B. Public Notice, Hearings and Action.
1. Planning and Transportation Commission. After conducting a duly-noticed public hearing, the Planning and Transportation Commission shall make a recommendation on the proposed revocation within thirty (30) days.
2. City Council. Within forty-five (45) days after receipt of the recommendation of the Planning and Transportation Commission, the City Council shall conduct a duly-noticed public hearing and act on the proposed revocation.
C. Required Findings. The Planning and Transportation Commission may recommend and the City Council may revoke or modify the permit if it makes any of the following findings:
1. The approval was obtained by means of fraud or misrepresentation of a material fact;
2. The use, building, or structure has been substantially expanded beyond what is set forth in the permit or substantially changed in character;
3. The use in question has ceased to exist or has been suspended for one year or more;
4. There is or has been a violation of or failure to observe the terms or conditions of the permit or variance, or the use has been conducted in violation of the provisions of this title, or any applicable law or regulation; or
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 399
137
5. The use to which the permit or variance applies has been conducted in a manner detrimental to the public safety, health and welfare, or so as to be a nuisance.
D. Notice of Action. Following City Council action to revoke or modify a permit, the City Clerk shall within seven days issue a notice of action describing the Council’s action, with its findings.
The City Clerk shall mail notice to the permit holder and to any person who requested the revocation proceeding. (Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.27.150 Appeals. Revised 1/24
A. Applicability. Any action by the Zoning Administrator, Director, or Planning and Transportation Commission in the administration or enforcement of the provisions of this title may be appealed in accordance with this section.
1. Appeals of Zoning Administrator Decisions. Decisions of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning and Transportation Commission by filing a written appeal with the Planning Division.
2. Appeals of Director Decisions. Decisions of the Director may be appealed to the Planning and Transportation Commission by filing a written appeal with the Planning Division.
3. Appeals of Planning and Transportation Commission Decisions. Decisions of the Planning and Transportation Commission may be appealed to the City Council by filing a written appeal with the City Clerk.
B. Rights of Appeal. Appeals may be filed by the applicant, by the owner of property, or by any other person aggrieved by a decision that is subject to appeal under the provisions of this title.
C. Time Limits. Unless otherwise specified in State or Federal law, all appeals shall be filed in writing within ten (10) days of the date of the action, decision, motion, or resolution from which the action is taken. In the event an appeal period ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or any other day the City is closed, the appeal period shall end at the close of business on the next consecutive business day.
D. Procedures.
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 400
138
1. Filing. The appeal shall identify the decision being appealed and shall clearly and concisely state the reasons for the appeal. The appeal shall be accompanied by the required fee.
2. Proceedings Stayed by Appeal. The timely filing of an appeal shall stay all proceedings in the matter appealed including, but not limited to, the issuance of City building permits and business licenses.
3. Transmission of Record. The Director, or in the case of appeals to the City Council, City Clerk, shall schedule the appeal for consideration by the authorized hearing body within forty-five (45) days of the date the appeal is filed. The Director shall forward the appeal, the notice of action, and all other documents that constitute the record to the hearing body. The Director shall also prepare a staff report that responds to the issues raised by the appeal and may include a recommendation for action.
E. Calls for Review. A majority of the City Council may call for review of a decision of the Director, Zoning Administrator, or Planning and Transportation Commission within the ten (10) day appeal period. The call for review shall be processed in the same manner as an appeal by any other person. Such action shall stay all proceedings in the same manner as the filing of an appeal. Such action shall not require any statement of reasons and shall not represent opposition to or support of an application or appeal.
F. Standards of Review. When reviewing any decision on appeal, the appeal body shall use the same standards for decision-making required for the original decision. The appeal body may adopt the same decision and findings as were originally approved; it also may request or require changes to the application as a condition of approval.
G. Public Notice and Hearing. Public notice shall be provided and the hearing conducted by the applicable appeal body pursuant to this chapter. Notice of the hearing shall also be given to the applicant and party filing the appeal and any other interested person who has filed with the City Clerk a written request for such notice. In the case of an appeal of a Planning and Transportation Commission decision, notice of such appeal shall also be given to the Planning and Transportation Commission. The Planning and Transportation Commission may be represented at the hearing.
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 401
139
H. Action. An action to grant an appeal shall require a majority vote of the hearing body members. A tie vote shall have the effect of rejecting the appeal. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.27.160 Interpretations and determinations.
Requests for interpretations of this title and verifications relating to prior approvals or permits may be made to the Director. Requests shall be in writing. The decision of the Director on such requests may be appealed under Section 18.27.150, Appeals. (Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 402
140
Chapter 18.29
DESIGN REVIEW AND OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS COMPLIANCE REVIEW Revised 1/24
Sections:
18.29.010 Purpose. Revised 1/24
18.29.020 Applicability. Revised 1/24
18.29.030 Assignment of review responsibilities. Revised 1/24
18.29.040 Procedures. Revised 1/24
18.29.050 Scope of design review. Revised 1/24
18.29.060 Design review criteria. Revised 1/24
18.29.070 Required findings. Revised 1/24
18.29.080 Conditions of approval. Revised 1/24
18.29.090 Appeals—Expiration, extensions, and modifications. Revised 1/24
18.29.010 Purpose. Revised 1/24
This chapter establishes the design review and compliance review procedures to ensure that new development supports the General Plan’s goal of creating a vibrant pedestrian- and transitoriented core and distinctive neighborhoods and districts with a diversity of building types that provide continuity in scale and character with appropriate transitions, where needed. The specific purposes of the design review and compliance review process are to:
A. Promote excellence in site planning and design and the harmonious appearance of buildings and sites;
B. Ensure that new and modified uses and development will be compatible with the existing and potential development of the surrounding area; and
C. Supplement other City regulations and standards in order to ensure control of aspects of design that are not otherwise addressed. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)154173
18.29.020 Applicability. Revised 1/24
Design review or objective design standards compliance review is required for all projects that require a permit for new construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation, alteration, deviations or exceptions from objective design standards or other improvements to the exterior of a structure, site, or a parking area except for:
A. Construction, reconstruction, alterations, improvements, and landscaping for a project developed in compliance with a previous design review approval; and
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 403
141
B. Additions of floor area within an existing building envelope not including accessory dwelling units or junior accessory dwelling units.
C. As specified by the State law.
Compliance review is required for allany residential improvement in the Single-family (RS), Multi-family (RM), and Mixed-Uuse (MU) districts or Commercial districts that are subject to the objective design standards of the specified district. (Ord. 1604 § 4 (Exh. B), 2023; Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.030 Assignment of review responsibilities. Revised 1/24 A. Planning and Transportation Commission. The Planning and Transportation Commission shall have design review and/or objective design standards compliance review authority for all projects requiring Planning and Transportation Commission approval (such as but not limited to, all new projects that contain five (5) or more net new residential units, design review for new commercial development, conditional use permits, single-family deviations, major deviations or exceptions to the objective design standards, and variances).
B. Director.
1. The Director shall conduct compliance review of all projects with four (4) or less new units, any residential improvement in the RS districts subject to objective design standards, and any request for a minor deviation subject to the requirements of this chapter .
2. Upon written request submitted within ten (10) calendar days of the compliance review decision, the Director shall conduct a Director’s Review to verify whether the project complies with applicable objective design standards. This request may be submitted by the applicant or, adjacent or directly facing neighbors of the project site. Such requests must provide a written statement to the City specifying which objective design standards they believe are not being met.T, the Director shall conduct verification of any compliance review decision.
3. The Director shall have design review authority for all projects that do not meet subsection A of this section for a decision by the Planning and Transportation Commission, including outdoor dining and outdoor retail sales pursuant to Sections 18.23.140 and
18.23.150.
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 404
142
4. The Director may refer items directly to the Planning and Transportation Commission when in his/her/their opinion the public interest would be better served by having the Planning and Transportation Commission conduct design review.
5. If an application to create or serve an accessory dwelling unit or a junior accessory dwelling unit is submitted with an application to create a new single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot, staff may delay approving or denying the permit application for the accessory dwelling unit or the junior accessory dwelling unit until staff approves or denies the permit application to create the new single-family or multifamily dwelling, but the application to create or serve the accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall be considered without discretionary review or hearing. (Ord. 1604 § 4 (Exh. B), 2023; Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.040 Procedures. Revised 1/24
A. Forms and Fees. Written applications for design review and objective design standards compliance review applications shall be submitted to the Planning Division in compliance with the application procedures in Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures and set forth in the compliance review guidelines.
B. Objective Design Standards. Objective Design Standards, where applicable and adopted by the City Council, are intended to provide measurable and predictable standards for residential or residential mixed-use and multi-family development projects to promote cohesive building design, quality craftsmanship, and compatible building scale. As applicable, singlefamily, multi-family, and residential mixed-use projects shall undergo a compliance review process to ensure conformance with the Objective Design Standards.
C. Objective Design Standards Deviations. Proposed deviations or exceptions from the objective standards shall require design review and the review and approval of the Director or Planning and Transportation Commission as outlined below:
1. Single - Family (RS) Districts
a. As outlined in Section 18.04.030(B), allowed deviations or exceptions from the following objective design standards shall require the review and approval of the Planning and Transportation Commission:
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 405
143
i. Building articulation and massing
ii. Building materials and colors
iii. Building modification to preserve a protected tree unless a setback modification requires a variance
iv. Driveway location, width, and configuration
v. Entry location, connectivity, and treatments
vi. Garage location and setbacks
vii. Landscape design
viii. Roof form and detail
ix. Window treatment
Standards not on this list shall not be eligible for a deviation or exception for single-family development projects.
2. Multi-Family (RM) and Mixed-Use (MU) Districts
a. The Director may, at his/her/their discretion, refer any application for a minor or major deviation from the objective design standards that may generate substantial public controversy or involve significant land use policy decisions to the Planning and Transportation Commission for a decision rather than acting on it himself/herself/themself:
b. Major Deviations.
i. All major deviation requests shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission
ii. Allowed major deviations or exceptions from the following objective design standards are outlined below:
1. Massing breaks
2. Corner Designs
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 406
144
3. Roof variety
4. Transitional standards
5. Ground floor active uses / transparency
6. Landscaping
7. Ornamentation in-lieu of massing and articulation
8. Other standards as deemed major by the Director and City Manager or his/her/their designee
All deviation requests shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission
c. Minor Deviations.
i. All minor deviations shall be reviewed and approved by the Director and City Manager or his/her/their designee unless deemed to be a major deviation by the Director or specified otherwise.
ii. Allowed minor deviations or exceptions from the following objective design standards are outlined below: :
1. Building entrances
2. Upper story step-backs
3. Windows (including trim)
4. Building materials
5. Street frontage improvements
6. Base, middle, and top
7. Street trees
8. Other as deemed minor by the Director and City Manager or his/her/their designee
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 407
145
iii. For projects with four (4) or less residential units: All minor deviations shall be reviewed and approved by the Director unless deemed to be a major deviation by the Director.
iv. For projects with five (5) or more residential units: All minor deviation requests submitted with the compliance review application, shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
D. Design Guidelines. Design guidelines, where applicable and adopted by the City Council, provide recommendations to be used in the design review process. They are intended to promote high-quality design, well-crafted and maintained buildings and landscaping, the use of high-quality building materials, and attention to the design and execution of building details and amenities in both public and private projects.
EC. Concurrent Processing. When a development project requires a use permit, variance, or any other discretionary approval, the design review and/or compliance review application shall be submitted to the Planning Division as a part of the application for the underlying permit, use permit, deviation or exception to the objective design standards or variance.
FD. Peer Review. At the sole discretion of the Director, a project may be referred to an architect or design professional retained by the City to provide independent peer review of architectural plans and specifications, landscape plans, and related documents for consistency with the purposes of this section, the General Plan, adopted design guidelines, and the findings required in Section 18.29.070, Required findings. The applicant shall pay the reasonable actual cost and a reasonable administrative fee for hiring an approved architect or design professional to provide peer review.
EGF. Public Notice.
1. All applications for design review and objective design standards compliance review subject to review by the Director or his/her/their designee shall be required to perform noticing and outreach as outlined by the Planning Division within the compliance review procedures.
2. All applications for design review and objective design standards compliance review subject to review by the Planning and Transportation Commission shall require public
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 408
146
notice and hearing before the Planning and Transportation Commission pursuant to Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures.
FG. Alterations to Drawings. If alterations to the approved drawings are desired by the applicant, the drawings shall be resubmitted and processed according to the procedures established for approval of the original drawings.
GH. Private Architectural Review. Where deed restrictions or private property covenants, codes, and restrictions require review by a private architectural board, committee, or homeowners’ association, the review shall be accomplished by the applicant and the findings of the board or committee shall be transmitted in writing to the City prior to City action. Application to the board and transmission of its findings shall be the responsibility of the applicant, not the City. Conditions or requirements imposed pursuant to private covenants, restrictions, and regulations are not binding upon or enforced by the City unless approved by the City pursuant to the requirements of this chapter. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1574 § 4 (Exh. A), 2021; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1443 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2012; Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.050 Scope of design review. Revised 1/24
Design review shall be based on consideration of the requirements of this chapter as they apply to the design of the site plan, structures, landscaping, and other physical features of a proposed project, including:
A. Building proportions, massing, and architectural details; B. Site design, orientation, location, and architectural design of buildings relative to existing structures on or adjacent to the property, topography, and other physical features of the natural and built environment;
C. Size, location, design, development, and arrangement of on-site parking and other paved areas;
D. Exterior materials and, except in the case of design review of a single-family residence, color as they relate to each other, to the overall appearance of the project, and to surrounding development;
E. Height, materials, design, and, except in the case of design review of a single-family residence, color of fences, walls, and screen plantings;
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 409
147
F. Location and type of landscaping including selection and size of plant materials, design of hardscape, and irrigation; and
G. Size, location, design, color, lighting, and materials of all signs. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.060 Design review criteria. Revised 1/24
When conducting design review, the Director, Planning and Transportation Commission, or City Council shall evaluate applications to ensure that they satisfy the following criteria, conform to the policies of the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, the City’s design guidelines, and are consistent with any other policies or guidelines the City Council may adopt for this purpose. To obtain design review approval, projects must satisfy these criteria to the extent they apply.
A. The overall design of the project including its scale, massing, site plan, exterior design, and landscaping will enhance the appearance and features of the project site and surrounding natural and built environment.
B. The project design is appropriate to the function of the project and will provide an attractive and comfortable environment for occupants, visitors, and the general community.
C. Project details, materials, signage and landscaping are internally consistent, fully integrated with one another, and used in a manner that is visually consistent with the proposed architectural design.
D. The project has been designed to be compatible with neighboring development by avoiding big differences in building scale and character between developments on adjoining lots in the same zoning district and providing a harmonious transition in scale and character between different districts.
E. The project contributes to the creation of an attractive and visually interesting built environment that includes a variety of building styles and designs with well-articulated structures that present varied building facades, roof lines, and building heights within a unifying context that encourages increased pedestrian activity and promotes compatibility among neighboring land uses within the same or different districts.
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 410
148
F. The design of streetscapes, including street trees, lighting, and pedestrian furniture, is consistent with the character of activity centers, commercial districts and nearby residential neighborhoods.
G. The proposed design is compatible with the historical or visual character of any area recognized by the City as having such unified character.
H. The project design preserves major public views and vistas from major public streets and open spaces and enhances them by providing areas to stroll, benches to rest and enjoy views, and similar amenities.
I. Parking areas are designed and developed to buffer surrounding land uses; complement pedestrian-oriented development; enhance the environmental quality of the site, including minimizing stormwater run-off and the heat-island effect; and achieve a safe, efficient, and harmonious development.
J. Lighting and lighting fixtures are designed to complement buildings, be of appropriate scale, provide adequate light over walkways and parking areas to create a sense of pedestrian safety, and avoid creating glare.
K. The proposed building design and landscaping supports public safety and security by allowing for surveillance of the street by people inside buildings and elsewhere on the site.
L. Landscaping is designed to be compatible with and enhance the architectural character and features of the buildings on site, and help relate the building to the surrounding landscape.
Proposed planting materials avoid conflicts with views, lighting, infrastructure, utilities, and signage. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.070 Design review Rrequired findings. Revised 1/24 The Director, Planning and Transportation Commission, or City Council may only approve a design review application if it finds that the application is consistent with the purposes of this chapter and with the following:
A. The applicable standards and requirements of this title; B. The General Plan and any applicable specific plans the City Council has adopted; C. Any applicable design guidelines adopted by the City Council;
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 411
149
D. Any approved tentative map, use permit, variance, or other planning or zoning approval that the project required; and
E. The applicable design review criteria in Section 18.29.060, Design review criteria. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.080 Conditions of approval. Revised 1/24
In granting design review or objective design standards compliance review approval, the Director, Planning and Transportation Commission, or City Council may impose conditions that are reasonably related to the application and deemed necessary to achieve the purposes of this chapter and ensure compliance with the applicable criteria and standards established by this title. They may not impose requirements pertaining to use or that are more restrictive than the standards set forth in this title or a valid use permit or variance if such conditions would require a reduction in the residential density or the floor area ratio (FAR) of a proposed project. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.29.090 Appeals—Expiration, extensions, and modifications. Revised 1/24 A. Appeals. Design review decisions are subject to the appeal provisions of Section
18.27.150, Appeals.
B. Expiration, Extensions and Modifications. Design review and compliance review approval is effective and may only be extended or modified as provided for in Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures. (Ord. 1603 § 3 (Exh. A), 2023; Ord. 1537 (Exh. D (part)), 2018: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh.
A (part)), 2011)
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 412
150
Chapter 18.30
USE PERMITS Revised 4/24
Sections:
18.30.010 Purpose. Revised 4/24
18.30.020 Applicability. Revised 4/24
18.30.030 Review authority. Revised 4/24
18.30.040 Application requirements. Revised 4/24
18.30.050 Public notice and hearing. Revised 4/24
18.30.060 Required findings. Revised 4/24
18.30.070 Conditions of approval. Revised 4/24
18.30.080 Appeals—Expiration, extensions, and modifications. Revised 4/24
18.30.090 Failure to comply with conditions. Revised 4/24
18.30.100 Revocation of use permits. Revised 4/24
18.30.010 Purpose. Revised 4/24
The use permit review and approval process is intended to apply to uses that are generally consistent with the purposes of the zoning district where they are proposed but require special consideration to ensure that they can be designed, located, and operated in a manner that will not interfere with the use and enjoyment of surrounding properties. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.020 Applicability. Revised 4/24
Approval of a use permit is required for uses or developments specifically identified in Article II, Base and Overlay Districts, and/or any other section of this title which requires a use permit. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.030 Review authority. Revised 4/24
A. Conditional Use Permits. The Planning and Transportation Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny applications for conditional use permits based on consideration of the requirements of this chapter.
B. Minor Use Permits. The Zoning Administrator shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny applications for minor use permits based on consideration of the requirements of this chapter.
The Zoning Administrator may, at his/her discretion, refer any application for a minor use permit for a project that may generate substantial public controversy or involve significant land use policy decisions to the Planning and Transportation Commission for a decision rather than acting on it himself/herself. In that case, the application shall be processed as a conditional use
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 413
151
permit. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh.
A (part)), 2011)
18.30.040 Application requirements. Revised 4/24
Applications for use permits shall be filed with the Planning Division on the prescribed application forms. In addition to any other application requirements, the application for a use permit shall include data or other evidence in support of the applicable findings required by Section 18.30.060, Required findings. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.050 Public notice and hearing. Revised 4/24
A. Conditional Use Permits. All applications for conditional use permits shall require public notice and hearing before the Planning and Transportation Commission pursuant to Chapter
18.27, Common Procedures.
B. Minor Use Permits. All applications for minor use permits shall require public notice and hearing before the Zoning Administrator pursuant to Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.060 Required findings. Revised 4/24
The decision-maker must make all of the following findings in order to approve or conditionally approve a use permit application. The inability to make one (1) or more of the findings is grounds for denial of an application.
A. The proposed use is allowed within the applicable zoning district and complies with all other applicable provisions of this title and all other titles of the municipal code; B. The proposed use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan; C. The proposed use will not be adverse to the public health, safety, or general welfare of the community, nor detrimental to surrounding properties or improvements; D. The proposed use complies with any design, objective design standards, or development standards applicable to the zoning district or the use in question unless waived or modified pursuant to the provisions of this title;
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 414
152
E. The design, location, size, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses in the vicinity; and F. The site is physically suitable for the type, density, and intensity of use being proposed, including access, utilities, and the absence of physical constraints.
G. Proposed projects located within the Landmark Commercial (LC) zoning district are subject to one (1) of the following additional findings, as applicable:
1. Regional retail and destination-oriented uses must have significant beneficial results in employment growth and contribute to the economic sustainability of the City and implementation of the Economic Development Plan, and meet the economic objectives for landmark sites.
2. Interim uses (uses other than regional retail and destination-oriented uses) shall be considered on an interim basis and shall entail use of existing buildings; erection of permanent buildings inconsistent with regional retail and destination-oriented uses shall not be permitted; additions or alterations to a building or site may be considered for health and safety purposes and limited to bring a structure into conformance with Building Code requirements. Interim uses shall be conditioned with time limitations and may be renewed on a periodic basis subject to Planning and Transportation Commission use permit review and approval.
H. Proposed projects located within the Northeast Area Overlay District (see Chapter 18.14A) are subject to the following additional finding:
1. The design, location, size, site, and operating characteristics of the proposed activity are compatible with the existing and reasonably foreseeable future land uses as contemplated in the development of the Northeast Area Specific Plan as set forth in Resolution 2023-032. (Ord. 1612 § 1 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.070 Conditions of approval. Revised 4/24
In approving a use permit, the decision-maker may impose reasonable conditions or restrictions deemed necessary to:
A. Ensure that the proposal conforms in all significant respects with the General Plan and with any other applicable plans or policies adopted by the City Council;
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 415
153
B. Achieve the general purposes of this title or the specific purpose of the zoning district in which the project is located;
C. Achieve the findings for a use permit listed in Section 18.30.060, Required findings; or D. Mitigate any potentially significant impacts identified as a result of environmental review conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
The decision-maker may require reasonable guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being, or will be, complied with. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.080 Appeals—Expiration, extensions, and modifications. Revised 4/24 A. Appeals. A decision of the Zoning Administrator may be appealed to the Planning and Transportation Commission and a decision of the Planning and Transportation Commission may be appealed to the City Council, as provided in Section 18.27.150, Appeals.
B. Expiration, Extensions and Modifications. Use permits are effective and may only be extended or modified as provided for in Chapter 18.27, Common Procedures. (Ord. 1612 § 1 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.090 Failure to comply with conditions. Revised 4/24 Failure to comply with any condition of approval of a use permit is a violation of this title subject to provisions of Chapter 18.39, Enforcement and Abatement Procedures. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh.
A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
18.30.100 Revocation of use permits. Revised 4/24
A use permit may be revoked as provided by Section 18.27.140, Revocation of permits. (Ord. 1611 § 3 (Exh. A), 2024; Ord. 1464 § 3 (Exh. C (part)), 2013: Ord. 1438 § 4 (Exh. A (part)), 2011)
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 416
154
Chapter 18.41
TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Revised 1/24 Revised 4/24
Sections:
18.41.010 List of terms. Revised 1/24 Revised 4/24
18.41.020 Definitions. Revised 1/24 Revised 4/24
18.41.010 List of terms. Revised 1/24 Revised 4/24
18.41.020 Definitions.
“Deviation” from an objective design standard is a request for relief from objective design standards that apply to a project. Deviations may be classified as minor or major, as outlined in SCMC Section 18.29.040, and are subject to design review to ensure consistency with the overall intent of the applicable regulations. Approval authority for deviations rests with either the Director or the Planning and Transportation Commission, based on the nature and scope of the request.
“Massing Break” means a design technique that reduces the visual bulk of a building by dividing its form into smaller, articulated components.
Minor Massing Break, Multi-Family (RM) and Mixed-Use (MU) Districts is a minimum of four (4) feet wide by two (2) feet deep extending the full height of the building above the ground floor and shall include a corresponding break in the roof line.
Major Massing Break, Multi-Family (RM) and Mixed-Use (MU) Districts is a minimum of ten (10) feet wide by ten (10) feet deep extending the full height of the building above the ground floor and shall include a break in the roof line “Ornamentation” means decorative elements of a building façade often using artistic flourishes that enhance the building’s architectural character. Ornamentation includes but is not limited to elements such as awnings, eave brackets, column or pilaster capitals and bases, tiles, reliefs, moldings, lighting fixtures, door and window trim, accent materials or colors, graphic motifs, balconies, balustrades, cornices, entry door features, or other such architectural features. “Podium” means the above grade portion of a building that is constructed of concrete. It is usually the ground floor or first two floors of a building depending on the construction type.
Podiums often are taller than the wood-framed residential floors above and often contain structured parking. In multi-family residential buildings, the roof of the podium often serves as a courtyard common open space.
9.n
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 417
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 14, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the Final Design for the 700 Block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Implementation).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommend that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving the Final Design for the 700 Block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Implementation).
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
There are no fiscal implications for approving the Final Design of Phase 1B, the 700 block of Laurel Street. Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Fund Project #C2215 sets aside funding for improvements in the downtown core, including:
Project C2215 – Downtown Renovation Plan
Implementation
Prior Year
Adopted
Budget
FY 2025-26
Adopted
Budget
Design/Engineering $1,800,000
Election Campaign Consultants 350,000
Phase 1.a Harrington Park 1,350,000 $2,350,000
Phase 1.b 700 Block Laurel $3,900,000
TOTAL ADOPTED BUDGET $3,500,000 $6,250,000
Within CIP project fund C2215, a total of $1,800,000 is set aside for design/engineering (i.e. “shovel ready”) drawings and $7,600,000 is budgeted for the construction of Harrington Park and the full span of the 700 block of Laurel Street, from Cherry Street to Olive Street.
Although the construction timing for the 700 block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B) has not been determined, the current construction cost estimates are $9,423,0001 (including the pavilion and the base of the water feature).
Final construction costs will not be known until the City publicly advertises and receives bids from qualified contractors to complete the work in each of the phases. 1 The current estimate does not include the costs associated with selecting the vertical centerpiece for the water feature, nor does it include the cost of the centerpiece itself, its installation, or any construction management and design support during construction of the full span of the 700 Block of Laurel Street.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 418
BACKGROUND:
Developing Shovel Ready Drawings for Harrington Park and the 700 Block of Laurel Street The City’s first step towards implementing the adopted Downtown Streetscape Master Plan includes creating “shovel ready” drawings for Harrington Park (Phase 1A) and the 700 block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B).
Completing shovel ready drawings requires two key decision points:
1. Approving the Final Design (defines what will be built)
2. Approving Construction Documents (detailed engineering and construction information) On June 9, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-054, approving the Final Design for Harrington Park (Phase 1A) and further directed staff to prepare Harrington Park construction documents — the Plans, Specifications, and Estimates (PS&E). These technical plans are scheduled to be presented to the City Council on November 10, 2025, along with a request to authorize the public bidding process to construct Harrington Park improvements. Construction is estimated to commence in spring 2026.
At its June 9 meeting, the City Council deferred the Final Design for the entire 700 block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B), as stated in Resolution No. 2025-054.
The purpose of this meeting is to approve the Final Design for the 700 block of Laurel Street, which will be transformed into a new pedestrian-oriented plaza, “Centennial Plaza.” The Final Design represents the community-approved vision for the space; it defines what will be built. This includes:
• New plaza paving and sidewalk layouts
• Rain gardens and stormwater features
• New trees and landscaping
• Public seating, including custom benches
• Multi-purpose pavilion /performance stage
• Lighting
• Water feature
• Streetscape amenities such as bicycle parking and drinking fountains This Final Design of the 700 block of Laurel Street focuses on the look, feel, and function of the new plaza. It includes drawings and renderings that help visualize how this new plaza will serve the public and enhance the downtown environment.
Should the Council approve the Final Design for the 700 block of Laurel Street, City staff and consultants will continue their work to develop technical construction documents (PS&E) for Centennial Plaza (700 block Laurel Street). These documents will provide detailed engineering and construction information that contractors will use to build the project should funding become available and pursuant to the City Council’s direction.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 419
Project History
In 2022, the City commenced a planning process for a Downtown Specific Plan, aimed at enhancing the downtown core. A key component of the Downtown Specific Plan is the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, which was adopted by the City Council on April 28, 2025. The Downtown Streetscape Master Plan outlines a series of placemaking, pedestrian, environmental, community-oriented, and business-friendly improvements along several downtown streets (primarily along Laurel), with the 700 block of Laurel Street (including Harrington Park) operating as a pedestrian promenade and central community gathering point.
During the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan process, the City Council expressed a strong desire to begin constructing improvements in an area within the downtown. Given their prominence, the 700 block of Laurel and Harrington Park were identified for Phase 1 implementation. In October 2024, the City Council authorized a contract with design/engineering firm WRT to prepare design engineering (i.e. “shovel ready”) drawings for the 700 block of Laurel Street and Harrington Park, with the direction to begin construction on Harrington Park sometime in 2025.
Since that time, the City Council has met four times (see Attachments 3, 4, 5 and 6) with staff and WRT to refine the designs for Phase 1 (Phase 1A consists of the renovation of Harrington Park and Phase 1B consists of the entire pedestrianized zone along the 700 block of Laurel Street, spanning from Cherry to Olive Streets). The extent of each phase is mapped in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1. Phase 1 Downtown Implementation: Harrington Park (1A); 700 Block, Laurel Street (1B) At its last meeting on June 9, 2025, the City Council supported the overall design for the 700 block of Laurel Street, and provided comments to address:
• Skateboard deterrence on custom benches
• Finalizing the design of the water feature is challenging; agreed to maintain the location/footprint, size/scale, base design, amount of recirculating water through a reflecting pool basin and overflow edge; and to use the City’s public art process for civic
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 420
engagement to determine the water feature’s vertical centerpiece; and explore fundraising opportunities for construction
• Concern about adequate space for interactive play structures/elements • Improve organization and design of newspaper racks
• Ensure adequate pedestrian flow throughout
Tonight’s discussion marks a key milestone in the process, as the City Council will review and consider approving the Final Design for Phase 1B, as shown in Exhibit A to the Resolution.
Council approval will authorize staff and the consultant team to proceed with preparing “shovelready” design and engineering documents for public bidding, ensuring the 700 block of Laurel Street is ready for construction when directed by Council.
Revisiting the Final Design for the 700 Block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B):
Phase 1B – 700 Block of Laurel Street (“Centennial Plaza”); See Exhibit A to the Resolution for Final Design Exhibit
Consistent with the vision outlined in the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, the 700 block of Laurel will serve as a pedestrian promenade lined with trees and raingardens. The plant palette will include a mix of native plants as well as Golden rain trees and Crepe myrtles. The raingardens will help capture and filter runoff. The vacated street section currently running through the 700 block of Laurel will be filled in and raised to the height of the existing shops and sidewalks, creating a seamless experience for visitors. Smaller entry plazas will be added at either end of the 700 block of Laurel, near where the promenade intersects Cherry and Olive Streets. These small plaza areas will include bicycle racks for visitors. A mix of benches and moveable seating opportunities are integrated into the design.
Figure 2. Bird’s Eye View of the 700 Block of Laurel Street
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 421
The winding (i.e. “sway”) pedestrian promenade running through the middle of the 700 block of Laurel is designed to double as an emergency access path for responder vehicles, with a minimum twenty-foot clearance running throughout. Retractable bollards will be installed at both ends of the promenade (at the Cherry and Olive Street intersections) to allow for access in emergency situations or to accommodate larger City-sponsored events.
The design includes space that could accommodate a variety of special or more unique elements, such as an oversized chess board and a digital wayfinding kiosk. These spaces are located near 784 and 786 Laurel Street and space for e.g. a digital kiosk could be located near the intersection of Laurel and Cherry Streets. As part of the final design, the Balancing Act (a.k.a. “Blue Man”) sculpture is planned to be relocated along the northern edge of the promenade, near 717 Laurel Street.
The lighting plan includes a mix of contemporary-style light posts, illuminated bollards, underlighting beneath benches, and catenary (string/market) lights near the central portions of the 700 block of Laurel.
Pavilion
The aspirational pavilion would rise to 16 feet in height at the low point and up to 22 feet tall at the high point. The pavilion contemplates a raised stage, 18-inches tall, that could be used to support a wide variety of activities and programs. The stage is designed to face three directions and host small-to-medium sized events. The current design includes a sloping path to allow accessibility to the stage; see Figure 3.
Figure 3. Multi-Purpose Pavilion / Performance Stage, Centennial Plaza Direct and indirect lighting fixtures and speakers could be integrated into the columns. The stage could also include mounting points for artists and other performers to set up their audio equipment in support of City events.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 422
The pavilion is positioned along Laurel Street to allow for – at its closest point – a twenty-one-foot pathway for emergency vehicle access. Meanwhile, a minimum of 20-feet area serves as the main promenade along the full span of the 700 block of Laurel Street.
Water Feature
The design of the water feature, shown in Figure 4 below, is based upon City Council input received during previous meetings.
On June 9 the City Council directed staff to maintain the water feature’s location/footprint, its overall size/scale, the design of its base (to serve as additional public seating), and the volume of water in a reflecting pool with overflow edges, which shall be recirculated to conserve water.
However, the Council directed staff to follow a public engagement process to determine the vertical centerpiece of the water feature and further directed staff to explore fundraising opportunities. Staff will return to the City Council and present options for establishing a process and timeline for public engagement to determine the centerpiece of the water feature.
Figure 4. Base of Water Feature as Presented on June 9, 2025; Centerpiece To Be Determined.
Technical documents for the 700 block of Laurel Street will omit the vertical centerpiece of the water feature, deferring it until a public engagement process is completed.
NEXT STEPS:
Should the City Council approve the final design for Phase 1B, staff and the WRT consultants will continue to prepare construction documents consisting of exact measurements, elevations, grading, utility connections, drainage systems, structural details for the pavilion and fountain base, materials and product specifications, and refinements to cost estimates for construction. The goal is to have construction documents ready for the 700 block of Laurel Street should funding become available, and pursuant to the Council’s direction.
TBD
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 423
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt a Resolution approving the Final Design for the 700 Block of Laurel Street (Phase 1B Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Implementation); or
2. Do not adopt the Resolution; or
3. Provide staff with alternate direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Al Savay, Community Development Director
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution Approving the Final Design
Exhibit A to Resolution: Final Design Plans, Elevations, Renderings and Graphics
2. Construction Cost Estimates for Phase 1B
3. Council Input from Meeting of February 10, 2025
4. Council Input from Meeting of March 10, 2025
5. Council Input from Meeting of May 12, 2025
6. Council Input from Meeting of June 9, 2025
7. Council Resolution No. 2025-054
8. Downtown Streetscape Master Plan, Adopted April 28, 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 424
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING THE FINAL DESIGN FOR THE 700 BLOCK OF LAUREL STREET (PHASE 1B DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN IMPLEMENTATION). ___________________________________________________________________________ WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos has made planning for the future of its downtown one of its top strategic objectives since 2021, beginning with the adoption of its 2021 Strategic Plan and as reaffirmed during its City Council Retreat on January 21, 2022, and subsequent meetings on January 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, and April 14, 2025; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2023, the City Council unanimously voted to adopt Resolution 2023-106 authorizing the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement with WRT, Inc. to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 2024, and September 23, 2024, the City Council expressed a desire to begin implementing a downtown street redesign project; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution 2024-114 authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the professional services agreement with WRT, Inc. for additional consulting services associated with the Downtown Specific Plan and Streetscape Master Plan to include design engineering drawings for Phase 1 Downtown implementation; and WHEREAS, on April 7, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission adopted Resolution 2025-02 recommending the City Council adopt the San Carlos Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution 2025-031 adopting the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2025, March 10, 2025, May 12, 2025, and June 9, 2025, the City Council provided specific direction and feedback on the design of Harrington Park and the 700 Block of Laurel Street; and
WHEREAS, on June 9, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2025-054 approving the Final Design for Harrington Park, Phase 1A, and deferring the Final Design of the 700 Block of Laurel Street, Phase 1B; and
WHEREAS, on October 14, 2025, the Final Design of the 700 Block of Laurel Street, Phase 1B, was presented to the City Council for approval.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby approves the Final Design for the 700 Block of Laurel Street, Phase 1B, as delineated and set forth in Exhibit A.
