas, site layout, orientation or location of buildings, architectural or landscape elements may be permitted provided all other Objective Design Standard can be met Deviations from the approved roadway configurations, including lane provision and width, shall not be permitted unless approved by the Department of Public Works.K.1.5 Submittal Requirements. Submittal requirements shall include documentation as set forth in the 2023 Daly City Municipal Code Section 17.28.030 C. 2. (a) – (f), Procedure for Application for Planned Development of the Daly City Zoning Ordinance, and shall include a completed Conformance Review Check List, as attached to the Precise Plan as Appendix A, and any additional information requested by the Planning Manager. Submittal requirements for minor modifications to approved and constructed projects to be per Planning Manager request.

K.1.5 Review Process and Timing.

1. Pre-submittal conference. Upon request of the Applicant, the Planning Manager shall convene a pre-submittal conference to review the scope of the project, submittal requirements, conformance review process, timeline, and staff availability. It is an opportunity for the Applicant and the design team to ask technical questions to prepare a submittal. The Planning Manager, City Engineer, and Development Coordinating Committee members shall attend upon request.

2. Submittal. The Applicant shall submit documentation as described under "Submittal Requirements" above.

3. Conformance Review. The Planning Manager, designated staff or third-party consultants shall conduct the Conformance Review per the responsibilities described in Table 7.2. The Planning Manager shall coordinate reviewer

34 comments and provide them to the Applicant no later than 45 business days after filing a project submittal.
12 4. Determination. The Planning Manager shall review the project submittal and reviewer comments to determine whether the submittal is plan consistent and standards compliant and therefore approved as-of-right.

If the Planning Manager deems a project application inconsistent with the Precise Plan or Entitlement Documents, and/or non-compliant with the Objective Development Standards in Section II, prior to a decision to deny approval of the proposed project, the Planning Manager shall provide the Applicant with written documentation as to what elements of the submittal are not in conformance.13 The Applicant can revise the submittal and resubmit. The Planning Manager, upon receipt of the re-submittal, shall make their determination. Total City Review Time from submittal to determination shall not exceed 90 business days. 14 If the City fails to complete Conformance Review per the above timing requirements, the submittal shall be deemed to be conforming with the Precise Plan and Entitlement Documents, planning review shall be complete, and requested permits shall be issued.

5. Notification of Determination. The Planning Manager shall communicate in writing to the Applicant the Planning Manager's determination.

6. Appeal. A Conformance Review determination may be appealed within 20 business days to the City Manager by the Applicant. City Manager shall make a determination within 20 business days of receipt of the appeal. The City Manager’s decision on appeal shall be final and not appealable.

K.1.6 Review Criteria. The following criteria shall guide the determination of plan consistency and standards compliance:
12 Notwithstanding anything in this chapter, to the extent the Permit Streamlining Act or other State Law applies for shorter deadlines, the regulations in such laws shall govern. 13 This process is separate and independent from the Planning Manager's coordination and provision of any reviewer comments on the Applicant's initial project submittal, as required under the "Review Process and Timing" section of this Chapter.
14 For this paragraph, "City Review Time" shall mean the time, measured in business days, taken by the City to review a project submittal and provide comments to the applicant or render a Conformance Review decision. City Review Time does not include the Applicant’s time from the date of receiving comments to the date of resubmitting a revised project submittal responsive to comments.

35 • All Figures in the Precise Plan illustrate the general arrangement and relationships among parcels, buildings, streets, accessways, parks and open spaces, and exact compliance or conformance is not required so long as other objective criteria are met. • The final configuration of parcels, buildings, streets, accessways, parks and open spaces are subject to refinement, and exact compliance or conformance is not required so long as other objective criteria are met.
• Consistency and conformance with the Precise Plan shall be construed rationally and shall accommodate unforeseen solutions or innovation that can occur over the extended build-out of the Precise Plan. Notwithstanding the above, no deviations are permitted to minimum residential densities and minimum open space area requirements.

K.1.7 Standards Interpretation. The nature of the Objective Standards is such that consistency determinations are ministerial, without the exercise of discretion.

