DATE: June 15, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Stefan Chatwin, City Manager
Marlene Subhashini, Assistant City Manager
FROM: Sofia Mangalam, Deputy City Manager
Thai-Chau Le, Interim Community Development Director
Maira Blanco, Senior Planner
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
SUBJECT: GILEAD CAMPUS EXPANSION MASTER PLAN PROJECT
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council take the following actions:
1. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council approving the second addendum and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) to the Chess-Hatch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR) (SCH#2008122065), and addendum thereto, for the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Project of up to 800,000 square feet (SF) of Research and Development (R&D) and ancillary uses, located in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area (APNs: 094-010-500, 094-010-510, 094-010-100) (EA2025-0001); and
2. Introduce by title only and waive further reading of an ordinance of the City Council amending the Foster City Zoning Map to modify the previously approved General Development Plan (GDP) for an approximately 11.87- acre land known as Chess Hatch Master Plan located at 1155- 1159, 1161- 1169, and 1175- 1191 Chess Drive in the C - M/PD (Commercial Mix-Planned Development Combining) District with an amended GDP removing office as a primary use and updating associated exhibits to facilitate the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion project to allow up to 800,000 SF of biotechnology or R&D uses with a reduced parking ratio (APNs: 094- 010-500, 094-010-510, 094-010- 100) (RZ2025-0005); and
3. Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of Foster City approving and authorizing the Mayor to execute a parking agreement between the City of Foster City and Gilead Sciences, Inc. for the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Project – up to 800,000 SF of R&D and ancillary uses, located in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area (APNs: 094- 010- 500, 094-010-510, 094-010-100).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant, Gilead Sciences, Inc., is proposing to expand beyond its integrated main campus on an approximately 11.87-acre site consisting of three (3) contiguous parcels in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area, known as the Gilead Campus Expansion Master Plan (“Project”). The Project will be a phased construction up to a maximum of 800,000 SF of biotechnology R&D and ancillary uses, including:
• Phase 1 would include the construction of an approximately 175,000 SF two-story lab building (New Chess Facility/B1165) and surface parking.
• Phase 2 would include construction of the remaining approximately 625,000 SF of R&D uses in two (2) additional multi-story buildings with a multi -story parking structure. The surface parking provided during Phase 1 would be removed as part of the full buildout.
Figure 1: Proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Phasing Plan; Source: Gilead Plan Set
Figure 2: Proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Phasing Plan; Source: Gilead Plan Set
The Project requires the approval of the following actions:
1. Environmental Assessment (EA2025- 0001): Second Addendum to the Chess - Hatch Master Plan EIR and addendum thereto pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Section 15164.
2. Amendment to GDP (RZ2025- 0005): Amending the Foster City Zoning Map to modify the previously approved GDP for Chess Hatch Master Plan, removing office as a primary use and updating associated exhibits to facilitate the Project.
3. Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (RS2025- 0002): A Vesting Tentative Parcel Map relocating one (1) existing parcel line and documenting disposition of existing and created easements to facilitate the Project.
4. Use Permit (UP2025- 0012): A Specific Development Plan/Use Permit (“Use Permit”) to allow the construction of Phase 1.
5. Parking Agreement: A written parking agreement for the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion project.
On May 21, 2026
, the City’s Planning Commission considered the project and voted 4-0 approving Resolutions for a Specific Development Plan/Use Permit to allow the construction of Phase 1, approximately 175,000 SF R&D building and a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map.
At that meeting, the Planning Commission also voted 4-0 to approve Resolutions making recommendations to the City Council for approval of Second Addendum and associated MMRP to the Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR (SCH#2008122065), and addendum thereto; an amendment to the Foster City Zoning Map to modify the previously approved GDP with an amended GDP removing office as a primary use and updating associated exhibits, and a parking agreement.
It is important to note that the Planning Commission’s approval of the Use Permit would only take effect if and when the Council approves the GDP Amendment/Rezoning.
At completion, the project would be an expansion of the Gilead campus with public-facing green spaces along Chess Drive and Lagoon, and a more defined gateway presence at Chess Drive and Foster City Blvd. The proposed Project was reviewed for consistency with the applicable General Plan goals and policies and the applicable provisions of the Foster City Municipal Code (FCMC). T he project would enable Gilead’s campus expansion within Foster City , provide a positive fiscal benefit to the City and improve existing site conditions through traffic signal timings modifications, a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan, and site design and public realm improvements as detailed in the analysis section below. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council approve the three (3) Council actions associated with the Gilead Campus Expansion project in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area.
NOTICING/PUBLIC OUTREACH
Notice of June 15, 2026, public hearing was made available to the public in the following ways:
• Notice in the Foster City Islander – June 3, 2026
• Electronic mailing to the Project applicants, owners and persons who expressed interest in receiving Project updates – June 3, 2026
• Mailing to property owners who own property within a 1,000- foot radius – June 3, 2026
• Foster City Website: www.fostercity.org – June 3, 2026 • Public Posting Places – June 3, 2026
Per CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum does not require a public circulation period under CEQA; however, environmental documents were made public through the course of sequenced public meetings, including this City Council meeting.