* * * * * * *
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 14th day of October 2025, by the following vote:
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 425
AYES, COUNCIL MEMBERS: __________________________________________________ NOES, COUNCIL MEMBERS: __________________________________________________ ABSENT, COUNCIL MEMBERS: ________________________________________________ _______________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Final Design for the 700 Block of Laurel Street, Phase 1B
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 426
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION PHASE 1B – 700 Block Laurel Street OC T OB ER 1 4, 2 02 5
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 427
AGENDA OVERVIEW
• Design Development Progress
• Project Images
• Phase 1A/1B Delineation
• Pavilion + Water Feature
• Furnishings + Materials
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 428
WHERE WE LEFT OFF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Seating Custom Seating
Restroom / Storage
Dropoff / Food Truck Parking
Custom Seating
Bioretention Planting
Moveable Seating
Pavilion
20’ Clearance Line Water
Feature
Bridge at
Bioretention
Moveable
Seating
CHERRY STREET
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
OLIVE STREET
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 429
CURRENT SITE DESIGN CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTATION PLAN
Seating Custom Seating
Restroom / Storage
Dropoff / Food Truck Parking
Moveable Seating
Pavilion
20’ Clearance Line Water
Feature
Bridge at
Bioretention
Moveable
Seating
Sculptural Play Element
Custom Seating
Bioretention Planting
CHERRY STREET
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
OLIVE STREET
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 430
BIRD’S EYE VIEW 700 LAUREL BLOCK
Grove
Grove
Bioretention Area
Harrington Park
Bioretention Area Bioretention Area
Pavilion
Water Feature
Moveable Seating
Restroom/Storage
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 431
BIRD’S EYE VIEW HARRINGTON PARK + CENTENNIAL PLAZA
Harrington Park
Restroom/Storage
Water Feature
Pavilion
Moveable Seating
Moveable Seating
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 432
RENDERED VIEW CENTENNIAL PLAZA
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Looking towards Harrington
Park from Centennial Plaza
(Laurel Street)
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 433
RENDERED VIEW LAUREL STREET BIORETENTION AREAS
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Looking towards Cherry Street
from Centennial Plaza (Laurel
Street) pedestrian walk
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 434
PHASE 1A/1B DELINEATION
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 CHERRY STREET
OLIVE STREET
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 435
PAVILION + WATER FEATURE LOCATION UPDATE
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 436
PAVILION DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Looking from Centennial Plaza
(Laurel Street) towards
Harrington Park
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 437
PAVILION DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Looking south down Centennial
Plaza (Laurel Street) towards
Harrington Park and Pavilion
Vertical Element, TBD by
community process
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 438
Vertical Element, TBD by
community process
WATER FEATURE DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 439
SITE FURNISHINGS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Bench
Twig, Landscapeforms
Cafe Table + Chairs
Parc Centre, Landscapeforms
*powdercoat color options available
Skateboard Deterrent Grooves
Custom Precast Concrete Bench
Custom Benches
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 440
SITE ELEMENTS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Waste Receptacles
Multiminium,mmcite
Bike Racks
Emerson, Landscapeforms
*powdercoat color options available
Bottle Filling Station
Elkay
*powdercoat color options available
E-bike Charging Station
Saris Power Post
Hydraulic Bollards Removable Bollards
Tree Grate 1
Spin, Iron Age (5’ dia.)
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Tree Grate 2
Rain, Iron Age (5’ x 5’)
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Pedestrian Bridge
Rain, Iron Age (Custom)
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Trench Drain
Rain, Iron Age
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 441
PREVIOUS PAVING MATERIALS PALETTE
Unit Paver 1, Permeable
Narrow Modular Pavers (3” X 9”), Stepstone
in medium shade (See below)
Medium Shades
Medium Shades
Dark Shades
C.I.P Concrete 1 & 2
in light and dark grey
Select 1 Shade
Select 1 Shade
Unit Paver 3
CALARC® Pavers (12” X 24”), Stepstone
in dark shade (See below)
Dark Shades
Select 3 Shades(1 from each)
Unit Paver 2
Narrow Modular Pavers (6” X 12”), Stepstone
in light, medium and dark shades (See below)
Light Shades
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 442
Color: 1824,
PEBBLE
Finish: Light
Sandblast
Color: 1824,
PEBBLE
Finish: Medium
Sandblast
Color: 1801,
GRANADA
WHITE
Finish: Medium
Sandblast
Color: 1801,
GRANADA
WHITE
Finish: Light
Sandblast
Color: 1825,
ADOBE
Finish: Medium
Sandblast
Unit Paver Material
Samples
UPDATEDPAVING MATERIALS PALETTE
Unit Paver 2
Narrow Modular Pavers (6” X 12”), Stepstone
in light, medium and dark shades (See below)
Light Shades
Unit Paver 3
CALARC® Pavers (12” X 24”), Stepstone
in dark shade (See below)
Light Shades
Unit Paver 1, Permeable
Narrow Modular Pavers (3” X 9”), Stepstone
in medium shade (See below)
Medium Shades
Medium Shades Medium Shades
Dark Shades
medium
Sandblast
medium
Sandblast
C.I.P Concrete 1 & 2
in light and dark grey
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 443
PLANTING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT TRE
E
SHRUB
GROUNDCOVER
Two-colored Kangaroo Paw
Anigozanthos bicolor
Crepe Myrtle Lagerstroemia
indica x fauriei ‘Muskogee’
Blue Fescue
Festuca glauca ‘Elijah Blue’
Canby Oak
Quercus canbyi
*Semi-evergreen species
Engelmann Oak
Quercus engelmannii
*Evergreen species
Beach Sagewort
Artemisia Pycnocephala
California Sycamore
Platanusracemosa ‘Roberts’
Mesa Glow Maple
Acer grandidentatum
Dry
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025 Wet
California Field Sedge
Carex praegracilis
Salt Grass
Distichlisspicata
Seep Monkey Flower
Mimulus guttatus
Giant Chain Fern
Woodwardia fimbriata
Autumn moor grass
Sesleria autumnalis
Narrow-leaf Chalksticks
Senecio vitalis
Berkeley Sedge
Carex divulsa c. tumulicola
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 444
LIGHTING PHASE 1A AND PHASE 1B
Catenary LED Festoon Stringlight
PRIMUS
Surface Mounted LED Striplight
QTL
14’ Pole Mounted Area Light LED Bollard Path Light
LUMEC, UrbanScape (*w/ outlets and WiFi) BEGA INTERLUX, Dirigo Bull Rail Lighting At Bridges
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | OCT 14 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 445
LIGHTING SITE PLAN
14’ Pole Mounted Area Light
LED Bollard
Path Light
Catenary LED Festoon Stringlight
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | PHASE 1 | JUNE 9 2025
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 446
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 447
SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
Design Development Cost Estimate
5/30/25
UNIT
ITEM DESCRIPTION QTY. UNIT COST CONT AMOUNT
General
101 Mobilization/ Demobilization 1 LS 152,409.00 $ 10% $167,650 102 Traffic Management 1 LS 25,000.00 $ 10% $28,750
103 Water Pollution Control 1 LS 25,000.00 $ 10% $27,500 104 Construction Layout 1 LS 30,000.00 $ 10% $33,000
105 Construction Fencing/ Pedestrain Access 1 LS 30,000.00 $ 10% $33,000 106 Monument Preservation 1 LS 5,000.00 $ 10% $5,500
Subtotal $295,400
Demolition
200 Concrete Flatwork Removal (incl. Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk) 20,000 SF $ 10% $176,000 8.00 201 Remove AC Pavement 32,000 SF $ 10% $246,400 7.00
202 Remove Trees 20 EA $ 10% $11,000 500.00
203 Remove Street Lights 11 EA $ 10% $9,680 800.00
204 Remove Existing Water Valve Box (Sizes to Confirm) 15 EA $ 10% $1,650 100.00 205 Remove/Abandon in Place Ex. Water Main, Laterals and Water Valves 800 LF 50.00 $ 10% $44,000
206 Remove Ex. Fire Hydrant and Assembly 1 EA $ 10% $880 800.00 207 Remove Ex. Sanitary Sewer (SS) Main 700 LF $ 10% $38,500 50.00 208 Remove/Abandon in Place Ex.Sanitary Sewer (SS) Laterals 250 LF $ 10% $6,875 25.00 209 Remove/Abandon in Place Ex.Sanitary Sewer (SS) Clean outs 10 EA $ 10% $5,500 500.00 210 Remove Ex. Storm Drain (SD) Main 382 LF $ 10% $21,010 50.00 211 Remove Ex. Storm Drain Inlet 3 EA 3,500.00 $ 10% $11,550 212 Remove/Abandon in Place Ex. Storm Drain (SD) Laterals (Inc. SD Lateral from Phase 1A) 90 LF $ 10% $2,475 25.00 213 Miscellenous 1 LS 50,000.00 $ 10% $55,000
214 AT&T, Comcast, Other Fiber & Communication (TBD) 1 LS 50,000.00 $ 10% $55,000 215 Coordination with PG&E (Gas & Electric) 1 LS 50,000.00 $ 10% $55,000 216 Remove Pullboxes 35 EA $ 10% $30,800 800.00
217 Remove Receptacles 24 EA $ 10% $6,072 230.00
Subtotal $777,392
Earthwork
300 Earthwork 875 CY $ 10% $81,813 85.00
301 Export 875 CY $ 10% $96,250 100.00
Subtotal $178,063
Hardscape
400 Flush Concrete Bands 0 SF $ 20% $0 25.00
401 Vertical Curb at Planter 0 LF $ 20% $0 42.00
402 Detectable Warning Device 24 SF $ 5% $1,058 42.00
403 Stormwater Blocks SF $ 20% $0 120.00
404 Permeable Unit Pavers 3,565 SF $ 5% $157,217 42.00
405 Unit Pavers 19,274 SF $ 5% $971,410 48.00
406 Enhanced Concrete Paving 20,570 SF $ 5% $539,963 25.00 407 Asphalt Paving - Raised Intersection 0 TON $ 15% $0 800.00 408 Water Barrier 0 SF $ 15% $0 8.00
409 Lines and Markings 1 LS 15,000.00 $ 10% $16,500
410 Signs 1 LS 2,000.00 $ 10% $2,200
Subtotal $1,688,347
Electrical and Communications
500 3/4"PVC conduit with 3#10 AWG + GND. 840 LF $ 10% $41,580 45.00 501 2" PVC Conduit for Comcast 915 EA $ 10% $11,072 11.00 502 2" PVC spare conduit for CCTV 595 LF $ 10% $7,200 11.00 503 Trench and Backfill 560 CY $ 10% $215,600 350.00
504 Electrical Pull/ Splice Box 55 EA 1,800.00 $ $108,900 505 120 V Electrical Outlets 43 EA $ 10% $23,650 500.00 LAUREL STREET - CHERRY TO OLIVE STREET (700 BLOCK)
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Page 448
10%
506 Lighting Fixture Type "R1" - Pedestrian Pole 12 EA 8,650.00 $ 10% $119,370 507 Lighting Fixture Type "R2" - Illuminated Bollard 16 EA 3,800.00 $ 10% $69,920 508 Lighting Fixture Type "R3" - Catenary Light System 272 EA $ 10% $21,583 69.00 509 Lighting Fixture Type "R4" - Integrated Site Furniture Lighting 9 EA 3,100.00 $ 10% $32,085 510 Lighting Fixture Type "R5" - Toekick lighting 8 EA 4,300.00 $ 10% $39,560 511 Lighting Fixture Type "E1" - Lighting at Canopy 48 EA $ 10% $39,336 745.00 Subtotal $729,855
Storm Drainage
700 Drain Inlet (Including overflow Drain Inlets) 4 EA 6,000.00 $ 10% $26,400 701 Manhole 1 EA 7,000.00 $ 10% $7,700
702 Turning Structure 8 EA 2,500.00 $ 10% $22,000
703 18" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) 360 LF $ 10% $118,800 300.00 704 15" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) 40 LF $ 10% $12,100 275.00 705 12" Storm Drain Pipe (RCP) 400 LF $ 10% $110,000 250.00 706 Trench Drain 350 LF $ 10% $115,500 300.00
707 8" Perforated Pipe 357 LF $ 10% $29,453 75.00
708 6" Perforated Pipe 300 LF $ 10% $21,450 65.00
709 Bioretentation Soil Media 233 CY $ 10% $63,963 250.00 710 Retaining Curb and Gutter/wall 1,100 LF $ 10% $302,500 250.00 711 Class II Permeable 116 CY $ 10% $10,874 85.00
712 Landscape Mulch 29 CY $ 10% $6,396 200.00
713 Outfall Rock Dissipator 4 EA 1,000.00 $ 10% $4,400
714 Subdrain Cleanout 4 EA $ 10% $550 125.00
715 Tie in to Ex. Storm Drain Main 1 EA 10,000.00 $ 10% $11,000 Subtotal $863,085
Sanitary Sewer
800 12" Sanitary Sewer Pipe (VCP) 700 LF $ 10% $281,050 365.00 801 Lateral Replacement (PVC SDR-26) incl Cleanout 12 EA 15,000.00 $ 10% $198,000 802 Manhole 2 EA 10,000.00 $ 10% $22,000
803 Tie In to Ex, Sanitary Sewer Main (TBD) 1 EA 10,000.00 $ 10% $11,000 Subtotal $512,050
Water
900 Water Main - PVC 750 LF $ 10% $247,500 300.00
901 Water Service Laterals 16 EA 6,000.00 $ 10% $105,600 902 Fire Service Laterals 2 EA 8,000.00 $ 10% $17,600
903 Water Gate Valves 10 EA 2,000.00 $ 10% $22,000
904 Tie In - Water Main 4 EA 10,000.00 $ 10% $44,000
905 Fire Hydrant 1 EA 12,500.00 $ 10% $13,750
Subtotal $450,450
Public Utility
1000 Adjust PGE Vault 4 EA 1,000.00 $ 10% $4,400
1001 Adjust ATT Vault 4 EA 1,000.00 $ 10% $4,400
1002 Adjust Comcast Vault 4 EA 1,000.00 $ 10% $4,400
1003 Adjust Water Meter & Valve 26 EA $ 10% $14,300 500.00 1004 Adjust Gas Valve 6 EA $ 10% $3,300 500.00
Subtotal $30,800
Landscaping
1100 Import Soil 341 CY $ 10% $31,859 85.00
1101 Street Tree 41 EA $ 10% $36,080 800.00
1102 Shrub 460 EA $ 10% $10,120 20.00
1103 Ground Cover 4,600 SF $ 10% $20,240 4.00
1104 Mulch 57 CY $ 10% $3,123 50.00
1105 Irrigation System 1 LS 130,000.00 $ 10% $143,000
Subtotal $244,423
Furnishings
1200 Retractable Bollard 10 EA 8,200.00 $ 20% $98,400
1201 Bench type 2 - Custom precast with wood slats 4 EA 43,642.00 $ 5% $183,296 1202 Bench type 3 - Custom precast with wood slats 4 EA 18,090.00 $ 5% $75,978 1203 24 EA $ 360.00 $9,072
1204 Steel tables 12 EA $ 870.00 5% $10,962
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 449
Steel chairs 5%
1205 Bench type 4 - Twig bench 4 EA $ 7 ,000.00 5% $29,400 1206 Bike Rack 10 EA $ 2 ,100.00 10% $23,100
1207 Trash/ Recycle Receptacles 4 EA $ 2 ,400.00 10% $10,560 1208 Drinking Fountain 2 EA $ 2 5,000.00 15% $57,500
1209 Play Sculpture 2 ALLOW $ - 15% $0
1210 Tree Grate (square) 27 EA $ 1 ,500.00 15% $46,575
1211 Tree Grate (round) 6 EA $ 1 ,500.00 15% $10,350
Subtotal $555,193
Water Features
1100 Concrete - Base slab for pool 235 SF $ 40.00 25% $11,750 1101 Concrete - Basin Walls 115 LF $ 2 50.00 25% $35,938 1102 Waterproofing - fluid-applied 320 SF $ 35.00 25% $14,000 1103 Miscellenious hardware and fittings 1 ALLOW $ 1 5,000.00 25% $18,750 1104 Granite Finish - pool floor 210 SF $ 7 5.00 25% $19,688 1105 Granite Cladding - Weirs 65 LF $ 1 50.00 25% $12,188 1106 Precast Removable Pavers Over Trough 40 SF $ 5 0.00 25% $2,500 1107 Stone Sculpture 1 EA $ 7 5,000.00 25% $93,750
1108 Pump, Filter System and Controls 1 EA $ 2 07,138.00 25% $258,923 1109 Waterfall Pump and Lights 1 EA $ 5 0,000.00 25% $62,500 1110 Contractor costs 40% $211,994
Subtotal $741,979
Structures and Elements
1200 Pavilion Wood Canopy (TBD Pending Fabricator) 1 EA 1,540,000.00 $ 25% $1,925,000 1201 Concrete Stage 1 LS 200,000.00 $ 25% $250,000
1202 Stage AV Allowance 1 LS 225,000.00 $ 25% $281,250
1203 Pavilion Lighting LS 30,000.00 $ 25% $0
Subtotal $2,456,250
Total Construction Cost: $9,523,287
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 450
City Council Meeting February 10, 2025
10. STUDY SESSION
b
.
Receive a Presentation and Provide Direction to Staff on the Design and Layout of Key Features for Improvements to the 700 Block of Laurel Street and Harrington Park (Phase 1 Downtown Implementation Component).
Lisa Porras, Planning Manager and Jim Stickley, Principal consultant at WRT presented the item.
Council Member (CM) Layton inquired about the intended purpose and vision for the small and medium size stage. He also asked about the spatial relationship between the stage and the water feature, questioning whether they might compete with each other during a music performance. Lastly, he inquired about the design concept and functionality of the alleyway.
CM Dugan expressed his preference for the pavilion to be medium or medium-plus in size, considering the nearby residents behind the Wheeler Plaza area. He questioned whether this location would serve as the primary gathering space and suggested making it the central focal point.
CM Dugan noted that the public may want seating options as events are happening on the pavilion. He also expressed his preference for the fountain to have an organic, flowing design that complements the overall aesthetic rather than a boxed-in structure.
CM Dugan agrees with CM Leighton that the alley entrance should be welcoming and pull people into the plaza. He also suggested beginning public communication about the plans for the Memorial Bricks and their future placement. Council Member Dugan reminded staff and the consultant team to keep in mind the existing newspaper boxes and the City’s free papers, emphasizing their significant community benefit.
CM Rak expressed his appreciation for the idea of a gateway to the park from the alleyway.
He agreed with CM Dugan’s idea of making the water structure more fluid like. He also noted the importance of finding the right balance with the stage and music, considering there are residents all around, including along El Camino Real.
Mayor McDowell emphasized the need for a drinking fountain or water station. She also wanted to ensure that diaper-changing stations are included in the restrooms. Additionally, she expressed uncertainty about the inclusion of outdoor handwashing stations.
Mayor McDowell liked the idea of a bench in front of the water structure, as it serves a dual purpose—providing seating and acting as a barrier to prevent young children from
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 451
accessing the water directly. She suggested backless seating so people can face either the fountain or pavilion.
Mayor McDowell inquired about the status of the U.S. Bank driveway and expressed her appreciation for the natural elements incorporated into the overall design, especially the wood pavilion, which soften the features.
Mayor McDowell agreed with CM Dugan that if the City builds a medium-sized stage, it should be able to accommodate at least a medium-sized band. She noted that there may be some pushbacks from residents in Wheeler Plaza if bands perform in that area.
Mayor McDowell suggested bike parking in the alley behind Harrington Park.
Public Comment
Karen Molinari (in person) expressed gratitude for the project and enthusiasm for its impact.
As a member of the Economic Development Advisory Commission, she is optimistic that it will increase foot traffic in downtown and benefit businesses along Laurel Street.
Caroline (in Zoom) supported the idea of sinks outside the bathrooms, noting they would reduce wait times and discourage their use for bathing. They suggested looking at a similar example in a park on 24th Street in San Francisco’s Noe Valley for reference.
Council Members Final Comments
CM Dugan sought confirmation from City Attorney Greg Rubens that the City is not infringing on the US Bank easement due to the permanent closure of the 700 block of Laurel Street.
He also proposed adding Tableau rock seating in the 700 block, similar to those in Chilton Park, as they would complement the fountain well.
CM Layton emphasized the importance of design details, particularly regarding outdoor handwashing stations, which could unintentionally encourage bathing. He also highlighted the need for thoughtful seating design to enhance events like Music in the Park and ensure the pavilion remains the focal point. He raised concerns about potential bottlenecks in the fountain areas and the impact of elevating the pavilion, including accessibility and unintended uses, such as protests. CM Leighton urged careful consideration of these elements to ensure a functional and welcoming downtown space.
CM Rak emphasized maintaining the promenade's accessibility, ensuring that while music and seating are important, they should not obstruct movement or business access. He preferred backless benches and highlighted the there should be a distinction between an urban plaza and a traditional park. While natural design elements are welcome, the space
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 452
should still function as a downtown promenade, balancing aesthetics with practicality in an urban setting.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 453
March 10, 2025, City Council Meeting Study Session Notes
11. STUDY SESSION
Receive a Presentation and Provide Direction to Staff on Site Furnishings, Paving Design and Materials, Special Elements, Lighting, Planting Palette, and Design Choices for the Water Feature on the 700 Block of Laurel Street and Harrington Park.
Water Feature:
CM Rak inquired about the budget for the water feature. He expressed a preference for the first design option, noting that he could envision children playing in it but was uncertain if the additional cost was justified. CM Rak views the area as an urban park with a modern aesthetic rather than a wooded setting and would prefer a fountain design that aligns with that theme, provided cost is not a concern.
VM Venkatesh shared that a water feature encouraging children's play would create more noise and unlike the Zen feel that people think of a water feature. She liked the fog concept for its uniqueness but was unsure how it would work. She preferred the sculptural rock option with plantings, seeing it as more organic, peaceful, and still engaging for children in fun ways, like adding boats.
CM Layton expressed concerns about the cost of Concept 1 and leaned towards Concept
2. He appreciated the creativity of the fog feature and its year-round concept. He also noted that a large water feature, like in concept 1, would take up a significant amount of space.
CM Dugan inquired about the safety concern in concept 1 and the various features. He also inquired who is drawn to fog, referring to concept 2. CM Dugan expressed his appreciation for the Interactive Blooms feature in concept 1, highlighting its role as a central gathering space for families, where children can engage while others dine. He noted its modular and flexible design, allowing it to be turned off for a more peaceful setting during pavilion events. Additionally, he acknowledged its benefit of providing extra seating in the area. CM Dugan shared that he is not too concerned about the budget for a signature design.
Mayor McDowell stated that she is not a fan of the concept 1 design because children will get wet and go inside a retail shop or restaurant soaking wet. She noted that San Carlos downtown is for retail and dining, it is not a park. Mayor McDowell commented that concept 2, the fog feature, is unsustainable and would prefer concept 3. She commented that there should be barriers around the fountain and no splash pads. Mayor McDowell wanted a feature that runs 24/7.
CM Rak inquired about the amount of water loss in the fog water feature option and the sizes of each option.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 454
He also inquired if the consultants sought feedback from the downtown businesses on their thoughts of having a water feature downtown such as noise.
CM Rak shared that he leaned toward Concept 3, noting it is a better fit for the space and more suitable for accommodating events.
VM Venkatesh inquired if the fog would cool down the surrounding area.
CM Layton requested clarification from the Mayor on the goal of the evening—whether it was for the Council to reach consensus on a water feature or to determine a majority preference for one of the options.
CM Layton wanted to know if there are other options available other than the 3 that were presented.
CM Dugan requested clarification on the meaning of the term “interactive.” He asked the Council to consider a raised version of Option 1 for the water feature—one where people aren’t playing in it, but rather with it.
City Manager echoed CM Dugan’s thought.
CM Dugan did not support fog in downtown San Carlos.
Mayor McDowell stated they should consider the cost of the water feature and needed to understand the cost tradeoffs and not fall short on the budget.
CM Rak suggested that a fountain with occasional water bursts or intermittent activity could be a viable option.
CM Dugan commented that a common thread among the Council was incorporating a vertical stone element into the water feature.
Public Comment – Water Feature
Sonia Elks (In-person) suggested piloting a section of misters that activate above 80°F to provide a refreshing, low-impact experience, especially for children. She recommended using runoff water from features to irrigate downtown landscaping. Additional ideas included incorporating color-changing elements and using mist or fog to add moisture to the air for comfort in dry conditions.
Paving Feature
CM Layton inquired about the meaning of pathways. He shared his liking of using paving to distinguish the different functions or dynamics within the area. CM Layton commented that the public would appreciate clarification of flow patterns, such as centralized points and diagonal walking paths.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 455
CM Dugan appreciated the thoughtfulness of the paving patterns but suggested keeping them casual and natural in appearance. He expressed that it would be ideal to use pavers that are not scooter-friendly, to discourage people from riding through the area.
CM Dugan, suggested to have the Donor pavers close to the pavilion instead of tucked aways near the bathroom.
VM Venkatesh inquired about the maintenance of the pavers, considering the presence of foliage.
Mayor McDowell inquired about the outdoor dining setup, specifically whether there would be short partitions and how they might impact the pavers. She asked who is zoned for retail and restaurants that might potentially receive less space due to the bioretention areas, emphasizing that this is information the City should know sooner rather than later.
Mayor McDowell stated that the Council needs to set a policy direction for how outdoor dining should be implemented. She commented that streetscape and pavers are interwind and perhaps the Council needs to have another meeting to discuss.
CM Dugan shared that the European model was discussed at the Downtown subcommittee meeting. He shared that in his mind the seating would always be bistro tables, umbrellas, and no enclosure. It would be free flowing.
CM Dugan emphasized the need to review best practices for outdoor dining, noting that parklets were a temporary pandemic solution and should not dictate future space allocation. They stressed that outdoor dining should stay in front of restaurants—not spill into retail areas—and that the focus should be on creating a vibrant public square. The Council should approach this deliberately and reach consensus, given the expected strong community opinions.
CM Rak shared that he is unsure if the dining policy would have anything to do with the paver designs.
Mayor McDowell expressed concern about costs and asked whether it was necessary to have so many different colors of pavers. She inquired whether certain types of pavers might be difficult for people with disabilities to traverse.
Public Comment – Paving Features
Sonia Elks (in-person) shared that there are alternative ways to deter scooters, such as using truncated domes, with examples seen at the major playground in Redwood City.
She emphasized the importance of creating a designated space for active teens to help prevent disruptive behavior in other parts of Downtown.
Benches
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 456
CM Dugan expressed a preference for the innovative concrete bench designs, noting that wood does not hold up well in outdoor weather conditions. He noted that steel or concrete could be comfortable as well.
CM Layton shared that he liked the look and feel of benches with integrated lighting and noted that he is not a strong supporter of movable furniture.
VM Venkatesh reiterated that wood would not work in this area, unless it is teak, which is expensive.
CM Rak reiterated the preference for using materials other than wood for benches. He agreed with CM Layton that movable furniture should be reserved for special occasions and not require daily handling by staff. He also suggested placing some backless benches in the center of the plaza to allow flexibility for people to turn around during performances and similar events.
Mayor McDowell commented that the City should consider the heat generated by the sun on benches during the summer months. She also wondered whether there is a way to anchor the furniture, noting that people often like to sit and enjoy their email.
VM Venkatesh shared her preference for the wood look, citing an example from the Palo Alto Medical Foundation. She noted that steel benches become uncomfortably hot to sit on during the summer.
CM Rak commented that tables should be provided so people can sit outside and enjoy their meals. Regarding benches, he expressed a preference for materials that require minimal maintenance and can withstand weather conditions.
CM Dugan expressed a preference for bench materials that offer a long-term solution. He proposed using metal benches for the urban plaza setting, while reserving more organic elements for the area around the Pavilion.
Other Furnishing
CM Dugan shared that he liked the proposed contemporary furniture elements, appreciating the mix of urban and organic styles.
CM Rak expressed a preference for a more contemporary look. He emphasized the importance of including recycling, trash, and compost bins in the downtown area, stating that he wants San Carlos to demonstrate ecological leadership.
CM Rak inquired whether the consultant team had consulted with an arborist to ensure appropriate tree sizing and to confirm that the trees would grow well together and remain healthy.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 457
VM Venkatesh inquired about the design of the bridge and whether it would resemble the one shown in the photos. She expressed concern that children might fall into it.
Mayor McDowell shared that she would like to know the cost of the various bollard options and noted that all the proposed designs looked great.
Public Comment - Furnishings
Sonia Elks (in-person) emphasized the importance of including bike racks and suggested that incorporating more artistic designs would be a nice touch.
Planting and Trees
VM Venkatesh shared her concern with Crepe Myrtle and the California Sycamore trees.
CM Rak expressed a dislike for deciduous trees. He said he liked the Crepe Myrtle for corner plantings, noting that they are not large trees. He also expressed a preference for plants that are more native to the area.
CM Layton expressed agreement with CM Rak and VM Venkatesh, noting that the most frequent complaints from the public involve sap on the pavement and other droppings, such as acorns. They emphasized the importance of selecting plantings that help keep the area clean. He also voiced support for incorporating more California native plants into the downtown area, both for maintenance benefits and to enhance the local thematic identity.
CM Dugan expressed appreciation for the variety of colors in the proposed plants and trees. He agreed with other Councilmembers on the importance of maintaining cleanliness in the area. He also shared his dislike for evergreen trees, citing their large size and resemblance to Christmas trees, and expressed a preference for deciduous trees.
Mayor McDowell inquired about the possibility of aphids being present on the plants. She also expressed her appreciation for the Sycamore evergreen trees. Additionally, she asked whether the bioretention area had expanded. Mayor McDowell emphasized the importance of ensuring that the bioretention area does not encroach upon the 700 block of Laurel Street, as this area is designated for retail and dining purposes.
CM Dugan stated that if they believe the bioretention area is too large, the City can always install a storm drain as an alternative.
Public Comments – Plantings
Sonia Elks (In-person) propose placing a metal grate over large bioretention areas, with a picnic table or bike racks on top, allowing water flow while making the space usable.
Lighting
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 458
CM Dugan expressed a preference for more contemporary lighting options. He mentioned that he had never heard of catenary lighting before but liked the sense of place that the lantern-style lighting provides.
CM Rak agreed with CM Dugan on the catenary lights and a more contemporary lighting option. He liked the upper left and lower right lighting options.
CM Layton agreed with his fellow council members and requested clarification on the decision regarding aerial lighting.
CM Rak appreciated catenary lights throughout downtown which makes the area more inviting.
Mayor McDowell liked the catenary lights as well but noted that she is unsure how that fits in the overall light scheme of downtown. She also shared that she did not like the contemporary light.
Mayor McDowell shared that she once visited a town called Winter Park in Florida, where the streetlamps were "smart” allowing people to charge their phones and featuring small speakers that played music.
CM Dugas expressed support for the lights but questioned using them along the entire block, suggesting it might dilute their impact. He sees the lights as a way to highlight special areas, such as near a future fountain with unique lighting. He recommended involving a consultant to explore options, including different light styles or sizes, perhaps even a commercial version of fairy lights for places like Harrington Park.
CM Dugas expressed his linking of bollard lights and bench lights.
VM Venkatesh noted that the final choice should be based on cost and what makes the most sense.
Special Element
CM Dugan expressed a desire for the special element to be both artistic and functional, ideally serving as something children can also play on. He liked the idea of a chessboard and suggested adding a ping pong table that could double as a dining table. CM Dugan also expressed interest in having a cornhole game in the downtown area.
VM Venkatesh expressed a preference for chalkboards and chalk, allowing children to be creative rather than simply observing something. She favored a more organic approach and shared an example from San Diego, where trees are incorporated into the space in a way that allows kids to climb on them.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 459
CM Rak appreciated the elements presented by the consultants. He liked the idea of interactive features and suggested that some of them could be seasonal, brought out occasionally to enhance the experience.
CM Layton emphasize viewing these areas as opportunities rather than immediately committing to structures or play equipment. For example, a play sculpture might be a great fit for Harrington Park to start with, while leaving room to add other elements gradually over time.
CM Dugan encouraged collaboration with the Parks and Recreation Department, noting their ongoing Centennial celebrations, including installing historical markers with QR codes around town. He suggested designating a spot in the Centennial Plaza and placing one of these markers there to highlight San Carlos’s history.
Mayor McDowell expressed her support for the Ping Pong table idea and inquired whether the consultant team is collaborating with Art Bias to potentially create a project for the 700 block
Public Comment – Special Element
Sonia Elks (in-person) stressed the importance of engaging teenagers and proposed two ideas. First, she suggested creating a pump track for kids on wheels, which should be accessible to the downtown. Second, she recommended organizing a mystery or trivia challenge where participants move around the town to solve clues, with a prize like $100 and potential business sponsorships. In addition, Sonia advised incorporating interactive elements like short tree trunks or rocks for walk on them, as they encourage movement and play, rather than relying on a single static structure.
Nathan (via Zoom) suggested adding a community board along with a directory of retail shops and restaurants.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 460
City Council 5/12/25 Regular Meeting Item #10 Study Session Notes
10. STUDY SESSION
a. Receive a Presentation and Provide Direction to Staff on the Design of the Pavilion, Restrooms, and Water Feature as Part of Improvements to the 700 Block of Laurel Street and Harrington Park.
John Ware, Principal and Liam Lautze, Architectural Designer with Ware Associates, presented the Pavilion. Jim Garland from Fluidity Design Consultants presented the water feature design.
Staff and Consultant Team responded to Council’s questions and comments.
Water Fountain
CM Dugan commended the staff and consultant team for their good work and expressed enthusiasm for the comprehensive Downtown Specific Plan. He noted that he had originally brought up the Trevi Fountain as inspiration and shared his appreciation for the proposed design. He remarked that the fountain is visually striking and approachable, while not being overly inviting for play, and its zero-depth design that prevents people from getting soaked.
CM Dugan invited the Consultant to speak to the commissioning process for the fountain—specifically, how the artist would be selected, whether the current design is final, and if it reflects the desired vision. Also encouraged exploring ways to involve the community more in the design process, noting that the original Trevi Fountain was the result of a contest and commission. He noted that he viewed this as an opportunity to engage the public and generate excitement around the project.
Jim Garland stated that their assumption was to produce the work themselves. He explained that the current process involves working with a fabricator to refine the design, but they are open to involving an artist or broader community participation, though it would affect the process and potentially increase costs.
CM Dugan suggested that, since the project is still in Phase 1B and without a firm timeline, there is an opportunity to engage the community in shaping the public art element. He noted that the Community Foundation has expressed interest in participating and that the local artist collective Art Bias may also be a valuable partner. CM Dugan encouraged exploring community involvement in the design process, rather than defaulting to an industrial production approach.
Jim Garland clarified that his use of the term "industrial" referred to a process with an artistic character, rather than something mechanical or machine-like.
VM Venkatesh referred to slide 30 and 40, and inquired about segment benches.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 461
Jim Garland explained that the three segment benches are designed to work together to cradle the cascade feature without fully enclosing it, allowing the water to flow freely in all directions. He added that this segmented design aims to maximize seating opportunities while preserving the integrity of the water’s movement.
VM Venkatesh shared her concern that dogs or children may go into the fountain via the opening.
Jim Garland explained that the fountain is not meant to be interactive.
CM Layton inquired about the distance between the fountain and the pavilion.
John Ware answered 20 feet to allow for emergency vehicle access, which is a critical design element, and allowing pedestrian access through the two sides is the other critical element.
CM Layton inquired about the distance from the fountain to the Bank of America Building.
John Ware stated that it is on the order of 10 feet.
CM Layton wanted clarification on the rocks proposed for the fountain.
Jim Garland explained there are two proposed rocks, one is the dark rock in the pool which provides a reflective foundation and the other is the lighter color rock in the sculpture. He noted that both are indigenous.
Mayor McDowell referred to slide 40 and expressed concern that young children might be able to climb into the water fountain and get wet. She emphasized that, as stated in the previous Council meeting, her clear preference was for a fountain that would not allow children to run into it.
Mayor McDowell commented that the fountain is very large with a dimension shy of 40 feet per Jim Garland.
Other
CM Rak referenced slide 27, which shows the site plan, and inquired about how the design team plans to integrate tables and seating into the space.
Jim Stickely stated that the design allows for flexible use of the stage from two directions, with informal seating options like benches and seating walls throughout the park. For formal events, temporary seating would be brought in or attendees could bring their own chairs, a practice that has worked well in other communities.
CM Rak inquired how unfinished the ground covers would be for phase 1A and 1B.