Accordingly, it is not anticipated there will be cause for interpretation of these standards by the City. In the unforeseen event that interpretation is required, the Planning Manager shall make any interpretation of the Precise Plan’s development standards required to evaluate the proposed project, and shall inform the reviewer of any interpretations as needed. The Planning Manager shall include any interpretations as part of its written determination of consistency with the objective development standards of the Precise Plan.

K.1.8 Staffing. The Planning Manager shall check on staff availability prior to the presubmittal conference to meet the conformance review timeline. If staffing is not available, the City can designate a third-party consultant to be paid for by Applicant.

Consultants shall have professional planning experience on similar projects. The Applicant shall pay all reasonable staff coordination and third-party consultant costs.

K.1.9 Staff or Consultant Review Responsibilities. Staff or consultant review responsibilities are per Table 7.2, Reviewer Responsibilities.
• The Planning Manager shall provide oversight and make all Conformance Review determinations.
• Staff of consultant shall compare the project submittal, Conformance Check List, and applicable plan elements, standards and requirements of the Precise Plan and the Entitlement Documents.
• Reviewers are to provide written comments on plan consistency to the Planning Manager. In the case where the reviewer concludes inconsistency with plan elements, or non-compliance to objective development standards, the reviewer shall identify specific objective standards to be addressed to achieve a consistency. • If requested by the Applicant, the Planning Manager and any reviewers shall meet with the Applicant to discuss steps to resolve any comments.

36 The Planning Manager shall consider the recommendations of the reviewers, and shall make the final determination for approval, approval with conditions, or denial of the submittal based on objective criteria as set forth herein.

Table 7.2: Reviewer Responsibilities

RESPONSIBILITY REVIEWER
PLAN

CONSISTENCY

STANDARDS

COMPLIANCE

PLANNING

MANAGER

STAFF OR

THIRD-PARTY

CONSULTANT
(IF RETAINED)
CITY

ENGINEER

DEVELOPMENT

COORDINATING
COMMITTEE15

HOUSING AND

COMMUNITY

DEVELOPMENT

MANAGER
Phasing X X
Parks X X
Streets X X X
Utilities, off-site
transportation
Improvements
X X X
Development
Agreement X
Final Map X

MMRP X X X
Inclusionary
Housing
Agreement
X
Tentative Map and
Conditions of
Approval
X X
Land use and
urban design X X
New Buildings X X
Parks X X
Streetscapes X X
Exceptional
Projects16 X X X X X
15 Development Coordinating Committee includes Planning Division, Building Division, Engineering Division, Department of Water and Wastewater Resources, North County Fire Authority and other committee members as deemed appropriate by the Planning Manager.
16 For exceptional projects, Planning Manager to determine at pre-application conference what type of review and staffing is required.

37 RESPONSIBILITY REVIEWER
Minor
modifications to
existing buildings
& facilities
X X X
IV. PLAN AMENDMENTS
Amending the Precise Plan shall follow the requirements of the Daly City Municipal Code section 17.28.020 (I) as of the date of approval of the Precise Plan. This Municipal Code section is included as a part of Supporting Documents provided with this Precise Plan.

V. SUBDIVISIONS
Subdivision of parcels shall conform to the requirements of the Precise Plan and the Daly City Municipal Code Title 16 Subdivisions.

VI. INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
The following requirements are subject to the terms and exceptions provided in the affordable housing agreement:

A. Construction of inclusionary units is required within the Planned Development Zone PD31 area pursuant to an Affordable Housing Plan.

B. This Precise Plan authorizes flexibility in timing of construction and geographic distribution of inclusionary units throughout the PD-31 area to allow for a greater number of inclusionary units and deeper level of affordability than the minimum levels required by the City Ordinance.