BACKGROUND
PROJECT SITE
The subject site is comprised of three (3) contiguous parcels, including Parcel 1 , APN:
094-010-500 (approximately 4 acres), Parcel 2, APN: 094 -010-510 (approximately 5 acres) and Parcel 3, APN: 094-010-100 (approximately 2.9 acres), totaling approximately
11.87 acres, and is located in the Chess/Hatch Drive area (Figure 1). The site is bounded by Chess Drive (northwest), lagoon/canal (north), CA State Route 92 (southeast) and Foster City Boulevar d (south) and surrounded by low -rise office and commercial buildings.
Figure 3: Location Map; Source: Near Map
PROPOSED PROJECT
On February 14, 2025, 2025, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Review application (PR2025-0003) for the proposed Project on the subject 11.87-acre property. On April 30, 2025, an Environmental Assessment application (EA2025- 0001) was submitted by the applicant to begin environmental review of the proposed Project. On June 24, 2025, a GDP Amendment (RZ2025-0005) and associated Use Permit application (UP2025-0012) were submitted by the applicant, requesting to amend the Chess Hatch GDP, including removing office use as a primary use and updating associated exhibits, and construction of Phase 1, respectively. On July 30, 2025, a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map application (RS2025-0002) was submitted by the applicant to relocate one existing parcel line on one (1) of the three (3) parcels.
PUBLIC MEETINGS
To date, there have been several public meetings pertaining to the proposed Project, including City Council Gatekeeper Meeting on June 16, 2025, three Planning Commission (3) Study Sessions, and one (1) Planning Commission Public Hearing as included below:
• On June 16, 2025, a City Council Development Project Preliminary Review (Gatekeeper) meeting was held to introduce
the preliminary Project proposal, review the preliminary transportation study results, provide an overview of
the anticipated environmental analysis and required studies, and seek input on the proposed Project and the associated environmental review.
• On December 4, 2025, Planning Commission Study Session #1 was held to formally introduce the Project and to seek public input. See link for Meeting minutes.
Key highlights:
o Staff presented on all Project components and requested entitlements. o Questions were raised regarding the projected employee headcounts associated with both phases of the Project.
o The Commission emphasized the need for fiscal impact analysis and traffic studies to evaluate the full buildout of both Phase 1 and Phase 2. o Clarification was requested regarding the removal of office as a primary use in the amended GDP and the differences in employee density and traffic generation between traditional office use and R&D use.
o Discussion also focused on the proposed phasing strategy, including the anticipated timing between Phase 1 and Phase 2, interim site conditions, and whether existing buildings would remain unoccupied. o Comments were provided on the proposed building design and site layout, including massing, building placement, height visibility from highway and City gateway, feasibility and practicality of a ten-story biotechnology R&D building.
o Additional information was requested regarding the environmental review and public safety associated with the Project, including potential releases to the air, land and water; hazardous materials handling; regulatory oversight and emergency response planning during construction and operation of the Project.
o Questions were also asked about the Project’s impact on the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) calculations and the relationship between the proposed expansion Project and the main integrated campus.
• On February 5, 2026, Planning Commission Study Session #2 was held to provide follow-up responses to the Planning Commission’s concerns and questions raised during Study Session #1. See link for Meeting minutes.
Key highlights:
o The applicant team presented additional information related to the design evolution of the master plan campus, high-rise R&D precedent (built examples in other nearby cities), contextual considerations and design comparison to previously approved entitlements.
o Staff also provided an update on next steps, including status of technical studies and purpose of next Study Session.
• On April 23, 2026, Planning Commission Study Session #3 was held to provide the public and Planning Commission with an opportunity to review and provide input on the Project-specific environmental assessment, Fiscal Impact Analysis, and other associated aspects such as
traffic analysis under Level of Service (LOS) standards.
Key highlights:
o Staff presented the CEQA determination (i.e., Second Addendum to certified EIR), and overall findings.
o Staff elaborated on specific areas analyzed in the Second Addendum, including Aesthetics, Air Quality, Transportation, and Hazards and Hazardous Materials.
o Staff also presented highlights from the Fiscal Impact Analysis. o Staff presented traffic analysis, including Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis, LOS analysis, studied intersections, proposed signal timing modifications, and required traffic study under Phase 2.
• On May 21 2026, a Planning Commission Regular Meeting was held to consider and approve two (2) actions of the Project, including the Specific Development Plan/Use Permit for Phase 1 and Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. Additionally, the Planning Commission made recommendations for City Council approval of three (3) actions, including Second Addendum to the Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR, the amendment to GDP, and the Parking Agreement. See the link for Meeting minutes.
Key highlights:
o One of the Commissioners noted that any improvements or solutions to alleviate traffic congestion prior to and in anticipation of Phase 2 should be pursued in the interim.
After the meeting, staff raised this concern with the applicant, and they agreed to work on a traffic study.
For a detailed discussion on actions taken by the Planning Commission, see Planning Commission Actions section below.
HISTORY OF PREVIOUS ENTITLEMENTS
There are several City approvals associated with the redevelopment of the subject property, starting in 2006 with the latest GDP approved by Ordinance No. 573 in 2013.
The original project was approved with an Environmental Impact Report and a Statement of Overriding Considerations (“Chess Hatch Master Plan EIR ” State Clearinghouse No. 2008122065) in November 2009.
On June 20, 2013, an Initial Study/Addendum (“IS/First Addendum”) to the previously approved Chess Hatch Master Plan EIR was approved by the City Council for minor changes to the approved project.
On September 13, 2013, the City Council approved a Master Development Agreement (DA) with a five-year term to develop the previously approved project with the prior owners of the property.