Jim Stickley suggested that if Phase 1A only includes Harrington Park, a clean and simple boundary from building corner to corner could mark the transition to new paving. However,
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 462
he stated that if the pavilion is added to Phase 1A, it would be better to align the boundary with the existing diagonal pavement patterns to create a more natural and integrated look.
Mayor McDowell inquired about the location of the Blue Man statue.
Jim Stickely explained that the Blue Man statue is showing at one of the end plazas on 700 block, which means it would not be in phase 1A.
Bathrooms/ Drinking Fountain
VM Venkatesh inquired if the bathrooms are ADA compliant.
John Ware confirmed they are.
Mayor McDowell inquired about the drinking fountain.
John Ware referred to slide 10 and explained that the water filling stations are outside the restroom located on both sides of the hand wash basin.
CM Dugan referred to slide 10. He gave a shout out to Parks and Recreation Commissioner (Alternate) Alexandra Sber, who was the one to bring awareness, attention, and focus to the inclusion of a universal changing table. He inquired about the through put of the restrooms during events.
John Ware clarified that by code, they need to put a lavatory (wash basin) in the restroom and the two restrooms would not address peak demands.
CM Dugan asked if there is room for another bathroom.
John Ware stated to add another bathroom it will cost more and use more space.
CM Dugan referred to slide 8. He inquired if the bathroom could be 9 foot tall instead of
8. John Ware noted that could be done and he added they could add a skylight.
CM Dugan welcomed the skylight suggestion and recommended making the bathroom height to 10 foot tall.
CM Dugan referred to slide 27. He inquired about the angling of the stage.
John Ware explained that the design addresses several key factors. First, and most critically, it accommodates an ADA-compliant ramp that must span a specific length to rise 18 inches without requiring handrails, which imposes certain spatial constraints.
Second, the design incorporates organic forms that reflect and compliment the surrounding street layout, helping the structure blend more naturally into the environment.
Third, the pavilion has been intentionally oriented toward the open space along Laurel Street, particularly in the area near the Bank of America plaza. This placement allows
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 463
performances to engage the public space more effectively while minimizing direct impact on the buildings across the street.
Pavilion
CM Dugan expressed appreciation for the beautiful design, noting its strong iconic presence while maintaining an organic feel. He also valued the integration of hanging lights and speakers into the columns. However, he voiced a slight concern regarding the potential massing and bulk of the structure, which could cast dark shadows, and asked whether a more translucent design might help mitigate that issue.
John Ware clarified that the design team views the shadow cast by the pavilion as a benefit during the hot summer months. He noted that the pavilion’s height is scaled to match the adjacent buildings but acknowledged that adjustments to the height could be made if necessary. Regarding translucency, he explained that it would be challenging to achieve a mass timber structure.
Lisa Porras shared that community feedback emphasized the desire for ample shade and noted that the pavilion is one element that could help achieve that goal.
CM Dugan pointed out that the rear entrance to the centennial plaza must be addressed soon as he did not see it in the packet.
Jim Stickely described the park entrance as an inviting space created through the combination of landscaping, signage, and building materials, rather than a formal gate or structure.
John Ware noted that the alley-facing side of the building includes a roll-up door for storage access. He suggested two options to enhance its appearance: one is to collaborate with local artists to paint a mural on the door; the other is to use cedar wood cladding, consistent with the pavilion design, to visually screen the door and protect it from rain.
VM Venkatesh inquired about the Alaskan Yellow Cedar.
John Ware explained that the Alaskan Yellow Cedar is a stronger wood and has better structural properties. He added that his firm has used the same wood in Berkeley for a pedestrian bridge. John Ware noted that when the wood ages naturally, it will turn into a grey tone. They could not use Redwood because it does not have the structural properties and could not use Douglas Fur which is great structurally but could rot when exposed to water.
CM Rak inquired about the Pavilion and bathroom’s metal roof, specifically its ability to absorb noise - such as the sound of rain.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 464
John Ware clarified that it depends on the slop of the roof but he does not think it is an issue.
CM Rak inquired how much of the acoustics are affected by the height.
John Ware stated he will talk to the acoustic consultant, Salter.
CM Layton inquired about the $295K cost of civil work.
Lisa Porras clarified that the $294K is for the area around the pavilion and any civil work within Harrington Park would be part of the $4.25 million.
CM Layton agreed with CM Rak on obtaining acoustic advice from the consultant.
Mayor McDowell referred to slide 3 and inquired about the pavilion’s location, noting that in previous renderings it was shown partially in Harrington Park and partially on Laurel Street, whereas the current rendering placed it entirely on Laurel Street.
Jim Stickely explained that the pavilion was shifted outward to improve pedestrian flow.
Initially, the sidewalk area felt too narrow, so a setback of 10 to 15 feet from building corners was introduced to create a clearer, more spacious entry into Harrington Park.
Mayor McDowell shared that now her concern is overcrowding Laurel Street with the new Pavilion location.
Public Comment
Andrew Bernette (In-person) residence of San Carlos expressed concern that the current plans may miss an opportunity to incorporate more natural elements into the city, which already lacks green coverage and street canopies. Given climate change and the urban heat island effect, he emphasized the benefits of using natural materials to help lower temperatures. He suggested the design should better align with the city’s values, symbolized by the oak tree on the city seal, and perhaps offer a more whimsical, natureintegrated experience.
Andrew Bernette also questioned the practicality of designing a pavilion stage to be viewed from behind, asked how frequently it would be used for concerts, and suggested incorporating a flat, multi-use element—especially one usable by young children, as seen in Burton Park.
John Durkin (Zoom) asked the following questions:
• Asked what the construction fence will close off during Phase 1A. • Asked whether pedestrians will be able to walk on both the east and west sidewalks during construction.
• Inquired if emergency vehicles will still have 20 feet of clearance to get through the 700 block.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 465
• Asked how many trees will be removed in Harrington Park. • Asked whether Phase 1A will be the first implementation of a curbless 700 block. • If a curb is later added:
o Will the 18-inch stage be lowered?
o Will the curb affect Hometown Days parades, including vehicles and marching bands?
• Asked whether the fountain will be turned off during a future drought. • Asked whether the fountain will operate 24 hours a day or on a timer. • Inquired how construction vehicles will access the site daily and where they will park.
• Echoed Councilmember Dugan’s question about why a local artist was not involved in the fountain design.
• Suggested that designs should show existing Laurel Street for better context of what the pavilion would look like in that location.
• Asked about the overall construction timeline:
• If the project starts in November, how will it impact Holiday 2025? • Will Holiday 2026 also be affected?
• Mentioned the alley entrance currently has four parking spaces and asked whether they will be lost.
• Expressed concern that the right-angled surfaces in the design will attract skateboarders.
• Commented that aside from kids playing in the fountain, the area could also attract adults drinking beer and wine.
Lisa Porras and Consultant Team answered caller John Durkin’s questions.
Final/ General Comments
CM Layton emphasized that the specific plan is the broader vision of reimagining the downtown for the next generation. While acknowledging that not every issue can be resolved or every question answered within this plan, he expressed confidence that the project is successfully achieving its goal of creating a renewed and involving downtown.
He concluded by commending the staff and design team for their efforts in moving this vision forward.
CM Layton expressed that there is no need to rush the process and that beginning with Harrington Park is a sensible and appropriate starting point.
CM Rak expressed a desire to better understand the dimensions and flow of the redesigned pavilion space, particularly how a 20-foot clearance—might function during events. He suggested it might be helpful for the Council to visit the site with a tape measure to get a clearer visual sense before making final decisions. While he understood
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 466
the reasoning behind moving the pavilion further from the park, he wanted to assess the spatial impact.
Regarding the fountain CM Rak acknowledged that no design can completely eliminate risk, as children could still access the water from surrounding benches. However, he felt the design had moved in a better direction compared to earlier concepts and were supportive with the possibility of minor tweaks.
CM Rak wondered if only one ADA-compliant restroom might suffice and whether redesigning the others to include more stalls, just toilets could improve throughput. He felt that the outside hand washing station would not get used often if there was a hand washing basin inside the restroom.
Overall, CM Rak voiced appreciation for the effort and thought that had gone into the project and recognized the complexity.
Jim Stickely noted that the Council Members comments were on target about the right issues.
VM Venkatesh expressed difficulty in visualizing the project from the current design plans and suggested marking out the layout with chalk on Laurel Street for better understanding.
She generally supported the direction of the project but wanted to see more areas for sitting and is unsure what is going to happen to the pavilion when it is unused. VM Venkatesh also reiterated concerns about the fountain where children can run into it. She thanked staff for their hard work and the refinements made to the design.
Jim Stickley clarified that when there is no performance at the pavilion, there will be removable tables and chairs there for people to hang out.
CM Dugan shared that he preferred the pavilion positioned further out on Laurel Street.
He suggested that, if space is a constraint, the fountain could potentially be shifted more to the left.
Jim Stickely explained that they are trying to make the fountain as part of the central plaza and not impinge on the dinner area.
CM Dugan agreed with CM Rak’s suggestion to make one restroom ADA compliant and the other non-ADA compliant, containing only stall-style toilets without lavatories.
CM Dugan stated that he felt the consultant had done a good job refining the design. He shared that he does not believe the new design would attract children to splash and play in the fountain, as it is zero-depth. He also remarked that the water flowing down to the ground and wrapping over the edge is quite striking.
CM Dugan inquired if the $8 million cost would include all the underground work and would the $6.9 million give them 1A.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 467
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager, explained that expanding Phase 1A beyond Harrington Park would create major drainage and utility challenges, requiring costly temporary infrastructure that would be removed later. Due to these complications and inefficiencies, he does not recommend extending Phase 1A further.
Lastly, CM Dugan reiterated that it would be beneficial to engage the public for input on the fountain and invited feedback from his fellow council members.
Mayor McDowell shared that she liked the idea of going to downtown and chalk out how big the fountain and pavilion would be. She stated that she does not support the fountain in its current form that allows children to walk straight into the water. Mayor McDowell expressed concern with the $1 million fountain price tag.
Mayor McDowell expressed that she does not believe seeking public input on the fountain would be productive, as it would likely only delay the process. She noted that art is highly subjective, and if the council is struggling to reach a consensus, it would be even more difficult to do so with the broader public.
Mayor McDowell expressed that she is comfortable with the proposed plan for two restrooms. She noted that during large events like the Art and Wine Festival, there are typically plenty of port-a-potties provided for public use. She added that even if a few more restrooms were added in Harrington Park, they would not be sufficient to meet the demand during major events.
Mayor McDowell referred to Slide 27 and inquired about the pink dotted lines. Jim Stickely clarified that those are soil trenches and permeable pavers above them.
Mayor McDowell shared that she still has concerns about the two large structures but believes that a chalk visual would be helpful. She asked Staff whether a decision was needed that evening.
Jeff Maltbie noted that a decision would be needed that evening in order to meet the November deadline.
Jim Stickley suggested taking the Council’s input from the evening to the design team, allowing them to make minor modifications to address concerns and continue the project as an ongoing design development.
Jim Garland emphasized their commitment to meeting the Council's expectations and expressed confidence in the stone and water design. While the fountain was not designed to be inviting children to enter, he acknowledged that young kids may still be drawn to it.
He welcomed feedback and expressed willingness to refine the design, including adding benches and addressing safety concerns, to ensure Council satisfaction.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 468
CM Rak commented that if the decision is limited to Phase 1A, the Council could make a decision that evening. If necessary, the Staff and Consultant team could present two restroom options at the June meeting for the Council to consider and select from.
Lisa Porras stated that if the design team need to flush out two restroom options, it would delay the schedule for a month.
CM Rak commented that he is fine with the current restroom design for Harrington Park.
CM Layton expressed appreciation for the unique and thoughtfully designed fountain, noting it avoids a generic feel and serves as a strong focal point. He acknowledged that children will likely interact with the fountain regardless of design. Regarding restrooms, he was hesitant to support adding another downtown due to questionable return on investment, especially since large events will still require portable toilets.
Lisa Porras reminded the Council that the new plaza design will also incorporate public restrooms.
CM Dugan stated that he is ready to approve phase 1A as it is presented with the stipulation of the skylights and 10-foot ceiling in the restrooms.
VM Venkatesh shared that she is also supportive of phase 1A with the exiting design and of adding more bathrooms in Wheeler Plaza.
Mayor McDowell asked if the consultant team could tape out the pavilion and water feature.
Lisa Porras stated that staff will notify the Council and City Manager once the chalk layout on the ground is ready.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 469
June 9, 2025 City Council Item 10a Meeting Notes
10. NEW BUSINESS
a. Consideration of Adopting a Resolution Approving the Final Design for Harrington Park and the 700 Block of Laurel Street (“Phase 1 Downtown Streetscape Master Plan Implementation”); and Consider Adopting a Resolution Directing Staff to Proceed with the Plans, Specifications, and Estimate (PS&E) for Phase 1A Renovation of Harrington Park.
CM Dugan inquired should the Council decide to join 1A and 1B together, was there a need to have all the design input in the evening.
City Manager Maltbie clarified that even if the projects are separated, the design work for the 700 block should continue so construction can proceed without delay. He noted that unless the Council has had a major change of heart, it still wants the design completed promptly. If the Council chooses to re-combine the projects and provide additional feedback, the meeting could serve as another study session.
He mentioned that the extended work might require adjustments to the existing contracts with the design team, particularly regarding the number of meetings and scope of work.
City Manager Maltbie stated that if project 1A and 1B were to be combined, the staging of construction would take place most likely in 2027.
Design Element comments and questions
VM Venkatesh inquired about the bulletin board in Harrington Park Consultant Liam shared that the thought behind the bulletin board was to create a more welcoming, greeting spot as people enter through the alley.
VM Venkatesh inquired if the steel tables would get hot during the summer.
Jim Stickley suggested using a lighter tone to help reflect the heat.
VM Venkatesh inquired about the boof finish.
The consultant explained that the boof finish is a baked-on oil finish.
CM Rak recommended that the tables and chairs follow the city's color palette. He expressed his appreciation for the pavilion and emphasized the importance of ensuring there is sufficient space for the public to move around it.
CM expressed his appreciation for murals in Harrington Park and should leverage the local artists.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 470
CM Rak commented that he preferred a scaled-down fountain and suggested potentially partnering with local nonprofits, such as the Community Foundation, to fundraise for a larger fountain in the future.
CM Layton referred to slide 13 and asked whether the pavilion shown is the same size as the area that was chalked out downtown.
Jim Stickely clarified that the pavilion and stage remain the same size, but their position in the diagram has been shifted slightly—about one foot back. While the on-site layout showed approximately 20 feet of separation, the current plans show 21 feet. He noted that the team worked to carefully nestle the structure within the 12.5-foot clearance radius.
CM Layton inquired about the 8-foot outdoor dining area and asked whether it falls more under the guidelines of the Specific Plan.
Lisa Porras Planning Manager clarified that proposed design aligns with the Streetscape Master Plan by expanding outdoor dining areas—up to 9 feet on some blocks, nearly double the pre-COVID allowance. It also includes additional dining space between trees.
The Specific Plan will define how these areas are managed, including details like awnings and seating. This design sets the groundwork for that future process.
CM Layton questioned the design intent, asking whether the plaza is meant for largescale events, such as moving Music in the Park downtown, or for smaller activations like Friday night jazz performances to support local businesses.
Jim Stickely explained that the plaza is designed to be flexible and active even when no performances are happening, with options like movable seating and informal games. For performances, it would accommodate small to medium-sized events, with adaptable configurations—facing different directions or using parts of the street for overflow. The goal is to always keep the space vibrant and usable, not just during event.
CM Dugan referred to slide 17. He asked for clarification about a discrepancy in the staff report, noting that it mentioned a 10-foot canopy, which seems incorrect. He believed the canopy height should be more like 14 feet, especially since the other report referred to a 10-foot ceiling height.
Lisa Porras clarified that the canopy heigh is 15 feet and there is a typo. The 10 feet refers to the interior ceiling height.
CM Dugan requested clarification on the smaller entry plazas on either end of the 700 block.
Jim Stickely explained that the size of the entry plazas is about the size of the pavilion.
He stated that the entry plazas are not meant to be a gathering place. He added that the drinking fountain and bike racks are located there.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 471
CM Dugan referred to slide 27. He expressed concern about the angular nature of the paving design, noting it feels reminiscent of 1980s aesthetics with strong angles and shapes like parallelograms. He questioned whether this was an intentional design choice, a cost-saving measure, or if the design should instead reflect the more organic and flowing character previously discussed.
Jim Stickely explained that the meandering feel comes from how people move through the space, while the angled paving lines are meant to break up the large area and create a sense of smaller, unified spaces based on pedestrian flow and design intuition.
CM Dugan shared that he liked the Centennial logo color theme. He appreciated the warm tone of the schematic designs. CM Dugan shared that he would prefer to steer away from the gray and concrete look.
CM Dugan shared that he prefers darker paver colors.
Jim Stickely explained that they want to keep a certain reflectivity (SRI) of the pavers so it would not get too hot. He added that the pavers could be darken until it reaches the reflectivity threshold.
CM Dugan wanted to know if the budget included the AV for the pavilion.
Jim Stickely confirmed that it is included in the cost.
CM Dugan shared that he liked the lighting, and sound be integrated into the columns of the pavilion.
CM Dugan inquired about the large ramp at the stage and asked whether it exceeds ADA requirements.
Consultant Liam explained that 18 inches is the requirement for an ADA ramp without a handrail. (1:48:00)
Mayor McDowell referred to slide 31 and inquired about how the locations of the play sculptures were determined. She expressed particular concern about the sculpture on the left, noting that it may obstruct the restaurant in front of it.
Jim Stickely clarified that the left-hand play sculpture is in front of Bank of America.
Mayor McDowell expressed concern they are trying to put too many things in the plaza and asked if the play sculpture could be placed in Harrington Park.
Jim Stickely said that is possible.
Mayor McDowell referred to slide 19. She inquired if skateboards could run along the bench.
Jim Stickely stated that they could look into adding joints to reduce the length of the bench.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 472
Mayor McDowell asked what type of design is planned for the poured-in-place concrete.
Jim Stickely said that they are flat and scored with some texture, and pigment could be added.
Mayor McDowell expressed a preference for using less concrete but wanted to understand the cost trade-offs involved. She also shared that she agreed with other CM that she liked the warm tone.
Mayor McDowell expressed a preference for a more pared-down fountain design, emphasizing the importance of engaging the community. She suggested considering a sculpture that incorporates running water but would still look appealing without water during a drought.
Public Comment (1:55:19)
Cynthia Wiggen (in-person) residence of San Carlos for 28 years. She supported many design elements but felt the fountain and pavilion may not suit the character or scale of the space. She described the fountain as too formal and possibly unsafe for children and questioned whether the tall pavilion would provide enough shade despite its visual impact.
Linda Garvey (in-person) president of the Community Foundation expressed support for facilitating a community conversation about the fountain or the murals and shared their interest in collaborating on that effort with the City.
Garrett Park (in-person) representing Faith and Spirits supported the project but raised concerns about pedestrian space, lack of communication regarding a proposed mural, and the location of a drop-off zone near their dumpsters. He asked to be included in future planning discussions.
Sonia Elks (Zoom) emphasized the importance of making downtown inviting year-round, stressed making downtown comfortable in cold weather, supported modest water features and bike racks, and recommended a nearby pump track to safely accommodate skateboards and mopeds, keeping downtown enjoyable for all.
John Durgin (Zoom) praised Harrington Park’s current greenery but noted it lacks basic amenities like a bathroom and dog bowl. He raised concerns about the lack of shades in the new park design, losing parking spaces and safety issues with the alley and drop-off area. He questioned event planning choices and expressed worries about construction impacts on nearby businesses.
Design Element comments and questions
VM Venkatesh recommended placing the play structure in the central area to keep it more contained and easier to monitor. She also expressed a preference for warm-toned colors, noting they tend to hide spills better. Regarding the fountain, she commented that the
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 473
current design does not match her vision of something more Zen and peaceful, describing it as more modern than she had imagined. Lastly, she suggested allowing existing downtown businesses to cater events rather than bringing in outside food trucks.
CM Dugan referred to slide 31inquired Parks & Rec how the City engages local artist (2:22:17).
Amy Newby explained the two processes.
CM Dugan suggested building on the processes the City already uses and knows well.
He noted that there are ample opportunities for public art throughout downtown and inquired about staff’s thoughts to incorporating the public art procurement process specifically for the fountain.
City Manager Jeff Maltie Staff explained that partnering with community organizations on public art can reduce controversy and foster positive engagement. He noted the City has successfully used community fundraising for past projects and suggested this approach would offer flexibility—allowing infrastructure to be prepared now and the artwork installed later, once plans or funding are finalized. This method also allows for future updates or changes to the art.
CM Dugan noted that finalizing the fountain design by the council is challenging and recommended utilizing the public art procurement process.
CM Dugan inquired whether the paver design and poured-in-place concrete could be made less suitable for scooters and skateboards.
Jim Stickely noted that it is not possible as the City needs to follow ADA requirement to have a certain level of smoothness for wheelchair access.
CM Layton expressed concern that the proposed stage may not be practical for its intended use. He felt that aiming for flexibility might result in a design that doesn’t fully serve any purpose well. He suggested that the limited number of events requiring a stage could be accommodated with temporary staging instead. CM Layton also echoed the Faith & Spirit Owner’s concern that the stage's placement could negatively impact pedestrian flow. Lastly, he noted that without a finalized design and with only general specifications available, it's difficult to make an informed decision.
CM Layton shared his view that the fountain should either be a statement piece commemorating the centennial and highlighting the 700 block—or it should be omitted entirely. Lastly, he shared that he does not think the council is ready for the final plan.
CM Rak supported highlighting local businesses over outside food trucks and agreed that placing the play structure back in Harrington Park makes sense. He was open to warmer paver tones and liked the current flowing design of the pavers. He agreed that any murals
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 474
should involve coordination with property owners. He supported incorporating design features to deter skateboarding. While acknowledging differing views from CM Layton, CM Rak felt the pavilion should be the main feature of the square and believed it would be actively used to draw people downtown. Lastly, he supported turning the fountain into a community-driven project, potentially funded through public input and fundraising.
CM Dugan opposed removing the fountain from the budget, suggesting that the City could build the base now and allow the community to enhance it later. He emphasized the need to be realistic about the foundation’s fundraising capacity, noting a million-dollar campaign may be too ambitious. CM Dugan supported including a play area in Harrington Park if it fits well but also liked the idea of artistic, sculpture-like play elements near the pavilion, creating a dual-use space for both children and parents. He endorsed incorporating local animal themes throughout. He also raised the issue of newspaper boxes, recommending a more organized and attractive system, potentially with a fee structure, and asked whether this was still being addressed in planning.
Jim Stickely noted that they will look into the newspaper box located in front of Bank of America.
Mayor McDowell inquired about the 3-foot walkway clearance from the stage to the outdoor dining.
Jim Stickley clarified that if dining seatings were placed at the building corner in the 12.5 feet radius zone, then that leaves only 3 feet walkway.
Mayor McDowell inquired about how a temporary stage would look like, a one where it would be put in storage when not in use.
Jim Stickely explained that the idea is to create a platform that fits within the area between the four columns to support performances or events. A ramp may not be included initially, but ADA access would need to be considered if required. The platform would be divided into four sections for easier transport, allowing it to be moved by a few workers or with a lift and stored when not in use.
Mayor McDowell emphasized the importance of activating the downtown area to benefit both the community and local businesses. She highlighted that elements like live music on a stage, pedestrian-only blocks, and seasonal pop-up activities such as ice rinks or mini golf could make the downtown more vibrant and engaging. Mayor McDowell stated the focus is on creating a welcoming space that encourages people to visit, linger, shop, and dine.
CM Layton clarified that his main concern is pedestrian flow and suggested that temporary staging could meet event needs without disrupting circulation. He noted that downtown activation relies not just on infrastructure but also on business demand—
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 475
something outside the council’s control. He supported using flexible elements like a canopy and events to enhance the space, while cautioning that these alone won’t guarantee vibrancy without active businesses.
CM Dugan expressed strong support for the pavilion and permanent stage, emphasizing that it enhances the downtown’s flexibility and sense of place. He noted that the design moves away from rigid parklets and toward a more adaptable environment, like bistrostyle seating. While acknowledging that a nearby business might lose a table during big events, he felt the increased foot traffic would be a net gain.
CM Dugan believed that the public sidewalk space is being generously shared and that the stage and pavilion will be key tools for activation, allowing for frequent events and community use, including more intimate performances directed toward Harrington Park.
He opposed shifting to temporary staging.
CM Rak emphasized the stage as a key centerpiece of the downtown area and noted the importance of maintaining flexibility in its design and placement. He acknowledged that the final design of the fountain could impact available space, allowing for adjustments such as moving the stage to improve clearance. CM Rak expressed confidence that attracting more people downtown would benefit local businesses and create greater opportunities for the entire community.
VM Venkatesh (2:56:41) stated that the stage adds value and contributes to making the downtown area unique, welcoming, and inviting.
CM Rak shared that he received feedback from a constituent that some benches in the downtown area should have back rest.
Jim Stickely sought clarification on the fountain design, specifically whether the base should remain in the project or be made smaller. He emphasized the importance of clearly identifying which elements to include or exclude so the project can be properly documented.
Vice Mayor Venkatesh inquired about how the pavilion ramp could be designed to discourage use by skateboarders and bicyclists.
CM Dugan expressed mixed feelings about the fountain design options, noting that while the colorful, interactive floral concept was creative, the Council might prefer a more modern and understated approach. He suggested focusing on setting a budget range and exploring potential community support, emphasizing that there is still time to decide and a final design does not need to be selected that evening.
CM Rak proposed to put a budget for the fountain and go from there.
CM Dugan proposed to put a budget of $1 million.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 476
Jeff Maltbie suggested that the City establish a clear funding cap for the fountain by determining how much it is willing to contribute, with the understanding that it would match community contributions dollar for dollar up to that limit. He emphasized the importance of setting a ceiling to avoid an unreasonably large total expenditure.
Mayor McDowell shared that she saw in Next Door platform there were many comments on the fountain and most do no agree the City to spend a million dollars on it. She also shared that she received emails from the community about concerns with drought.
CM Dugan emphasized that the project is not intended for completion years from now, so there is no need to finalize decisions immediately. He suggested allowing the community to engage in the process, similar to the mural project, where public input and cost estimates guided the decision-making. CM Dugan recommended agreeing on a likely budget for the fountain but postponing detailed decisions until more community involvement occurs.
CM Layton raised several considerations about the fountain decision. He questioned how the Council would respond if, after public outreach, the community favored a design that the council had previously moved away from—such as a flat, splash pad-style fountain.
He also expressed concern about the need to set a clear budget cap, possibly around $1 million, and noted that different fountain designs could require significantly different infrastructure, potentially affecting costs. Finally, CM Layton asked whether the Council needs to establish a timeline for making a decision, given the remaining uncertainties.
Jeff Maltbie (3:09:44) stressed the need for the council to set clear limits on unacceptable design elements upfront while remaining open to community input. He noted that council decisions can evolve if strong community support emerges and emphasized the importance of confirming the fountain's location and ensuring the infrastructure can support future choices.
Jim Stickely noted that, to properly size the infrastructure, the consultant team needs a general assumption about the scale of the fountain. He explained that if the Council can confirm it will not pursue an interactive fountain and instead opt for a simpler, noninteractive basin with a defined water volume and basic circulation, then the infrastructure can be appropriately designed to support that concept.
VM Venkatesh shared that personally she does not like a fountain in the downtown but is open to community input.
Mayor McDowell expressed support for the general footprint of the fountain and was open to features like tiers or waterfalls but clearly stated opposition to a splash pad. She also voiced support for including a barrier and offered this as her overall direction.
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 477
CM Dugan suggested treating the current fountain design as a baseline to guide planning and infrastructure, while remaining open to community input that could improve it before final decisions are made.
Mayor McDowell expressed discomfort with the proposed fountain budget, stating they could not support spending $1 million and was uneasy even with a $750,000 price tag.
She felt the cost may not be acceptable to the community and opposed finalizing the current design, instead advocating for reopening the process to gather community input.
CM Rak supported keeping the current fountain footprint but preferred sending the design back to the community for input. He was not comfortable spending $1 million—and found $750,000 high unless it was a shared cost with the community. They suggested determining community interest and fundraising potential before finalizing the design and expressed openness to a 50/50 cost split once the community's preferences are known.
Implementation
CM Rak inquired where the area would be blocked off if only Phase 1A proceeded. He asked whether the site could remain flush with the buildings to allow construction trucks to access the rear for demolition and work, and questioned how disruptive that portion of the construction would be.
CM Rak followed up on the city manager’s point about potential color differences in materials, especially wood, if the project is done in phases. He asked whether all the wood could be purchased at once to maintain consistency and whether Harrington Park could be built initially without the wood elements, adding them later when the pavilion wood is installed.
Jim Stickely noted that key structural elements must be designed and installed upfront, making phased construction challenging. He added that material differences would likely go unnoticed due to distance and landscaping, and unit pavers can be blended effectively between phases.
CM Rak expressed uncertainty about the best approach to the project but ultimately leaned toward starting construction sooner rather than waiting. He felt that completing something visible would demonstrate progress to the community and allow for feedback before moving on to larger phases. Given that the street has already been closed for five years, they were concerned about further delays and believed the city should begin work to show commitment.
Liam agreed with the City Manager that phasing the project, especially with different contractors increases the risk of mismatched materials. While efforts can be made to plan and coordinate phasing to minimize discrepancies, he emphasized that this approach mitigates risk but does not eliminate it entirely
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 478
VM Venkatesh asked if the City starts construction on Laurel and not Harrington Park, can the City use Harrington Park as the staging area.
Jim Stickely does not recommend that as he suggest Harrington Park should be kept open to the public.
Jeff Maltbie confirmed that if the entire project were done at once, Harrington Park could be used as a primary staging area during construction. With a large project like the 700 block, staging can shift within the site as work progresses. If the Council prioritizes keeping staging out of sight, instructions could be included to direct contractors to use the alleyway and Harrington Park as staging areas as much as possible, until construction reaches those specific sections.
VM Venkatesh agreed with CM Rak. She proposed to start construction of Phase 1A first.
CM Dugan preferred to follow the recommendation of our staff and city manager and move forward with combining the two phases together.
CM Layton aligned with CM Dugan’s remarks and clarified his own position as a cautious decision-maker who prefers to minimize risk. He supported combining both phases of the project if it leads to better bids, cost savings, or avoids mismatched materials. His greater concern was the potential loss of momentum and public support if the project is done in stages. He emphasized the importance of completing the full vision at once to avoid backlash and falling short of the overall goals.
Mayor McDowell shared that she is inclined to move forward with Phase 1A.
CM Dugan agreed with CM Layton. He urged caution, highlighting the significant risk of public backlash if the disruption to Harrington Park yields only modest results before additional major construction begins. He stressed the importance of carefully considering this risk before moving forward with the project.
MOTION: Adopt resolution 2025-54 of the City Council of the City of San Carlos approving the final design for Harrington Park only
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: Sarah McDowell
AYES: Venkatesh, Rak, McDowell
NAYS: Layton
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 479
ABSTAIN: Dugan
RESULT: Motion Passed 3 – 1 – 1
MOTION: Adopt resolution 2025-55 of the City Council of the City of San Carlos directing staff to proceed with this plan specifications and estimate PS&E for phase 1A renovation of Harrington Park
MOVER: Adam Rak
SECONDER: Pranita Venkatesh
AYES: Venkatesh, Rak, McDowell
NAYS:
ABSTAIN:
Layton
Dugan
RESULT: Motion Passed 3 – 1 – 1
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 480
RESOLUTION NO. 2025 - 054
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS APPROVING THE FINAL DESIGN FOR HARRINGTON PARK, PHASE 1A OF THE DOWNTOWN STREETSCAPE MASTER PLAN.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos has made the planning for the future of its downtown one of its top strategic objectives since 2021, beginning with the adoption of its 2021 Strategic Plan and as reaffirmed during its City Council Retreat on January 21, 2022, and subsequent meetings on January 27, 2023, January 18, 2024, and April 14, 2025; and WHEREAS, on August 28, 2023, the City Council unanimously voted to adopt Resolution 2023-106 authorizing the City Manager to enter into a professional services agreement with WRT, Inc. to prepare a Downtown Specific Plan and Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and WHEREAS, on June 10, 2024 and September 23, 2024, the City Council expressed a desire to begin implementing a downtown street redesign project; and WHEREAS, on October 28, 2024, the City Council adopted Resolution 2024-114 authorizing the City Manager to execute an amendment to the professional services agreement with WRT, Inc. for additional consulting services associated with the Downtown Specific Plan and Streetscape Master Plan to include design engineering drawings for Phase 1 Downtown implementation; and WHEREAS, on April 7, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission adopted Resolution 2025-02 recommending the City Council adopt the San Carlos Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, on April 28, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution 2025-031 adopting the Downtown Streetscape Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, on February 10, 2025, March 10, 2025, and May 12, 2025, the City Council held study sessions and provided specific direction and feedback on the design of Harrington Park and the 700 Block of Laurel Street; and
WHEREAS, on June 9, 2025, the final designs for the 700 Block of Laurel Street and Harrington Park were presented to the City Council. The City Council approved the final design for Harrington Park, deferring the final design for the entire 700 block of Laurel Street.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of San Carlos hereby approves the final design for Harrington Park as delineated and set forth in Exhibit A.
RRRKERE
|, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a scheduled meeting thereof held on the 9"" day of June 2025, by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS: VENKATESH, RAK, MCDOWELL
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS: LAYTON
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 481
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN, COUNCILMEMBERS: DUGAN
Beige IS. CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
ates of the City of San Carlos
Exhibit A: Final Design for Harrington Park
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 482
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
SITE PLAN
Seating Custom Seating
Restroom / Storage
Dropoff / Food Truck Parking
CHERRY STREET
OLIVE STREET
Bioretention Planting
Custom Seating
Movaeble Seating
Canopy Pavilion
20’ Clearance Line Water
Feature
Bridge at
Bioretention
Moveable
Seating
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 483
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
PHASINGCHERRY STREET
OLIVE STREET
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 484
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
Bird’s-eye view looking North
towards 700 Laurel block
MODEL VIEWS 700 LAUREL BLOCK
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 485
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
Expanded bird’s-eye view
looking North towards 700
Laurel Block
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 486
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
PAVILION DESIGN WARE
Looking towards Harrington
Park at pavilion
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 487
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
Looking towards Harrington
Park and Olive Street at
pavilion
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 488
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
In Harrington Park looking at
restroom towards park rear
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 489
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
WATER FEATURE DESIGN FLUIDITY
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 490
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
PAVING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Light Shades Medium Shades Dark Shades
Narrow Modular Pavers (3” X 9”), Stepstone
in medium shade (See below)
Narrow Modular Pavers (6” X 12”), Stepstone
in light, medium and dark shades (See below)
CALARC® Pavers (12” X 24”), Stepstone in light and dark grey in dark shade (See below)
Unit Paver 1, Permeable Unit Paver 2 Unit Paver 3 C.I.P Concrete 1 & 2
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 491
Dry Wet
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
PLANTING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
California Field Sedge
Carex praegracilis
Salt Grass
Distichlis spicata
Seep Monkey Flower
Mimulus guttatus
Giant Chain Fern
Woodwardia fimbriata
Autumn moor grass
Sesleria autumnalis
TREE SHRUB GROUNDCOVER
Two-colored Kangaroo Paw
Anigozanthos bicolor
Crepe Myrtle
Lagerstroemia indica x fauriei
‘Muskogee’
Blue Fescue
Festuca glauca ‘Elijah Blue’
Canby Oak
Quercus canbyi
Engelmann Oak
Quercus engelmannii
Beach Sagewort
Artemisia Pycnocephala
California Sycamore
Platanus racemosa ‘Roberts’
Mesa Glow Maple
Acer grandidentatum
Narrow-leaf Chalksticks
Senecio vitalis
Berkeley Sedge
Carex divulsa c. tumulicola
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 492
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
SITE FURNISHINGS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Twig, Landscapeforms
Bench
Custom Benches
Parc Centre, Landscapeforms
*powdercoat color options available
Cafe Table + Chairs
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 493
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
SITE ELEMENTS DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Multiminium, mmcite
*metal or wood finish options available
Emerson, Landscapeforms
*powdercoat color options available
Bike Racks Waste Receptacles
Elkay
*powdercoat color options available
Hydraulic Bollards Bottle Filling Station
Spin, Iron Age (5’ dia.)
