Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Supplement to the Community Development Department General Application Gilead Campus Expansion Project
Updated: June 6, 2025
To: Foster City Community Development Director Sofia Mangalam
Gilead Sciences, Inc. (“Gilead”) presents this formal application for the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Project (“Project”) in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area (“Property”) in the City of Foster City (“City”).
This letter serves as a supplement to the City’s Community Development Department General Application form. It is intended to clarify, expand upon, and formally submit Project details for the City’s review and entitlement processing. As of June 6, it has also been modified per City feedback.
Prior to this formal application, Gilead submitted a Preliminary Review application on February 14, 2025. (File No: PR2025-0003.) City staff provided formal feedback in writing on April 8, 2025, following internal review and a meeting of an Interdepartmental Evaluation Committee (IDEC) conducted with Gilead on March 5, 2025. This letter, as well as other relevant Project materials, incorporates and responds to that feedback. Additionally, Gilead is transmitting, concurrent to this formal application, a comprehensive response log to the City’s Preliminary Review feedback. This response log outlines how Gilead has addressed each comment and request for clarification raised during the Preliminary Review process.
This supplement provides the following sections: (1) Background, (2) Project Description, (3) Land Use Consistency, (4) Requested Entitlements, (5) California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Review and Environmental Assessment Form, (6) Submittals for Formal Application, and (7) Project Implementation Timeline.
1. Background
In 2005-2006, the City initiated a study of the Property in or der to promote new business development, especially biotechnology and high technology companies. In response to the study, the two property owners, Northwestern Mutual Life and Sea Cliff Prope rties (the “Original Owners”), proposed the Chess-Hatch Master Plan project (the “O riginal Project,” RZ-07-002 and DA-09-002), with the following:
On November 2, 2009, the City certified the Final EIR (SCH #2008122065, EA-07-001) and adopted a Mitigation Mon itoring and Reporting Program for the Original Project.
Additionally, on November 2, 2009, the City ame nded its General Plan to designate the Property as Chess/Hatch Office Research.
On January 24, 2011, the Original Owners submitted a proposal to revise the Original Project to substitute five multi-story structures a nd one single-story struct ure for the three multi- story structures previously proposed. On August 19, 2013, the City adopted the Addendum
dated February 19, 2013 as an adequate e nvironmental document pursuant to CEQA via Resolution No. 2013-64.
On September 3, 2013, the City approved a Master Development Agreement to develop the Chess Hatch Master Plan on the Chess-Hatc h Property via City Or dinance No. 574. The Master Development Agreement was recorded with the County of San Mateo on September 11, 2014 as Document No. 2014-082572, with an initial term of five years. Additionally, on September 3, 2013, the City amended its zoning map for the Chess-Hatch Property, changing the zoning designation to CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development). It also approved a General Development Plan to allow up to 800,000 square feet of office, biotechnology, or research and development uses on the Chess-Hatch Property via City Ordinance No. 573.
On April 17, 2014, the City’s Planning Commission approved Use Permit/Specific Development Plan (UP-13-004 and EA-07-001B) to allow the demolition of nine office buildings, comprising 146,000 square feet of development, and construction of 600,000 square feet of office devel opment area and up to 5,000 square feet of business supporting use in two towers and a connector building, and construction of tw o multi-story parking garages.
On September 1, 2015, the Original Owners assigne d their interest as Developers in the Development Agreement to Gilead. On Janua ry 8, 2019, Gilead and the City signed a Memorandum of Extension, and the Initial Term of the Ma ster Development Agreement was extended to expire on September 7, 2024.
Ultimately, the Original Project was never constructed. On September 7, 2024, both the Use Permit/Specific Development Plan and the Master Development Agreement expired. The original nine office buildings, comprising 146,000 square feet of existing development, remain in use on the Chess-Hatch Property.
2. Project Description
Gilead proposes a new Project fo r the Property to support its long-te rm expansion in the City and fulfill the original vision for the Property. The Project builds on Gilead's integrated campus operations and aims to enhance Gilead’s research capabilities to support its growing pipeline.