On April 17, 2014, the Planning Commission approved the Use Permit/Specific Development Plan (UP-13-004 and EA-07-001B) to allow the demolition of nine (9) office buildings comprising 146,000 square feet of development and construction of 600,000 square feet of office development area and up to 5,000 SF of business supporting use in two (2) towers and a connector building, and construction of two (2) multi -story parking garages.
The subject property was sold to Gilead Sciences Inc. T he DA was subsequently assigned to Gilead and was extended in 2019. While an application to extend the Chess Hatch DA was submitted in 2023, Gilead Sciences, Inc. d ecided not to pursue th e extension and the DA expired in 2024. Since the expiration of the DA and the expiration of the associated Use Permit on September 7, 2024, Gilead has proposed an updated project to meet their needs. The current proposal still includes the phased redevelopment of the site up to 800,000 square feet but amends the allowed use with changes to design and massing. For more details, please see link for history/timeline of the Chess Hatch Site.
ANALYSIS
The proposed Project includes five (5) discretionary actions. The Planning Commission has approved the first two actions pertaining to the Specific Development Plan/Use Permit and the Vesting Tentative Parcel Map. The remaining three (3) actions require City Council approval and are discussed in detail below.
1. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA2025-0001) (Attachment 1) Pursuant to CEQA, the Lead Agency (Foster City) must analyze and disclose all potential environmental impacts associated with a project. When a previously certified EIR has been prepared, an addendum can be prepared to build on or “tier” from the previous analysis if it meets CEQA Guidelines Section 15164.
The subject site was previously evaluated in the Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR (“Certified EIR”) that was certified in November 2009 (State Clearinghouse No. 2008122065). On June 20, 2013, an Initial Study/Addendum (“IS/First Addendum”) for the previously approved Chess Hatch Master Plan EIR was approved by the City Council. The Chess - Hatch Master Plan EIR analyzed demolition of 190,000 SF of existing buildings and development of 800,000 SF of new office uses (including flexible space for retail and other amenities), for a net new development amount of 610,000 SF. On September 3, 2013, the City Council approved a GDP to allow up to 800,000 SF of office, biotechnology, or
R&D uses on the Chess-Hatch property via City Ordinance No. 573 (see link for history of EIR and Addendum).
First Addendum (2013)
In 2011, the project proponent proposed changes to the planned configuration of parking on the site, which would have resulted in changes to the building height, massing, and on-site circulation under the approved Master Plan. The new project would have substituted the three multi-story structures evaluated in the Certified EIR with six discrete structures, two of which would be reserved for parking only. The proposed changes would have still occurred within the approved 800,000 SF development envelope for the Master Plan. In 2013, an Initial Study/Addendum (“First Addendum”) to the Chess -Hatch Master Plan EIR was prepared to analyze the environmental impacts of the 2011 project modifications. On June 20, 2013, the City Council approved the First Addendum to the Certified EIR under Resolution No. P-15-13.
Second Addendum (2026)
The environmental consultant, Placeworks, Inc., conducted a project-level analysis in the form of an Initial Study with all applicable technical reports for the proposed Project.
Based on this analysis, it was determined that the proposed Project met the criteria under Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines for preparation of an Addendum to a Certified EIR and did not meet the conditions in Section 15162 (calling for preparation of a Supplemental EIR) of the CEQA Guidelines and therefore, an Addendum could be prepared.
Specifically, the Project would have no new or more significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in the certified EIR, would have no new mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the certified EIR, and would not result in a substantial increase in the magnitude of any significant environmental impact previously identified in the certified EIR. Based on this determination, a s econd addendum to the Chess -Hatch Master Plan EIR (“Second Addendum”) was prepared.
The Second Addendum analyzes the proposed Project, consisting of development of a new phased R&D campus totaling up to 800,000 SF at buildout in two (2) phases:
• Phase 1: Construction of one (1) two- story R&D building up to 200,000 SF and surface parking lot.
• Phase 2:
o Demolition of the remaining four (4) office and light industrial buildings totaling 67,971 SF; demolition of the surface parking lot constructed in Phase 1.
o Construction of up to 6 00,000 SF of R&D use and a multi -story parking structure. A maximum of 800,000 SF of R&D and ancillary uses; remaining square footage from Phase 1 may be utilized under Phase 2.
The Second Addendum also considered other Project components, including a Vesting Tentative Parcel Map to relocate one (1) existing parcel line affecting two (2) Project lots, four (4) onsite generators and TDM Plan.
It shall be noted that Second Addendum analyzed Phase 1 up to 200,000 SF of R&D building, which was further refined and finalized as an approximately 175,000 SF R&D building. This refinement remains within the scope of the Second Addendum.
The Second Addendum, including technical reports and updated MMRP is available on the project website . Along with the application for environmental assessment, the applicant provided several technical reports, including a Transportation Impact Study, a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, and CA Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) 523 forms. As is the practice in the City with projects subject to CEQA, these technical studies were peer- reviewed by the environmental consultant at the applicant’s expense.
The environmental analysis in the Second Addendum is organized based on Appendix G Checklist of the 2025 CEQA Guidelines and analyzes the full buildout of the Project (Phase 1 and Phase 2).
The Certified EIR identified environmental topics/resources that were identified as less than significant, including agricultural and forestry resources, biological resources, energy, population and housing, mineral resources, public services, recreation, utilities, and wildfire.