C. The Precise Plan requires, for Parcels B-F, not less than 20 percent of the total number of total residential units completed at final build-out to be affordable housing, consisting of

13.5% low-income units at no greater than 60% AMI and 6.5% moderate income units at no greater than 120% AMI. One market rate residential building can be constructed prior to construction of affordable units. 150 low-income affordable units are planned to be located on Parcel C. The subsequent phases after the first market rate building and the first residential structure built on Parcel C have been constructed can be phased and include unit counts proposed by the developer in any way such that the overall percentage of affordable units does not drop below 20% of all constructed residential units at Parcels B-F at any time consisting of 13.5% low-income units and 6.5% moderate income units.

38 VII. 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.

VIII. ENTITLEMENT DOCUMENTS
The term "Entitlement Documents" shall refer to all the below except the Precise Plan. • General Plan Amendment. By Resolution No. [], City Council approved text and map amendments to the General Plan to enable high density residential and mixed-use residential development.
• Precise Plan. By Resolution No. [], City Council approved the Serramonte Del Rey Precise Plan, which modified land use designations and created a new street and open space network.
• Development Agreement. The District and the City of Daly City entered into a Development Agreement to secure vested development rights and terms. • Affordable Housing Agreement. The District and the City of Daly City entered into an Affordable Housing Agreement to secure rights and terms for the Project’s Affordable Housing Plan.
• Tentative Map and Conditions of Approval. The City Council approved a Tentative Map indicating the subdivision of the District lands into parcels with infrastructure and open space improvements, including Conditions of Approval.
• Mitigation and Monitoring and Reporting Program. 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, 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.

20284220.5
Hanson Bridgett LLP
425 Market Street, 26th Floor, San Francisco, CA 94105
SEAN R. MARCINIAK

PARTNER
DIRECT DIAL (925) 746-8471
DIRECT FAX (925) 746-8498
E-MAIL [email protected]
January 9, 2024
Re: Jefferson Union High School District Serramonte Precise Plan Project Dear Honorable Members of the City Council:

Our office represents the Jefferson Union High School District (the "District") in its development of a new mixed-use project at 699 Serramonte Boulevard (the "Project"). As this project nears its hearing date, we recognize the City Council will be fielding many different questions and issues. By this letter, we merely ask the City Council keep in mind something that might get lost in the deluge of information, as it concerns the housing crisis, and urgency is necessary:

The Project is crucial to the City meeting its fair share housing requirements assigned under the applicable Regional Housing Needs Allocation ("RHNA").

We feel it is necessary to point this out because some Project opponents have alleged the Project is inconsistent with the City's RHNA requirements. The very opposite is true.

At buildout, the Project will consist of 1,113 new residential units in Daly City, not including the existing 122 units of District faculty housing. These apartments include 150 new low-/very lowincome units, 73 new affordable moderate-income units, and 890 above-moderate-income units.

As shown in the chart below, the City needs these units for its December 2023 Draft Housing Element (i.e., the City's blueprint for meeting RHNA requirements) to work. Failing to meet RHNA requirements would result in time-consuming revisions to the Draft Housing Element, and the City would risk losing substantial zoning powers under the Housing Accountability Act.

Type of Unit Units Required
Under RHNA
Citywide Units
With Project
Citywide Units
Without Project
End Result Without
Project
Lower-Income 2,105 2,139 1,989 116 units below RHNA
Moderate-Income 762 9431 870 108 units above RHNA
Above-Moderate
Income
1,971 2,0122 1,122 849 units below RHNA
Total Units 4,838 5,094 3,981 857 units below RHNA
1 The City's Draft Housing Element does not reflect the latest iteration of the Project, which will provide 150 lowerincome units, 73 moderate-income units, and 890 above-moderate income units. This number has been adjusted to reflect that 73 moderate-income units will be provided, as opposed to the 27 moderate-income units listed in the Draft Housing Element.
2 Pursuant to the above footnote, this number has been adjusted to reflect that 890 above-moderate-income units will be provided, as opposed to the 936 listed in the Draft Housing Element.