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Rain, Iron Age (5’ x 5’)
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Rain, Iron Age (Custom)
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Rain, Iron Age
*Cast Iron w/ or w/o BOOF finish available
Tree Grate 1 Tree Grate 2 Trench Drain Pedestrian Bridge
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 494
CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOWNTOWN IMPLEMENTATION | JUNE 2025
LIGHTING DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
PRIMUS QTL
LUMEC, UrbanScape BEGA INTERLUX, Dirigo
Catenary LED Festoon Stringlight
14’ Pole Mounted Area Light LED Bollard Path Light
Surface Mounted LED Striplight
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 495
Attachment 8
Downtown Streetscape Master Plan
Approved April 28, 2025
Resolution 2025-031
Click link below to access online:
https://www.sancarlosdowntownplan.com/
10.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 496
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF REPORT
MEETING DATE: October 14, 2025
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of Actions for the Minkoff Project Located at 789 Old County Road (APNs 046-131-610 and 046-131-630): Adopt a Resolution Adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; Introduce an Ordinance Approving the 789 Old County Road Project Planned Development Plan, Sign Program, and Related Zoning Map
Amendment to Rezone the Project Site from Heavy Industrial (IH) to Planned Development (PD); and Introduce an Ordinance Approving a Development Agreement with Bransten Road Associates LLC.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and Transportation Commission and staff recommend that the City Council take the following actions for the Minkoff Project, located at 789 Old County Road:
1. Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; and
2. Introduce an Ordinance approving the 789 Old County Road Project Planned Development Plan, Sign Program, and related zoning map amendment to rezone the project site from heavy industrial (IH) to planned development (PD); and
3. Introduce an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement with Bransten Road Associates LLC.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:
The Applicant has paid the appropriate application fees and provided deposit funds to pay for expenses related to the environmental review and other reports and analyses associated with the Project. The Project will be required to pay building permit fees and City impact fees. City impact fees total over $11.6 million and include; commercial linkage (affordable housing), childcare, sewer, and traffic fees. The proposed Development Agreement includes Community Benefits, which are outlined in the analysis section below and are valued at over $4.2 million.
The proposed development will also benefit the City with increased property tax, increased sales tax revenue, and new job creation. The estimated increased revenue to the City is $674,000 per year in additional property, sales, and business registration tax revenue. The Development Agreement also has a requirement to designate the property as the place of sale for construction materials to ensure the sales tax is distributed directly to the City.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 497
BACKGROUND:
On July 15, 2022, The Minkoff Group submitted an application for a new life science development at 789 Old County Road. On July 19, 2024, the applicant submitted a revision to the original project that resulted in reduced height of the buildings, additional landscape screening, and included an above ground parking structure to reduce the overall height of the buildings. The City released the Draft Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration on February 26, 2025 for a 30-day public review and comment period.
The Planning and Transportation Commission, at its September 2, 2025 meeting conducted the public hearing and adopted Resolution PTC2025-09, recommending the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) and adopted Resolution PTC2025-10, recommending the City Council adopt the Planned Development Zoning, Planned Development Plan, Sign Program, and Development Agreement. The Commission also approved the Design Review, Grading and Dirt Haul, and Transportation Demand Management Plan, which would all become effective if the City Council approves the forementioned items.
The items for consideration by the City Council are the EIR, Planned Development Zoning, Planned Development Plan, Sign Program, and Development Agreement.
Existing Conditions:
The 3.4-acre project site is located in the East Side Innovation District at the northeast corner of Bransten Road and Old County Road. The western part of the site is currently being used as a staging area for a cargo trucking company and contains shipping containers. The eastern part of the site is currently improved with industrial equipment and large metal bins from when the site was formerly occupied by Cemex, a concrete company. Various commercial retail, including a restaurant, and service auto uses are to the northwest of the site. An automotive body shop and the City of San Carlos Corporation Yard are located to the east. Commercial recreational, industrial, and service uses are across Bransten Road to the south of the site. Additionally, the Sobrato Organization was approved for two life science R&D buildings at 841 Old County Road in 2023, just south of the 789 Old County Road site. Single family residential properties are located 418 feet to the north of the project site.
The site is zoned Heavy Industrial (IH) with a General Plan designation of Planned Industrial. The site is located within the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan area.
The applicant is seeking approval of a Planned Development Zoning designation, an accompanying Planned Development Plan, Design Review for the new buildings, a Transportation Demand Management Plan, a Grading & Dirt Haul Certificate and a Development Agreement.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Building:
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 498
The applicant has revised the proposed development design since the original submittal on July 15, 2022. The building was previously proposed at four stories with a height of 76’ along Old County Road, increasing to six stories and a height of 112’ along Bransten Road. The applicant reduced the height of the buildings, increased rear setbacks, and designed an above ground parking structure to reduce the overall height of the buildings.
The development is now proposed to be configured with two buildings with a combined 326,648 square feet (sf) above grade. One four-story building is located at the corner of Old County Road and Bransten Road, at a height of 69’ to the main roofline and 83’ to the top of the mechanical screen. A five-story building is located along Bransten Road, at a height of 85’ to the roofline and 99’ to the top of the mechanical screen, with an above grade parking structure consisting of 225,291 sf and seven levels with a height of 83’ at its highest architectural element. The combined above grade building area is 552,569 sf (reduced from the original proposal of 714,974 sf). The project may be built in phases.
For comparison purposes, the following is a summary of approved and proposed building heights and distance to residential areas (Greater East San Carlos and El Camino Real) for Planned Development projects in the industrial area:
Address Development Roof Height Mechanical
screen
Distance to
residential
789 Old County The Minkoff Group 85’ 99’ 418’
841 Old County Sobrato 90’-6” 99’ 463’
987 Commercial* Alexandria 84’ 100’ 281’
301 Industrial Palo Alto Medical
Foundation
72’ 84’ 550’
825/835 Industrial Alexandria (formerly
“Meridian 25”)
86’-2” 100’ 740’
405 Industrial Menlo Equities 86’-10” 90’-10” 250’
642 Quarry Presidio 100’ 114’-2” 423’
* Height of proposed building at Old County/Commercial Street The first floor of each building includes lobby space, lease space, trash, storage, and mechanical rooms. The west building includes a loading dock, while the east building includes a tenant-only fitness center, locker room, showering facilities, and long-term bicycle parking. All parking would be provided in the seven-level above ground parking garage and would include 694 spaces.
Visually, the buildings share the same central entryway along Bransten Road but would be physically separated with separate entrances and an interior wall for the separate tenants of each building (Figure 1). There would be a three-tiered terrace connecting the buildings between levels two and four. The roof is planned with various mechanical equipment, elevator access enclosed mechanical space, and solar panels. The roof equipment and roof screen are located within the center of each building.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 499
Site Plan and Landscaping:
The site plan includes perimeter landscaping along the rear, streetside, and front property lines (Figure 3). A driveway is proposed from Bransten Road to provide fire access to the east building and an entryway into the parking garage. All mechanical equipment is within the building or on the roof. The applicant proposes to provide an enhanced bike and pedestrian path along Old County Road consistent with the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan and the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. The sidewalk on the north side of Bransten Road would also be landscaped. The project also includes landscaping on the terraced areas of the building.
Figure 2
Site Plan
Architecture/Design:
The proposed development consists of two primary buildings—east and west—framing a central open space, along with a separate parking structure (Figure 3). Both buildings incorporate varied roof heights, setbacks, and penthouse elements that break down the visual scale. The project includes a pavilion at the south frontage (Bransten Road) featuring exposed mass timber structural members as part of a public art canopy, providing both architectural interest and pedestrian-scale engagement. The west building (Old County Road frontage) is designed one story lower than the east (Bransen Road frontage) building to reduce the apparent mass when looking at the project from Old County Road. The fifth floor of the east building steps back from Old County Road to reduce the appearance of mass. Terraces in between the buildings break up the mass when viewed from the north and include outdoor balcony space with landscaping. Lobby entrances are designed to open to the central landscaped pavilion.
Changes based on community feedback:
In response to neighborhood concerns relating to the height and massing of the original building design, the applicant lowered the height of the building along Old County Road and reduced the
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 500
building located along Bransten Road by one floor. The applicant also designed the project as two separate buildings and a parking structure to break up the massing, provide a view corridor, and add additional light and air between the buildings. In addition, trees were added to the rear of the building at ground level and on the second level deck in an effort to screen portions of the building. A green screen is also included along the rear elevation of the parking garage (facing north).
The combination of high-quality glazing, metal panel systems, and textured stone creates a dynamic interplay of transparency and solidity. The extensive use of vision glass at upper floors allows for light penetration while reflecting the surrounding environment, reducing visual mass.
Vertical and horizontal fins introduce shadow lines and depth, breaking up large planes and providing solar shading. The dark bronze and copper tones add warmth, complementing the natural wood of the canopy and landscaped elements.
In consideration of the view of the rear façade from adjacent properties, the applicant included a green (planted) wall treatment on the north facing garage façade that would soften the appearance of the concrete structure over time and establish a green screen when viewed from properties to the north. The pavilion canopy, with its wood beams, functions as both an artistic focal point and a sheltered pedestrian gathering space, enhancing the project’s street-level experience.
Figure 3
North Elevation of Revised Building Design with outline of original building submittal
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 501
View from Old County Road at Bransten Road
Parking Vehicles and Bicycles:
The San Carlos Municipal Code requires one vehicle parking space for 800 square feet of lab space and one vehicle parking space for 300 square feet of office area. As proposed (70% office and 30% lab), the required parking is 867 spaces. In accordance with San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.20.050, the number of parking spaces shall be reduced by 20% with a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan. With the TDM reduction, the required parking is 694 parking spaces. The project is designed to accommodate office or life science tenants. Due to the speculative nature of the project, the exact ratio of lab to office is difficult to determine. The ratio of 70% office to 30% lab is based on the applicant team’s experience with similar projects. The project is consistent with the TDM parking reduction with the provision of 694 on-site parking spaces.
Short-term bicycle parking is located in the pavilion leading to the lobby entrances in between the two buildings and secured long-term bicycle parking is provided to the rear of the east building.
The San Carlos Municipal Code requires short-term bicycle parking be provided at a rate of 10% of total required vehicle spaces (69 short-term bicycle spaces) and long-term bicycle parking be provided at a rate of 5% total required vehicle spaces (35 long-term bicycle spaces) for a total of 104 bicycle spaces. The project proposes 20 short term and 84 long term bicycle parking spaces for a total of 104 bicycle spaces. While the provided parking does not strictly adhere to the ratios required, staff supports the greater amount of long-term bicycle parking given the project is an office/R&D project and the long-term parking provides greater opportunity for employees’ use.
Off-site Improvements:
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 502
The project includes improvements along the property frontages with new sidewalks, underground utilities, streetlights, and trees. The improvements also include rapid flashing beacons at the Terminal Way intersection to allow bicyclists to cross over to the Caltrain station until the western stretch of the bike improvements are constructed along Old County Road. The applicant would also contribute to the installation of trees for several residential properties on the south side of Hall Street.
Community Benefits:
The community benefits offered by the developer include completing the East Side Connect offsite improvements along Old County Road from the project site north to Terminal Way. The offsite improvements include underground utilities, new sidewalk, green infrastructure, street trees, and lights. The applicant would also contribute to the installation of trees for several residential properties on the south side of Hall Street as requested by residents of the GESC neighborhood.
The total community benefits are valued at $4,200,000 and include a fiscal contribution of $2,448,955 due at building permit issuance and a credit for the cost of the off-site improvements along Old County Road valued at $1,751,045. In addition, the value of the neighborhood trees is estimated at $30,000.
The Community Benefits are included in the Development Agreement. The developer is requesting a 15-year term on the Development Agreement, vesting city laws and impact fee provisions. The details of the Community Benefits are included in the Development Agreement.
As the City’s Transportation Impact Fee (TIF) will be updated soon, the applicant has agreed to pay the TIF in effect at the time the building permit is issued, in an amount not to exceed 1.5x the current fee. The final impact fee amounts will be determined at building permit submittal based on the building square footage. Impact fees are required to be paid at building permit issuance.
The Development Agreement also requires the applicant to designate the property as the place of sale for construction materials to ensure the sales tax is distributed directly to the City.
The applicant has agreed to make the payment of the Community Benefits contribution prior to issuance of a building permit.
The applicant will be required to pay City impact fees based on the fee amount in effect at the time the Development Agreement is approved, with code established escalators, except for the TIF as outlined above. Based on the proposed plans, the impact fees are estimated as follows:
City Impact Fees:
Commercial Linkage fee (for affordable housing) $5,964,220.00 Sewer fees (connection and capacity) $2,939,832.00
Traffic impact fee* $1,196,750.08
Child Care impact fee $1,500,001.00
Total City impact fees $11,600,803.08
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 503
Other Reviewing Agencies:
The C/CAG Airport Land Use Committee reviewed the project at its January 23, 2025 meeting, with a favorable recommendation to the Board. The C/CAG Board, at its April 24, 2025 meeting, determined that the project is consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the San Carlos Airport. The applicant also received a written determination of no hazard to air navigation from the FAA. The project, as proposed, is consistent with the Airport Plan, would not exceed obstruction standards, and would not be a hazard to air navigation. The applicant is required to file additional information with the FAA within five days of construction reaching its greatest height.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City has undertaken an environmental review of the project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The potential for the project to result in environmental impacts was assessed in an Initial Study addressing all environmental topics under CEQA per section 15063 of the CEQA Guidelines. Technical analysis supported conclusions in the Initial Study.
Based on the analyses, the Initial Study concluded that, with implementation of standard conditions of approval and mitigation measures identified in the Initial Study, the project would not result in any significant environmental impacts.
Potentially Significant Impacts Requiring Mitigation
The analysis found some impacts that could potentially be significant without mitigation. They are included in full in the MND and summarized below with the proposed mitigation measures:
Air Quality, Construction Emissions: Construction of the project would result in emissions and fugitive dust. A mitigation measure requires the project to demonstrate compliance with all applicable regulations, including the implementation of Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) “Basic Construction Mitigation Measures.”
Biological Impact: A mitigation measure requires the applicant conduct a pre-construction nesting bird survey. Additionally, as a condition of approval, the project shall include design features to reduce the potential for avian collisions, including, but not limited to bird-safe glazing, shadow boxes, and use of perforated metal panels.
Cultural Resources Impact. There are no known cultural resources, however, project construction may disturb unknown buried archaeological resources. A mitigation measure requires further site assessment and archaeological sensitivity training prior to the start of construction and prior to ground disturbance. In the event archaeological resources are unearthed during construction, all resources shall be evaluated by a qualified professional archaeologist and an appropriate treatment plan for the resources shall be prepared. If human remains are unearthed, the County Coroner shall be consulted and if determined to be of Native American origin, the Native American Heritage Commission shall be consulted for ultimate disposition.
Hazardous Materials: The applicant is required to prepare a Site Management Plan and implement health and safety measures, which would mitigate any impacts during construction
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 504
activities. As a condition of approval, the applicant is also required to assess remaining structures for asbestos and to abate any lead-based paint and asbestos prior to building demolition.
Noise: The applicant is required to conduct a detailed mechanical noise analysis once rooftop equipment has been selected and provide noise mitigation if needed to comply with noise ordinance limits. The contractor will be required to reduce construction vibration and monitor if major construction equipment is operational within 10 feet of existing buildings.
With implementation of the mitigation measures and standard conditions of approval, the project will not result in a significant impact to the environment.
Transportation Impact Analysis:
A complete Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) has been completed to determine if there are any safety issues under CEQA or non-CEQA impacts that should be addressed.
The analysis concludes that there will not be any new significant impacts to intersections as a result of the project. Some of the study intersections are operating at levels considered unacceptable and/or are projected to operate at unacceptable levels under cumulative conditions; however, the contribution of the proposed project traffic to these intersections would not be significant per the City General Plan standards and C/CAG standards with the contribution of the traffic impact fees as required. In addition to payment of the traffic impact fees, the applicant is also required to pay its fair share of a new traffic signal at Bransten Road and Old County Road.
Circulation and Comment Period:
The MND was available for a 30-day public review and comment period from February 26, 2025 through March 28, 2025. Notice of the availability of the MND was circulated to state and local agencies as required by CEQA Guidelines and property owners and occupants within 300’ of the site. Comments were received from the Greater East Side Community, Department of Toxic Substances Control, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a letter from a resident on Hall Street.
No comments received necessitated changes to the MND. Comments dealt with oversight of potential contamination, hazardous materials in buildings, the potential for bird collisions, air quality, noise, transportation (traffic, bicycle, and pedestrian), and shadowing. Lamphier-Gregory, the City’s CEQA consultant prepared a memo responding to the comments (Attachment 6).
ANALYSIS:
A complete list and analysis of the required findings for the Planned Development Zoning, Planned Development Plan, and Development Agreement are included as attachments to the respective Ordinances.
Consistency with the General Plan:
The subject site has General Plan land use designation of Planned Industrial which permits research and development (R&D), biotech, light industrial, flex, warehousing, and related uses.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 505
The project is consistent with General Plan policies to encourage new commercial development to expand the City’s tax base and to support the expansion of key growth industrials (Attachment 2, Exhibit D).
Consistency with the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan:
The subject site is located within the Industrial Core Subarea of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan. The project is consistent with the following principles from the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan (ESIDVP):
Includes drought-tolerant plantings for new landscape, within private setbacks and public rights-of-way, increases the overall District tree canopy, and continues the provision of street trees along Old County Road to create a pleasant and safe pedestrian connection between the San Carlos Multi-Modal Transit Center and the District (ESIDVP, page 31,
2.E.3.i and ii and page 67, 8.E, F and G).
Conforms with height maximums of 120 feet considered for a Planned Development Plan.
Proposed maximum height of 85 feet for the interior building (East Building) and 69 feet for the building adjacent to Old County Road (West Building) (ESIDVP, page 42, 5.A.i). Enhances the character of the street and embodies superior quality of architecture and urban design by placing buildings closer to the street to support a “streetwall” (ESIDVP, page 43, 5.C.i).
The buildings enhance the character of the street with quality architecture; the entrance is articulated and includes visually interesting materials (ESIDVP, page 43, 5.C.iii). Implements a 10-foot sidewalk width along Old County Road and would construct a portion of the Old County Road cycle path towards the prioritization of first- and last-mile bicycle and pedestrian connections to Caltrain Station, including a rapid flashing beacon at Terminal Way and Old County Road to enhance bicycle and connections (ESIDVP, Big Move 8, pages 54-57).
Improves the Old County Road and Bransten Road intersection in coordination with the Sobrato development with payment of its fair share towards a traffic signal (ESIDVP, page 66, 8.C.i).
Promotes environmental stewardship by encouraging alternative transportation (see TDM section below), all-electric building, designed to be purple pipe ready and includes roof top solar panels (ESIDVP, page 40, 4.B and page 68, 9.).
Contribution towards community benefits (ESIDVP Chapter 4).
The East Side Innovation District Vision Plan does not include goals or principals to require building stepdown or additional setbacks from residential at this site. However, the Plan calls for locating more moderate development heights along Old County Road (ESIDV Plan page 42,
5.B.ii). The Plan requires use of San Carlos Municipal Code Section 18.07.030 Development Standards for further guidance on transitional standards where an industrial district adjoins and RS district (ESIDV Plan page 42-43, item 5.B.iii). when adjacent to residential. This site is over
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 506
400 feet from Greater East San Carlos residential properties and there are several industrial buildings and Terminal Street between the site and the residences to the north.
Planned Development Zoning District and Planned Development Plan The Developer has requested rezoning the subject site from Heavy Industrial (IH) to Planned Development (PD) Zoning District in accordance with SCMC Chapters 18.10, Planned Development District, and 18.36, Planned Development. The rezoning requires City Council approval, and the Planning and Transportation Commission is the recommending body for the action.
The proposed project complies with all development standards and supplemental regulations of the IH Zoning District except for height, floor area, and exterior side yard setback. The project complies with other setback requirements, landscaping, and parking requirements. The applicant is requesting the following Planned Development zoning standard adjustments:
1. Height: Exceed the maximum height of 50’ allowed the IH District. The applicant proposes two new buildings and an above ground parking garage. The height of the west building is proposed at 69’ to the main roofline and 83’ to the top of the mechanical screen and the east building at 85’ to the roofline and 99’ to the top of the mechanical screen with above grade parking proposed at a height of 83’ at its highest architectural element.
2. Floor Area: Exceed the maximum site floor area ratio of 1.0. The applicant proposes total building square footage of 552,569 square feet: 326,648 square feet for the office/research and development buildings and 225,921 square feet of above grade parking garage, resulting in a FAR of 3.481.
3. Bicycle Parking: Bicycle parking shall consist of 20 short-term stalls and 84 long-term stalls for a total of 104 bike stalls.
4. Sign Program: Tenant signage is limited to no more than two (2) signs per building façade, with two signs permitted on the west building along the northwest façade, which shall be non illuminated. No signs are permitted on the east building, north façade.
5. Use: All uses as allowed in the Heaving Industrial zoning district. All future tenants will be required to comply with the biosafety regulations in effect at the time a business registration or building permit is issued for tenant lab space.
In considering whether to recommend the Planned Development Zoning designation and Planned Development Plan, the Planning and Transportation Commission must consider the findings as outlined in Attachment 2, Exhibit C.
Development Agreement
A Development Agreement is proposed with the project as provided for in state law and Municipal Code Chapter 18.37. The Development Agreement outlines a project description including community benefits and developer (applicant) obligations. The applicant offers community benefits totaling $4,200,000 in fiscal contributions and value of on and off-site improvements. The
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 507
City Council will determine the ultimate use of the community benefit funds. To approve a Development Agreement, the City Council is required to find that the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan. The Planning and Transportation Commission is the recommending body on Development Agreements. As outlined above, the project and the contribution of community benefits are consistent with the General Plan as well as the guiding principles of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Upon receipt of a completed application, the project information is added to the City’s Development Project webpage. The applicant conducted public outreach with business owners, property owners, stakeholders, Councilmembers, and Planning and Transportation Commission members. Staff met with GESC Board members, individual property owners as requested, and invited all east side property owners to an East Side Projects outreach event in January 2025 to review this project as well as others projects and planning efforts.
The outreach efforts are listed below:
Date Stakeholder(s) Outreach Lead
March 2022 Councilmembers Applicant
November 1, 2022 Art Bias Applicant
November 2, 2022 Park and Rec Foundation Applicant
February 7, 2023 Councilmember Applicant
April 2023 Planning Commissioners Applicant
July 26,2023 One Life Counseling Applicant
April 26, 2023 SCEF and SCSD Superintendent Applicant
August 2, 2023 Health Cities Tutoring Applicant
August 10, 2023 San Carlos Community Foundation Applicant September 21, 2023 GESC Board members Scot Marsters &
Jennifer Rosse
Applicant
September 27, 2023 Project site meeting – notice mailed to 300’ radius and additional email invites
Applicant
October 17, 2023 GESC Board member meeting Applicant
December 12, 2023 Planning Commissioner Applicant
May 6, 2024 GESC Board member meeting City
July 8, 2024 GESC Board member meeting
(architectural update)
Applicant
September 17, 2024 GESC Board member meeting City
December 11, 2024 Councilmember Applicant
January 30, 2025 San Carlos East Side Projects outreach event (mailed notice to all east side
residents – hosted at Laureola Park)
City
February 26, 2025 Mailed and published notice of public review availability for MND. Emailed
notice to GESC Board representative
City
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 508
July 17, 2025 Public hearing notice mailed to property
owners within 300’ of site and emailed to
GESC Board rep
City
August 19, 2025 Public hearing notice mailed to property owners within 600’ of site
City
August 22, 2025 Meeting with interested resident City
September 2, 2025 Planning and Transportation
Commission meeting
City
In addition to the outreach meetings and notices listed above, staff responded to numerous project questions and inquiries via phone and email over the past three years.
Through the various meetings and correspondence, GESC Board members expressed concern with on-site contamination, height of the buildings, and views of the buildings from the neighborhood. Four written public comments were received for the Planning and Transportation Commission meeting. A comment letter from a resident on Hall Street requested additional screening, assurances on exterior lighting, limitations on the dirt haul route north of the site, and a courtesy interior site visit upon project completion. Letters of support were received from Suzi Hughes of One Life Counseling, and Debbie Denton on behalf of the Parks Foundation (Attachment 7). Verbal public commentors at the Planning and Transportation Commission meeting included support for the project, as well as several commentors expressing concern with the size and scale of the buildings, compliance with the East Side Innovation Plan, and construction impacts.
Since the original submittal, the applicant modified the plans to address comments from the GESC, stakeholders, and staff as follows:
Reduced the overall size of the project
Reduced the building height (removed one floor and reduced the overall height) Included dense trees along the rear of the building at grade and along the second-floor deck
Included a green planted screen along the rear elevation of the parking structure (north facing)
Agreed to install automatic window shades along the north facing elevation Agreed to contribute funds for neighborhood tree planting in the backyard of homes on the south side of Hall Street.
At the September 2, 2025 Planning and Transportation Commission meeting, the applicant agreed to the following additional project modifications in response to neighbor comments:
Modified the sign plan to prohibit signs on the north elevation of the east building and limit signs on the north elevation to the western building at the northwest corner of the building
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 509
and limit these signs to non-illumination
Modified the Dirt Haul route to prohibit trucks north of the site along Old County Road Agreed to a condition of approval relating to exterior lighting Modified the Development Agreement to allow use of the neighbor tree fund to be utilized for window treatments
The revised design of the project with two buildings and a parking structure provides visual breaks between the buildings and additional areas for landscaping. The applicant provided a shade study that shows that during a worst-case event (early morning winter solstice), shadows from the building will not reach the rear properties of the residential homes.
The required public notice for the Planning and Transportation Commission meeting was mailed to all property owners within 300’ of the sites on July 17, 2025 and the notice was published in the newspaper on July 18, 2025. On August 18, 2025, Planning and Transportation Commission opened the public hearing at its and continued the hearing to the September 2, 2025 Planning and Transportation Commission meeting. The mailing radius for the notice of the September 2, 2025 meeting was expanded to 600’ to ensure notification to nearby residents along Hall Street.
The required public notice for the City Council meeting was published in the newspaper and mailed to all property owners within 600’ of the site and all property owners on Hall Street between Old County Road and Industrial Road on September 30, 2025.
ALTERNATIVES:
The alternatives available to the City Council include:
1. Adopt a Resolution adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program; introduce an Ordinance approving the 789 Old County Road Project Planned Development Plan, Sign Program and related Zoning map amendment to rezone the project site from heavy industrial (IH) to planned development (PD); and introduce an Ordinance approving a Development Agreement with Bransten Road Associates LLC; or
2. Do not proceed with the proposed Resolution or Ordinances; or
3. Provide staff with alternative direction.
Respectfully submitted by:
Al Savay, Community Development Director
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 510
Approved for submission by:
_______________________
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. Resolution with Exhibit A - Mitigated Negative Declaration Exhibit B: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan
2. Ordinance - Planned Development (PD) with Exhibit A - Zoning Map Exhibit B: Planned Development Plan (Project Plans)
Exhibit C: Sign Program
Exhibit D: Findings
3. Ordinance - Development Agreement (DA) with Exhibit A - Findings Exhibit B: Development Agreement
4. Code Compliance Certificate for the Design Review, Transportation Demand Management and Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate
5. Public Notice
6. CEQA Public Comments and Staff Response Memo
7. Public Comments
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 511
RESOLUTION NO. 2025 – ____
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
ADOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND ASSOCIATED
MITIGATION MONITORNING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT.
WHEREAS, Bransten Road Associates LLC, a Delaware limited liability company controlled by the Minkoff Group, proposes to develop two new life science/research and development buildings totaling 339,170 square feet ("Project") on an approximately 3.41 acre site at 789 Old County Road (APNs 046-131-610 & 046-131-630); and WHEREAS, the City of San Carlos ("City") determined that the Project requires review pursuant the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to CEQA Section 15070, the City as the lead agency under CEQA, hired Lamphier-Gregory Inc., ("Consultant") to prepare an Initial Study to determine if the Project may have a significant effect on the environment, concluded that there is no substantial evidence that the Project may cause a significant effect on the environment, and prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND); and
WHEREAS, the prepared MND included an assessment of potential environmental effects and a description of mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant environmental effects to a less than significant level; and
WHEREAS, the City issued a Notice of Intent regarding the MND seeking public comment and agency review and comment for the period of February 26, 2025 through March 28, 2025 on the prepared MND pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15072 and 15073; and WHEREAS, the C/CAG Board of Directors, acting as the Airport Land Use Commission, determined that the Project is consistent with the applicable airport/land use policies and criteria contained in the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Carlos Airport and the Project will not result in a safety hazard; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Transportation Commission opened the public hearing on August 18, 2025 and continued the public hearing to September 2, 2025, and at the September 2, 2025 meeting, voted 5-0 to adopt Resolution 2025-09 to recommend the City Council adopt the MND; and
WHEREAS, the City mailed a public hearing notice for the project on September 30, 2025 to property owners and occupants within a 600-foot radius of the project site, published the public hearing notice on September 30, 2025, and made reference to the fact that an MND was available for public review per Section 15073 of the CEQA Guidelines; and WHEREAS, the City Council conducted the duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2025, reviewed all evidence presented both orally and in writing and considered in light of public comments and testimony the information in the MND, for adequacy, completeness and compliance with CEQA and State CEQA Guidelines; and
WHEREAS, CEQA requires that the lead agency approving a project adopt a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for changes to the project to ensure compliance during project implementation; and
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 512
WHEREAS, the City prepared a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the Project.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council makes the following findings and certifies the MND:
1. The City Council has independently reviewed and analyzed the MND, including Public Comments and Response to Comments and other information in the record and the mitigation measures incorporated into the Project would avoid or substantially lessen all of the significant environmental effects as identified in the MND to a less than significant level; and
2. The MMRP accurately reflects the mitigation measures contained in the MND.
IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED Having fully reviewed, considered, and evaluated all of the testimony and evidence submitted in this matter and based on its independent judgment and analysis, the City Council hereby certifies the MND (Exhibit A) and adopts the MMRP (Exhibit B), both of which are on file in the Office of the City Clerk of the City of San Carlos and incorporated herein by this reference.
The Community Development Director is designated as the custodian of the documents and records of proceedings on which this decision is based. The Community Development Director's office is located at City Hall, 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, California.
Severability. If any term, provision, or portion of this resolution or the application of this resolution to a particular situation is held by a court to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remaining provisions of this resolution, or their application to other actions related to the Project, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by the City.
This Resolution is effective upon its adoption.
*****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the 14th day of October, 2025 by the following vote:
_____________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
______________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:
A. Mitigated Negative Declaration
B. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 513
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 514
Intentionally Left Blank
EXHIBIT A
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
The Mitigation Negative Declaration and Technical Attachments are available on the City’s website:
https://www.cityofsancarlos.org/business_detail_T10_R94.php
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 515
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 1 OF 13
EXHIBIT “B”
STANDARD CONDITIONS AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE 789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT
Standard Condition Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
Standard Condition: Exterior Materials. Pursuant to
San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, the colors
and materials of the structure and improvements shall
be in substantial compliance with those presented
and described within the application materials. Any
changes determined to be significant as determined
by the Community Development Director shall be
reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in planning
documents
San Carlos
Planning Division
Standard Condition: Avian Collision Risk. Pursuant to
the requirements to prevent avian mortality of
protected birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act
and exterior materials design review requirements
per San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, the
project design shall include design features to reduce
the potential for avian collisions, which may include
the following: Low-reflectivity glazing (<15%
reflectance) on all buildings; features that reduce the extent of transparent glazing that can be seen as a
clear path, including opaque wall panels, screens,
spandrel glazing, and perforated metal panels;
features that help the buildings appear as solid
structures from a distance such as mullions, shadow
boxes, fins, and overhangs; and minimal vegetation
that could act as an attractant to birds along
potentially dangerous flight paths including in
between most buildings and adjacent to transparent
glass corners.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in planning
documents
San Carlos
Planning Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 516
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 2 OF 13
Standard Condition Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
Standard Condition: Exterior Lighting Plan. Pursuant
to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, a final
exterior lighting plan with specifications in
conformance with the approved plans is subject to
review and approval by the Planning Division prior to
Building Permit issuance.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in planning
documents
San Carlos
Planning Division
Standard Condition: Signage. New signs are subject to
compliance with San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter
18.22. No signs have yet been approved as part of this
project. Any signs that are visible from U.S. Highway
101 shall require approval by the Planning
Commission.
Prior to new sign
installation
Applicant Verify proposed signs are in
compliance
San Carlos
Planning Division
Standard Condition: Protection of Trees. Pursuant to
San Carlos Municipal Code Sections 18.18.070 and
18.41.020, the project proponent shall obtain a
permit to remove any tree(s) protected under the
City’s Interim Protected Tree Ordinance, as
determined by an arborist, and shall also prepare a
tree protection plan that includes a map of the tree
protection zone and is included in the construction
drawings and bid package. Removed trees will be
replaced in accordance with the ordinance at the
discretion of the Community Development Director. If
any removed trees are within the jurisdiction of
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW),
and CDFW issues a Lake and Streambed Agreement
for the project, the tree replacement ratios shall
comply with CDFW requirements.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 517
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 3 OF 13
Standard Condition Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
Standard Condition: Protection of Human Remains. If
human remains are unearthed during grounddisturbing activities, Section 7050.5(b) and (c) of the California Health and Safety code will be
implemented. Section 7050.5(b) and (c) states:
(b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any
human remains in any location other than a
dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further
excavation or disturbance of the site or any
nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie
adjacent remains until the coroner of the county
in which the human remains are discovered has
determined, in accordance with Chapter 10
(commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of
Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that
the remains are not subject to the provisions of
Section 27492 of the Government Code or any
other related provisions of law concerning
investigation of the circumstances, manner and
cause of death, and the recommendations
concerning treatment and disposition of the
human remains have been made to the person
responsible for the excavation, or to his or her
authorized representative, in the manner provided
in Section 5097.98 of the PRC. The coroner shall
make his or her determination within two working
days from the time the person responsible for the
excavation, or his or her authorized
representative, notifies the coroner of the
discovery or recognition of the human remains.
(c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not
subject to his or her authority and if the coroner
recognizes the human remains to be those of a
Native American, or has reason to believe that
they are those of a Native American, he or she
Prior to and during
construction activities
involving ground
disturbance
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 518
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 4 OF 13
Standard Condition Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the
NAHC. [In which case, section 5097.98 of the
California PRC would apply.]
Standard Condition: Compliance with Design-level
Geotechnical Investigation and Structural Design
Plans. Consistent with plan check procedures for
Building Permit consideration and Section 12.80.060
of the San Carlos Municipal Code, proper foundation
engineering and construction shall be performed in
accordance with the recommendations of a
Registered Geotechnical Engineer and a Licensed
Professional Engineer. The structural engineering
design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation,
shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with
the California Building Code.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Applicant Verification that design
requirements are met and
reviewed by qualified
professional
San Carlos
Building Division
Standard Condition: Hazardous Building Materials.
Pursuant to BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2 and
California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1529
and Title 22, Division 4.5, prior to demolition buildings shall be assessed for asbestos containing materials,
lead-based paint, or other suspected hazardous
building materials, and during demolition, any
suspected such materials shall be abated by a licensed
abatement contractor and disposed of according to all
state and local regulations.
Prior to issuance of
demolition permits
Applicant Verify completion of surveys
and abatement
San Carlos
Building Division
Standard Condition: Stormwater Control Plan. A
stormwater and drainage control plan shall be
prepared and implemented in compliance with the
San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention
Program (SMCWPPP), Provision C.3 of the County’s
Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit and
Prior to issuance of
building permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in planning
documents
San Carlos
Planning Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 519
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 5 OF 13
Standard Condition Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
any other required provisions of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code. The plan shall specify best
management practices for the control and prevention
of stormwater pollution. The plan shall address both
construction-phase and post-construction pollutant
impacts from development.
Construction-phase measures shall include: erosion
control measures such as installing fiber rolls, silt
fences, gravel bags, or other erosion control devices
around and/or downslope of work areas and around
storm drains prior to earthwork and before the onset
of any anticipated storm events; monitoring and
maintaining all erosion and sediment control devices;
designating a location away from storm drains when
refueling or maintaining equipment; scheduling
grading and excavation during dry weather; and
removing vegetation only when absolutely necessary.
Post-construction drainage controls shall be specified
to capture and treat stormwater onsite.
Standard Condition: Construction Noise.