The Gilead Campus Expansion Project proposes phased demolition of twelve existing office buildings (totaling 191,507 square feet
1), together with the constr uction of up to a maximum of 800,000 square feet of biotechnology or research and development us es, in addition to a single, standalone, multi-story parking garage.
Similar to the Original Project, the Project would proceed in tw o phases, as described below and depicted in concept in the attached Project Plans.
1 Note that the square footage of existing buildings is approximate.
A. Phase One
In Phase One, eight of the tw elve existing office buildings, comprising approximately 123,536 square feet of development, would be demolished and a two-story building of up to approximately 200,000 square feet would be constructed.
In Phase One, the two-story building would be supported by surface parking. Based on Gilead’s anticipated parking needs and integration wi th its existing campus Transportation Demand Management/Transportation Systems Management (“TDM/TSM”) program, the parking proposed would require approval of a reduction in parking requirements under the provisions of Zoning Code Section 17.36.060. Gilead will submit a Parking Impact Analysis Report with the formal application to support the need for reduced parking.
The landscaping around the existing buildings w ould be removed and replaced, although some of the landscaping and trees would be retained until Phase Two is complete. Vehicular access to the property would be from Chess Drive. There are three driveways accessed from Chess Drive.
Additionally, a loading area is planned. A service road/fire lane encircles most of the site, providing emergency vehicle and service access to the rear of the property.
B. Phase Two
As shown conceptually in the attached Projec t Plans, Phase Two would consist of additional buildings up to a maximum of approximately 600,000 square feet, together with a multi-story parking garage. The new building would replace so me of the surface parking used in Phase One.
The remaining four existing build ings (approximately 67,971 square feet) would be demolished, and a multi-story parking garage would replace them, providing all of the necessary parking for the entire site.
3. Land Use Consistency
The Property is designated as Chess/Hatch Office Research in the Genera l Plan. The Property is zoned as CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Devel opment). The Property is also subject to the Chess Hatch General Development Plan adopted in 2013.
The Project has been designed to comply with the General Plan and Zoning. Attachment A provides an initial consistency analysis with all applicab le General Plan designati ons and Zoning district regulations.
The Chess Hatch General Development Plan contains limitations and authorizations that are specific to the Original Project. The Chess Hatch General Development Plan requires revisions to allow for the Gilead Campus Expansion Pr oject. Notably, the new Project pr oposes to remove standalone office space as an approved use under the Gene ral Development Plan. However, there may be ancillary office space that is in support of biot echnology uses, while standalone office is proposed to be removed as a permitted us e within the General Development Plan. Similarly, other changes are intended to modernize the General Development Plan to bring it into conformance with the new Project. Attachment B provides a draft redline and annotations of the proposed revisions to the General Development Plan for the City’s review and feedback.
The proposed revisions to the General Development Plan repr esent minimal adjustments to modernize outdated provisions ra ther than substantive policy changes. The existing General Development Plan was crafted in 2013 for the Original Project , which had a different design approach and site layout than the current proposa l more suited to the office product that was in demand at the time. The prescriptive language in the current General Development Plan references specific exhibits and design parameters that are no longer applicable to Gilead's proposed development approach, creating unnecessary constraints that serve to impede the Property’s development.
Provisions in the existing General Development Plan contain outdated references to expired agreements. The Master Development Agreement expired in September 2024, and multiple sections of the General Development Plan reference this expired agreement as the basis for ongoing obligations. These references create increased uncer tainty as they point to documents that are no longer operative.
The existing General Development Plan also contains overly prescriptive design standards that were tailored to a specific architectural approach contemplated in 2013. While the fundamental development parameters — including the 800,000 square foot maximum, height limits, and FAR requirements — remain unchanged, the specific layout requirements and design mandates in the current General Development Plan are unnecessa rily restrictiv e and prevent Gilead from implementing a more current design that still meet s all of the City's redevelopment goals for the Property.
The proposed amendments update outdated refere nces, remove provisi ons tied to expired agreements, and provide appropriate flexibility in site design while maintaining the substantive planning that the City intended. These revisions enable implementation of the Project while ensuring continued compliance with the City's vision for high-quality development on the Property.