Where appropriate, the Second Addendum evaluates new significance criteria using the environmental checklist questions in Appendix G of the 2025 CEQA Guidelines. For instance, as of December 28, 2018, VMT has been considered the appropriate CEQA threshold for addressing transportation impacts rather than traffic congestion under LOS standards. Similarly, significance thresholds may have also been updated for the region.
For example, since the 2009 Certified EIR, the Bay Area Air District’s emissions thresholds have changed from the 2006 Clean A ir Plan to the updated 2017 Clean Air Plan.
Findings of the Second Addendum
The Second Addendum’s findings conclude that the proposed Project meets the criteria of CEQA Guidelines Section 15164 and that an addendum to the Certified Chess -Hatch Master Plan EIR is the appropriate CEQA document to address the proposed Project. As analyzed in the Second Addendum, the proposed Project would not result in any new significant environmental effect or result in a substantial increase in the severity of a significant effect identified in the 2009 Certified Chess -Hatch Master Plan EIR.
Furthermore, the conclusions related to the significant environmental effects of the
proposed Project were identified in the Certified EIR (i.e., Aesthetics, Air Quality, Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Noise, and Transportation) and reiterated in the Second Addendum. The proposed Project does not make any substantial changes that would require major revisions of the Certified Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR because no new significant environmental effects have been identified and no substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects have been identified. Finally, no new information which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence reveals any new significant impacts that would require reevaluation.
At the time the previous EIR was certified as complete, the Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR indicated that the Project would ha ve one or more significant effects. Those significant effects previously examined in the Second Addendum were determined not to be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR, and the mitigation measures in the certified Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR were found to be feasible for the proposed Project. Only minor text additions/clarifications are necessary for the previously adopted mitigation measures in the certified Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR and do not constitute a substantial change.
Staff Comments: Based on environmental analysis, the proposed Project meets the criteria for the preparation of an addendum under CEQA Guidelines 15164 and no conditions under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 calling for the preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred; therefore, an addendum is the appropriate level of CEQA review for the Project. Staff recommends City Council approve the Second Addendum to the Chess-Hatch Master Plan EIR and First Addendum thereto.
In addition to environmental analysis for the purposes of CEQA, the proposed Project’s environmental assessment also included a consistency analysis with General Plan policies that support the goals and vision for the City, including LOS of the public roads and a fiscal impact analysis. This analysis is outside of the requirements of CEQA, but still important and necessary to review when a project is proposed.
2. GDP AMENDMENT/REZONING (RZ2025-0005) (Attachment 2)
The subject site is zoned C -M/PD Commercial Mix District/Planned Development Combining District. Per FCMC Chapter 17.28, t he C -M District shall be used only in conjunction with the combining zone PD ( Planned Development). The PD C ombining District for the subject site is under Chess Hatch GDP, which was approved via Ordinance No. 573.
General Plan Consistency
The subject site is designated Chess/Hatch Office Research on the Land Use Map of the General Plan ( Land Use and Circulation Element ), which is intended for office, industrial and biotechnology uses. Specifically:
“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. Incompatible uses such as housing, schools, day care, and other uses serving primarily children are prohibited. 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.
Uses must meet the requirements of Chapter 17.68, General Performance Standards, of Title 17, of the Foster City Municipal Code. FARs for d evelopments
in this area would range from 0.6 to 1.55 FAR.”
As noted in the Land Use and Circulation Element:
“In 2009, a General Plan Amendment for properties in the Chess Drive/Hatch Drive area adjacent to SR 92 was approved for a portion of this area to allow redevelopment of the older industrial buildings to an office campus. A new Land Use Plan designation of Chess/Hatch Office Research was applied. A Rezoning/General Development Plan for up to 800,000 square feet of office, biotechnology or research and development use was approved in 2013 and a Specific Development Plan/Use Permit for Phase 1 consisting of up to 600,000 square feet was approved in 2014.”
Staff Comments: The applicant is requesting to remove office use from the allowable uses in the GDP. The Project would consist of R&D uses and ancillary uses consistent with the land use designation and does not include any prohibited sensitive uses.
The Project’s proposed Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of approximately 1.55 is consistent with the Chess/Hatch Research Office designation.
Furthermore, the Project is consistent with the multiple goals and policies contained in the Land Use and Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan as detailed out in Attachment 6. Staff has highlighted two (2) key policies that are relevant. a. Traffic Level Service Standards (LUC-F-1) Policy
The proposed Project was evaluated for consistency with the City’s General Plan Land Use and Circulation Element, including Policy LUC -F, which establishes LOS standards for intersections within the City. LOS is a qualitative measure of intersection performance, ranging from LOS A (free- flow conditions with minimal delay) to LOS F (oversaturated conditions with significant delay and queuing).
The applicant submitted a Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) prepared by Kimley-Horn to identify potential impacts associated with the Project for both Phase 1 and full buildout of the Project based on standards and methodologies established by Foster City and by the State of Ca lifornia Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation (formerly the Office of Planning and Research) .
The TIA included evaluations of traffic operational conditions during the AM and PM peak hours for six (6) study intersections (see Table 1 for the location of the intersections). The study found that all studied intersections currently operate at LOS D or better, with the exception of the Foster City Boulevard / Chess Drive intersection, which operates at LOS E during the PM peak period. This condition is consistent with General Plan Policy LUC- F, which anticipates and accepts LOS E or F operations at this location due to its function as a primary freeway access point.