Construction Activities shall comply with the City’s
noise ordinance (Chapter 9.30 of the San Carlo
Municipal Code), which includes restriction of
construction activities to the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on weekdays, and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on
Saturdays.
Prior to issuance of
demolition, building
or grading permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
Standard Condition: Transportation Demand
Management (TDM). Pursuant to Chapter 18.25 of
the City of San Carlos Municipal Code and San Mateo
County Congestion Management Program Land Use
Implementation Policy (C/CAG TDM Policy), a
A TDM Plan
applicable to the
space must be
approved by the City
prior to issuance of a
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in project
documents
San Carlos
Planning Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 520
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 6 OF 13
Standard Condition Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be
implemented for the life of the project as presented
to and approved by the Planning and Transportation
Commission. The owner and/or future tenants shall
be responsible for supplying Planning Staff with the
contact information for the Designated TDM Contact
person.
A report documenting the TDM activities undertaken
and their results shall be submitted to the Community
Development Director annually at the responsibility of
the applicant. The Director may impose reasonable
changes to assure the program’s objectives will be
met. The owner and/or future tenants shall be
responsible for ensuring that C/CAG TDM Policy
requirements and monitoring and reporting are met.
As new, more efficient and effective TDM measures
become available to reduce vehicle trips, these
measures may be included or substituted to maintain
the trip reduction levels described in the Plan. Any
such substitutions shall be to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director. Any changes
determined to be substantive or inconsistent with the
TDM Plan by the Community Development Director
shall require review and approval by the Planning and
Transportation Commission.
Certificate of
Occupancy for that
space
-andCompliance with the
TDM Plan would be
required Pursuant to
Chapter 18.25 of the
City of San Carlos
Municipal Code, to be
reported annually
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 521
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 7 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
Air Quality
Mitigation Measure Air-1: Basic Construction
Management Practices. The project shall
demonstrate proposed compliance with all applicable
regulations and operating procedures prior to
issuance of demolition, building or grading permits,
including implementation of the following BAAQMD
“Basic Best Management Practices”:
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging
areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved
access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other
loose material off-site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent
public roads shall be removed using wet power
vacuum street sweepers at least once per day.
The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be
limited to 15 miles per hour.
5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be
paved shall be completed as soon as possible.
Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible
after grading unless seeding or soil binders are
used.
6. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition
activities shall be suspended when average wind
speeds exceed 20 mph.
7. All trucks and equipment, including their tires,
shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
Prior to issuance of
demolition, grading or
construction permits
-andDuring construction
Applicant Verify requirements are
included in construction
contracts and are met
during construction
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 522
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 8 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
8. Unpaved roads providing access to sites located
100 feet or further from a paved road shall be
treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted
layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel
9. Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the
telephone number and name of the person to
contact at the City regarding dust complaints.
This person shall respond and take corrective
action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General
Air Pollution Complaints phone number shall also
be visible to ensure compliance with applicable
regulations.
Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure Bio-1: Pre-Construction Nesting
Bird Survey. Initiation of construction activities during the avian nesting season (February 1 through August
31) shall be avoided to the extent feasible. If
construction initiation during the nesting season
cannot be avoided, pre-construction nesting bird
surveys for each construction phase shall be
conducted by a qualified biologist within 14 days
before initial ground disturbance or vegetation
removal for such construction phase to avoid
disturbance to active nests, eggs, and/or young of
nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty
Act (MBTA) and California Fish & Game Code. Surveys
shall encompass the entire construction phase area
and the surrounding 100 feet. An exclusion zone
where no construction would be allowed shall be
established around any active nests of any protected
avian species found in the project site until a qualified Prior to initiation of
construction activities
or re-initiation of
construction activities
if inactive for 30 days
or more
Applicant If construction is initiated or
re-initiated during nesting
season, verification of
survey and that any required
buffers are included in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 523
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 9 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
biologist has determined that all young have fledged
and are independent of the nest. Suggested exclusion
zone distances differ depending on species, location,
and placement of nest, and shall be at the discretion
of the biologist (typically 300 feet for raptors and 100 feet for other species). These surveys would remain
valid as long as construction activity is consistently
occurring in a given area and shall be completed again
if there is a lapse in construction activities of more
than 14 consecutive days during the nesting bird
season.
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Mitigation Measure Culture-1: Further Site
Assessment. Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified
consultant shall conduct further archival and field
study research to determine the appropriate locations
for cultural or tribal cultural resource
(historic/archaeological/paleontological/Native
American) monitoring during removal of asphalt or
concrete, fill, vegetation, or structures. Field study
may include, but is not limited to, hand auger
sampling, shovel test units, or geoarchaeological
analyses as well as other common methods used to
identify the presence of buried archaeological
resources.
Culture-2: Archaeological Sensitivity Training. In
anticipation of discovery of unknown archaeological
resources during construction, Archaeological
Sensitivity Training shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist for all personnel who will engage in
Prior to construction
activities involving
ground disturbance
Prior to construction
activities involving
ground disturbance
Applicant
Applicant
Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 524
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 10 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
ground disturbing activities on the site. The training
shall be conducted at the start of construction and
prior to ground disturbance. The training shall include suitable photographic materials showing the kinds of
artifacts and evidence of prehistoric archaeological
sites likely to be found in the area, as well as written and verbal descriptions for archaeological resources
and signs of potential archaeological discovery. The
training shall also include written materials describing what to do in the event of a discovery, or suspected
discovery of archaeological resource.
Culture-3: Protection of Accidentally Discovered
Cultural Resources. In the event that any previously
undiscovered cultural resource (historic/
archaeological/paleontological/Native American) are
uncovered during ground disturbing activities, all such activity shall cease until these resources have been
evaluated by a qualified consultant and specific
measures can be implemented to protect these
resources in coordination with the City and in
accordance with Sections 21083.2 and/or 21084.1 of
the California Public Resources Code.
GP-MM TRIB-1: Consider all Native American
Archaeological Discoveries to be Significant
Resources. All Native American artifacts (tribal finds) shall be considered as a significant Tribal Cultural
Resource, pursuant to PRC 21074 until the lead
agency has enough evidence to make a determination
of significance. The City shall coordinate with an
archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the
Interior’s Professional Qualifications, as well as an
During construction
activities involving
ground disturbance
During construction
activities involving
ground disturbance
Applicant
Applicant
Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 525
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 11 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
appropriate tribe or tribes, as determined by the
NAHC, to develop an appropriate treatment plan for
the resources. The plan may include implementation
of archaeological data recovery excavations to
address treatment of the resource along with
subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. An
archaeological report shall be written detailing all
archaeological finds and submitted to the City and the
Northwest Information Center.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Mitigation Measure Haz-1: Site Management Plan
and Health and Safety Measures. The applicants shall
develop and implement a Site Mitigation Plan and
relevant contractor health and safety measures to
provide procedures and protocols during construction
in the event of a new discovery of previously
unknown impacts such as impacted soil, underground
storage tanks, or other underground features during
site disturbance.
Prior to issuance of
building or grading
permits
-andPrior to occupancy
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
Noise
Mitigation Measure Noise-1: Construction Vibration
Reduction and Monitoring. Wherever feasible,
operation of vibration inducing equipment shall be
avoided within the distance to existing buildings
specified below.
Clam shovel drop – 18 feet (ft)
Hydromill (slurry wall) in soil – 1 ft
Hydromill (slurry wall) in rock – 2 ft
Prior to issuance of
demolition, building
or grading permits
Applicant Verify inclusion of
requirements in
construction documents
San Carlos
Building Division
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 526
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 12 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
Vibratory Roller – 19 ft
Hoe Ram – 9 ft
Large bulldozer – 9 ft
Caisson drilling – 9 ft
Loaded trucks – 8 ft
Jackhammer – 4 ft
Small bulldozer - <1 ft
If this equipment must operate closer to existing
buildings than specified above, a vibration monitoring
plan shall be prepared, submitted to the City, and
implemented to monitor construction vibration at the
nearest structures, including at a minimum the
following:
• A list of all heavy construction equipment to be
used for this project known to produce high
vibration levels (e.g., tracked vehicles, vibratory
compaction, jackhammers, hoe rams, clam
shovel drop, and vibratory roller, etc.).
• An indication of what efforts will be implemented
for reducing vibration levels below the
thresholds, such as location of equipment away
from adjacent building as possible and use of
alternative methods or equipment that would
produce less vibration.
• A designated contact responsible for registering
and investigating claims of excessive vibration.
The contact information of such person shall also
be clearly posted on the construction site. Any
damage to adjacent buildings shall be addressed
by the applicant team.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 527
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT – SC/MMRP PAGE 13 OF 13
Mitigation Measure Timing / Schedule Implementation
Responsibility
Verification
Monitoring Action Monitoring
Responsibility
Date
Completed
• Document conditions at all structures located
within 20 feet of construction prior to, during,
and after vibration-generating construction
activities. Perform a photo survey, elevation
survey, and crack monitoring survey prior to any
construction activity, at the end of each phase of
construction, and after project completion, and
shall include internal and external crack
monitoring in structures, settlement, and
distress, and shall document the condition of
foundations, walls and other structural elements
in the interior and exterior of said structures. If
vibration generated by project construction
results in damage to adjoining structures, repairs
shall be completed to restore structures to preconstruction conditions.
Examples of efforts to minimize vibration could
include use of a smaller vibratory roller, such as the
Caterpillar model CP433E vibratory compactor, and
use of alternative methods for breaking up existing
pavement, such as a pavement grinder, instead of
dropping heavy objects, when work must occur within
20 feet of the adjacent buildings
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 528
ORDINANCE NO. ___
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
APPROVING THE 789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN,
SIGN PROGRAM, AND RELATED ZONING MAP AMENDMENT TO REZONE THE
PROJECT SITE FROM HEAVY INDUSTRIAL (IH) TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (PD) AT 789 OLD COUNTY ROAD (APNs 046-131-610 & 046-131-630).
RECITALS
WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 18 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code (the “Zoning Code”), Bransten Road Associates LLC, a Delaware limited liability company controlled by the Minkoff Group, filed an application for approval of a Planned Development Plan and accompanying Zoning Map Amendment for the development of the 789 Old County Road Project (APNs 046-131-610 & 046-131-630); and
WHEREAS, by Resolution PTC2025-09, adopted on September 2, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held on September 2, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission approved the Design Review Permit, Transportation Demand Management Plan, and Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate; and WHEREAS, by Resolution PTC2025-10, adopted on September 2, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommends the City Council approve the Zoning Map Amendment as set forth in Exhibit A to this Resolution and adopt the Planned Development (PD) Plan as set forth in Exhibit B and Sign Program as set forth in Exhibit C to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos held a duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2025 to consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, the proposed Planned Development Plan and the proposed Zoning Map Amendment; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2025-__, adopted on October 14,2025, the City Council adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of San Carlos as follows:
SECTION 1: Based on the findings set forth in the staff report and as outlined in Exhibit D, the Zoning Map Amendment of San Carlos is hereby amended from Heavy Industrial (IH) District to Planned Development (PD) District (Exhibit A), by the adoption of a Planned Development Plan (Exhibit B) for the construction of two office and research and development buildings with a combined 326,648 square feet (sf) above grade and one parking structure, for a total above grade building area square footage of 552,569 sf and landscaping improvements on
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 529
the 3.4 acre site located at 789 Old County Road (APN 046-131-610 & 046-131-630) as show on the plans prepared by DES Architects & Engineers dated April 1, 2025. The Planned Development Plan contemplates there will be a four story building at a height of 69’ to the main roofline and 83’ to the top of the mechanical screen; a five story building at a height of 85’ to the roofline and 99’ to the top of the mechanical screen; and above grade parking consisting of 225,291 sf with a height of 83’ at its highest architectural element.
SECTION 2: That the City Council hereby adopts the Plan of Development filed as “789 Old County Road” attached hereto as Exhibit B based on the findings set forth in the staff report.
This plan indicates the location of the proposed building, the size of the building, the parking to be provided and areas to be landscaped.
Standards of Development are as follows:
1. The land use regulations for the PD zone shall be those uses allowed in the Heavy Industrial (IH) Zoning District. Research and Development Use shall be considered a Permitted Use. In addition, the following uses are permitted within the ground floor tenant space:
a. Research and Development shall be considered a Permitted Use. b. Eating and Drinking Establishments, Full Service and Convenience shall be considered a Permitted Use.
2. Life Science/Research and Development tenants shall comply with the City’s Bio Safety regulations in effect on the Agreement Date as defined in and subject to the Development Agreement.
3. The buildings shall be situated on the property in accordance with the Plan of Development (attached hereto as Exhibit B) prepared by DES Architects & Engineers dated April 1, 2025. This plan indicates the location of the building, the size of the building, the parking to be provided and areas to be landscaped.
4. Floor area and height of the buildings shall be provided in substantial compliance with the Plan of Development. The project shall comply with the current Heavy Industrial (IH) zoning standards in effect, except as follows:
i. The maximum building height is limited to 69’ to the top of the roofline and 83’ to the top of the mechanical screen for the four-story (west) building, 85’ to the top of the roofline, 99’ to the top of the mechanical screen for the five-story (east) building and 83’ for the above ground parking structure.
ii. The total allowed floor area for the site is 552,569 square feet resulting in a FAR of 3.481, inclusive of the above ground parking structure. iii. Bicycle parking shall consist of 20 short-term stalls and 84 long-term stalls for a total of 104 bike stalls.
5. Signage for the site and buildings shall be consistent with the Sign Program attached as Exhibit C. Building signage for tenant(s) is limited to no more than two signs per
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 530
building elevations. Signage on the north facing elevation shall be limited to two signs on the north west corner of the building and shall not be illuminated. Future changes to the Sign Program requires review and approval by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
6. The project shall be constructed in accordance with all requirements of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Plan, Design Review Certificate, Transportation Demand Management Plan and Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate.
SECTION 4: The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5: This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption. *****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on the 14th day of October, 2025 and passed and adopted as an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the ____ day of _______, 2025 by the following vote:
________________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
____________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:
A. Zoning Map
B. Planned Development Plan (Part 1 and 2)
C. Sign Program
D. Findings
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 531
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 532
Intentionally Left Blank
EXHIBIT A
SAN CARLOS ZONING MAP
789 Old County Road (APNs 046-131-610 & 046-131-630) Zoned Planned Development (PD)
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 533
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 536
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 537
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 538
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 539
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 540
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 541
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 542
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 543
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 544
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 545
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 546
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 547
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 548
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 549
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 550
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 551
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 552
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 553
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 554
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 555
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 556
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 557
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 558
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 559
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 560
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 561
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 562
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 563
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 564
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 565
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 566
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 567
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 568
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 569
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 570
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 571
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 572
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 573
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 574
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 575
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 576
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 577
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 578
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 579
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 580
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 581
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 582
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 583
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 584
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 585
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 586
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 587
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 588
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 589
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 590
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 591
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 592
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 593
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 594
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 595
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 596
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 597
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 598
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 599
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 600
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 601
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 602
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 603
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 604
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 605
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 606
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 607
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 608
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 609
1020 - 1040 BRANSTEN ROAD
1020-1040
BRANSTEN ROAD
MASTER SIGNAGE PLAN
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 610
HEX #524F4A HEX #F2EDDF HEX #CCB596 HEX #FFFFFF
FORMA
COLOR PALETTE
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 611
I N D U S T R I A L
A R C H I T E C T U R A L
S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y
FORMA
CONCEPT
C O N V E R G E N C E
F L O W I N G N A T U R E
L A N D S C A P I N G C O N C E P T
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 612
FORMA
SIGNAGE TYPE
URBANIST
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Urbanist ExtraLight
Urbanist ExtraLight Italic
Urbanist Thin
Urbanist Thin Italic
Urbanist Light
0123456789
GOOGLE FONTS
PARKING
Designed by Corey Hu
EXIT
Thin
MODERN
GEOMETRIC
VERSATILE
FONT
Font details semi-closed
aperture
vertical
terminal
Numbers
Font Family
Basic glyphs
at
vertex
rectangular
stem
MODERN
GEOMETRIC
VERSATILE
FONT
Urbanist Light Italic
Urbanist Italic
Urbanist Regular
Urbanist Medium
Urbanist Medium Italic
Urbanist SemiBold
Urbanist SemiBold Italic
Urbanist Bold
Urbanist Bold Italic
Urbanist ExtraBold
Urbanist ExtraBold Italic
Urbanist Black
Urbanist Black Italic
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 613
FORMA
ICONS
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 614
FORMA
MASTER PLAN
EXTERIOR
EXTERIOR SIGNAGE &
WAYFINDING
A. Primary Monument ID
B. Primary Building ID/Tenant Monument
C. Vehicular Wayfinding
D. Address ID
E. Garage Entry Sign LOBBY LEASE DOMESTIC PUMP ROOM FIRE EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE EMERGENCY ELECTRICAL ROOM ELECTRICAL ROOM MPOE TRASH MPOE PG&E METER AND PRIMARY 12kV DISTRIBUTION ROOM ELECTRICAL ROOM WEST BLDG SUBSTATION ROOM DOMESTIC PUMP ROOM BUILDING MANAGEMENT STORAGE EAST BLDG SUBSTATION ROOM EMERGENCY GENERATOR ROOM WB-40 STORAGE BIKE ROOM EMERGENCY GENERATOR ROOMWB-40 FIRE EQUIPMENT FIRE PUMP ROOM TRASH FIRE EQUIPMENT STORAGE EMERGENCY ELECTRICITY ROOM FITNESS LOCKER ROOM LOCKER ROOM SHIPPING RECEIVINGUPS DELIVERY STORAGE LEASE SHIPPING & RECEIVING STORAGE BRANSTEN RD
OLD COUNTY RD PODIUM EDGE
E
C
A
B B
D D
D
E C
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 615
CONCEPT
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 616
FORMA
A. PRIMARY MONUMENT ID (Corner Of Old County and Bransten) FRONT
VIEW
SIDE
VIEW
1020 - 1040 BRANSTEN ROAD
ALTERNATE LAYOUT
FOR SINGLE TENANT
SCENARIO
60”
132” 9” ALUMINUM
PAINTED FINISH
GRAY ALUMINUM
PAINTED FINISH
OR CONCRETE
ACRYLIC PUSH THRU
LETTERS
PAINTED ALUMINUM
LETTERS WITH ACRYLIC
FACES
COLOR REFERENCE
** FACE LIT
LETTERS
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 617
FORMA
A. PRIMARY MONUMENT ID
ILLUMINATION VIEW
FACE LIGHTING
REFERENCES
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 618
1020 - 1040 BRANSTEN ROAD
FORMA
A. PRIMARY MONUMENT ID
(Corner Of Old County and Bransten)
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 619
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
EAST
1020-1040
BRANSTEN
ROAD
FORMA
B. PRIMARY BUILDING / TENANT MONUMENT
FRONT
VIEW
REFERENCE
SIDE
VIEW
ALUMINUM WITH
PAINTED FINISH
** NON
ILLUMINATED
TENANT VINYL TEXT
APPLIED TO ALUMINUM
(NO ILLUMINATION)
25”
107”
6”
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
EAST
1020-1040
BRANSTEN
ROAD
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
TENANT XYZ
1020-1040
BRANSTEN
ROAD
WEST
ALUMINUM LETTERS
PAINTED FINISH WITH
APPLIED FCO FACES
IN CONTRASTING COLOR
ALUMINUM FCO LETTERS
PAINTED FINISH
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 620
FORMA
B. PRIMARY BUILDING / TENANT MONUMENTS
(Bransten Road)
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 621
FRONT
VIEW
SIDE
VIEW
ALTERNATIVE
PARKING
ENTRANCE
FORMA
EAST
FORMA
WEST
C. VEHICULAR WAYFINDING
FORMA
78”
25”
PARKING
ENTRANCE
FORMA EAST
FORMA WEST
PARKING
ENTRANCE
FORMA
EAST
FORMA
WEST
ALUMINUM
PAINTED FINISH
ALUMINUM FCO LETTERS
PAINTED FINISH
ALUMINUM LETTERS
PAINTED FINISH
OR ACRYLIC
REFERENCE
** NON
ILLUMINATED
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 622
FRONT
VIEW
FORMA
D. ADDRESS ID
1020 1040
ALUMINUM WITH
PAINTED FINISH
WITH FACES PTD TO
CONTRAST
15”
46”
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 623
FORMA
E. GARAGE ENTRANCE ID & INFORMATIONAL
FRONT
VIEW
PARKING EAST
PAINTED ALUMINUM
WITH STENCIL CUT LETTERS
20”
200”
ALUMINUM WITH
PAINTED FINISH
ALUMINUM FCO
LETTERS WITH
PAINTED FINISH
** NON
ILLUMINATED
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 624
FORMA
MASTER PLAN
G. BUILDING MOUNTED TENANT SIGNAGE
EXTERIOR WAYFINDING &
SIGNAGE
Tenant Sign Design Standards
WEST BLDG EAST BLDG
G.2
G.12
G.10
G.5 G.6 G.7 G.8
G.9
G.1
G.11
G.3
G.4
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 625
FORMA - EAST BUILDING, EAST ELEVATION
G. TENANT SIGNAGE
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
LOCATION KEY
WEST BLDG EAST BLDG
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 626
FORMA - WEST BUILDING, WEST ELEVATION
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
G. TENANT SIGNAGE
LOCATION KEY
WEST BLDG EAST BLDG
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 627
FORMA - BRANSTEN / SOUTH ELEVATION
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
WEST BUILDING
EAST BUILDING
G. TENANT SIGNAGE
LOCATION KEY
WEST BLDG EAST BLDG
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 628
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
FORMA - EAST BUILDING, WEST ELEVATION
G. TENANT SIGNAGE
LOCATION KEY
WEST BLDG EAST BLDG
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 629
FORMA - NORTH ELEVATION
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
WEST BUILDING
EAST BUILDING
G. TENANT SIGNAGE
LOCATION KEY
WEST BLDG EAST BLDG
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 630
1020 - 1040 BRANSTEN ROAD
FORMA
G. TENANT SIGNAGE
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 631
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
G. TENANT SIGNAGE - OLD COUNTY ROAD LOOKING SOUTH
OLD COUNTY ROAD
WEST BUILDING
EAST BUILDING
CALTRAIN
FORMA
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 632
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
FORMA
WEST BUILDING
EAST BUILDING
CALTRAIN
EL CAMINO REAL
G. TENANT SIGNAGE - EL CAMINO LOOKING SOUTH
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 633
SIGN LOCATION
POSSIBILITIES
FORMA
EL CAMINO REAL
CALTRAIN
G. TENANT SIGNAGE - EL CAMINO LOOKING NORTH
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 634
TENANT
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 635
EXHIBIT D
REQUIRED FINDINGS FOR CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT
Planned Development Zoning and Planned Development Plan Findings:
In considering whether to recommend the Planned Development Zoning designation and Planned Development Plan, the City Council must consider the following findings.
A. The proposed development is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable specific plan, including the density and intensity limitations that apply.
Basis for Finding: The proposed Planned Development zoning district and accompanying PD Plan are consistent with the San Carlos general Plan. The General Plan calls for intensification of employment and innovation uses in the industrial corridor, encourages design that respects surrounding land uses, and promotes transit-supportive development. The PD Plan establishes site-specific standards that implement these policies while incorporating community input to ensure compatibility with adjacent properties
The City does not have an adopted Specific Plan, however the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan is considered a guiding document for development in the area. The project is consistent with the East Side Vision planning strategies within the area, including implementing pedestrian and bicycle improvements along Old County Road toward the prioritization of first- and last-mile connections to the Caltrain station, improves the Old County and Bransten Road intersection, increases the overall District tree canopy and continues the provision of street trees along Old County Road, promotes environmental stewardship and contributes towards community benefits.
The project is consistent with the General Plan and the General Plan classification of Planned Industrial as outlined in Attachment 6. The project complies with the Heavy Industrial District development standards except for height, floor area, and bicycle parking.
B. The subject site is physically suitable for the type and intensity of the land use being proposed;
Basis for Finding: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use classification, which seeks to allow retail service, office, research and development and industrial uses. This designation offers maximum flexibility for non-residential use. The office use and research and development use would be compatible with other office and research and development uses in the surrounding area. The 3.4-acre site is large enough to accommodate the intensity of development while providing adequate landscaping, adequate on-site circulation and emergency access.
C. Adequate transportation facilities and public services exist or will be provided in accord with the conditions of PD plan approval, to serve the proposed development; and the approval of the proposed development will not result in a reduction of traffic levels of service or public services so as to be a detriment to public health, safety, or welfare;
Basis for Finding: The City has undertaken an environmental review of the project as required by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), including a complete Initial Study/Mitigated
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 636
Negative Declaration and a separate Traffic Operations Analysis. The analysis concluded that the project’s payment towards the City’s Traffic Impact Fee program would offset any potential negative effects on operations by providing the project’s share of funding for planned improvements at all intersections. Additionally, the project applicant’s proportional payment share of a new signal at Bransten Road/Old County road would facilitate traffic operations along Old County Road. Therefore, there are no anticipated public service concerns associated with the project that would be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare.
D. The proposed development will not have a substantial adverse effect on surrounding land uses and will be compatible with the existing and planned land use character of the surrounding area;
Basis for Finding: The project includes demolition of the existing improvements and construction of a new office and research and development/life-science project. The project has been designed to be in scale with other proposed developments in the area including approved developments at 841 Old County Road and 987 Commercial Street. In response to neighborhood concerns regarding height, bulk and compatibility, the applicant reduced building heights and overall building area. The project steps back from Old County Road by proposing a lower building height of the west building (four stories) that then increases by one story to the east building (five stories) to reduce the apparent mass of the building. Trees are included along Old County Road, Bransten Road and the northern property line of the project area to further screen the buildings and a green screen is proposed along the rear elevation of the parking structure. The project as redesigned reduces impacts to the surrounding area.
E. The development generally complies with applicable adopted design guidelines; and Basis for Finding: The City does not have adopted design guidelines. The project has undergone review by City staff to ensure quality architecture. Street trees and the first floor setback of the southwestern corner of the west building provide a pedestrian scale to the building, while latticing and large windows break up the building mass and provide an aesthetic feature to the neighborhood. The building color and materials are high quality and appropriate for the area.
F. The proposed development is demonstratively superior to the development that could occur under the standards applicable to the underlying base district, and will achieve superior community design, environmental preservation and/or substantial public benefit. In making this determination, the following factors shall be considered:
1. Appropriateness of the use(s) at the proposed location.
2. The mix of uses, housing types, and housing price levels.
3. Provision of units affordable to persons and families of low and moderate income or to lower income households.
4. Provision of infrastructure improvements.
5. Provision of open space.
6. Compatibility of uses within the development area.
7. Creativity in design and use of land.
8. Quality of design, and adequacy of light and air to the interior spaces of the buildings.
9. Overall contribution to the enhancement of neighborhood character and the environment of San Carlos in the long term.
Basis for Finding: The proposed development complies with the development standards in the zoning code with the exception of height, floor area, and required bicycle parking. The property is
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 637
located along within the industrial corridor along Old County Road and Bransten Road, an area designated in the General Plan for higher-intensity employment uses. The step-down in building heights along Old County Road creates a transition to adjacent lower scale development, addressing compatibility concerns. The project’s architectural design, setbacks and open space elements improve the visual and functional relationship with nearby properties. The applicant’s revisions to the project design, informed by resident and staff feedback, have improved the appropriateness of the project for the site. The project includes contribution of community benefit that may be utilized to benefit the greater community.
G. SIGN PROGRAM FINDINGS
1. The master sign program proposal is consistent with the San Carlos General Plan and the Zoning Code;
2. The design of the master sign program is appropriate to the City, the neighborhood, and the lots in which it is proposed;
3. The design of the master sign program proposal is compatible with its environment with respect to use, forms, materials, setbacks, location, height, design, or similar qualities; and
4. The proposed master sign program satisfies all rules stated in Municipal Code Chapter 18.22 (pursuant to the proposed PD Plan).
Basis for Finding: The proposed master sign program was submitted with the PD Plan application, including the size and location of all proposed signs. The master sign program for the Project includes monument signs, wayfinding signs and tenant signs. Signs on the north elevation will be limited to two signs at the northwest corner and the signs shall be non-illuminated. The future tenant signs require staff level review for consistency with the master sign program.
The master sign program has been reviewed for consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Code as well as compatibility with the City, neighborhood, and Project site and provides for comprehensive sign design to ensure consistency and compatibility across the Project site.
Future staff level review will ensure consistency with the master sign program approved by the City.
GENERAL PLAN POLICIES
The site at 789 Old County Road has a General Plan land use designation of Heavy Industrial.
The proposed office and research and development/life-science project is consistent with the following General Plan Polices
• LU-5.2: Implement the City’s adopted Economic Development Plan, which is updated annually as it relates to supporting the local economy. • LU-5.3: Support and encourage businesses and land uses that contribute to the City’s financial viability.
• LU-5.7: Support high-wage industries that provide quality jobs for workers at all education levels.
• LU-5.13: Consider use of multiple level parking facilities to provide increased space where available land is limited.
• LU-5.15: Promote economic revitalization on underutilized parcels designated for higher intensity land uses.
• LU-6.1: Support commercial/industrial activity and businesses on the East Side.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 638
• LU-6.2: Prohibit the conversion of property designated for industrial/commercial land on the East Side to non-industrial/commercial uses. ·Ensure proposed new uses in the East Side do not introduce land use conflicts that would adversely impact industrial/commercial activities.
• LU-6.3: Support the expansion of key growth industries while maintaining the overall diversity of land uses within East Side employment areas. • LU-6.6: Encourage new development on the East Side to feature high quality architecture that reinforces the character of the area. • LU-8.1: Require all development to feature high quality design that enhances the visual character of San Carlos.
• LU-8.3: Encourage design features and amenities in new development and redevelopment, including, but not limited to:
o Visual buffers.
o Facilitation of pedestrian activity.
o Distinctiveness and variety in architectural design
• LU-8.4: Promote pedestrian-scaled design through site planning, building design, finish details and landscaping for all types of development by requiring height and locational transitions between buildings of varied levels that are sensitive to the interrelationships of surrounding uses and structures, especially residential. • LU-8.5: Optimize architectural quality by encouraging the use of quality materials, particularly as accents and authentic detailing, such as balconies and window trims. • LU-8.8: Encourage design of convenient pedestrian walkways with shade and minimal tripping hazards, preferably with landscape buffers.
• LU-8.10: On all sides of buildings, require the incorporation of quality architectural design elements for all building façades and stepping back upper floors in order to reduce bulk and mass and to break up monotonous wall lines. • LU-8.18: Encourage “green building” practices in new development and redevelopment, such as those that make a building more energy efficient and reduces its effect on human health and the environment through better siting, design, construction, maintenance and operation.
• LU-11.1: Require high quality design for buildings at visually significant locations in gateway areas.
• LU-11.2: Encourage design features, such as landscaping, art and displays in gateway areas that are welcoming, attractive and contribute to a unique sense of place. • LU-11.3: Encourage distinctive architectural features, such as tower elements or a plaza at building entry, for buildings located at visually significant locations within gateway areas.
• CSH-3.1: Strive to reduce base-line and development-related traffic by 20 percent through public-private partnership efforts.
• CSH-3.2: Support city-wide efforts to reduce vehicular trips within and through the community.
• CSH-3.3 Support the incorporation of Transportation Demand Measures in new development to reduce traffic impacts.
• CSH-3.11: New developments and businesses shall be required to provide adequate loading, unloading and delivery areas, and/or shall be required to conduct such activities during nonbusiness/ peak hours
• EM-11.9 Coordinate with major employers, neighboring municipalities, transit agencies and providers to enhance regional transit and shuttle service.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 639
ORDINANCE NO. ___
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS
APPROVING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH BRANSTEN ROAD
ASSOCIATES LLC, FOR THE 789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT.
WHEREAS, Bransten Road Associates LLC is the fee owner of the property located at 1026 Bransten Road, San Carlos, California and identified as Assessor Parcel Number 046-131- 630 and has entered into an agreement to purchase the property located at 789 Old County Road and identified as Assessor Parcel Number 046-131-610 (collectively, the “Property”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Title 18 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code (“SCMC”) and California Government Code Sections 65864 to 65869.5, Bransten Road Associates LLC, a Delaware limited liability company controlled by the Minkoff Group, filed an application for approval of a Development Agreement for the Property in conjunction with its application for a Planned Development Plan and accompanying Zoning Map Amendment, Design Review, Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate, and Transportation Demand Management Plan to facilitate the development of a research and development campus that will include a 5-story, 179,665 square foot building, a 4-story,146,983 square foot building, and an 8-level parking structure, which collectively total approximately 552,569 square feet of building floor area (the “Project”); and WHEREAS, by Resolution PTC2025-09, adopted on September 2, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution PTC2025-10, adopted on September 2, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance approving the Zoning Map Amendment to change the site from Heavy Industrial (IH) Zoning District to Planned Development (PD) Zoning District and adopt the Planned Development Plan and Sign Program; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Transportation Commission discussed the specific terms of the Development Agreement and recommended that the City Council approve the Development Agreement by Resolution PTC-2025-10, adopted on September 2, 2025; and WHEREAS, at a duly noticed public hearing held on September 2, 2025, the Planning and Transportation Commission approved the Design Review Certificate, Transportation Demand Management Plan, and Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate, subject to approval of the Planned Development Plan and effective on the effective date of the Planned Development Plan; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos held a duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2025 to consider the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan, the proposed Planned Development Plan and the proposed Zoning Map Amendment and Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution 2025__, adopted on October 14, 2025, the City Council adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 640
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos held a duly noticed public hearing on October 14, 2025 and introduced an ordinance amending the Zoning Map to change the site from Heavy Industrial Zoning District (IH) to Planned Development Zoning District (PD) and adopted the Planned Development Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of San Carlos held a duly noticed public hearing regarding the adoption of the Development Agreement on October 14, 2025.
NOW THEREFORE THE CITY OF SAN CARLOS DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1: The City Council finds that the Project is a development for which a development agreement is appropriate in order to: 1) eliminate uncertainty in the City’s land use planning for the Project and provide for the orderly development of the Project; 2) assure installation of necessary improvements on the property; 3) provide for the public infrastructure and services appropriate to the development of the Project; 4) secure City improvements that benefit the community; 5) provide for the developer to deliver community benefits in excess of those that the City could require as conditions of approval; and 6) otherwise achieve the goals and purposes of Chapter 18.37 of the SCMC.
SECTION 2: The City Council finds that the Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan as described in Exhibit A.
SECTION 3: The City Council hereby approves the Development Agreement included as Exhibit B and the City Manager is hereby authorized to execute the Development Agreement on behalf of the City. The City Manager is further authorized, with concurrence of the City Attorney, to approve minor, non-monetary amendments to the Development Agreement that are necessary for the development of the Project as contemplated in the Development Agreement.
SECTION 4: Severability. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance sentence by sentence, paragraph by paragraph, and section by section, and does hereby declare that any provisions of this Ordinance are severable and if for any reason any sentence, paragraph or section of this Ordinance shall be held invalid, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining parts of this Ordinance.
SECTION 5: Publication and Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be published and posted according to law and shall take effect and be in force from and after 30 days after its passage and adoption.
****
I, City Clerk Crystal Mui, hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced on the 14th day of October, 2025 and passed and adopted as an Ordinance of the City of San Carlos at a regular meeting thereof held on the ____ day of ________, 2025 by the following vote:
AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS:
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 641
_____________________________
CITY CLERK of the City of San Carlos
APPROVED:
___________________________
MAYOR of the City of San Carlos
Exhibits:
A. Consistency with the General Plan
B. Development Agreement
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 642
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 643
Intentionally Left Blank
Exhibit A
Consistency with the General Plan
Development Agreement Finding:
In considering whether to approve the Development Agreement, the City Council must find the Development Agreement consistent with the General Plan.
Basis for Finding: The Development Agreement and its requirement that the Developer provide certain community benefits, including extending the underground electrical and green infrastructure from the northwest corner of the Property to Terminal Way and providing funds to be used to reimburse the purchase of trees by residents whose yards face the Project, are consistent with the following General Plan policies:
• LU-5.2: Implement the City’s adopted Economic Development Plan, which is updated annually as it relates to supporting the local economy. • LU-5.3: Support and encourage businesses and land uses that contribute to the City’s financial viability.
• LU-5.7: Support high-wage industries that provide quality jobs for workers at all education levels.
• LU-5.15: Promote economic revitalization on underutilized parcels designated for higher intensity land uses.