4. Requested Entitlements
The following entitlements are anticipated to be required:
an Amendment to the General Developm ent Plan for Chess-Hatch Master Plan for the Property.
a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map for the Property. (The Project proposes the creation of four or fewer parcels and therefore qualifies under the Subdivision Map Act for a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map.)
a Use Permit/Specific Development Plan for only Phase One. (As in the Original Project, a Use Permit/Specific Development Plan would be separately submitted for Phase Two in the future.)
For clarity, Gilead proposes to amend the existing General Development Plan that already applies to the entire Property, regardless of phasing. The existing General Development currently contemplates a project in two phases; similarly, the Project also proposes a project in two phases,
modified to reflect a new design. Just as before with the originally approved Chess-Hatch project, Gilead is requesting a Use Permit/Specific Development Plan for only Phase One at this time.
Gilead will apply for Phase Two in the future.
5. CEQA Review and Environmental Assessment Form
The Background section above describes the CEQA review that has occurred to date. The proposed Project is similar in nature compared to the Original Project, and the Project is within the envelope of what was studied within the CEQA documents for the Original Project. Therefore, Gilead does not anticipate the Project to result in new significant impacts. Gilead has retained Lamphier- Gregory to assist with the preliminary environmental review and submitted initial recommendations for discussion with the City as a Memo on CEQA Compliance in conjunction with the Preliminary Review. Gilead prepared this solely for the City’s information and understands that the City will use its independent discretion to complete the formal CEQA analysis as Lead Agency. The memo on CEQA compliance will not accompany the formal application.
Gilead is enclosing the Environmental Assessment Form as requested by the City with regard to CEQA.
6. Submittals for Formal Application
Gilead is submitting a formal a pplication and materials to support the requested entitlements, as described in Section 4:
Community Development Department General Application Form and Application Fee Response Log to Preliminary Review (File No: PR2025-0003) Letter (received by Gilead on April 8, 2025)
Current Preliminary Title Report
Project and Land Use Tables
Project Plans
TDM Plan and TDM Checklist
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map
New Chess Facility (Phase 1) Use Permit Drawing Set
Arborist Report
Building Permit Acknowledgment Form
Water Neutrality Documentation
C.3 and C.6 Development Checklist
Environmental Assessment Form
Parking Impact Analysis Report
In addition, a Transportation Impact Analysis is being prepared in conjunction with this submission and will be submitted after April 30, 2025.
Gilead also notes that the following checklist materials are not included with this submission.
Gilead is committed to continuing to work with the City to determine what, if any, additional information is appropriate to submit and the best timing for doing so. Gilead will provide any necessary supplemental materials once expectations have been clarified. These checklist materials are:
Solid Waste Management Plan
Landscape Project Application for Outdoor Water Conservation in Landscaping Climate Action Plan Development Checklist
Lastly, Gilead has elected not to submit the following:
Voluntary Architectural Plan Release Form
7. Project Implementation Timeline
The following is an estimated timeline for the implementation of the Gilead Campus Expansion Project. These dates are subject to adjustment based on City feedback and other circumstances.
The plan is structured to achieve Gilead’s goal of commissioning and occupying its Phase One building by the end of 2028. The following dates are structured to facilitate that outcome. Note that all dates in the future are approximate and subject to change.
A. Phase One
February 14, 2025 – Submission of Preliminary Review application to the City. File No: PR2025- 0003.
April 8, 2025 – Receipt of Preliminary Review feedback from the City.
April 30, 2025 – Formal application submission following Preliminary Review feedback.
First Quarter 2026 – Targeted entitlement approvals.
Second Quarter 2026 – Submission of building permits, with approval targeted by Fourth Quarter 2026.
Second Quarter 2026 – Demolition of selected existing structures begins.
Fourth Quarter 2026 – Phase One construction commences.
First Quarter 2028 – Construction of the Phase One building and surface parking is completed.
Fourth Quarter 2028 – Gilead commissions and moves into its Phase One building, achieving the project’s targeted milestone.