Table 1: Existing Conditions Intersection LOS
# Intersection LOS
Criteria
Existing
AM Peak PM Peak
LOS Delay
(sec)
LOS Delay
(sec)
1 Foster City Boulevard / Vintage Park
Drive - Chess Drive
F B 16.9 B 18.9
2 Vintage Park Drive / Chess Drive F B 17.4 C 24.4 3 HWY 92 WB Ramps / Chess Drive F C 29.7 D 45.6
4 Foster City Boulevard / Chess Drive F C 24.9 E 57.6 5 HWY 92 EB Ramps / Metro Center D C 24.9 D 42.5
6 Foster City Boulevard / Metro Center
Boulevard
F D 47.2 D 49.2
Notes:
*The average control delay is reported for signalized intersections.
Source: Kimley-Horn Technical Memorandum, March 2026
It shall be noted that TIA was peer reviewed by Fehr & Peers (City’s consultant) to confirm key assumptions and modeling parameters.
The TIA concluded that traffic operations under Existing Conditions Plus Phase 1, Existing Plus Full Buildout (Proposed), and Cumulative Plus Buildout, would not result in any Project deficiency and no improvements would be necessary with signal timing modifications.
Phase 1 of the proposed Project would result in an increase in peak -hour delay of approximately eight (8) seconds at both the SR 92 Westbound Ramps / Chess Drive and Foster City Boulevard/Chess Drive intersections during the PM peak period. This increase does not result in a change in LOS letter grade at either intersection.
The TIA also evaluated several Phase 2 operational scenarios to illustrate how the intersection system would perform under different timing and background conditions. To
provide a simple reference point for decision -makers, staff requested a sensitivity case showing existing conditions plus full buildout to model the Project as if it were fully constructed today. This scenario shows a 37- second increase in delay at Foster City Boulevard/Chess Drive (PM peak) and a 23-second increase in delay at HWY-92/Chess Drive (PM peak) relative to existing operations. However, this scenario is speculative at this point because Phase 2 is not being constructed at the same time as Phase 1.
Staff Comments: While the City does not apply a formal numeric delay threshold as part of its adopted standards, staff has historically used a planning- level guideline of approximately four (4) seconds of additional delay at intersections operating at LOS D or worse as an indicator for further evaluation and potential mitigation.
For Phase 1, to address the Project-related delay, staff re commended signal timing modifications at both intersections. With implementation of these improvements, the modeled delay is reduced to approximately three (3) seconds. This reduction is within acceptable operational variation and is not anticipated to result in measurable degradation of intersection performance. The signal modifications are necessary to address this Project-related delay and conditions of approval for Phase 1 w ere included as part of the approved Use Permit.
Future Phase 2, development will require a subsequent TIA at the time of the Use Permit application. The scope of that analysis may be refined by the Public Works Director/City Engineer based on project size, trip generation, and prevailing traffic conditions at the time of entitlement review. The analysis will evaluate whether add itional operational or physical improvements are required to ensure consistency with General Plan Policy LUC- F-1.
b. Provide for Economic Development (LUC-I) Policy
To evaluate the proposed Project’s conformance with the Economic Development policy, staff initiated a Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) (Attachment 5) to better understand the proposed Project’s effect on the City’s tax base, service costs and long- term fiscal sustainability.
The FIA scope of work included analysis of the Phase 1 buildout and the full Project buildout in terms of projected annual General Fund revenue, projected annual General Fund service costs, net fiscal impact to the City, one-time revenues or costs, and total 10- year impacts. The key findings are presented below:
• Expenditure:
o Public Safety costs represent the largest share of the City’s anticipated additional General Fund expenditures associated with the proposed Project. At full buildout, the proposed Project is estimated to cost $331,000 in annual General Fund expenditures, including approximately $124,000 for Police Services, approximately $76,000 for fire services and other City service costs.
• Revenue/Net General Fund Benefit:
o At full buildout, the proposed Project is estimated to generate about $2. 4 million in annual General Fund revenues (including property tax, VLF, permits, rentals etc.). After accounting for $331,000 in projected city service costs, the Project would result in an estimated $2.1 million at full buildout. (Note: the existing site’s estimated net contribution is approximately $357,000.). Full breakdown for the two phases is shown in the table below.
Table 2: Summary of Fiscal Impact Estimates
Estimated General
Fund Revenues
and Expenditures
Annual General
Fund Revenues
Annual General
Fund
Expenditures
Annual Net Impact
on General Fund
Existing Site $357,000 $0 $357,000
Phase I Buildout
Proposed $717,000 ($61,000) $656,000
Net of Existing1 $359,000 ($61,000) $298,000
Phase II Buildout
Proposed $2,402,000 ($331,000) $2,071,000
Net of Existing1 $2,044,000 ($331,000) $1,713,000
10 Years Post-Buildout (2026$)
Proposed $2,204,000 ($346,000) $1,859,000
Net of Existing1 $1,877,000 ($346,000) $1,532,000
*values shown are rounded to nearest thousand - values may not sum due to [1] Net of Existing values subtract Existing Site values from Proposed values.
Source: Economic & Planning Systems
• One-time Impact Fees:
o The FIA estimates that the proposed Project would generate approximately $21.9 million in one-time impact fee revenue at full buildout. o As the applicant will build Phase 1 right away, staff estimates that the City will receive and estimated $1.85 million based on net new SF (Note: Similar to Environmental Assessment, FIA assumed 200,000 SF for Phase 1). Full breakdown is available in the table below.