• LU-6.1: Support commercial/industrial activity and businesses on the East Side. • LU-6.2: Prohibit the conversion of property designated for industrial/commercial land on the East Side to non-industrial/commercial uses. ·Ensure proposed new uses in the East Side do not introduce land use conflicts that would adversely impact industrial/commercial activities.
• LU-6.3: Support the expansion of key growth industries while maintaining the overall diversity of land uses within East Side employment areas. • LU-6.6: Encourage new development on the East Side to feature high quality architecture that reinforces the character of the area. • LU-8.1: Require all development to feature high quality design that enhances the visual character of San Carlos.
• LU-8.3: Encourage design features and amenities in new development and redevelopment, including visual buffers
• LU-8.4: Promote pedestrian-scaled design through site planning, building design, finish details and landscaping for all types of development by requiring height and locational transitions between buildings of varied levels that are sensitive to the interrelationships of surrounding uses and structures, especially residential. • LU-8.18: Encourage “green building” practices in new development and redevelopment, such as those that make a building more energy efficient and reduces its effect on human health and the environment through better siting, design, construction, maintenance and operation.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 644
4917-8489-0160 v10
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED
RETURN TO:
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, California 94070
Attn: City Clerk
Space Above This Line Reserved for Recorder’s Use
Exempt from Recording Fee Per Government Code
Section 27383
DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
by and between the
CITY OF SAN CARLOS,
a California municipal corporation,
and
BRANSTEN ROAD ASSOCIATES LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
regarding the
789 Old County Road Project
Effective Date: _____________
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 645
i
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ARTICLE 1 DEFINITIONS............................................................................................................3
1.1 Definitions .......................................................................................................................3 ARTICLE 2 EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM ..............................................................................7
2.1 Effective Date ..................................................................................................................7
2.2 Term.................................................................................................................................7
2.3 City Representations and Warranties...............................................................................8
2.4 Developer Representations and Warranties.....................................................................9 ARTICLE 3 DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY............................................................................9
3.1 Vested Rights...................................................................................................................9
3.2 Reservations of Authority..............................................................................................10
3.3 Regulation by Other Public Agencies............................................................................11
3.4 Life of Project Approvals; Termination.........................................................................11
3.5 Initiatives .......................................................................................................................12
3.6 No Affirmative Obligation to Develop; Timing of Development .................................13
3.7 No Conflicting Enactments............................................................................................13
3.8 Changes in the Law........................................................................................................13
3.9 No Reservation of Sanitary Sewer or Potable Water Capacity .....................................14 ARTICLE 4 FEES AND OTHER CHARGES..............................................................................14
4.1 City Fees. .......................................................................................................................14
4.2 Other Agency Fees.........................................................................................................15
4.3 Taxes and Assessments..................................................................................................15 ARTICLE 5 DEVELOPER COMMUNITY BENEFITS COMMITMENTS ..............................16
5.1 Public Benefits...............................................................................................................16
5.2 Recycled Water Pipe......................................................................................................17
5.3 Sales Tax Point of Sale Designation..............................................................................17 ARTICLE 6 ANNUAL REVIEW .................................................................................................18
6.1 Periodic Review.............................................................................................................18
6.2 Appeal Hearings ............................................................................................................20
6.3 Final Determination .......................................................................................................20
6.4 Relationship to Default Provisions................................................................................20 ARTICLE 7 MORTGAGEE PROTECTION................................................................................21
7.1 Mortgagee Protection.....................................................................................................21
7.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated ..............................................................................................21
7.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right to Cure .............................................................21
7.4 No Supersedure..............................................................................................................22
7.5 Technical Amendments to this Article 7 .......................................................................22 ARTICLE 8 AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT AND PROJECT APPROVALS.....................22
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 646
ii
8.1 Amendment of this Agreement......................................................................................22
8.2 Amendments to Development Agreement Statute.........................................................24
8.3 Amendments to Project Approvals................................................................................24
8.4 Reliance on IS/MND .....................................................................................................25
8.5 Subsequent CEQA Review............................................................................................25 ARTICLE 9 COOPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION........................................................25
9.1 Additional Project Approvals ......................................................................................25
9.2 Scope of Review of Additional Project Approvals........................................................26
9.3 Processing Applications for Additional Project Approvals...........................................26
9.4 Other Agency Additional Project Approvals; Authority of City...................................27
9.5 Implementation of Necessary Mitigation Measures and Conditions.............................27
9.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge................................................................27
9.7 Revision to Project.........................................................................................................29
9.8 State, Federal or Case Law ............................................................................................29
9.9 Compliance with Laws ..................................................................................................30
9.10 Indemnity and Hold Harmless.......................................................................................31 ARTICLE 10 ASSIGNMENT.......................................................................................................31
10.1 Transfers ........................................................................................................................31 ARTICLE 11 DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION ..........................................................32
11.1 Breach and Default ........................................................................................................32
11.2 Withholding of Permits..................................................................................................33
11.3 Termination....................................................................................................................33
11.4 Specific Performance for Violation of a Condition .......................................................33
11.5 Resolution of Disputes...................................................................................................33
11.6 Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative...........................................................................34
11.7 Limitation on Damages..................................................................................................34
11.8 Surviving Provisions......................................................................................................35 ARTICLE 12 MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS.......................................................................35
12.1 Incorporation of Recitals, Exhibits and Introductory Paragraph ...................................35
12.2 Severability ....................................................................................................................35
12.3 Construction...................................................................................................................35
12.4 Covenants Running with the Land.................................................................................35
12.5 Notices...........................................................................................................................35
12.6 Counterparts and Exhibits; Entire Agreement ...............................................................37
12.7 No Joint Venture or Partnership ....................................................................................37
12.8 Waivers..........................................................................................................................38
12.9 California Law; Venue...................................................................................................38
12.10 City Approvals and Actions...........................................................................................38
12.11 Estoppel Certificates......................................................................................................38
12.12 No Third Party Beneficiaries.........................................................................................39
12.13 Signatures.......................................................................................................................39
12.14 Time ...............................................................................................................................39
12.15 Days...............................................................................................................................39
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 647
iii
12.16 Limitation on Liability...................................................................................................39
12.17 Recordation of Development Agreement ......................................................................39
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit A Developer Property Legal Description
Exhibit B Developer Property Map
Exhibit C 789 Owner Property Legal Description
Exhibit D 789 Owner Property Map
Exhibit E Impact Fees
Exhibit F [Form of] Assignment & Assumption Agreement
Exhibit G Electrical and Green Infrastructure
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 648
1 DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) dated for reference purposes as of the Effective Date, is entered into by and between the CITY OF SAN CARLOS, a California municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (“City”), and BRANSTEN ROAD ASSOCIATES LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Developer”). City and Developer are sometimes referred to individually herein as a “Party” and collectively as “Parties.”
R E C I T A L S
The following recitals are a substantive part of this Agreement; capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise defined are defined in Section 1.1 of this Agreement.
A. In order to strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic costs and risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California enacted Section 65864 et seq. of the Government Code (“Development Agreement Statute”) which authorizes a city and a developer having a legal or equitable interest in real property to enter into a binding, long-term development agreement, establishing certain development rights in the property. This Agreement has been drafted and processed pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute.
B. Developer is the fee owner of that certain real property located at 1026 Bransten Road, designated as APN 046-131-630, and more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit A and Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein (“Developer Property”). The Developer Property is currently developed with the Cemex San Carlos Ready-Mix Concrete Plant.
C. Developer is under contract to purchase (“789 PSA”) from 789 OLD COUNTY ROAD, LLC, a California limited liability company (“789 Owner”) fee title to that certain real property located at 789 Old County Road, designated as APN 046-131-610, and more particularly described and depicted in Exhibit C and Exhibit D attached hereto and incorporated herein (“789 Owner Property”). The 789 Owner Property is currently developed with a parking lot that is used by a trucking business. The Developer Property and the 789 Owner Property are collectively the “Property”.
D. Developer wishes to redevelop the Property with an office/research and development campus that will include a 5-story, 179,665 square foot building, and a 4-story, 146,983 square foot building (each a “Building”) which total approximately 326,648 square feet, and one eight-level parking structure (collectively, the “789 Old County Road Project” or the “Project”).
E. To achieve the Parties’ mutual goals of redevelopment as expeditiously as possible, the Developer desires to receive assurance that it may proceed with the Project in accordance with the Applicable City Regulations. Therefore, this Agreement between City and Developer sets forth, among other things, the applicable fees, policies and zoning requirements that will apply to
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 649
2 Developer’s development of the Project and provides Developer with a vested right to develop the Project.
F. The City has prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Project (“IS/MND”) and held hearings pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) (set forth in Public Resources Code, Section 21000 et seq.). On February 26, 2025, the City circulated the IS/MND for public review and comment for a period through March 28, 2025.
G. Prior to or concurrently with approval of this Agreement, the City has taken or will take the following actions in connection with the development of the Project on the Property:
(a) Certification of the IS/MND by Resolution No. [_] adopted by the City Council on [_], following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission;
(b) Approval of the Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Plan (“MMRP”) by Resolution No. [_] adopted by the City Council on [_] following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission;
(c) Planned Development Rezoning of the Property by Ordinance No., adopted by the City Council on [_] following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission;
(d) Planned Development Plan, including a Master Sign Program, by Resolution No. [_], adopted by the City Council, following review and recommendation by the Planning Commission;
(e) Approval of Transportation Demand Management Plan by the Planning Commission on September 2, 2025;
(f) Approval of Design Review by the Planning Commission on September 2, 2025;
(g) Approval of Grading & Dirt Haul Certificate by the Planning Commission on September 2, 2025.
The approvals and development policies described in this Recital G, together with this Agreement, are collectively referred to herein as the “Project Approvals.” H. The Development Agreement Statute provides that the purpose of development agreements is to strengthen the public planning process, encourage comprehensive planning, obtain private participation in meeting community needs, and reduce uncertainty in the approval of development. The City has determined that by entering into this Agreement, City will further the purposes set forth in the Development Agreement Statute and City will benefit from the redevelopment of the Property, including monetary contributions to the City, underground electrical and green infrastructure, reimbursement for trees or window treatments on Hall Street, and other benefits provided in this Agreement.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 650
3 I. The terms and conditions of this Agreement have undergone review by City staff, the Planning and Transportation Commission and the City Council at publicly noticed meetings and have been found to be fair, just and reasonable and in conformance with the goals, policies, standards and land use designations specified in the City’s General Plan and consistent with the requirement under Government Code Section 65867.5, and further, the City Council finds that the economic interests of City’s citizens and the public health, safety and welfare will be best served by entering into this Agreement.
J. On September 2, 2025, after a duly noticed public hearing, the Planning Commission, the initial hearing body for purposes of development agreement review, adopted its Resolution No. [_] recommending approval of this Agreement to the City Council. After duly noticed public hearings, on October 14, 2025, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. [_] approving this Agreement (“Enacting Ordinance”), and adopted it on [_]. The Enacting Ordinance will become effective on [_], thirty (30) days thereafter.
A G R E E M E N T
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants and provisions set forth herein, the receipt and adequacy of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
ARTICLE 1
DEFINITIONS
1.1 Definitions.
“789 Owner” is defined in Recital C.
“789 Owner Property” is defined in Recital C.
“789 PSA” is defined in Recital C.
“Additional Project Approvals” is defined in Section 9.1. “Administrative Project Amendment” is defined in Section 8.3.2. “Affiliate of Developer” means an entity or person that directly or indirectly controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with Developer. For the purposes of this definition, “control” means the possession, direct or indirect, of the power to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of an entity or person, whether through the ownership of voting securities, by contract, or otherwise, and the terms “controlling” and “controlled” have the meanings correlative to the foregoing.
“Agreement” means this Development Agreement.
“Agreement Amendment” is defined in Section 8.1.3.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 651
4 “Applicable City Regulations” means (a) all City policies, standards and specifications set forth in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, including the specific conditions of approval adopted with respect to the Project Approvals; (b) with respect to matters not addressed by this Agreement or the Project Approvals but governing permitted uses of the Property, building locations, sizes, densities, intensities, design and heights, site design, setbacks, lot coverage and open space, and parking, those City ordinances, rules, regulations, official policies, standards and specifications in force and effect on the Effective Date; and (c) with respect to all other matters, including building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical codes, those New City Laws which may be applied to the Project and Developer pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, including but not limited to Section 3.2.
“Applicable Laws” means (a) all State and Federal laws and regulations applicable to the Property and the Project as enacted, adopted and amended from time to time; and (b) the Applicable City Regulations.
“Assignment and Assumption Agreement” is defined in Section 10.1. “Building” is defined in Recital D.
“Certificate of Occupancy” or “COO” means an official document issued by the City Building Official that certifies that the Building (not including any tenant improvements) proposed as part of the Project has been inspected and determined to comply with the Project Approvals, including the applicable California Building Standards Code and the City’s local ordinances which govern construction and occupancy. A “temporary” COO confirms the Building is safe for the proposed temporary use or occupancy but is still subject to a punch list of items required to be complete to obtain a final COO. A “final” COO means the Building has been inspected and determined safe for the proposed use and occupancy and all final punch list items are complete. “CEQA” is defined in Recital F.
“CEQA Guidelines” means those certain State CEQA Guidelines (set forth in California Code of Regulations section 15000 et seq.).
“Changes in the Law” is defined in Section 3.8.
“City” means the City of San Carlos, a California municipal corporation. “City Party” and “City Parties” are defined in Section 9.10. “Claims” means liabilities, obligations, orders, claims, damages, fines, penalties and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees (which may include, without limitation, reasonable City Attorney’s time as a pass-through cost without markup) and costs. “Connection Fees” means those fees charged by City or by a utility provider to utility users as a cost for connecting to water, sanitary sewer and other applicable utilities. “Community Benefits” is defined in Section 5.1.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 652
5 “Community Development Director” means the Director of Community Development of the City of San Carlos, or his/her designee.
“Default” is defined in Section 11.1.
“Developer” means BRANSTEN ROAD ASSOCIATES LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.
“Developer Party” and “Developer Parties” are defined in Section 9.10. “Developer Permitted Transfer” is defined in Section 10.1. “Developer Property” is defined in Recital B.
“Development Agreement Statute” is defined in Recital A. “Effective Date” is defined in Section 2.1.
“Enacting Ordinance” is defined in Recital J.
“Exactions” means exactions that may be imposed by the City as a condition of developing the Project, including requirements for acquisition, dedication or reservation of land; and obligations to construct on-site or off-site public and private infrastructure improvements such as roadways, utilities or other improvements necessary to support the Project, whether such exactions constitute subdivision improvements, mitigation measures in connection with environmental review of the Project, or impositions made under Applicable City Regulations. For purposes of this Agreement, Exactions do not include Impact Fees.
“Existing Traffic Impact Fee” is defined in Section 4.1.1. “Expiration Date” is defined in Section 2.2.1.
“Finding of Compliance” is defined in Section 6.1.3(a). “Finding of Noncompliance” is defined in Section 6.1.3(b). “First Tier Hall Street Lot” is defined in Section 5.1.3. “Force Majeure Delay” is defined in Section 2.2.2.
“General Plan” means the General Plan of the City of San Carlos in effect as of the Effective Date.
“Good Neighbor Payment” is defined in Section 5.1.
“Impact Fees” means the monetary amount charged by City in connection with a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of mitigating the impacts of the development project or development of the public facilities related to the development project, including, any “fee” as that term is defined by Government Code Section
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 653
6 66000(b). For purposes of this Agreement, a fee that meets both the definitions of an Impact Fee and an Exaction, will be considered to be an Impact Fee. Impact Fees do not include Other Agency Fees.
“Insubstantial Amendment” is defined in Section 8.1.2(b). “IS/MND” is defined in Recital F.
“Litigation Challenge” is defined in Section 9.6.
“MMRP” is defined in Recital G.
“Mortgage” is defined in Section 7.1.
“Mortgagee” is defined in Section 7.1.
“Municipal Code” means the Municipal Code of the City of San Carlos in effect as of the Effective Date.
“New City Laws” means and includes any ordinances, resolutions, orders, rules, official policies, standards, specifications, guidelines or other regulations, which are promulgated, adopted, enacted or amended by the City (including but not limited to any City agency, body, department, officer or employee) or its electorate (through the power of initiative or otherwise) after the Effective Date.
“Office/R&D” is defined in Section 4.1.1.
“Official Records” is defined in Section 12.17.
“Operating Memorandum” is defined in Section 8.1.2.
“Other Agency” or “Other Agencies” means any other public agency (individually) and other public agencies (collectively) having jurisdiction over the Property or the Project. “Other Agency Fees” is defined in Section 4.2.
“Other Agency Additional Approvals” means Additional Project Approvals to be obtained from entities other than City.
“Party/Parties” is defined in the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals of this Agreement.
“Planning Commission” means the Planning Commission of the City of San Carlos. “Prevailing Wage Laws” is defined in Section 9.9.
“Processing Fees” means all fees for processing development project applications, including any required supplemental or other further environmental review, plan checking and inspection and monitoring for land use approvals, design review, grading and building permits,
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 654
7 General Plan maintenance fees, encroachment permits, and other permits and entitlements required to implement the Project, which are in effect at the time those permits, approvals or entitlements are applied for and in effect at the time such work occurs, and which are intended to cover the actual costs of processing the foregoing, and which may include the cost of retaining outside contractors for plan checking or other purposes and City’s administrative expenses related to such retention as set forth in Section 9.3.
“Project” is defined in Recital D.
“Project Approvals” is defined in Recital G.
“Property” is defined in Recital C.
“Quarter End” is defined in Section 5.1.3.
“Reimbursement Request Deadline” is defined in Section 5.1.3. “Revised Traffic Impact Fee” is defined in Section 4.1.1. “Second Tier Hall Street Lot” is defined in Section 5.1.3. “Term” is defined in Section 2.2.1.
ARTICLE 2
EFFECTIVE DATE AND TERM
2.1 Effective Date. This Agreement shall become effective upon the later to occur of (i) the date the Enacting Ordinance is effective and (ii) execution by the Parties (“Effective Date”).
2.2 Term.
2.2.1 Term of Agreement. The “Term” of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and shall expire upon the earliest to occur of the following: (1) the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy for the Project; (2) termination of this Agreement in accordance with its terms, including without limitation this Section
2.2; or (3) the fifteenth (15
th) anniversary of the Effective Date. Upon such
termination, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect, subject, however, to the extension provisions set forth in Section 2.2.2 and Section 2.2.3, and subject to Section 11.8 below and those provisions that expressly survive termination. Termination of the Term as it may be extended is referred to herein as the “Expiration Date.” City shall have the right to extend the Term if it deems necessary for Developer to satisfy all its obligations under this Agreement.
2.2.2 Force Majeure Delay; Extension of Times of Performance. Subject to the limitations set forth below, performance by either Party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in Default, and all performance and other dates specified in this
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 655
8 Agreement shall be extended (except as otherwise excluded or qualified herein), where delays are unavoidable and beyond the reasonable control of the Party seeking the delay and actually prohibit, prevent or delay performance due to: war; insurrection; strikes and labor disputes; lockouts; riots; floods; earthquakes; fires; casualties; acts of God; acts of the public enemy; pandemics or epidemics; quarantine restrictions; freight embargoes; governmental restrictions or priority; litigation and arbitration, including court delays; legal challenges to this Agreement, the Project Approvals, or any other approval required for the Project or any initiatives or referenda regarding the same; environmental conditions, preexisting or discovered; unusually severe weather but only to the extent that such weather or its effects (including, without limitation, dry out time) result in delays that cumulatively exceed twenty (20) days for every winter season occurring after Commencement of Construction of the Project; acts or omissions of the other party; or acts or failures to act of any public or governmental agency or entity (except that acts or failures to act of City shall not excuse performance by City); moratorium (each a “Force Majeure Delay”). A Party’s financial inability to perform or obtain financing or adverse economic conditions generally shall not be grounds for claiming a Force Majeure Delay. An extension of time for any such cause shall be for the period of the enforced delay and shall commence to run from the time of the commencement of the cause, if written notice by the party claiming such extension is sent to the other party within sixty (60) days of the commencement of the cause.
If written notice is sent after such sixty (60) day period, then the extension shall commence to run no sooner than sixty (60) days prior to the giving of such notice.
Times of performance under this Agreement may also be extended in writing by the mutual agreement of City and Developer. The Term of this Agreement shall not be subject to extension for any Force Majeure Delay.
2.2.3 Extension of Term for Commencement of Construction of the Project. If the Developer is in good faith compliance with this Agreement, the City Manager may in his or her reasonable discretion enter in an Insubstantial Amendment to extend the Term until a final Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for all buildings and structures shown in the Project Approvals; provided, however, that the extension shall not exceed two (2) years and notwithstanding such extension, the Term shall expire and this Agreement shall terminate if after commencement of construction of the Project, work stops for more than six (6) consecutive months.
Upon such termination, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect except for those provisions that expressly survive termination.
2.3 City Representations and Warranties. City represents and warrants to Developer that, as of the Effective Date:
2.3.1 City is a municipal corporation, and has all necessary powers under the laws of the State of California to enter into and perform the undertakings and obligations of City under this Agreement.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 656
9 2.3.2 The execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of the obligations of City hereunder have been duly authorized by all necessary City Council action and all necessary approvals have been obtained.
2.3.3 This Agreement is a valid obligation of City and is enforceable in accordance with its terms.
During the Term of this Agreement, City shall, upon learning of any fact or condition which would cause any of the warranties and representations in this Section 2.3 not to be true, immediately give written notice of such fact or condition to Developer.
2.4 Developer Representations and Warranties. Developer represents and warrants to City that, as of the Effective Date:
2.4.1 Developer is duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, and is in good standing and has all necessary powers under the laws of the State of California to own property interests and in all other respects enter into and perform the undertakings and obligations of Developer under this Agreement.
2.4.2 The execution and delivery of this Agreement and the performance of the obligations of Developer hereunder have been duly authorized by all necessary company action and all necessary member approvals have been obtained.
2.4.3 This Agreement is a valid obligation of Developer and is enforceable in accordance with its terms.
2.4.4 Developer has not (i) made a general assignment for the benefit of creditors, (ii) filed any voluntary petition in bankruptcy or suffered the filing of any involuntary petition by Developer’s creditors, (iii) suffered the appointment of a receiver to take possession of all, or substantially all, of Developer’s assets, (iv) suffered the attachment or other judicial seizure of all, or substantially all, of Developer’s assets, (v) admitted in writing its inability to pay its debts as they come due, or (vi) made an offer of settlement, extension or composition to its creditors generally.
During the Term of this Agreement, Developer shall, upon learning of any fact or condition which would cause any of the warranties and representations in this Section 2.4 not to be true, immediately give written notice of such fact or condition to City.
ARTICLE 3
DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY
3.1 Vested Rights. The City hereby grants to Developer the present vested right to develop and construct on the Property all the improvements authorized by, and in accordance with, the Project Approvals. To the extent permitted by Applicable Laws, and except as otherwise provided herein, no future modification of the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, ordinances, policies or regulations shall apply to the Property that purports to: (i) limit the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, or the maximum height and
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 657
10 size of proposed buildings; (ii) impose requirements for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes or requirements for infrastructure, public improvements, or public utilities, other than as provided in the Project Approvals or pursuant to this Agreement; (iii) impose conditions upon development of the Property other than as permitted by the Applicable Laws, Changes in the Law, the Project Approvals and this Agreement; (iv) limit the timing, phasing or rate of development of the Property; provided, however, that nothing in this Agreement shall prevent or preclude City from adopting any land use ordinances, policies, regulations or amendments permitted herein or relieve Developer of its obligation to develop the Property within the times provided in this Agreement; (v) limit the location of building sites, grading or other improvements on the Property in a manner that is inconsistent with or substantially more restrictive than the limitations included in this Agreement or the Project Approvals; (vi) frustrate in a more than insignificant way the intent or purpose of the Project Approvals in relation to the Project; (vii) limit or control the ability to obtain public utilities, services, or facilities; (viii) require the issuance of additional permits or approvals by the City other than those required by Applicable Laws; or (ix) limit the processing or procuring of applications and approvals of Additional Project Approvals.
3.2 Reservations of Authority. The Parties acknowledge and agree that City is restricted in its authority to limit its police power by contract. This Agreement shall be construed to reserve to City all such power and authority which cannot be restricted by contract.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, the following regulations and provisions shall apply to the development of the Project:
3.2.1 Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.1, Processing Fees, Connection Fees and other fees of every kind and nature imposed by the City, and any increase or modification to those fees that are in force and effect at the time land use or development permits, approvals or entitlements are applied for or issued on any or all portions of the Project.
3.2.2 Regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals and any other matter of procedure then applicable in City at the time of permit application.
3.2.3 Regulations governing construction standards and specifications, including City’s building code, plumbing code, mechanical code, electrical code, fire code and grading code, and all other uniform construction codes then applicable in City at the time of permit application, and any regional changes to any uniform construction code then applicable in City at the time of building permit application, provided such New City Laws are uniformly applied on a City-wide basis to all substantially similar types of development projects and properties.
3.2.4 New City Laws applicable to the Property or Project, which do not conflict with this Agreement.
3.2.5 New City Laws which may be in conflict with this Agreement but which are necessary to protect persons or property from dangerous or hazardous conditions
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 658
11 which create a threat to the public health or safety or create a physical risk, based on findings by the City Council identifying the dangerous or hazardous conditions requiring such changes in the law, why there are no feasible alternatives to the imposition of such changes, and how such changes would alleviate the dangerous or hazardous condition. City’s decision to apply New City Laws to the Project shall be reviewed based on substantial evidence, and this section shall not be construed to impose the requirements set forth in Government Code Section 65589.5.
3.2.6 Exactions required by this Agreement, the Project Approvals or any Additional Project Approvals.
3.3 Regulation by Other Public Agencies. Developer acknowledges and agrees that other public agencies not within the control of City possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City, and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such other public agencies. Developer shall, at the time required by Developer in accordance with Developer’s construction schedule, apply for all such other permits and approvals as may be required by other governmental or quasigovernmental entities in connection with the development of, or the provision of services to, the Project. Developer shall also pay all required fees, including Other Agency Fees, when due to such public agencies. Developer acknowledges that City does not control the amount of any such fees. City shall reasonably cooperate with Developer in Developer’s effort to obtain such permits and approvals; provided, however, City shall have no obligation to incur any costs, without compensation or reimbursement by Developer, or to amend any policy, regulation or ordinance of City in connection therewith.
3.4 Life of Project Approvals; Termination.
3.4.1 Generally. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, the term of any and all Project Approvals shall automatically be extended for the longer of the Term of this Agreement or the term otherwise applicable to such Project Approvals, subject to the provisions of this Section 3.4. The termination of this Agreement at the end of the Term set forth in Section 2.2.1 shall have no effect on the Project Approvals, subject to the provisions in Section 3.4.2 below; provided, however, if this Agreement is terminated by either Party before expiration of the Term other than by Developer due to a Default by City, this Agreement and all Project Approvals shall terminate and have no further force or effect.
3.4.2 Continuing Vested Rights. In order to address and clarify Developer’s ability to build and operate the Project after the Expiration Date if not yet completed, the Parties agree that the following terms shall govern Developer’s vested rights. (a) Provided Developer has satisfied all its obligations under this Agreement as of the Expiration Date and termination of this Agreement, and Developer has obtained a final Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, the Project Approvals shall continue in effect as required for operation and use of the Project, subject only to California law that may apply to continued reliance on such approvals.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 659
12 (b) If development of the Project has not been completed as of the Expiration Date and termination of this Agreement, Developer may continue work after such termination and may complete the Project as approved by the Project Approvals so long as the following conditions are satisfied:
(i) As of the Expiration Date Developer is not in Default, or if subject to a breach that has not yet been cured then Developer may not exercise its rights under this Section 3.4.2(b) unless and until it timely cures the breach in the reasonable judgment of City; (ii) As of the Expiration Date, physical site work has commenced and qualifies for vesting under California common law established by Avco Community Builders v. South Coast Regional Commission, 17 Cal.3rd 785 (1976), provided such work does not stop for six (6) consecutive months or longer; and
(iii) As of the Expiration Date, Developer has satisfied all applicable mitigation measures and conditions of approval adopted by City as part of the Project Approvals that have come due as and when required.
(c) If Developer fails to satisfy all conditions under Section 3.4.2(b) by the Expiration Date, the following shall apply with regard to future development or operation of the Project:
(i) Developer’s vested rights secured by this Agreement with regard to the Project shall terminate and all Project Approvals shall be deemed terminated and may not be relied on by Developer or the Project, notwithstanding any ability under Applicable City Regulations that may provide for extensions of the Project Approvals; and (ii) Developer shall have no vested right to construct or continue construction of the Project without first obtaining new City discretionary approvals then required.
(d) The terms and conditions of this Section 3.4.2 and their enforcement shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement.
3.5 Initiatives. If any New City Law is enacted or imposed by a citizen-sponsored initiative or referendum, which New City Law would conflict with the Project Approvals or this Agreement or reduce the development rights or assurances provided by this Agreement, such New City Law shall not apply to the Property or Project; provided, however, the Parties acknowledge that City’s approval of this Agreement is a legislative action subject to referendum. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, no moratorium or other limitation (whether relating to the rate, timing, phasing or sequencing of development) affecting any entitlements or permits to use that are approved or to be approved, issued or granted by City shall apply to the Property or Project. Developer agrees and understands that City does not have authority or jurisdiction over any other public agency’s ability to
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 660
13 grant governmental approvals or permits or to impose a moratorium or other limitations that may affect the Project. City shall reasonably cooperate with Developer and, at Developer’s expense, undertake such actions as may be necessary to ensure this Agreement remains in full force and effect. City, except to submit to vote of the electorate initiatives and referendums required by law to be placed on a ballot and fulfill any legal responsibility to defend a ballot measure passed by its voters, shall not support, adopt or enact any New City Law, or take any other action which would violate the express provisions or spirit and intent of this Agreement.
3.6 No Affirmative Obligation to Develop; Timing of Development. The City acknowledges and agrees that the Developer has no affirmative obligation to develop the Project.
However, if the Developer, in its sole discretion, opts to develop the Project, such development shall comply with this Agreement. However, and not in any limitation of any of the foregoing, since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v.
City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to consider, and expressly provide for, the timing of development resulted in a later-adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties’ agreement, it is the desire of the Parties hereto to avoid that result. Therefore, notwithstanding the adoption of an initiative after the Effective Date by City’s electorate to the contrary, the Parties acknowledge that, except as otherwise provided for in this Agreement or the Project Approvals, Developer shall have the vested right to develop the Project in such order and at such rate and at such times as Developer deems appropriate in the exercise of its business judgment. However, if Developer proceeds with the Project, Developer shall meet its obligation to provide the public benefits described in Article 5 within the times provided therein.
3.7 No Conflicting Enactments. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, City shall not impose on the Project (whether by action of the City Council or by initiative, referendum or other means) any New City Law that is in conflict with this Agreement or the Project Approvals. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the City shall not (i) apply to the Property any change in land use designation or permitted use of the Property; (ii) limit or control the ability to obtain public utilities, services, or facilities; (iii) limit or control the uses; building setbacks, square footage, dimensions, floor plates, height; or location of buildings and structures; or spacing between buildings in a manner that is inconsistent with or more restrictive than the limitations included in the Project Approvals or this Agreement; or (iv) limit or control the rate, timing, or sequencing of the approval, development or construction of all or any part of the Project or Project Approvals, except as otherwise provided in this Agreement or the Project Approvals.
3.8 Changes in the Law. As provided in Section 65869.5 of the Development Agreement Statute, this Agreement shall not preclude the applicability to the Project of changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies, to the extent that such changes are specifically mandated and required by changes in State or Federal laws or by changes in laws, regulations, plans or policies of special districts or other governmental entities, other than the City, created or operating pursuant to the laws of the State of California (“Changes in the Law”). In the event Changes in the Law prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, the Parties shall meet and confer in good faith in order
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 661
14 to determine whether such provisions of this Agreement shall be modified or suspended, or performance thereof delayed, as may be necessary to comply with Changes in the Law, and City and Developer shall agree to such action as may be reasonably required. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude Developer from contesting by any available means (including administrative or judicial proceedings) the applicability to the Project of any such Changes in the Law.
3.9 No Reservation of Sanitary Sewer or Potable Water Capacity. City has found the Project to be consistent with the General Plan which anticipates that there will be sufficient potable water and sanitary sewer capacity to serve future development contemplated by the General Plan, including the Project. However, nothing in this Agreement is intended to exempt the Project or the Property from any water use rationing requirements that may be imposed on a City-wide basis from time to time in the future or be construed as a reservation of any existing sanitary sewer or potable water capacity. Nonetheless, to the maximum extent permitted by law and consistent with its authority, City upon Developer’s request shall cooperate with Developer (at no expense to City) in Developer’s effort to reserve such capacity for sewer and water services as may be necessary to serve the Project.
ARTICLE 4
FEES AND OTHER CHARGES
4.1 City Fees.
4.1.1 Impact Fees. Developer shall pay when due all existing Impact Fees applicable to the Project in accordance with this Agreement in effect as of the Effective Date at the lower of (i) the rates in effect as of the Effective Date, including all existing fee escalation provisions (including without limitation the escalation provision set forth in Resolution No. 2016-108) or (ii) the rates in effect when such existing Impact Fees are due and payable, and shall not be required to pay any escalations in such Impact Fees in excess of the fee escalation provisions in any Impact Fee in effect as of the Effective Date or pay any new Impact Fees enacted or established after the Effective Date. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Parties acknowledge and agree that City intends to undertake a new nexus study to support revisions to the traffic Impact Fee codified in Chapter 8.50 of the Municipal Code in effect as of the Effective Date (“Existing Traffic Impact Fee”). In the event that City adopts a revised traffic Impact Fee by December 31, 2030 (“Revised Traffic Impact Fee”), and the Revised Traffic Impact Fee applicable to office/research and development (“Office/R&D”) uses is different than the Existing Traffic Impact Fee applicable to Office/R&D uses, the Project thereafter shall be subject to the Revised Traffic Impact Fee applicable to Office/R&D uses; provided that in no event shall the Revised Traffic Impact Fee applicable to Office/R&D uses in the Project exceed one hundred and fifty percent (150%) of the Existing Traffic Impact Fee applicable to Office/R&D. No revisions to traffic Impact Fees applicable to Office/R&D uses subsequent to the Revised Traffic Impact Fee shall apply to the Project. The traffic Impact Fee for all uses in the Project other than Office/R&D uses shall be the Existing Traffic Impact Fee. The Impact Fees itemized on Exhibit E represent the
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 662
15 Parties’ good faith effort to identify the Impact Fees applicable to the Project. City and Developer agree to amend and restate Exhibit E, as necessary, in the event one or more Impact Fees have been inadvertently omitted or if any cost or credit amounts have been inadvertently miscalculated.
4.1.2 All Other City Fees. Except as otherwise provided in Section 4.1.1 above as to Impact Fees, Developer agrees to pay when due any existing, new, increased or modified fees, including Processing Fees and Connection Fees, at the rates then in effect at the time land use or development permits, approvals or entitlements are applied for or issued on any or all portions of the Project so long as any new fees or increases in existing fees from the amount existing as of the Effective Date applies on a Citywide basis and is consistent with the provisions of applicable California law, including the provisions of Government Code Section 66000 et seq.
4.1.3 Right to Protest. Developer acknowledges being aware of all City fees in effect as of the Effective Date that might be imposed on the Property and the Project, and Developer accepts and shall not protest or challenge imposition of the types and amounts of such fees in effect as of the Effective Date. Other than as specified in the previous sentence, Developer retains all rights to protest an imposition, fee, dedication, reservation, or other exaction, as set forth in California Government Code Section 66020, and nothing in this Agreement shall diminish or eliminate any of Developer’s rights set forth in such Section 66020. City may impose, and Developer shall comply with and not protest, those Exactions required by this Agreement and the Project Approvals.
4.2 Other Agency Fees. Nothing in this Agreement shall preclude City from collecting fees from Developer that are lawfully imposed on the Project by another agency having jurisdiction over the Project, which the City is required to collect on behalf of such other agencies (“Other Agency Fees”).