Hon. Members of the Daly City Council
c/o Ms. K. Annette Hipona, City Clerk
333 - 90th Street
2nd Floor
Daly City, CA 94015

Hon. Members of the Daly City Council
January 9, 2024

20284220.5
Under State law, the City's Housing Element must provide an inventory of planned projects and sites for future development that provides a realistic path to satisfy the City's RHNA requirement, and for all income levels throughout the 2023-2031 planning period. 3 If, at any
time, the City finds that its identified inventory is insufficient to accommodate its remaining RHNA, the City must take immediate action to amend its Housing Element to either add previously unidentified residential sites or rezone non-residential sites to correct for the shortfall.4 A city that fails to do so risks losing its power to deny housing projects in the future, including those that do not comply with the City's zoning and General Plan (i.e., Builder's Remedy projects). As shown in the above table, approval of the Project is instrumental to avoid these results.

In other words, without the Project, the City would need to immediately revise its Housing Element to rezone new non-residential sites in such a manner that would realistically allow for the development of 116 additional lower-income units and 849 additional above-moderateincome units – about 20% of the City's entire RHNA allocation.

Please note, this issue before the City is an urgent one, as the deadline for adopting a housing blueprint expired on January 31, 2023, more than a year ago. Meanwhile, the region's welldocumented housing crisis, as the City knows, has not abated in any respect, resulting in poverty and homelessness. (See Gov. Code 65589.5(a)(2).)5 The City's December 2023 Draft Housing Element, incorporated herein by this reference, documents this urgency. It provides the City's population will increase to 120,000 City residents in 2030, which represents about a 20 percent increase over the 2022 population. The City's low vacancy rate, aging housing stock, large percentage of overcrowded households, and sky-rocketing housing prices, as discussed extensively in the Draft Housing Element, underscore the need to act quickly. For instance, a single person making a moderate income cannot now afford to buy a home in Daly City. There is an urgent need to adopt the Project, which is a cornerstone in the City's housing blueprint.

The District remains in strong support of the City's goals to achieve its fair share of RHNA and adopt a 2023-2031 Housing Element that fully complies with State law. The District is proud of the essential role that the Project plays in these efforts, and looks forward to continuing to work with the City to make the vision of the Project and more housing options in Daly City a reality.

Sincerely,
Sean R. Marciniak
Partner
cc: Clients
City of Daly City Planning Staff
Rose Zimmerman, City Attorney, City of Daly City
3 See Gov. Code, §§ 65863(a); (b). 4 Id. 5 See also the California Department of Housing and Community Development's report entitled California's Housing Future: Challenges and Opportunities," incorporated by this reference and available here:
https://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/plans-reports/docs/SHA_Final_Combined.pdf

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; REVISED DECEMBER 28, 2023
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
Daly City Overview
Known as the "Gateway to the Peninsula", Daly City is located central to two of the Bay Area's major job growth zones of San Francisco and San Mateo counties, and is a regional hub for retail, healthcare, and small business. Because of its central location, diversified economy, excellent transportation links, and a growing young and productive labor force, Daly City's future for economic growth is bright.

JUHSD Site Characteristics
To assess the viability of office use at the site, BAE 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 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.

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 and this BART Station positions Daly City to capture future office tenant demand.

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

3 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. However, the Daly City BART Station area is an existing business center that can attract other businesses.

Figure 1 Office Location Criteria
Source: BAE, 2020.

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.

4 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 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 in contrast to other areas of Daly City.

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 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.

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 despite its being situated in a highly attractive and vibrant community. 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

5 upon the site’s characteristics as well as its 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.

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

6 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.

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

7 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 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

8 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.

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 yet high enough to support new 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.

9 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 offer potential for office development.

Daly City Class A Office Market
There are two Class A office buildings in Daly City, 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,

10 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 conditions1. 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.
1 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.

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

12 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.

13 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

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

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

Source: CoStar, BAE 2020

15 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

16 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

17 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)

18 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).

19 • 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

20 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.

(This space intentionally left blank)

21 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-story2. 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.
2 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.

22 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.

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

24 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

25 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 an 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.

26 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.

27 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 Redwood City, CA

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.

28 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

29 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

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

30 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.

31 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.