B. Phase Two
The timing of Phase Two will be based on the successful completion of Phase One and Gilead’s evolving business needs.
***
Thank you for your consideration of this formal application for the Gilead Campus Expansion Project. Gilead looks forward to working closely with the City to ensure the successful implementation of this Project.
Sincerely,
Lucerne Tsang
Gilead Sciences, Inc.
CC:
Corinne Quigley, Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Mi Yang, Gilead Sciences, Inc.
Tamsen Plume, Holland & Knight LLP
Attachment A: Consistency Analysis Chart
The following demonstrates the Project’s consistency with applicable policies and identifies proposed necessary revisions (in strikethrough and underline).
Requirement Consistency Analysis
The designation in the General Plan is Chess/Hatch Office Research.
Areas with this designation allow commercial,
office, industrial, biotechnology and other such
compatible uses including vehicle parking in
both parking structures and at-grade parking
lots on the project site.
Consistent. Gilead is proposing up to 800,000
square feet of development with biotechnology
uses.
Incompatible uses such as housing, schools,
day care, and other uses serving primarily
children are prohibited.
Consistent. No incompatible uses are
proposed.
Vertically and horizontally mixed-use
developments that maximize the use of land,
organize land uses and pedestrian/vehicular
circulation in a safe, logical and functional
manner and establish a safe, logical and
functional design relationship with adjacent
land uses is allowed within this designation.
Consistent. Gilead proposes uses consistent
with this designation.
Uses must meet the requirements of Chapter
17.68, General Performance Standards, of Title
17, Zoning, of the Foster City Municipal Code.
Consistent. These standards regulate fire
hazards, noise, vibration, air pollution, and
other performance standards. Gilead will meet
these standards with its project by design.
FARs for developments in this area would
range from 0.6 to 1.55 FAR.
Consistent. The total Floor Area Ratio, at full
project buildout, will be approximately 1.55.
The Zoning designation is C-M/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development).
The City of Foster City Zoning Map is hereby
amended to reclassify the +/- 11.9-acre land
bounded by Chess Drive, Foster City
Boulevard, and State Route 92 (APNs: 094-
010-100, - 500, -510) to change the Zoning
designation from M-1/PD (Light
Industrial/Planned Development) to C-M/PD
(Commercial Mix/Planned Development) with
a General Development Plan to allow up to
800,000 square feet of office, biotechnology, or
research and development uses and parking
structures and at-
grade parking lots, accessory
Consistent. Gilead is proposing up to 800,000
square feet of development with biotechnology
uses. Gilead proposes a revision via a proposed
General Development Plan Amendment to
reflect the change in scope of the Project.
Proposed Revision: The City of Foster City
Zoning Map is hereby amended to reclassify
the +/- 11.9-acre land bounded by Chess Drive,
Foster City Boulevard, and State Route 92
(APNs: 094-010-100, - 500, -510) to change
uses, such as commercial, industrial or light
assembly uses which are incidental or
supportive to the primary office, biotechnology
or research and development uses, with up to
5,000 sq. ft. of the total Project square footage
to be used for retail, restaurant or other
business-supporting ancillary commercial
amenities, except that the following uses are
excluded: housing, schools, day care, and other
uses primarily serving children.
the Zoning designation from M-1/PD (Light
Industrial/Planned Development) to C-M/PD
(Commercial Mix/Planned Development) with
a General Development Plan to allow up to
800,000 square feet of office, biotechnology, or
research and development uses and parking
structures and at-grade parking lots, accessory
uses, such as commercial, industrial or light
assembly uses which are incidental or
supportive to the primary office, biotechnology
or research and development uses, with up to
5,000 sq. ft. of the total Project square footage
to be used for retail, restaurant or other
business-supporting ancillary commercial
amenities, except that the following uses are
excluded: housing, schools, day care, and other
uses primarily serving children.
17.36.060(B) Off-street parking requirements in a PD district.