4.3 Taxes and Assessments. As of the Effective Date, assessments are in effect and applicable to the Property or the Project as shown on the latest property tax bill for the Property. City is not aware of any pending efforts to initiate or consider new or increased assessments that would apply to the Property or the Project. City may impose and Developer agrees to pay any and all existing, new, modified or increased taxes and assessments, other than Impact Fees, imposed on the Property or the Project in accordance with the laws in effect as of the date due, at the rate in effect at the time of payment. Nothing herein shall be construed so as to limit Developer from exercising whatever rights it may otherwise have in connection with protesting or otherwise objecting to the imposition of taxes or assessments on the Property, including but not limited to appealing property tax assessments in effect as of the Effective Date; provided, Developer acknowledges being aware of all taxes and assessments in effect as of the Effective Date, and, with the exception of real property tax assessments, Developer accepts and agrees that it shall not protest or challenge their imposition on the Property and the Project. In the event an assessment district is lawfully formed to provide funding for services, improvements, maintenance or facilities which are substantially the same as those services, improvements, maintenance or facilities being funded by the fees or assessments to be paid by Developer under the Project Approvals or
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 663
16 this Agreement, then at City’s election, taking into consideration City’s expectations as to when it would receive Developer’s payment of such fees or assessments, either (a) the fees or assessments to be paid by Developer shall be subject to reduction/credit in an amount equal to Developer’s new or increased assessment under the assessment district, or (b) the new assessment district shall reduce/credit Developer’s new assessment in an amount equal to such fees or assessments to be paid by Developer under the Project Approvals or this Agreement.
ARTICLE 5
DEVELOPER COMMUNITY BENEFITS COMMITMENTS
5.1 Public Benefits. Developer shall perform and provide the community benefit obligations described in this Section 5.1 (“Community Benefits”) in consideration for City permitting greater heights for the Buildings and a greater density for the Project than would otherwise be permitted under Applicable Law and in consideration for the rights and benefits conferred by City to Developer under this Agreement.
5.1.1 Developer’s Monetary Contribution. Developer shall pay City $2,448,955 prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Project. City shall deposit Developer’s payment into the City fund(s) of its choice, in its sole discretion, for expenditure by City in accordance with the terms of the fund.
5.1.2 Electrical and Green Infrastructure. Prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project, Developer shall have completed extension of the underground electrical and green infrastructure from the northwest corner of the Property to Terminal Way, as more particularly described in Exhibit G. The work described in this Section 5.1.2 shall be deemed to have a value of $1,751,045.
5.1.3 Good Neighbor Payment. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Project, Developer shall pay to the City a lump sum amount equal to THIRTY THOUSAND and 00/100 DOLLARS ($30,000.00) that City may pay to the residents of Hall Street for a tree or window treatments for windows facing the Project in the form of a reimbursement (“Good Neighbor Payment”). Upon Developer’s delivery of the Good Neighbor Payment to the City, Developer shall have no further obligations or responsibilities with respect thereto and shall have no liability in connection therewith.
Thereafter, City shall deliver an offer to reimburse the owner(s) of each residential lot addressed as 1005 Hall Street to 1063 Hall Street, representing the lots on the south side of Hall Street (each individually, a “First Tier Hall Street Lot” and collectively “First Tier Hall Street Lots”) for the cost to install one (1) tree in the backyard of each First Tier Hall Street Lot or to apply window treatments to the windows on the First Tier Hall Street Lot that face the Project, but not to exceed Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000). The offer shall include instructions and a deadline for delivering acceptance to City. The offer shall require that the owner(s)
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 664
17 of each First Tier Hall Street Lot deliver City evidence of the actual costs incurred to install the tree or apply window treatments.
If the owners of one or more First Tier Hall Street Lots fail to provide an acceptance on or before the City’s stated deadline, or fail to deliver City evidence of actual costs as stated above, City may in its sole and absolute discretion elect to (a) use the remaining portion of the Good Neighbor Payment to reimburse the owner(s) of one or more residential lots on Hall Street or Cherry Street between Old County Road and Industrial Road (each individually a “Second Tier Hall Street Lot” and collectively “Second Tier Hall Street Lots”) for the cost to install one (1) tree in each such Second Tier Hall Street Lot’s backyard or to apply window treatments to the windows on the Second Tier Hall Street Lot that face the Project, but not to exceed Three Thousand Dollars ($3,000) following the procedures described in the paragraph immediately above or (b) deposit the remaining portion of the Good Neighbor Payment into the City’s street tree/neighborhood improvement fund that was originally established for the area east of Old County Road to Industrial Road and extending north from Hall Street to Northwood Drive in accordance with the conditions of approval for the Transit Village Project.
5.2 Recycled Water Pipe. At the time of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the Project, the water infrastructure for the Project shall include dual plumbing for potable and recycled water, with separate pipe lines composed of appropriate material to accommodate recycled water.
5.3 Sales Tax Point of Sale Designation. The Developer shall use good faith, diligent efforts to the extent allowed by law to require all persons and entities providing materials to be used in connection with the construction and development of, or incorporated into, the Project, including by way of illustration but not limitation bulk lumber, concrete, structural steel, roof trusses and other pre-fabricated building components, to (a) obtain a use tax direct payment permit; (b) elect to obtain a subcontractor permit for the job site of a contract valued at $5 Million Dollars or more; or (c) otherwise designate the Property as the place of use of material used in the construction of the Project and the place of sale of all fixtures installed in and/or furnished in order to have the local portion of the sales and use tax distributed directly to City instead of through the county-wide pool. Developer shall instruct its general contractor(s) for the Project to, and shall cause such general contractor(s) to instruct its/their subcontractors to, cooperate with City to ensure the local sales/use tax derived from construction of the Project is allocated to City to the fullest extent possible and to the extent allowed by law. This Section 5.3 shall not apply to tenants who perform their own tenant improvement work.
5.3.1 To assist City in its efforts to ensure that such local sales/use tax is so allocated to City, Developer shall on an annual basis, or as frequently as quarterly upon City’s request, provide City with such information as shall be reasonably requested by City regarding subcontractors working on the Project with contracts in excess of the amount set forth above, including a description of all applicable work and materials and the dollar value of such subcontracts, and, if applicable, evidence of
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 665
18 their designation, such as approvals or applications for the direct payment permit, of City as the place of use of such work and materials. City may use such information to contact each subcontractor who may qualify for local allocation of use taxes to City. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the failure of any general contractor(s) or subcontractor(s) to allocate sales and use tax revenues as provided herein or to comply with this Section 5.3.1 shall not constitute a breach by Developer under this Agreement.
ARTICLE 6
ANNUAL REVIEW
6.1 Periodic Review.
6.1.1 As required by the City of San Carlos City Code Section 18.37.080, Developer shall be required to demonstrate compliance with the provisions of the Agreement at least once a year at which time the Community Development Director shall review the Agreement. The annual review required by California Government Code Section 65865.1 and Section 18.37.80 of the San Carlos Municipal Code shall be conducted for the purposes and in the manner stated in those laws as further provided herein. The procedure set forth in this Article shall be used by Developer and City in complying with the annual review requirement. The City and Developer agree that the annual review process shall review compliance by Developer with the obligations under this Agreement but shall not review compliance with other Project Approvals.
6.1.2 Developer Compliance Letter. No later than the last business day of January of each year, Developer shall submit a letter to the Community Development Director demonstrating Developer’s good faith compliance with the material terms and conditions of this Development Agreement and shall include in the letter a statement that the letter is being submitted to City pursuant to the requirements of Government Code Section 65865.1.
6.1.3 Community Development Director Review. Within thirty (30) days after the receipt of Developer’s letter pursuant to Section 6.1.2, the Community Development Director shall review Developer’s submission and determine on the basis of substantial evidence whether Developer has, for the year under review, demonstrated good faith compliance with the material terms and conditions of this Development Agreement.
(a) Community Development Director Compliance Finding. If the Community Development Director finds that Developer has so complied, the Community Development Director shall issue and deliver to Developer a written “Finding of Compliance” in recordable form containing the Community Development Director’s finding that Developer is in good faith compliance with the material terms and conditions of this Agreement for
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 666
19 the year under review. The Finding of Compliance may be recorded at the Community Development Director’s or Developer’s discretion. (b) Community Development Director Noncompliance Finding. If the Community Development Director (or the City Council on appeal pursuant to Section 6.2) finds that there is substantial evidence that Developer has not complied in good faith with the material terms and conditions of this Agreement and that Developer is in material breach of this Agreement for the year under review, the Community Development Director shall issue and deliver to Developer a written “Finding of Noncompliance” specifying in detail the nature of the failures in performance that the Community Development Director (or City Council on appeal) claims constitutes material noncompliance, all facts demonstrating substantial evidence of material noncompliance, and the manner in which such noncompliance may be satisfactorily cured in accordance with the Agreement. The Community Development Director shall grant a reasonable period of time for Developer to cure the alleged noncompliance. The Community Development Director shall grant a cure period of at least sixty (60) days and shall consider in good faith a request from Developer that City extend the sixty (60) day period if Developer is proceeding in good faith to cure the noncompliance and additional time is reasonably needed. At the conclusion of the cure period, the Community Development Director shall either (i) find that Developer is in compliance in accordance with Section 6.1.3(a); or (ii) find that Developer is not in compliance and the Parties may terminate or modify the Development Agreement by mutual consent pursuant to Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868 and Applicable City Regulations or the Community Development Director may refer the matter to City Council as specified in Section 6.1.4. In the event that the Finding of Noncompliance is disputed by the Parties or is an event of Default pursuant to Article 11 herein, the Parties shall be entitled to their respective rights and obligations under both Articles 5 and 7 herein, except that the entity allegedly in default shall be accorded only one of the sixty (60)-day cure periods referred to in Sections 6.1.3(a) and 11.1 herein. A Finding of Noncompliance may be recorded after it becomes final as determined by Section 6.3, provided that in the event City subsequently determines Developer to be in compliance, City shall issue and record a subsequent Finding of Compliance indicating that the prior Finding of Noncompliance has been cured.
6.1.4 Appeal or Referral to City Council.
(a) Referral. If Developer fails to cure any alleged noncompliance to the Community Development Director’s reasonable satisfaction during the prescribed cure period and any extensions thereto, the Community Development Director may refer the alleged noncompliance to the City Council for consideration of termination or modification of the Agreement in accordance with Government Code Sections 65865.1, the Applicable City Regulations, and this Agreement.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 667
20 (b) Appeal. Within seven (7) days after the Community Development Director’s issuance of a Finding of Compliance or a Finding of Noncompliance, any interested person may file a written appeal of the finding with the City Council. The appellant shall specify in writing the reasons for the appeal.
6.2 Appeal Hearings. The City Council shall hold a public hearing regarding any referral of noncompliance pursuant to Section 6.1.4(a) or any appeal pursuant to Section 6.1.4(b). City shall deliver notice of the hearing to Developer by certified mail containing: (i) the time and place of the City Council hearings; (ii) a statement as to whether City proposes to terminate or modify this Agreement and the terms of any proposed modification; and (iii) any other information reasonably necessary to inform Developer of the nature of the proceedings. At least three business (3) days prior to the hearing, City shall deliver to Developer all staff reports and all other relevant documents pertaining to the hearings. At the time of the hearings, Developer shall be given an opportunity to be heard. After the public hearings, the City Council may uphold, rescind, or modify the Community Development Director’s findings and issue a Finding of Compliance or a Finding of Noncompliance. In the event the City Council upholds or issues a Finding of Noncompliance, subject to the notice requirements of this section, the City Council may modify or terminate this Agreement, provided that any such modification or termination shall bear a reasonable nexus to, and be proportional in severity to the magnitude of, the alleged noncompliance, and in no event shall termination be permitted except in accordance with Article 11 herein.
6.3 Final Determination. The issuance of a Finding of Compliance by the Community Development Director and the expiration of the appeal period without appeal, or the confirmation by the City Council of the Finding of Compliance on such appeal, shall conclude the review for the applicable period and such determination shall be final. At Developer’s request, City shall issue and have recorded a certificate of compliance indicating Developer’s compliance with the terms of this Agreement. The issuance of a Finding of Noncompliance by the City Council shall conclude the review for the applicable period and such determination shall be final.
6.4 Relationship to Default Provisions. The above procedures shall supplement and shall not replace that provision of Section 11.1 of this Agreement whereby either City or Developer may, at any time, assert matters which either Party believes have not been undertaken in accordance with this Agreement by delivering a written notice of Default and following the procedures set forth in said Section 11.1. Notwithstanding the foregoing, following the issuance of any Finding of Noncompliance and expiration of the appeal period without appeal, or following any City Council hearing upholding any Finding of Noncompliance without any timely legal challenge, City need not issue any notice of Default or allow any further opportunity to cure pursuant to Article 11 and may proceed to terminate this Agreement according to the procedures set forth in Article 11.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 668
21 ARTICLE 7
MORTGAGEE PROTECTION
7.1 Mortgagee Protection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property or any portion thereof after the date of recording the Agreement, including the lien of any deed of trust or mortgage (“Mortgage”). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all of the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against and shall run to the benefit of any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee (“Mortgagee”), who acquires title or possession to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee’s sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure or otherwise, subject to the provisions in Section 2.1 limiting the benefits of this Agreement to Developer and its successors but not a separate owner of the Property.
7.2 Mortgagee Not Obligated.
7.2.1 Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 7.1 above, except as specified in Section
7.2.2, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement to construct or complete the construction of the Project, or any portion thereof, or to guarantee such construction or completion; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any use except in full compliance with the Project Approvals and this Agreement nor to construct any improvements thereon or institute any uses other than those uses and improvements provided for or authorized by this Agreement and the Project Approvals.
7.2.2 Any Mortgagee or successor in interest to a Mortgagee that is not proceeding to construct or complete construction of the Project pursuant to the Project Approvals and this Agreement must comply with all federal and state law and permit conditions applicable to the Project construction and shall not allow or permit a nuisance.
7.3 Notice of Default to Mortgagee; Right to Cure. With respect to any Mortgage granted by Developer as provided herein, so long as any such Mortgage shall remain unsatisfied of record, the following provisions shall apply:
7.3.1 City, upon serving Developer any notice of Default, shall also serve a copy of such notice upon any Mortgagee at the address for Mortgagee provided to City by Mortgagee or Developer, and no notice by City to Developer hereunder shall affect any rights of a Mortgagee unless and until a copy thereof has been so served on such Mortgagee; provided, however, that failure so to deliver any such notice shall in no way affect the validity of the notice sent to Developer as between Developer and City.
7.3.2 In the event of a Default by Developer, any Mortgagee shall have the right to remedy, or cause to be remedied, such Default within sixty (60) days following the
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 669
22 later to occur of (i) the date of Mortgagee’s receipt of the notice referred to in Section 7.3.1 above, or (ii) the expiration of the period provided herein for Developer to remedy or cure such Default, and City shall accept such performance by or at the insistence of the Mortgagee as if the same had been timely made by Developer; provided, however, that (a) if such Default is not capable of being cured within the timeframes set forth in this Section 7.3.2 and Mortgagee commences to cure the Default within such timeframes, then Mortgagee shall have such additional time as is required to cure the Default so long as Mortgagee diligently prosecutes the cure to completion and (b) if possession of the Property (or portion thereof) is required to effectuate such cure or remedy, the Mortgagee shall be deemed to have timely cured or remedied if it commences the proceedings necessary to obtain possession thereof within sixty (60) days after receipt of the copy of the notice, diligently pursues such proceedings to completion, and, after obtaining possession, diligently completes such cure or remedy.
7.3.3 Any notice or other communication which City shall desire or is required to give to or serve upon the Mortgagee shall be in writing and shall be served in the manner set forth in Section 12.5, addressed to the Mortgagee at the address provided by Mortgagee to City. Any notice or other communication which Mortgagee shall give to or serve upon City shall be deemed to have been duly given or served if sent in the manner and at City’s address as set forth in Section 12.5, or at such other address as shall be designated by City by notice in writing given to the Mortgagee in like manner.
7.4 No Supersedure. Nothing in this Article 7 shall be deemed to supersede or release a Mortgagee or modify a Mortgagee’s obligations under any subdivision or public improvement agreement, temporary access agreement or other obligation incurred with respect to the Project outside this Agreement, nor shall any provision of this Article 7 constitute an obligation of City to such Mortgagee, except as to the notice requirements of Section 7.3.
7.5 Technical Amendments to this Article 7. City agrees to reasonably consider and approve interpretations and/or technical amendments to the provisions of this Agreement that are required by lenders for the acquisition and construction of the improvements on the Property or any refinancing thereof and to otherwise cooperate in good faith with Developer at Developer’s expense to facilitate Developer’s negotiations with lenders.
ARTICLE 8
AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT AND PROJECT APPROVALS
8.1 Amendment of this Agreement.
8.1.1 Amendment of Agreement by Mutual Consent. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein (including but not limited to Section 6.1 relating to City’s annual review and Section 11.3 relating to termination in the event of a Default), this Agreement may be terminated, modified or amended in writing from time to time
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 670
23 only by mutual consent of the Parties hereto or their successors-in-interest or assigns, and in accordance with the provisions of Government Code sections 65867, 65867.5 and 65868.
8.1.2 Refinement by Operating Memoranda.
(a) The Parties acknowledge that the provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between City and Developer, and during the course of implementing this Agreement and developing the Project refinements and clarifications of this Agreement become appropriate and desired with respect to the details of performance of City and Developer. If and when, from time to time, during the Term of this Agreement, City and Developer agree that such a refinement is necessary or appropriate, City and Developer shall effectuate such refinement through a memorandum (the “Operating Memorandum”) approved in writing by City and Developer, which, after execution, shall be attached hereto as an addendum and become a part hereof. Any Operating Memorandum may be further refined from time to time as necessary with future approval by City and Developer. No Operating Memorandum shall constitute an amendment to this Agreement requiring public notice or hearing. The City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, shall make the determination on behalf of City whether a requested refinement may be effectuated pursuant to this Section 8.1.2 or whether the requested refinement is of such a character to constitute an amendment hereof pursuant to Section 8.1.3 below. The City Manager shall be authorized to execute any Operating Memoranda hereunder on behalf of City.
(b) Any amendment to this Agreement that, in the context of the overall Project contemplated by this Agreement that does not substantially affect (i) the Term; (ii) permitted uses of the Property; (iii) provisions for the reservation or dedication of land; (iv) conditions, terms, restrictions or requirements for Additional Project Approvals; (v) increases in the density or intensity of the use of the Property or the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; (vi) monetary contributions by Developer; (vii) the provision of Community Benefits described in Article 5; or (viii) the nature, timing of delivery, or scope of public improvements required by the Project Approvals or Additional Project Approvals shall be deemed an “Insubstantial Amendment”. The City Manager, except to the extent otherwise required by Applicable Law, may approve the Insubstantial Amendment without notice and public hearing.
8.1.3 Agreement Amendments. Any revision to this Agreement which is determined not to qualify for an Operating Memorandum as set forth in Section 8.1.2 shall be deemed an “Agreement Amendment” and shall require giving of notice and a public hearing before the Planning Commission and City Council in accordance with Applicable Law. The City Manager shall have the authority in her or his reasonable discretion to determine if a proposed revision is an Agreement
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 671
24 Amendment subject to this Section 8.1.3 or qualifies for an Operating Memorandum subject to Section 8.1.2.
8.1.4 Requirement for Writing. No modification, amendment or other change to this Agreement or any provision hereof shall be effective for any purpose unless specifically set forth in writing which refers expressly to this Agreement and is signed by duly authorized representatives of each Party or their successors.
8.2 Amendments to Development Agreement Statute. This Agreement has been entered into in reliance upon the provisions of the Development Agreement Statute as those provisions existed as of the date of execution of this Agreement. No amendment or addition to those provisions which would materially affect the interpretation or enforceability of this Agreement shall be applicable to this Agreement, unless such amendment or addition is specifically required by the California State Legislature, or is mandated by a court of competent jurisdiction. If such amendment or change is permissive (as opposed to mandatory), this Agreement shall not be affected by same unless the Parties mutually agree in writing to amend this Agreement to permit such applicability.
8.3 Amendments to Project Approvals.
8.3.1 Generally. Project Approvals (except for this Agreement the amendment process for which is set forth in this Article 8) may be amended or modified from time to time, but only at the written request of Developer or with the written consent of Developer at its sole discretion. All amendments to the Project Approvals shall automatically become part of the Project Approvals. The permitted uses of the Property, the maximum density, the intensity of use, the maximum height and size of the proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, the conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions, the provisions for public improvements and financing of public improvements, and the other terms and conditions of development as set forth in all such amendments shall be automatically vested pursuant to this Agreement, without requiring an amendment to this Agreement. Amendments to the Project Approvals shall be governed by the Project Approvals and the Applicable Laws. City shall not request or process any amendment to the Project Approvals that would affect the Property or the Project without Developer’s prior written consent.
8.3.2 Administrative Amendments of Project Approvals. Upon the request of Developer for an amendment or modification of any Project Approvals (except for this Agreement the amendment process for which is set forth in this Article 8), the City Manager or his or her designee shall determine, at his or her discretion and subject to referral to a hearing body if considered appropriate: (a) whether the requested amendment or modification is minor when considered in light of the Project as a whole; and (b) whether the requested amendment or modification substantially conforms with the material terms of this Agreement and the Applicable Laws and may be processed administratively. If the City Manager or his or her designee finds that the requested amendment or modification is both minor and substantially
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 672
25 conforms with the material terms of this Agreement and the Applicable Laws, the amendment or modification shall be determined to be an “Administrative Project Amendment,” and the City Manager or his or her designee may approve the Administrative Project Amendment, without public notice or a public hearing.
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, lot line adjustments, minor reductions in the density, intensity, scale or scope of the Project, minor alterations in vehicle circulation patterns or vehicle access points, variations in the location of structures that do not substantially alter the design concepts of the Project, substitution of comparable landscaping for any landscaping shown on any development plan or landscape plan, variations in the location or installation of utilities and other infrastructure connections and facilities that do not substantially alter design concepts of the Project, and minor adjustments to a subdivision map or the Property legal description shall be deemed to be minor amendments or modifications. Any request of Developer for an amendment or modification to a Project Approval that is determined not to be an Administrative Project Amendment as set forth above shall be subject to review, consideration and action pursuant to the Applicable Laws and this Agreement.
8.4 Reliance on IS/MND. The IS/MND, which has been certified by City as being in compliance with CEQA, addresses the potential environmental impacts of the entire Project as it is described in the Project Approvals as described in the MMRP. It is agreed that, in acting on any discretionary Additional Project Approvals for the Project, City will rely on the IS/MND to satisfy the requirements of CEQA to the fullest extent permissible by CEQA, and City will not require a new initial study, negative declaration or subsequent or supplemental EIR unless City determines that such additional analysis and processing are required by CEQA and will not impose on the Project any mitigation measures or other conditions of approval other than those specifically imposed by the Project Approvals and the MMRP or specifically required by the Applicable Laws.
8.5 Subsequent CEQA Review. In the event that any additional CEQA documentation is legally required for any discretionary Additional Project Approval for the Project, then the scope of such documentation shall be focused, to the extent possible consistent with CEQA, on the specific subject matter of the Additional Project Approval, and City, at Developer’s expense, shall conduct such CEQA review as expeditiously as possible.
ARTICLE 9
COOPERATION AND IMPLEMENTATION
9.1 Additional Project Approvals. Certain subsequent land use approvals, entitlements, and permits other than the Project Approvals, will be necessary or desirable for implementation of the Project (“Additional Project Approvals”). The Additional Project Approvals may include, without limitation, the following: amendments of the Project Approvals, grading permits, building permits, sewer and water connection permits, certificates of occupancy, lot line adjustments, site plans, development plans, land use plans, building plans and specifications, parcel maps and subdivision maps, and any amendments to, or repealing of, any of the foregoing. Except as otherwise expressly
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 673
26 provided herein, the City shall not impose requirements or conditions upon Project development and construction that are inconsistent with the Project Approvals and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. Further, except as expressly provided herein, City shall not exercise discretion in determining whether or how to grant Additional Project Approvals in a manner that would prevent development of the Project for the uses and to the maximum intensity of development set forth in the Project Approvals.
9.2 Scope of Review of Additional Project Approvals. By approving the Project Approvals, City has made a final policy decision that the Project is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare. Accordingly, City shall not use its authority in considering any application for a discretionary Additional Project Approval to change the policy decisions reflected by the Project Approvals or otherwise to prevent or delay development of the Project as set forth in the Project Approvals. Instead, the Additional Project Approvals shall be deemed to be tools to implement those final policy decisions.
9.3 Processing Applications for Additional Project Approvals.
9.3.1 Developer acknowledges that City cannot begin processing applications for Additional Project Approvals until Developer submits complete applications on a timely basis. Developer shall use diligent good faith efforts to (i) provide to City in a timely manner any and all documents, applications, plans, and other information necessary for City to carry out its obligations hereunder; and (ii) cause Developer’s planners, engineers, and all other consultants to provide to City in a timely manner all such documents, applications, plans and other materials required under Applicable Laws. It is the express intent of Developer and City to cooperate and diligently work to obtain any and all Additional Project Approvals.
9.3.2 Upon submission by Developer of all appropriate applications and Processing Fees for any pending Additional Project Approval, City shall, to the full extent allowed by Applicable Laws, promptly and diligently, subject to City ordinances, policies and procedures regarding hiring and contracting, commence and complete all steps necessary to act on Developer’s currently pending Additional Project Approval applications including: (i) if legally required, providing notice and holding public hearings; and (ii) acting on any such pending Additional Project Approval application. Upon Developer’s request and prior approval, when City deems it necessary or desirable, City will endeavor to retain consultants to assist in reviewing and processing Developer’s applications, at Developer’s expense including any added expense for City staff to retain and supervise such consultants.
City similarly will consider Developer’s request to arrange overtime staff assistance; provided, Developer acknowledges that City will have other development applications and planning work in process or waiting to be processed from time to time, and Developer’s Additional Project Approval applications are not entitled to priority treatment to the disadvantage of such other applications and work; and provided further, Developer acknowledges there are practical constraints on City’s ability to arrange staff overtime.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 674
27 9.4 Other Agency Additional Project Approvals; Authority of City. City shall cooperate with Developer, to the extent appropriate and as permitted by law, in Developer’s efforts to obtain, as may be required, Other Agency Additional Project Approvals. Notwithstanding the issuance to Developer of Other Agency Additional Project Approvals, Developer agrees that City shall have the right to review, modify, approve and/or reject any and all submissions subject to the Other Agency Additional Project Approvals which, but for the authority of the other governmental or quasi-governmental entities issuing the Other Agency Additional Project Approvals, would otherwise require City approval. Developer agrees that City may review, modify, approve and/or reject any such materials or applications to ensure consistency with this Agreement and the Project Approvals and Developer shall incorporate any and all changes required by City prior to submitting such materials and applications to the other governmental or quasi-governmental entities for review and/or approval. Other Agencies not within the control of City may possess authority to regulate aspects of the development of the Property separately from or jointly with City, and this Agreement does not limit the authority of such Other Agencies to issue or deny an Other Agency Additional Project Approvals. Nevertheless, City shall be bound by, and shall abide by, its covenants and obligations under this Agreement in all respects when dealing with any such agency regarding the Property. City shall cooperate with Developer, at Developer’s expense, to the extent appropriate and as permitted by law, in Developer’s efforts to obtain, as may be required, Other Agency Additional Project Approvals.
9.5 Implementation of Necessary Mitigation Measures and Conditions. Developer shall, at its sole cost and expense, comply with the MMRP requirements and conditions of approval included with the Project Approvals as applicable to the Property and Project.
9.6 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge. City and Developer shall cooperate in the defense of any court action or proceeding instituted by a third party or other governmental entity or official challenging the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the City’s approval of this Agreement or any of the Project Approvals (each, a “Litigation Challenge”), and the Parties shall keep each other informed of all developments relating to such defense, subject only to confidentiality requirements that may prevent the communication of such information. Developer’s monetary obligations under this Section
9.6 and its subsections shall survive expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
9.6.1 Meet and Confer. If a Litigation Challenge is filed, upon receipt of the petition, the Parties will have twenty (20) days to meet and confer regarding the merits of such Litigation Challenge and to determine whether to defend against the Litigation Challenge, which period may be extended by the Parties’ mutual agreement so long as it does not impact any litigation deadlines. The City and Developer mutually commit to meet all required litigation timelines and deadlines. The Parties shall expeditiously enter a joint defense agreement, which will include among other things, provisions regarding confidentiality. The City Manager is authorized to negotiate and enter such joint defense agreement in a form acceptable to the City Attorney. Such joint defense agreement shall also provide that any proposed settlement of a Litigation Challenge shall be subject to City’s and Developer’s approval, each in its reasonable discretion. If the terms of the proposed settlement
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 675
28 would constitute an amendment or modification of this Agreement, the settlement shall not become effective unless such amendment or modification is approved by Developer, and by City in accordance with Applicable Laws, and City reserves its full legislative discretion with respect thereto.
9.6.2 Defense Election. If, after meeting and conferring, the Parties mutually agree (each in its sole discretion) to defend against the Litigation Challenge, then the following shall apply:
(a) Joint Representation. For the purposes of cost-efficiency and coordination, the Parties shall first consider defending the Litigation Challenge jointly, with counsel and under terms of joint representation mutually acceptable to the City and Developer (each in its sole discretion), at the Developer’s sole cost and expense.
(b) If the Parties cannot reach timely and mutual agreement on a joint counsel, and Developer continues to elect (in its sole discretion) to defend against the Litigation Challenge, then:
(i) Developer shall take the lead role defending such Litigation Challenge and may, in its sole discretion, elect to be represented by the legal counsel of its choice;
(ii) City may, in its sole discretion, elect to be separately represented by the outside legal counsel of its choice in any such action or proceeding with the reasonable costs of such representation to be paid by Developer;
(iii) Developer shall reimburse City, within ten (10) business days following City’s written demand therefor, which may be made from time to time during the course of such litigation, all necessary and reasonable costs incurred by City in connection with the Litigation Challenge, including City’s administrative, outside legal fees and costs, and court costs;
(iv) The Parties intend that the City’s role under subsection (b)(ii) shall be primarily oversight although the City reserves its right to protect the City’s interests, and the City shall make good faith efforts to maximize coordination and minimize its outside legal costs (for example, minimizing filing separate briefs, and duplication of effort to the extent feasible).
(v) For any Litigation Challenge which the Developer has elected to defend under this Section 9.6.2(b) Developer shall indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City and the City Parties from any liability, damages, claim, action, cause of action, judgment (including City costs to effectuate such judgment, including any attorneys’ fees or cost awards, including attorneys’ fees awarded
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 676
29 under Code of Civil Procedure Section 1021.5, assessed or awarded against City by way of judgment, settlement, or stipulation), loss (direct or indirect), obligation, order, fine, penalty or proceeding (including legal costs, attorneys’ fees, expert witness or consultant fees, staff time, expenses or costs) related to such Litigation Challenge. “Attorneys’ fees” as used in this Section 9.6.2(b)(v) shall include reasonable City Attorney’s time as a pass-through cost without markup.
9.6.3 Developer Election Not To Defend. If Developer elects, in its sole and absolute discretion, not to defend against the Litigation Challenge, it shall deliver written notice to the City regarding such decision. If Developer elects not to defend or elects to terminate its defense, the City has the right, but not the obligation, to proceed to defend against the Litigation Challenge and shall take the lead role defending such Litigation Challenge and may, in its sole discretion, elect to be represented by the legal counsel of its choice, at its sole cost and expense. If Developer elects not to defend, the City has the right, but not the obligation, to terminate this Agreement and any Project Approvals then in effect, and to consider the Developer’s application for any Additional Project Approvals withdrawn. In the event the City does not terminate this Agreement, then if the terms of a proposed settlement would constitute an amendment or modification of this Agreement, the settlement shall not become effective unless such amendment or modification is approved by Developer, and by City in accordance with Applicable Laws, and City reserves its full legislative discretion with respect thereto. In the event the Developer does not approve such amendment or modification, the City retains the right, but not the obligation, to terminate this Agreement and any Project Approvals then in effect, and to consider the Developer’s application for any Additional Project Approvals withdrawn. If Developer elects pursuant to this Section 9.6.3 not to defend against the Litigation Challenge and so notifies City, and City thereafter elects not to defend against the Litigation Challenge, Developer shall be liable for and shall promptly reimburse City for (i) any costs, fees or payments owed as a result of the Litigation Challenge that may be City’s obligation, whether by judgment, settlement or otherwise, and (ii) all necessary and reasonable costs incurred by City in connection with the Litigation Challenge, including City’s administrative, outside legal fees and costs, and court costs.
9.7 Revision to Project. In the event of a court order issued as a result of a successful Litigation Challenge, City shall, to the extent permitted by law or court order, in good faith seek to comply with the court order in such a manner as will maintain the integrity of the Project Approvals and avoid or minimize to the greatest extent possible (i) any impact to the development of the Project as provided for in, and contemplated by, the Project Approvals, or (ii) any conflict with the Project Approvals or frustration of the intent or purpose of the Project Approvals.
9.8 State, Federal or Case Law. Where any state, federal or case law allows City to exercise any discretion or take any act with respect to that law, City shall, in an expeditious and timely manner, at the earliest possible time, (a) exercise its discretion in such a way as to
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 677
30 be consistent with, and carry out the terms of, this Agreement and (b) take such other actions as may be necessary to carry out in good faith the terms of this Agreement.
9.9 Compliance with Laws. Developer, at its sole cost and expense, shall comply with the requirements of, and obtain all permits and approvals required by local, State and Federal agencies having jurisdiction over the Property or Project. Furthermore, Developer shall carry out the Project work in conformity with all Applicable Laws including, if and to the extent applicable, all State Labor Code requirements and implementing regulations of the Department of Industrial Relations pertaining to “public works,” including the payment of prevailing wages (collectively, “Prevailing Wage Laws”). Developer shall require the contractor(s) for all work that is subject to Prevailing Wage Laws to submit, upon request by City, certified copies of payroll records to City at the Property or at another location within City, and to maintain and make records available to City and its designees for inspection and copying to ensure compliance with Prevailing Wage Laws. Developer shall also include in each of its contractor agreements, a provision in form reasonably acceptable to City, obligating the contractor to require its contractors and/or subcontractors to comply with Prevailing Wage Laws and to submit, upon request by City, certified copies of payroll records to City and to maintain and make such payroll records available to City and its designees for inspection and copying during regular business hours at the contractor’s or subcontractor’s regular place of business. Developer shall defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to the City), indemnify, assume all responsibility for, and hold harmless City Parties from and against any and all present and future Claims arising out of or in any way connected with Developer’s or its contractors’ or subcontractors’ obligations to comply with all Prevailing Wage Laws, including all Claims that may be made by contractors, subcontractors or other third-party claimants pursuant to Labor Code sections 1726 and 1781. Nothing herein is intended to require compliance with Prevailing Wage Laws beyond what is required by law. Developer hereby waives and releases City Parties from any and all manner of Claims or other compensation whatsoever, in law or equity, of whatever kind or nature, whether known or unknown, direct or indirect, foreseeable or unforeseeable, absolute or contingent, now existing or which may in the future arise, including lost business opportunities or economic advantage, and special and consequential damages, arising out of, directly or indirectly, or in any way connected with Developer’s obligation to comply with all Prevailing Wage Laws. Developer is aware of and familiar with the provisions of Section 1542 of the California Civil Code which provides as follows:
“A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE
CREDITOR OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO
EXIST IN HIS OR HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE
RELEASE AND THAT, IF KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE
MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE
DEBTOR OR RELEASED PARTY.”
INITIALS: DEVELOPER ____________
As it relates to this Section 9.9, Developer hereby waives and relinquishes all rights and benefits which it may have under Section 1542 of the California Civil Code.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 678
31 9.10 Indemnity and Hold Harmless. Developer shall indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to City) and hold harmless the City, including its elected and appointed officers, officials, employees, contractors, representatives and authorized agents (each a “City Party” and collectively “City Parties”) from and against any and all Claims, including Claims for any bodily injury, death, or property damage, resulting directly or indirectly from the development or construction of the Project, and, if applicable from compliance with the terms of this Agreement, and/or from any other acts or omissions of Developer under this Agreement, whether such acts or omissions are by Developer or any of Developer’s contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees (each a “Developer Party” and collectively “Developer Parties”); provided that Developer’s obligation to indemnify and hold harmless (but not Developer’s duty to defend) shall be limited (and shall not apply) to the extent such Claims are found to arise from the active negligence or willful misconduct of a City Party. Developer shall further indemnify, defend (with counsel reasonably acceptable to City) and hold harmless the City Parties from and against any and all Claims arising from or related to any Developer Party’s failure to comply with any Applicable Laws, including without limitation Prevailing Wage Laws. Developer’s obligations under this Section 9.10 shall survive expiration or earlier termination of this Agreement.