Table 3: Estimated One-Time Impact Fees
Item Fee Rate1 Phase I
Only
Phase II Only Overall Total
Existing Developed
Square Feet
123,536 67,971 191,507
Square Feet (Sq. Ft.) of
New Development2
200,000 600,000 800,000
Net New Square Feet 76,464 532,029 608,493
Affordable Housing
Commercial Linkage Fee
$30.78/Net New
Sq. Ft.
$2,353,562 $16,375,853 $18,729,415
Parks Facilities Impact
Fee
$3.60/Net New
Sq. Ft.
$275,270 $1,915,304 $2,190,575
Public Safety Impact Fee $0.38/Net New Sq. Ft.
$29,056 $202,171 $231,227
Transportation Impact
Fee
$1.22/Net New
Sq. Ft.
$93,286 $649,075 $742,361
Total Impact Fees $2,751,175* $19,142,403 $21,893,578
[1] City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District Master Fees & Service Charges Schedule Fiscal Year 2025-26 for industrial uses; Linkage Fee schedule specifies R&D uses are treated as industrial for purposes of fee administration so that assumption is utilized for all impact fee categories listed here.
[2] It is assumed that the Project will be built to its fully -entitled Phase I amount (200,000 square feet). The Developer's current plans.
*$1.85 million estimate i s if accounting for actual proposed square footage of UP2025 -0012 of about 175,000 SF.
Source: City of Foster City/Estero Municipal Improvement District Master Fees & Service Charges Schedule Fiscal Year 2025-26; Economic & Planning Systems
• One-time Construction Sales Tax Revenue:
o FIA estimates t hat proposed Project would also generate approximately $1.7 million in one -time construction sales tax at full buildout, including approximately $408,000 during Phase 1 and approximately $1.3 million during phase 2, subject to final construction details and applicable sales tax at the time.
Staff Comments: As outlined in the key findings, the proposed Project under Phase 1 and Phase 2 is anticipated to generate more revenue for the City than the existing use. Staff finds that the proposed Project would support the City’s economic development objectives and contribute to long-term fiscal sustainability.
Foster City Municipal Code/Zoning Consistency
The subject Project site is zoned C-M/PD Commercial Mix District/Planned Development Combining District. The C -M District is regulated by FCMC Chapter 17.28 and uses permitted within the C -M District are only those specified within the use permit required in connection with such district. Per FCMC Section 17.36.010, a PD, or Planned Development Combining District, is intended to accommodate a range of development types while offering flexibility by allowing tailoring of City standards to specific uses.
As discussed above, the GDP for the subject site was approved via Ordinance No. 573 for the previous 2009 Chess Hatch Master Plan with specific exhibits and included the following language:
“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 us es, 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.”
Pursuant to FCMC Section 17.36.100 , changes in the development plan shall be considered the same as changes in the zoning map, and shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.74, except that for amendment of general development plans including residential uses, the amended general plan shall be adopted by resolution of the city council and shall not require changes in the zoning map. Changes in the specific development plan shall be considered the same as changes to the use permit and shall be made in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 17.06.
Staff Comments: The approved GDP was established to support up to 800,000 SF of office, biotechnology and R&D uses with the associated Chess -Hatch Master Plan Project. The applicant is requesting to remove office use from the allowable uses, but the total developable square footage (i.e., 800,000 square feet) will remain unchanged. The Project will need approval of an amendment to the Foster City Zoning Map to modify the previously approved GDP removing office as a primary use and updating associated exhibits to facilitat e the proposed Gilead Campus Expansion Project. Staff finds the proposed GDP amendment remains consistent with the current GDP for the site, is limited in scope as it is only removing office use from list of uses, maintains the previously approved development intensity of 800,000 SF and updates the GDP exhibits to align with the proposed Project.
A new Use Permit/Specific Development Plan is associated with the updated Project and was approved by Planning Commission on May 21, 2026 , contingent upon Council approval of the GDP.
C-M/PD Development Standards
The proposed Project includes the following requested (proposed) development standards for the subject 11-87-acre site:
Table 4: Site Development Standards
Site Development Standards
Front Setback along Chess Drive 30 feet
Setback along Foster City Blvd 20 feet
Setback along HWY 92 20 feet
Setback along City lagoon 20 feet
Side Setback for Parcel 3 (North of the
site)
20 feet
Max Height 190 Feet
Staff Comments: The CM -PD District allows flexibility to accommodate a range of development types. The proposed Project is requesting to use the above standards to support the specific R&D use. Based on staff’s review of the overall Project, including the proposed development setbacks and height, the Project would be consistent with C-M/PD and compatible with the associated GDP. Upon approval, these requested standards would become the applicable standards for any development on the site.
Parking Analysis
FCMC Section 17.62.060.B.5.c requires 1 space per 300 SF for R&D uses; however, FCMC Section 17.36.060.B.D.2.d allows Planning Commission to accept a deviation from the total number of required off -street parking spaces subject to parking analysis and TDM plan.
The applicant is proposing a reduced parking ratio of 1.2 spaces/1000 SF (or 1 space/833 SF) for the proposed Project and has provided a parking study and a TDM plan to support a further 15% parking reduction, as discussed below.