When the planning commission has determined
that conditions allowing a deviation from the
total number of required off-street parking
spaces are present, the planning commission
may grant such deviation as deemed
appropriate, based upon the following
information provided by the applicant:
1. A parking analysis discussing all impacts
resulting from the deviation from usual off-
street parking requirements, including
alternative parking designs or strategies
considered, and why they were deemed
infeasible, if applicable, and alternatives for
mitigating negative impacts identified.
Consistent. Gilead will provide a Parking
Impact Analysis Report that will describe the
impacts of the proposed deviation from
standard off-street parking requirements in the
context of Gilead’s overall TDM strategy for
its integrated campus. This Report includes
consideration of alternative parking designs
and strategies, and explains why these
alternatives were deemed infeasible. It will also
include a list of TDM measures.
2. The parking analysis may include a clear,
documentable rationale describing how and
why the proposed parking will work at the
given site and specifically identifying where it
has been successfully used in other comparable
projects and cities, and/or any other
information as requested by staff and the
plannin
g commission.
Consistent. Gilead will submit a Parking
Impact Analysis Report and the required TDM
Plan and TDM Checklist, drawing from the
example of its Integrated Campus nearby in the
City of Foster City.
3. The parking analysis shall include a parking
demand study that demonstrates that the
parking demand for the proposed use is less
than the minimum off-street parkin
g required
Consistent. Gilead will include a Parking
Impact Analysis Report that demonstrates that
demand is less than the mandated requirement
by Section 17.62.060. The parking demand
study shall be prepared by a licensed
transportation professional.
in Section 17.62.060, borrowing from its
experience managing transportation demand in
its integrated campus.
4. Any such request for reduction of off-street
parking capacity may be satisfied by providing
a transportation systems management plan
(TSM)/travel demand management (TDM)
program consistent with the requirements
outlined in Section 17.62.060(D)(3).
Consistent. Gilead will submit a TDM Plan
and TDM Checklist in conjunction with its
development. It will propose expanding the
Integrated Campus TDM to Chess Hatch.
General Development Plan Limitations for Chess-Hatch Master Plan.
The CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned
Development) District of the +11.89-acre lands
bounded by Foster City Boulevard, Chess
Drive, Foster City Lagoon and State Route 92
(APN: 094-010-100, -500, -510) is herewith
limited and specified as follows:
1. The development will include up to
800,000 sq. ft. of office, biotechnology,
or research and development uses as
more specifically described in Exhibit
A to Ordinance No. 573 and with
layout, height and setbacks generally as
depicted in Exhibit B to Ordinance No.
573.
Gilead proposes a revision via a proposed
General Development Plan Amendment, as the
layout, height, and setbacks depicted in Exhibit
B conform to an earlier plan for development
on the property.
Proposed Revision: The development will
include up to 800,000 sq. ft. of office,
biotechnology, or research and development
uses as more specifically described in Exhibit
A to Ordinance No. 573 and with layout,
height and setbacks generally as depicted in
Exhibit B to Ordinance No. 573.
2. Each Specific Development Plan/Use
Permit shall demonstrate compliance
with the Mitigation Measures included
in the Chess-Hatch Master Plan
Environmental Impact Report (SCH
2008122065), including any Addenda.
The language as presented is anchored to an
outdated CEQA compliance document.
Proposed Revision: Each Specific
Development Plan/Use Permit shall
demonstrate compliance with the Mitigation
Measures included in the Chess-Hatch Master
Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH
2008122065), including any Addenda
mitigation measures, as identified in approvals
for the Project.
3. On-site traffic improvements shall be
included in conformance with the
Chess-Hatch Master Development
Agreement, or if the Agreement has
expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master
Plan Environmental Impact Report
The language as presented is anchored to an
outdated CEQA compliance document and an
expired Master Development Agreement.
Gilead proposes to delete.
Proposed Revision: On-site traffic
improvements shall be included in
(SCH 2008122065), including any
Addenda.
conformance with the Chess-Hatch Master
Development Agreement, or if the Agreement
has expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master Plan
Environmental Impact Report (SCH
2008122065), including any Addenda.
4. The project shall contribute its fair
share contribution toward off-site
traffic improvements as identified in the
Chess-Hatch Master Development
Agreement, or if the Agreement has
expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master
Plan Environmental Impact Report
(SCH 2008122065), including any
Addenda.