TDM Plan (Exhibit D of Attachment 2):
• Because the proposed Project is an (off -site) expansion of the integrated Gilead campus, the proposed TDM would be similar to the existing TDM plan prepared for the Gilead Sciences Integrated Corporate Campus Master Plan. Through the Project’s TDM, all Gilead employees, similar to the main campus TDM, would be provided amenities and incentives that help to reduce single- occupancy vehicle trips. Per the required annual reporting, the existing TDM for the main campus maintains a 23.3% reduction in single -occupancy vehicle trips. As Gilead employees, employees of the Project will have access to the multitude of amenities provided at the new Chess Hatch campus and throughout the Gilead Sciences Campus, for example: on- site secure bicycle storage, shower, lockers and changing rooms; commuter shuttle drop off/pick-up at 1149 Chess Drive (300 feet from Project site); the guaranteed ride home program; commuter subsidy program, and others as listed in the TDM Plan.
Parking Study (Attachment 4):
The applicant submitted a parking study (Attachment 4), prepared by Kimley Horn, licensed transportation professionals, to request deviation from the minimum Code - required parking. The study is based on observed utilization data from Gilead’s main campus - specifically a comparable lab- based campus (South Campus) - that demonstrates that the actual peak parking demand is substantially lower than the parking requirement under FCMC Section 17.62.060.B.5.c. (see Table 5). The proposed reduced parking ratio, as stated in the parking study, has been applied to the integrated main
Gilead campus and therefore has additional documentable rationale for how/why the specific ratio requested has been successfully used.
Table 5: Parking Comparison, South Campus with Proposed Project Maximum
Observed
Maximum Observed
(Adjusted for Building Occupancy)1
Foster City
Municipal Code
Requirements
Gilead Integrated
Campus Master Plan
Rates
Foster City
Municipal Code
Requirements
Gilead Integrated
Campus Master Plan
Rates
Required Spaces 4,707 1,456 4,707 1,456
Occupied Spaces 1,338 1,430
Surplus (+) /
Deficient (-)
Parking Spaces
+3,369 +118 +3,277 +26
Percent
Occupancy
28% 92% 30% 98%
1 The number of occupied spaces for buildings with less than 80% building occupancy were adjusted upward to reflect Gilead’s current space planning standard for fully occupied building (80% or greater).
Source: Kimley-Horn Parking Study, April 2025
Similar to the TDM Plan for the integrated main campus, the Gilead Campus Expansion TDM Plan reflects the amenities available to employees to reduce single- occupancy vehicle trips and supports an additional 15% parking reduction . The proposed parking ratio also utilizes an 85% efficiency rate (or gross leasable area pursuant to FCMC Section 17.62.040).
With the integration of the TDM Plan, the Project parking would be as follows:
Table 6: Proposed Parking
Total Size
Building Use
85% Efficiency
Gilead Integrated
Campus Master Plan
Rates
Size Unit Size Unit
Requirement
(spaces per
1,000 SF)
Parking
Spaces
Required
800,000 square
feet
Laboratory 680,000 square
feet
1.2 816
TDM Reduction (15%) -122
Total Minimum Required Spaces 694
Source: Kimley-Horn Parking Study, April 2025
Parking for Phase 1 of the Project addresses both near-term parking for the New Chess Facility (NCF) and continued support for existing buildings to remain on-site. It also outlines flexibility to expand surface parking in the future, as needed, based on ongoing
monitoring of actual parking demand. Proposed parking for Phase 1 of the Project includes 208 spaces on ’Day 1’ of the Project with 152 specifically designated for the NCF Building and up to 285 vehicle parking stalls on ‘Day 2’ or completion of Phase 1, if warranted by operational demand.
Staff Comments: The proposed Project has provided the required parking study pursuant to FCMC Section 17.36.060 demonstrating how and why the proposed parking ratio of
1.2 spaces per 1,000 SF would work with the proposed Project. The applicant submitted a TDM Plan employing all of the amenities and incentives proven to reduce single - occupancy vehicle trips to the campus and requested a further 15% parking reduction.
The parking analysis includes a parking demand study that demonstrates that the demand for the proposed use is less than the minimum off -street parking otherwise required per the Code as indicated by collecting parking data from a similar campus (South Campus) at the main Gilead campus. Staff would like to note that parking demand will continue to be monitored through the implementation of the TDM Plan.
3. PARKING AGREEMENT (Attachment 3)
Pursuant to FCMC Section 17.62.060 .D.3, where a TDM Plan is used to support a reduction in required parking, a written agreement between the landowner and the City is required to ensure implementation, monitoring and continued compliance. The agreement is subject to the Planning Commission and City Council approval.
Staff Comments : Staff recomm ends approval of the associated parking agreement to ensure implementation of the TDM measures, annual reporting, and continued compliance. A similar parking agreement was approved was approved for the Gilead Sciences Integrated Corporate Campus Master Plan in 201 3/2014 through Resolution No. 2013-82 for the implementation of reduced parking (also 1.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet of lab space).
PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION ITEMS (MAY 21, 2026)
Use Permit (UP2025-0012)
The Specific Development Plan/Use Permit (UP2025- 0012) was approved by Planning Commission on May 21, 2026, via Resolution P -08-26. The Use Permit approval, however, is contingent on the approval of the GDP Amendment.
A Specific Development Plan/Use Permit is required to be consistent with the General Development Plan, as outlined above, and must include the enumerated components in Section 17.36.050.B , including a Site Plan showing vehicular/pedestrian/bicycle circulation, parking areas and proposed parking ratio, landscaped areas, placement of all proposed buildings and structures , building setbacks, elevations, and materials and colors. It must also be determined that the proposed use would not be detrimental to the
health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood.