The language as presented is anchored to an
outdated CEQA compliance document and an
expired Master Development Agreement.
Gilead proposes to delete.
Proposed Revision: The project shall
contribute its fair share contribution toward
off-site traffic improvements as identified in
the Chess-Hatch Master Development
Agreement, or if the Agreement has expired,
with the Chess-Hatch Master Plan
Environmental Impact Report (SCH
2008122065), including any Addenda.
5. The development shall contribute to the
operation of a peak-hour shuttle
consistent with the Transportation
Demand Management Plan required
with each Specific Development Plan in
conformance with the Chess-Hatch
Master Development Agreement, or if
the Agreement has expired, with the
Chess-Hatch Master Plan
Environmental Impact Report (SCH
2008122065), including any Addenda.
The language as presented is anchored to an
outdated CEQA compliance document and an
expired Master Development Agreement.
Proposed Revision: The development shall
contribute to the operation of a peak-hour
shuttle consistent with the operate a
Transportation Demand Management Plan
required with each Specific Development Plan
in conformance with the Chess-Hatch Master
Development Agreement, or if the Agreement
has expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master Plan
Environmental Impact Report (SCH
2008122065), including any Addenda
approvals for the Project.
6. Applications for each Specific
Development Plan/Use Permit shall
demonstrate compliance with the Chess
Hatch Design Principles Document,
dated 06.05.13, prepared by Valerio
Dewalt Train and Associates or as later
amended by the Planning Commission.
Consistent. Gilead proposes a project
consistent with the Chess Hatch Design
Principles Document. See below.
7. Phases of the development may be
constructed in any order, but each phase
shall be generally as illustrated in the
Proposed Revision: Gilead proposes to revise
the phasing diagram to reflect the current
project.
phasing diagrams attached as Exhibit
D.
8. Each Specific Development Plan/Use
Permit application shall include the
Transportation Demand Management
Plan as required by the City/County
Association of Governments.
Consistent. Gilead will include a
Transportation Demand Management Plan as
required by C/CAG.
9. Until redevelopment of the property
occurs in accordance with this General
Development Plan, the existing M-
1/PD Zoning/General Development
Plan and Specific Development
Plan/Use Permit approvals shall govern
the uses of the property.
Consistent. As the property is redeveloped,
portions will remain in consistency with the
existing M-1/PD Zoning, until they are
redeveloped in the second phase.
Chess Hatch Design Principles Document, dated 06.05.13, prepared by Valerio Dewalt Train and Associates.
Maximum FAR: 1.55 Consistent. Gilead proposes a Project in two phases; upon full build-out, the Project’s FAR
will be approximately 1.55.
Maximum Building Height: 150 feet to 190
feet
Consistent. The Project as proposed does not
exceed this maximum building height.
Lot Coverage: Maintain significant public
open and green space, with the upper limit of
lot coverage governed by the success of the
design.
Consistent. Gilead proposes significant public
open and green space.
Context: Surfaces should not be monolithic,
they should have a sense of detail. Solids and
glass should be roughly equal, and the
composition balanced with an emphasis on the
horizontal.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with surfaces
that have a sense of detail.
Site Coherence: The building should mark the
corner with a visual icon, and buffer pedestrian
zones and entries from freeway. The building
shape should serve to help transition from high
to the low scale of the neighborhood.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with buffered
pedestrian zones, a transition from high to low
scale, and a visual icon at the corner.
Massing: There should be logic to how the
building meets the ground and the sky…and
what is in between.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with logical
massing considerations.
Building Form: The building should be solid
and rectangular in form so that the floor plates
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with
are similar in size. Any features such as curves,
angles, arcades and cantilevers should act as
punctuation to the overall design.
rectangular building forms and similar-sized
floor plates.
Integration: Parking should be part of the
overall building design, and signage should
never be an afterthought.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with parking
integrated into the overall building design and
signage thoughtfully considered.
Landscape: The open space around the
building should create a sense of place and
welcome people for momentary experiences. It
should provide a place for people to sit and
gather.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with open
spaces around the buildings that create a sense
of place and provide areas for people to sit and
gather.
Environmental Logic and Sustainability:
The overall design should respond to the
environment. Design should be driven by using
materials and methods that are low impact.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with a focus
on using low-impact materials and methods to
drive sustainability in the design.
Relationship between Materials: There
should be a contrast between the natural
materials used and the highly finished ones.
There should be roughly equal parts of both in
the final design. All materials should be
interpreted in their most natural color.
Consistent. Gilead proposes buildings that will
adhere to these design principles, with contrast
between natural and finished materials and an
emphasis on natural color.
Attachment B: Proposed Redline of General Development Plan
EXHIBIT A
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN NARRATIVE FOR CHESS HATCH MASTER PLAN
The City of Foster City Zoning Map is hereby amended to reclassify the +/- 11.9-acre land bounded by Chess Drive, Foster City Boulevard, and State Route 92 (APNs: 094-010-100, -500, -510) to change the Zoning designation from M-1/PD (Light Industrial/Planned Development) to C-M/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development) with a General Development Plan to allow up to 800,000 square feet of office, biotechnology, or research and development uses and parking structures and at-grade parking lots; accessory uses, such as commercial, industrial or light assembly uses which are incidental or supportive to the primary office, biotechnology or research and development uses; or other uses which, in the opinion of the planning director, are similar to and no more offensive than the above-listed uses; with up to 5,000 sq. ft. of the total Project square footage to be used for retail, restaurant or other business-supporting ancillary commercial amenities; except that the following uses are excluded: housing, schools, day care, and other uses primarily serving children.
EXHIBIT C
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN LIMITATIONS FOR CHESS-HATCH MASTER PLAN (RZ-07-002)
The CM/PD (Commercial Mix/Planned Development) District of the ±11.89-acre lands bounded by Foster City Boulevard, Chess Drive, Foster City Lagoon and State Route 92 (APN: 094-010-100, - 500, -510) is herewith limited and specified as follows:
1. The development will include up to 800,000 sq. ft. of office, biotechnology, or research and development uses as more specifically described in Exhibit A to Ordinance No. 573 and with layout, height and setbacks generally as depicted in Exhibit B to Ordinance No. 573.
2. Each Specific Development Plan/Use Permit shall demonstrate compliance with the Mitigation Measures included in the Chess-Hatch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2008122065), including any Addenda mitigation measures, as identified in approvals for the Project.
3. On-site traffic improvements shall be included in conformance with the Chess-Hatch Master Development Agreement, or if the Agreement has expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2008122065), including any Addenda.
4. The project shall contribute its fair share contribution toward off-site traffic improvements as identified in the Chess-Hatch Master Development Agreement, or if the Agreement has expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2008122065), including any Addenda.
5.3.The development shall contribute to the operation of a peak-hour shuttle consistent with theoperate a Transportation Demand Management Plan required with each Specific Development Plan in conformance with the Chess-Hatch Master Development Agreement, or if the Agreement has expired, with the Chess-Hatch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (SCH 2008122065), including any Addenda approvals for the Project.
6.4.Applications for each Specific Development Plan/Use Permit shall demonstrate compliance with the Chess Hatch Design Principles Document, dated 06.05.13, prepared by Valerio Dewalt Train and Associates or as later amended by the Planning Commission.
7.5.Phases of the development may be constructed in any order, but each phase shall be generally as illustrated in the phasing diagrams attached as Exhibit D.
8.6.Each Specific Development Plan/Use Permit application shall include the Transportation Demand Management Plan as required by the City/County Association of Governments.
9.7.Until redevelopment of the property occurs in accordance with this General Development Plan, the existing M-1/PD Zoning/General Development Plan and Specific Development Plan/Use Permit approvals shall govern the uses of the property.
EXHIBIT B
GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN GRAPHIC FOR CHESS-HATCH MASTER PLAN [INSERT NEW SITE PLAN HERE]
EXHIBIT D
PHASING EXHIBITS
[INSERT NEW PHASING EXHIBITS HERE]