Figure 4: NCF building façade; Source: Chess-Hatch Use Permit plan set.
Staff Comments: The Use Permit application was filed with the City on June 24, 2025 .
The proposed R&D use would not be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood because it would be developed consistent with the applicable development and performance standards in the Zoning Ordinance (Title 17), is in conformance with the Chess -Hatch Design Principles, is consistent with the applicable General Plan policies, and was required to adhere to the City’s environmental assessment process for discretionary projects, including analysis pursuant to CEQA ; applicable conditions of approval have been attached to the Use Permit for compliance.
Vesting Tentative Parcel Map (RS2025-0002)
The Vesting Tentative Parcel Map was approved by the Planning Commission May 21, 2026, via Resolution P -09-26. The Project’s Vesting Tentative Parcel Map involves relocating one (1) existing parcel (Parcel 2) line, thereby increasing the area of Parcel 2 from 4.988 acres to 5.329 acres and adjusting Parcel 3 from 2.900 to 2.559 acres, and documenting disposition of existing and created easements (i.e., private ingress/egress and parking easement and public uti lity easement) to facilitate the proposed Project.
Pursuant to FCMC Section 16.32.010, tentative and final parcel maps, as set out in the Subdivision Map Act, shall be prepared and filed with the planning commission together with the filing fee specified in Section 16.20.030.
Staff Comments: The vesting tentative parcel map titled “1155, 1165, 1185 Chess Drive Vesting Tentative Parcel Map” was prepared by BKF Engineers and reviewed by City staff and a consultant Land Surveyor. The Vesting Parcel Map includes all of the required information (i.e., accompanying data and statements) pursuant to FCMC Sections
16.32.020 and 16.32.030. The Tentative Map plan set also includes a survey prepared pursuant to the criteria in FCMC Chapter 16.12 and improvements shall conform to the
requirements in Chapter 16.40.0. Relatedly, the subject Project required the preparation of a Utility Impact Study which included a capacity analysis and identified certain improvements to be constructed and implemented to ensure there are no deficiencies associated with the proposed sub division and ultimately, the project; the improvements are included as Project conditions of approval. Furthermore, the map is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act in that it is a parcel map reconfiguring four or fewer pa rcels (project includes reconfiguring two of three parcels) and has been reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department for conformance with Title 16 (Subdivisions). Per FCMC Section 16.32.050, the final parcel map consistent with the approved tentative parcel map shall be prepared and presented to the Planning Commission. As such, the applicant would be required to prepare the final parcel map within the term allowed and satisfy the conditions of approval associated with the tentative map, before the City Engineer can present it to Planning Commission.
OTHER NOTABLE PROJECT HIGHLIGHTS
• Gateway landscape area and public-facing amenity: On the corner of Chess Drive and Foster City Boulevard, the Project would include a publicly accessible open space , including signage and other interactive amenities , including landscaping and outdoor seating, that connect the public realm with open space . Refer to Condition No. 9 of Attachment 2, Exhibit C. This w ould reinforce the site, enhance the pedestrian experience and provide a more defined gateway presence at the corner. • Activation of Foster City Lagoon: The Project would incorporate an activated lagoon edge along the Foster City Lagoon through enhanced landscaping and site design , including a pathway or other similar usable outdoor area to be utilized by Gilead employees. This may include a pathway or other similar usable outdoor area to be utilized by Gilead employees. Final design shall be subject to the review and approval of the Community Development Director. Refer to Condition No. 13 of Attachment 2, Exhibit C.
• Garage Screening: The proposed Phase 2 includes a multi-story parking structure that would be visible from SR 92 and Foster City Blvd. The applicant would incorporate architectural screening into the design of the structure. Refer to Condition No. 11 of Attachment 2, Exhibit C.
Figure 5: Gilead Campus Expansion View from corner of Chess Dr and Foster City Blvd. Phase I is the middle building, highlighted in the box in image above. Source: Gilead Plan Set
• LOS and Public Improvements: The proposed Project is required to conduct a subsequent Traffic Impact Analysis for Phase 2 utilizing LOS and ensuring the Project does not incur an additional 4 second delay or greater at any of the six (6) identified intersections. If a 4 second delay or greater is identified, physical improvements to the intersections may be necessary to minimize intersection delays caused by the Project. Any improvements, if needed, would be the responsibility of the applicant to install and in proportion to the Project's fair share contribution to the delay. However, if Foster City adopts a new Land Use and Circulation Element prior to Phase 2, the project will be subject to the requirements of the new Element.
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
A Second Addendum and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) to the Chess-Hatch Master Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR, SCH#2008122065), and addendum thereto has been prepared and subject to Council approval at the June 15th Public Hearing.
FISCAL IMPACT
Should the Council consider approval of the proposed Project, it will generate both one-time revenues as well as ongoing annual revenues as detailed out in the section: Provide for Economic Development (LUC-I) Policy.
CITY COUNCIL VISION, MISSION, AND VALUE/PRIORITY AREA
Smart Planning, Development, and the Local Economy
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment 1 – City Resolution for Second Addendum and MMRP Attachment 2 – Ordinance for General Development Plan Amendment and Exhibits Attachment 3 – City Resolution for Parking Agreement
Attachment 4 – Parking Study
Attachment 5 – Fiscal Impact Analysis
Attachment 6 – General Plan Consistency Analysis
Attachment 7 – Adopted Planning Commission Resolutions