ARTICLE 10
ASSIGNMENT
10.1 Transfers. Prior to the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy for the Project, neither City nor Developer may assign its rights or delegate its duties under this Agreement, except for Developer Permitted Transfers as defined below, without the express written consent of the other Party, which consent will not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Developer shall provide the City with written notice of any proposed transfer or assignment of Developer’s rights or obligations hereunder at least thirty (30) days prior to such Assignment and request City’s consent to such transfer, as provided herein. Each such notice of proposed transfer shall be accompanied by reasonable (non-confidential) evidence of the corporate, limited liability company or other legal entity’s existence and good standing, experience with similar projects, and financial resources. City may refuse to give consent to a proposed transfer only if, in light of the proposed transferee’s reputation, experience with similar projects, and/or financial resources, such transferee would not, in City’s reasonable opinion, be able to perform the obligations proposed to be assumed by such transferee, and such determinations will be made by the City Manager.
Prior to any transfer, the Developer and assignee shall enter into an assignment and assumption agreement in substantially the form of Exhibit F (“Assignment and Assumption Agreement”), and subject to prior approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed, of the City Manager and the City Attorney. So long as City has not provided Developer notice of breach before or during City’s review of Developer’s proposed assignment, upon Developer’s and assignee’s execution of the Assignment and Assumption Agreement, Developer shall be released from any further liability or obligation hereunder related to the portion of the Property and the assignee shall be deemed to be the “Developer,” with all rights and obligations related thereto. The City will review any submittals under this Section within fifteen (15) business days. In the event the City does
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 679
32 not respond timely and such submittal clearly identifies this section and the deadline for review, the submittal will be deemed approved. Developer acknowledges that satisfying the terms of this Agreement will achieve certain goals, objectives and public benefits for City which provide material consideration and incentive for City agreeing to enter into this Agreement and agreeing to grant the Project Approvals, and justify certain restrictions on the right of Developer to assign or transfer its interest under this Agreement in order to assure achievement of such goals, objectives, and public benefits, and therefore Developer agrees to and accepts the restrictions set forth in this Section 10.1 as reasonable and as a material inducement for City to enter into this Agreement. Developer shall pay the reasonable costs borne by City in connection with its review of the proposed assignment, including costs of attorney review and City staff time.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, each of following transfers are permitted and shall not require City consent under this Section 10.1 (each a “Developer Permitted Transfer”):
(a) Any transfer for financing purposes to secure the funds necessary for construction and/or permanent financing of the Project; (b) An assignment of this Agreement to an Affiliate of Developer; (c) Dedications and grants of easements and rights of way required in accordance with the Project Approvals; or
(d) Any leasing activity.
ARTICLE 11
DEFAULT; REMEDIES; TERMINATION
11.1 Breach and Default. Subject to extensions of time under Section 2.2.2 or by mutual consent in writing, failure by a Party to perform any action or covenant or satisfy any obligation required by this Agreement within thirty (30) days following receipt of written notice from another Party specifying the failure shall constitute a “Default” under this Agreement; provided, however, that if the failure to perform is non-monetary and cannot reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, a Party shall be allowed additional time as is reasonably necessary to cure the failure so long as such Party commences to cure the failure within the thirty (30) day period and thereafter diligently and continuously prosecutes the cure to completion at the earliest practicable date. Notwithstanding the above notice and cure provisions, if such failure to perform by Developer or a circumstance regarding the Project in City’s reasonable opinion creates a public health or welfare emergency, City may but is not obligated to implement a cure and Developer thereafter shall promptly reimburse City its costs and expenses, including attorney’s fees. The City shall provide Developer with reasonable notice appropriate for the circumstances of its determination of and nature of the emergency. If notice cannot be given prior to commencement of the cure, the City shall provide the Developer with its explanation of the emergency and a reasonable explanation for why prior notice could not be given.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 680
33 11.2 Withholding of Permits. In the event of a Default by Developer, or following notice of breach to Developer pursuant to Section 11.1 above and during the cure period provided therein, upon a finding by the City Manager or his or her designee that Developer is in breach, City shall have the right to refuse to issue any permit or other Additional Project Approvals to which Developer would otherwise have been entitled pursuant to this Agreement until such Default or breach is cured. This provision is in addition to and shall not limit any actions that City may take to enforce the conditions of the Project Approvals.
11.3 Termination. In the event of a Default by a Party, the non-defaulting Party or Parties shall have the right to terminate this Agreement effective immediately upon the defaulting Party’s receipt of the notice of intent to terminate. Termination of this Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of Section 11.8 hereof. The City Clerk shall record a notice of termination of this Agreement with the County Recorder following termination of this Agreement.
11.4 Specific Performance for Violation of a Condition. If City issues a Project Approval pursuant to this Agreement in reliance upon a specified condition being satisfied by Developer in the future, and if Developer then fails to satisfy such condition, City shall be entitled to specific performance for the purpose of causing Developer to satisfy such condition.
11.5 Resolution of Disputes.
11.5.1 Resolution Prior to Legal Action. With regard to any dispute involving the Project or this Agreement, the resolution of which is not provided for by this Agreement or Applicable Laws, prior to instituting legal action pursuant to Section 11.5.2, a Party shall, at the request of the other Party, meet with designated representatives of the requesting Party promptly following its request, which meeting may be continued by mutual consent. The parties to any such meetings shall attempt in good faith to resolve any such disputes, and by mutual consent may arrange a third party to mediate the dispute. In the event the Parties are not able to resolve the dispute and reach an agreement within fourteen (14) days of the request, either Party may initiate legal action or take such other actions available under this Agreement or the law. Nothing in this Section 11.5.1 shall in any way be interpreted as requiring that Developer and City and/or City’s designee reach agreement with regard to those matters being addressed, nor shall the outcome of these meetings be binding in any way on City or Developer unless expressly agreed to in writing by the parties to such meetings, and the fact of participation in such meetings and any information provided or oral or written statements made by a Party shall not be admissible or otherwise used against the Party in any subsequent legal action. Nothing in this Section 11.5 shall require a Party to postpone instituting any injunctive proceeding or to pursue resolution under this Section 11.5.1 if it believes in good faith that such postponement will cause irreparable harm to such Party.
11.5.2 Institution of Legal Actions. In addition to any other rights or remedies, a Party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any Default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 681
34 thereof, or to obtain any other remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. Any such legal action shall be brought in the Superior Court for San Mateo County, California, except for actions that include claims in which the Federal District Court for the Northern District of the State of California has original jurisdiction, in which case the Northern District of the State of California shall be the proper venue.
11.5.3 Acceptance of Service of Process. In the event that any legal action is commenced by Developer against City, service of process on City shall be made by personal service upon the City Clerk of City or in such other manner as may be provided by law. In the event that any legal action is commenced by City against Developer, service of process on Developer shall be made by personal service upon Chris McKenna, Developer’s registered agent for service of process in California, at c/o J.P. Morgan Asset Management, Real Estate Americas, 560 Mission Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco CA 94105, or in such other manner as may be provided by law.
11.6 Rights and Remedies Are Cumulative. The rights and remedies of the Parties are cumulative, and the exercise by a Party of one or more of such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times, of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by another Party, except as otherwise expressly provided herein.
11.7 Limitation on Damages. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary herein, neither Party shall have the right to recover any consequential, special, or punitive damages in the event of a Default by the other Party. In no event shall City or the Indemnified Parties be liable in damages for any default under this Agreement, it being expressly understood and agreed that the sole legal remedy available Developer for a Default by City shall be an action in mandamus, specific performance or other injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce the provisions of this Agreement, or to terminate this Agreement. City shall have all remedies available in law or equity, including but not limited to an action in mandamus, specific performance or other injunctive or declaratory relief to enforce the provisions of this Agreement, or to terminate this Agreement. In addition, City shall have the right to seek actual damages from Developer, including but not limited to enforcing payment of money or the performance of obligations requiring payment of money by Developer under the terms of this Agreement, including but not limited to Sections 5.1, 6.4, 9.6.2, 9.6.3, 10.1,
11.1 and 12.11. As part of recovering such damages, City shall be entitled to interest thereon at the lesser of ten percent (10%) per annum or the maximum rate permitted by law, compounded annually, from the date of expenditure. In connection with the foregoing provisions, each Party acknowledges, warrants and represents that it has been fully informed with respect to, and represented by counsel of such Party’s choice in connection with, the rights and remedies of such Party hereunder and the waivers herein contained, and after such advice and consultation has presently and actually intended, with full knowledge of such Party’s rights and remedies otherwise available at law or in equity, to waive and relinquish such rights and remedies to the extent specified herein, and to rely to the extent herein specified solely on the remedies provided for herein with respect to any breach of this Agreement by another Party.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 682
35 11.8 Surviving Provisions. In the event this Agreement is terminated, no Party shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder, except for those obligations of Developer which by their terms survive expiration or termination, or which are set forth in Section 9.6 (Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge).
ARTICLE 12
MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
12.1 Incorporation of Recitals, Exhibits and Introductory Paragraph. The Recitals contained in this Agreement, the introductory paragraph preceding the Recitals and the Exhibits attached hereto are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set forth herein.
12.2 Severability. If any term or provision of this Agreement, or the application of any term or provision of this Agreement to a particular situation, is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining terms and provisions of this Agreement, or the application of this Agreement to other situations, shall continue in full force and effect unless amended or modified by mutual consent of the Parties.
12.3 Construction. Each reference herein to this Agreement or any of the Project Approvals or Additional Project Approvals shall be deemed to refer to the Agreement, Project Approval or Additional Project Approval as it may be amended from time to time, whether or not the particular reference refers to such possible amendment. Section headings in this Agreement are for convenience only and are not intended to be used in interpreting or construing the terms, covenants or conditions of this Agreement. This Agreement has been reviewed and revised by legal counsel for City and Developer, and no presumption or rule that ambiguities shall be construed against the drafting party shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this Agreement. Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, (i) the plural and singular numbers shall each be deemed to include the other; (ii) the masculine, feminine, and neuter genders shall each be deemed to include the others; (iii) “shall,” “will,” or “agrees” are mandatory, and “may” is permissive; (iv) “or” is not exclusive; and (v) “include,” “includes” and “including” are not limiting and shall be construed as if followed by the words “without limitation.”
12.4 Covenants Running with the Land. Except as otherwise more specifically provided in this Agreement, this Agreement and all of its provisions, rights, powers, standards, terms, covenants and obligations, shall be binding upon the Parties and their respective successors (by merger, consolidation, or otherwise) and assigns, and all other persons or entities acquiring the Property, or any interest therein, and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns, as provided in Government Code Section 65868.5.
12.5 Notices. Any notice or communication required hereunder between City and Developer must be in writing, and may be given either personally, by registered or certified mail (return receipt requested), or by Federal Express or other similar courier promising overnight delivery. If personally delivered, a notice shall be deemed to have been given when delivered to the party to whom it is addressed. If given by registered or certified mail,
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 683
36 such notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the first to occur of (i) actual receipt by any of the addressees designated below as the party to whom notices are to be sent, or (ii) five (5) days after a registered or certified letter containing such notice, properly addressed, with postage prepaid, is deposited in the United States mail. If given by Federal Express or similar courier, a notice or communication shall be deemed to have been given and received on the date delivered as shown on a receipt issued by the courier. Notices and communications may be sent by email to expedite transmittal of information and responses, but shall not be deemed given unless and until followed by transmittal by one of the other processes described in this Section 12.5. Any party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. Such notices or communications shall be given to the parties at their addresses set forth below:
To City: City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Attention: City Manager
With a copy to:
With a copy to:
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Attention: City Attorney
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070
Attention: Director of Community
Development
To Developer:
Bransten Road Associates LLC
c/o J.P. Morgan Asset Management
Real Estate Americas
560 Mission Street, 5th Floor / CA1-0503
San Francisco, CA 94105
Attn: Chris McKenna
Email: [email protected]
With a copy to: Bransten Road Associates LLC
c/o J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc.
2029 Century Park East Blvd, Suite 4150
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Attn: Michael McGuire
Email:[email protected]
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 684
37 With a copy to:
With a copy to:
With a copy to:
With a copy to:
With a copy to:
With a copy to:
789 Old County Road, LLC
Bransten Road Associates LLC
c/o J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc.
277 Park Avenue, 36th Floor, NY1-L262
New York, New York 10172
Attn: David Ridley
Email:[email protected]
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
2029 Century Park East
Los Angeles, California 90067
Attn: Stuart Graiwer
Email: [email protected]
The Minkoff Group
6272Virgo Road
Oakland, California 94611
Attn: Daniel Minkoff
Email: [email protected]
The Minkoff Group
3388Las Huertas Road
Lafayette, California 94549
Attn: William Birdsey
Email:[email protected]
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, California 90067
Attn: David C. Schwartzman
Email: [email protected]
Holland & Knight
560 Mission Street, Suite 1900 San
Francisco, CA 94105
Attention: Tamsen Plume
12.6 Counterparts and Exhibits; Entire Agreement. This Agreement may be executed in multiple counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. This Agreement, together with the Project Approvals and attached Exhibits, constitutes the final and exclusive understanding and agreement of the Parties and supersedes all negotiations or previous agreements of the Parties with respect to all or any part of the subject matter hereof.
12.7 No Joint Venture or Partnership. It is specifically understood and agreed to by and between the Parties hereto that: (i) the Project is a private development; (ii) City has no interest or responsibilities for, or duty to, third parties concerning any public improvements until such
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 685
38 time, and only until such time, that City accepts the same pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement or in connection with the various Project Approvals or Additional Project Approvals; (iii) Developer shall have full power over and exclusive control of the Project herein described, subject only to the limitations and obligations of Developer under this Agreement, Project Approvals, Additional Project Approvals, and Applicable Laws; and (iv) City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of agency relationship, joint venture or partnership between City and Developer and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as creating any such relationship between City and Developer.
12.8 Waivers. Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agreement, any failures or delays by any Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies under this Agreement shall not operate as a waiver of any such rights or remedies, or deprive any such Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. A Party may specifically and expressly waive in writing any condition or breach of this Agreement by another Party, but no such waiver shall constitute a further or continuing waiver of any preceding or succeeding breach of the same or any other provision. Consent by one Party to any act by another Party shall not be deemed to imply consent or waiver of the necessity of obtaining such consent for the same or similar acts in the future.
12.9 California Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California, without reference to choice of law provisions. The exclusive venue for any disputes or legal actions shall be the Superior Court of California in and for the County of San Mateo or the US District Court, Northern California District.
12.10 City Approvals and Actions. Whenever reference is made herein to an action or approval to be undertaken by City, the City Manager or his or her designee is authorized to act on behalf of City, unless specifically provided otherwise or the context requires otherwise.
12.11 Estoppel Certificates. A Party may, at any time during the Term of this Agreement, and from time to time, deliver written notice to another Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that, to the knowledge of the certifying Party, (i) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties, (ii) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if amended; identifying the amendments, (iii) the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults, and (iv) any other information reasonably requested that relates to implementation of the Agreement. The requesting Party shall be responsible for all reasonable costs incurred by the Party from which such certification is requested and shall reimburse such costs within thirty (30) days of receiving the certifying Party’s request for reimbursement. The Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate or give a written, detailed response explaining why it will not do so within fourteen (14) days following the receipt thereof. The failure of either Party to provide the requested certificate within such fourteen (14) day period shall constitute a confirmation that this Agreement is in full force and effect and no modification or default exists. The Director of Community Development, the Planning Director or the City Manager, or their authorized designee, shall have the right
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 686
39 to execute any certificate requested by Developer hereunder. City acknowledges that a certificate hereunder may be relied upon by transferees and Mortgagees.
12.12 No Third Party Beneficiaries. City and Developer hereby renounce the existence of any third party beneficiary to this Agreement and agree that nothing contained herein shall be construed as giving any other person or entity third party beneficiary status.
12.13 Signatures. The individuals executing this Agreement represent and warrant that they have the right, power, legal capacity, and authority to enter into and to execute this Agreement on behalf of the respective legal entities of Developer and City.
12.14 Time. Time is of the essence of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof.
12.15 Days. The word “days” as used in this Agreement refers to calendar days unless specifically provided otherwise. In the event that any period to perform an obligation or notice period under this Agreement starts or ends on a Saturday, Sunday, or state or national holiday, the applicable time period shall be extended to the next regular City business day.
12.16 Limitation on Liability. In no event shall: (a) any member, partner, officer, director, member, shareholder, employee, affiliate, manager, representative, or agent of Developer or any general partner of Developer or its general partners be personally liable for any breach of this Agreement by Developer, or for any amount which may become due to City under the terms of this Agreement; or (b) any officer, elected or appointed official, agent or employee of City be personally liable for any breach of this Agreement by City or for any amount which may become due to Developer under the terms of this Agreement.
12.17 Recordation of Development Agreement. Pursuant to Government Code section 65868.5, no later than ten (10) days after City enters into this Agreement, the City Clerk shall record an executed copy of this Agreement in the Official Records of the County of San Mateo (“Official Records”) against the Developer Property. The Parties agree that in light of the 789 PSA, the City and the Developer, with written notice to 789 Owner, shall place this fully executed Agreement in the same escrow with the 789 PSA with supplemental joint escrow instructions between the City, Developer and 789 Owner to record this Agreement against the 789 Owner Property concurrent with the closing of the transaction contemplated by the 789 PSA. Thereafter, if this Agreement is terminated, modified, or amended, the City Clerk shall record notice of such action in the Official Records of the County of San Mateo.
[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank; Signature Pages Follow]
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 687
40 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by and between Developer and City as of the day and year first above written.
CITY:
City of San Carlos,
a municipal corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of California
By:
Jeff Maltbie, City Manager
[signature must be notarized]
State of ) County of )
On , before me, , a notary public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (Seal)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Gregory J. Rubens, City Attorney
ATTEST:
By:
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
[Developer signature on next page.]
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 688
41 DEVELOPER:
BRANSTEN ROAD ASSOCIATES LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company
By:
Name: Daniel Minkoff
Title: Authorized Signatory
[signature must be notarized]
State of ) County of )
On , before me, , a notary public,
personally appeared , who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature (Seal)
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 689
Exhibit A-1
Exhibit A
Developer Property Legal Description
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 690
Exhibit B-1
Exhibit B
Developer Property Map
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 691
Exhibit C-1
Exhibit C
789 Owner Property Legal Description
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 692
Exhibit D-1
Exhibit D
789 Owner Property Map
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 693
Exhibit E-1
Exhibit E
Impact Fees
Commercial Linkage fee
(Chapter 8.51 of the San Carlos Municipal Code)
$5,964,220
Sewer fees (connection and capacity)
(Chapter 13.04 of the San Carlos Municipal Code)
$2,939,832
Traffic impact fee
(Chapter 8.50 of the San Carlos Municipal Code)
$1,196,750
Child Care impact fee
(Chapter 8.52 of the San Carlos Municipal Code)
$1,500,001
Total City impact fees $11,600,803
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 694
Exhibit F-1
Exhibit F
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:
Attn:
(Space Above for Recorder’s Use)
[FORM OF] ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS AND ASSUMPTION OF OBLIGATIONS
UNDER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
(______________)
THIS ASSIGNMENT OF RIGHTS AND ASSUMPTION OF OBLIGATIONS UNDER DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (this “Assignment”) is made and entered into as of _________, 20__, by and between _______, a _________ (“Assignor”), and __________________, a ____________ (“Assignee”), and approved and agreed to by the City of ______, a ________ (“City”).
RECITALS
A. Assignor and City entered into that certain Development Agreement dated as of ______ for the _____ project, and recorded on _____ in the Official Records of the San Mateo County Recorder’s Office (“Official Records”) as Document No. _______, (the “Development Agreement”), with respect to approximately ____ acres of land within the City, as more particularly described in Exhibit A attached hereto (the “Property”).
B. Assignor and Assignee have entered into that certain Agreement for Purchase and Sale ____________ dated ____________ (as may be amended from time to time, the “Purchase Agreement”), pursuant to which Assignor intends to transfer to Assignee the Property.
Concurrently with transfer of the Property to Assignee, and solely in connection with such transfer in accordance with the Purchase Agreement, Assignor desires to assign to Assignee, and Assignee desires to accept from Assignor the rights, interests and obligations as Developer under the Development Agreement.
C. Section 10.1 of the Development Agreement provides that the Developer shall be released from its obligations under the Development Agreement upon the assignment of the Developer’s rights, interests and obligations under the Development Agreement if the City agrees to such release in writing, and Assignor wishes to memorialize that, upon the effective date of this Assignment, as set forth in Section 4 hereof, Assignor is hereby fully released from the duties and obligations of “Developer” with respect to the Development Agreement, including, without limitation, the Project Approvals, which release is hereby given by the City’s execution of this Assignment as provided below.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 695
Exhibit F-2
AGREEMENTS
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and for the purposes and in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter contained, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Assignor and Assignee agree as follows:
1. Defined Terms. All capitalized terms used but not defined in this Assignment shall have the meanings given to them in the Development Agreement.
2. Assignment and Assumption. Assignor hereby assigns to Assignee and Assignee hereby expressly and unconditionally assumes from Assignor, all rights, title, duties, interests and obligations under the Development Agreement.
3. Compliance with Assignment Requirements; Release. Approval of this Assignment by the City pursuant to Section 10.1 of the Development Agreement is an express condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Assignment. Each of Assignor and Assignee has complied with and satisfied all of the requirements and conditions under the Development Agreement with respect to assignment and assumption of the Assigned Interests, including, without limitation, those set forth in Section 10.1 of the Development Agreement, and all of the requirements and conditions under the Development Agreement for the release of Assignor from those obligations related to the Assigned Property and the Assigned Interests, set forth in Section
10.1 of the Development Agreement (collectively, the “Requirements”). Upon approval by the City pursuant to Section 10.1 of the Development Agreement, Assignor shall be fully released from all of the duties, obligations and liabilities of the “Developer” under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Interests.
Assignee on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns, waives any right to recover from, and forever releases, acquits and discharges, Assignor and its directors, officers, employees and agents of and from any and all claims, demands, losses, liabilities, damages (including foreseeable and unforeseeable consequential damages), liens, obligations, interest, injuries, penalties, fines, lawsuits and other proceedings, judgments and awards and costs and expenses, (including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs and consultants’ fees and costs) of whatever kind or nature, known or unknown, contingent or otherwise, whether direct or indirect, known or unknown, foreseen or unforeseen, that Assignee may now have or that may arise at any time on account of or in any way be connected with the Development Agreement, except as otherwise expressly set forth in the Purchase Agreement. This waiver is not intended to supersede or otherwise modify any terms of the Purchase Agreement.
In connection with the foregoing release, Assignee acknowledges that it is familiar with Section 1542 of the California Civil Code, which provides as follows:
A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR
OR RELEASING PARTY DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS OR
HER FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE AND THAT, IF
KNOWN BY HIM OR HER, WOULD HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS OR HER SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR OR RELEASED PARTY.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 696
Exhibit F-3
Assignee agrees that the release contemplated by this Section includes unknown claims.
Accordingly, Assignee hereby waives the benefits of Civil Code Section 1542, or under any other statute or common law principle of similar effect, in connection with the releases contained in this Section.
Assignor Assignee
Without limiting the foregoing and notwithstanding any contrary provision in the Development Agreement, City (i) acknowledges and agrees to the terms and conditions of this Assignment and that the Requirements have been satisfied, (ii) hereby fully releases Assignor, and Assignor is fully released, from all of the duties and obligations of the “Developer” under the Development Agreement and (iii) shall look solely towards Assignee with respect to performance, compliance and satisfaction of all covenants and obligations of Developer related to the Assigned Property.
4. Effective Date. Subject to the condition precedent set forth in Section 3 above, this Assignment shall be effective upon the later to occur of (i) the date all Parties have duly executed this Assignment and (ii) the date of the transfer of the Assigned Property to Assignee in accordance with the Purchase Agreement (the “Effective Date”). The Parties shall use a mutually acceptable escrow agent to record this Assignment Agreement and establish the Effective Date pursuant to mutually acceptable joint escrow instructions.
5. Acknowledgement of the Development Agreement and Project Approvals.
Assignee further agrees that: (i) Assignee has had adequate opportunity to obtain and review copies of the Development Agreement and Project Approvals, and all other documents and materials containing or relating to the terms and conditions of the development of the project; (ii) Assignee has read and understands all of the terms and conditions of said documents and materials; (iii) except as expressly set forth in the Purchase Agreement, Assignor has not made any representations or warranties with respect to the Assigned Property, the Project Approvals or any other aspect of development of the Property or the Development Agreement, and (iv) with such knowledge and understanding, which includes the nature and extent of the fees, taxes, assessments and other financial mechanisms and obligations described in such documents and materials, Assignee nevertheless has voluntarily, freely and knowingly assumed and agreed to perform all obligations and requirements and be bound by all of the provisions of such documents and materials.
6. Terms of Development Agreement and Purchase Agreement Not Affected. Except that Assignee shall be subject to, and Assignor shall be released from, the Development Agreement, the provisions of the Development Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and shall not be altered, amended or modified by this Assignment, nor shall any of the provisions of the Purchase Agreement be altered, amended or modified by this Assignment. In the event of any conflict between any provision of the Purchase Agreement and any provision of this Assignment, the provisions of this Agreement shall control.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 697
Exhibit F-4
7. Modifications. This Assignment may be amended, terminated or otherwise modified in any respect only by a writing duly executed on behalf of Assignor and Assignee and approved by the City.
8. Attorneys’ Fees. In the event of any controversy, claim, dispute, or litigation between the parties hereto to enforce or interpret any of the provisions of this Assignment or any right of either party hereto, the non-prevailing party to such litigation agrees to pay to the prevailing party all costs and expenses, including, without limitation, reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred therein by the prevailing party, including, without limitation, fees incurred during a trial of any action and any fees incurred as a result of an appeal from a judgment entered in such litigation. To so recover, it shall not be necessary that the prevailing party prevail in each and every one of its claims. Rather, the amount of the award of attorneys’ fees shall, in the court’s discretion, reflect the degree to which the prevailing party or parties have prevailed in some of their claims.
9. Consent of City. By signature of the Community Development Director of the City below, the City approves and agrees to the assignment, assumption and release set forth in this Assignment. The City is a party to this Assignment solely respect to Section 3 and Section 4 hereof.
10. Governing Law. This Assignment shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of California, as they apply to contracts executed in and to be carried out entirely within California.
11. Further Assurances. Each party to this Assignment, upon the request of any other party to this Assignment, will execute, acknowledge and deliver such further documents or instruments and perform such further acts as may be necessary, desirable or proper to carry out more effectively the purpose of this Assignment. Each of the individuals executing this Assignment certifies that he or she is duly authorized to do so.
12. Counterparts. This Assignment may be executed in one or more counterparts. All counterparts so executed shall constitute one agreement, binding on all parties, even though all parties are not signatory to the same counterpart.
[Signatures appear on the following page]
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 698
Exhibit F-5
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Assignment as of the date and year first above written.
ASSIGNOR:
__________, a ____________
By:
Name:
Its:
By:
Name:
Its:
ASSIGNEE:
______________________, a
________________________
By:
Name:
Its:
By:
Name:
Its:
ATTEST:
By:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
ACKNOWLEDGED AND APPROVED
TO BY CITY:
CITY OF ______, _________
By:
Name:
Its: ______________________________
[Signatures must be notarized]
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 699
Exhibit A to Exhibit F
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY
[to be inserted upon execution]
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 700
Exhibit G-1
EXHIBIT G
Electrical and Green Infrastructure Work
[Attached]
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 701
TERMINAL WAY
OLD COUNTY ROAD
(UNDEFINED WIDTH; PUBLIC R/W)
OLD COUNTY ROAD
(UNDEFINED WIDTH; PUBLIC R/W)
789 OLD COUNTY ROAD
PROJECT SITE
NOTE
·
·
·
·
·
·LEGEND
20220043
LEB 6/4/2025 JCL
1 1 Plot Jun 04, 2025 at 4:57pm
C3.00 - SITE PLAN.dwg COPYRIGHT © BKF ENGINEERS 2025
BKF ENGINEERS
150 CALIFORNIA STREET
SUITE 600
SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94111
(415) 930-7900
www.bkf.com
OLD COUNTY ROAD COMMUNITY
BENEFITS
60 scale
0 1" = 60'
60 feet
Community Benefits Will Include:
- New Bulb Outs for Stormwater Treatment
- New Streetlights
- New Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk
- Removal of Oversized Driveways
- Underground of Overhead Power Lines
- Grind and Overlay of Existing AC Pavement
- New Street Trees
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 702
1 CITY HALL
600 ELM STREET
SAN CARLOS CA 94070-3085
PLANNING DIVISION
TELEPHONE (650) 802-4263
FAX (650) 595-6763
WEB: http://www.cityofsancarlos.org
CODE COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
DESIGN REVIEW, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP, GRADING AND DIRT HALL
CERTIFICATE AND TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT PLAN
This is to certify that the San Carlos Planning and Transportation Commission on September 2, 2025, granted approval of Design Review, Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate and Transportation Demand Management Plan to the applicant and owner of 789 Old County Road, Bransten Road Associates, LLC / The Minkoff Group, (hereafter "Applicant") to allow for the construction of two new research & development life science buildings with a total of 326,648 square feet at 789 Old County Road (the “Project”) (APNs: 046-131-161, 046-131-630). The application was approved subject to the following conditions1:
General Conditions of Approval
1. All structures, parking areas, and landscaping shall be in substantial compliance with the plans prepared by DES Architects + Engineers Inc, dated April 1, 2025 and consisting of seventy-two (72) sheets, including the master signage plan, as presented to and approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission at the September 2, 2025 hearing.
2. Construction of this project shall be in strict conformance with the plans approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission on September 2, 2025. If the Building Division's set of drawings, or other subsequent plans, differ substantially as determined by Planning Staff from the approved drawings, the set of drawings shall require re-review by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
3. The applicant shall pay all required impact, in-lieu and commercial linkage fees prior to the issuance of a building permit as calculated by the Community Development Director based on the applicable fee schedule as outlined in the Development Agreement.
Standard Conditions
4. Aesthetics. Exterior Materials. Pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, the colors and materials of the structure and improvements shall be in substantial compliance with those presented and described within the application materials. Any changes determined to be significant as determined by the Community Development Director shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
5. Aesthetics. Exterior Lighting Plan. Pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, a final exterior lighting plan with specifications in conformance with the approved plans is subject to review and approval by the Planning Division prior to Building Permit issuance. Exterior lighting shall be downlit and not shine onto adjacent properties.
6. Aesthetics. Signage. New signs shall be consistent with the Sign Program approved with the Planned Development Permit and are subject to compliance with San Carlos Municipal Code 1 In the event any of these conditions is inconsistent with a provision of the Development Agreement executed in connection with this Project, the Development Agreement shall prevail.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 703
2 Chapter 18.22. No signs have yet been approved as part of this project. Tenant signs are limited to two signs per building elevations. No signs are permitted on the north elevation of the east building. Two signs are permitted on the north elevation of the west building per the exhibit in the Sign Program. Signs on the north elevation shall not be illuminated. Substantial changes to the Sign Program requires review and approval by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
7. Biological Resources. Compliance with Protected Tree Ordinance. Pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Sections 18.18.070 and 18.41.020, the project proponent shall obtain a permit to remove any tree(s) protected under the City’s Interim Protected Tree Ordinance, as determined by an arborist, and shall also prepare a tree protection plan that includes a map of the tree protection zone and is included in the construction drawings and bid package. Removed trees will be replaced in accordance with the ordinance at the discretion of the Community Development Director. If any removed trees are within the jurisdiction of California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and CDFW issues a Lake and Streambed Agreement for the project, the tree replacement ratios shall comply with CDFW requirements.
8. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources. Protection of Human Remains. If human remains are unearthed during ground-disturbing activities, Section 7050.5(b) and (c) of the California Health and Safety code will be implemented. Section 7050.5(b) and (c) states:
(b) In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the human remains are discovered has determined, in accordance with Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 27460) of Part 3 of Division 2 of Title 3 of the Government Code, that the remains are not subject to the provisions of Section 27492 of the Government Code or any other related provisions of law concerning investigation of the circumstances, manner and cause of death, and the recommendations concerning treatment and disposition of the human remains have been made to the person responsible for the excavation, or to his or her authorized representative, in the manner provided in Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code. The coroner shall make his or her determination within two working days from the time the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, notifies the coroner of the discovery or recognition of the human remains.
(c) If the coroner determines that the remains are not subject to his or her authority and if the coroner recognizes the human remains to be those of a Native American, or has reason to believe that they are those of a Native American, he or she shall contact, by telephone within 24 hours, the Native American Heritage Commission. [In which case Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code would apply.]
9. Hydrology/Water Quality. Stormwater Control Plan. A stormwater and drainage control plan shall be prepared and implemented in compliance with the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP), Provision C.3 of the County’s Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit and any other required provisions of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code. The plan shall specify best management practices for the control and prevention of stormwater pollution. The plan shall address both construction-phase and post-construction pollutant impacts from development.
10. Construction-phase measures shall include: erosion control measures such as installing fiber rolls, silt fences, gravel bags, or other erosion control devices around and/or downslope of work areas and around storm drains prior to earthwork and before the onset of any anticipated storm events; monitoring and maintaining all erosion and sediment control devices; designating a
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 704
3 location away from storm drains when refueling or maintaining equipment; scheduling grading and excavation during dry weather; and removing vegetation only when absolutely necessary.
11. Post-construction drainage controls shall be specified to capture and treat stormwater onsite.
12. Geology and Soils. Compliance with design level Geotechnical Investigation and Structural Design Plans. Consistent with plan check procedures for Building Permit consideration, proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a Registered engineering design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation, shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with the California Building Code.
13. Geotechnical Engineer and a Licensed Professional Engineer. The structural engineering design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation, shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with the California Building Code.
14. Noise. Construction Noise. Construction Activities shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance (Chapter 9.30 of the San Carlo Municipal Code), which includes restriction of construction activities to the hours of 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on weekdays, and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturdays.
Additionally, San Carlos General Plan Policy NOI-1.8 requires all phases of construction activity to utilize reasonable noise reduction measures to minimize the exposure of neighboring properties to excessive noise levels and comply with the City’s noise ordinance. These noise reduction measures would include but are not limited to the following (or similarly effective) measures:
• Utilize "quiet" models of air compressors and other stationary noise sources where such technology exists;
• Equip all internal combustion engine-driven equipment with mufflers, which are in good condition and appropriate for the equipment;
• Locate all stationary noise-generating equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, as far away as possible from adjacent land uses; • Locate staging areas and construction material areas as far away as possible from adjacent land uses;
• Prohibit all unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines; • Designate a “disturbance coordinator” who would be responsible for responding to any local complaints about construction noise. The disturbance coordinator will determine the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., starting too early, bad muffler, etc.) and will require that reasonable measures warranted to correct the problem are implemented.
• Conspicuously post a telephone number for the disturbance coordinator at the construction site and include it in the notice sent to neighbors regarding the construction
15. Transportation. Transportation Demand Management (TDM). Pursuant to Chapter 18.25 of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code and San Mateo County Congestion Management Program Land Use Implementation Policy (C/CAG TDM Policy), a Transportation Demand Management Plan shall be implemented for the life of the project as presented to and approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission. The owner and/or future tenants shall be responsible for supplying Planning Staff with the contact information for the Designated TDM Contact person.
A report documenting the TDM activities undertaken and their results shall be submitted to the Community Development Director annually at the responsibility of the applicant. The Director may impose reasonable changes to assure the program’s objectives will be met.
The owner and/or future tenants shall be responsible for ensuring that C/CAG TDM Policy requirements and monitoring and reporting are met.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 705
4 16. As new more efficient and effective TDM measures become available to reduce vehicle trips, these measures may be included or substituted to maintain the trip reduction levels described in the Plan. Any such substitutions shall be to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Any changes determined to be substantive or inconsistent with the TDM Plan by the Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
17. The property owner and/or tenants shall participate in a Transportation Management Association (TMA) when established that can serve the project site. The property owner and/or tenants shall participate in the TMA for the life of the project. The level of financial contribution of the participants in the TMA shall be based on an equitable measure such as square footage (or similar metric) as agreed upon by the participants and the City.] Planning Conditions of Approval
18. Prior to the issuance of a Final Certificate of Occupancy, a Landscape Architect shall certify in writing that the landscaping and irrigation systems are installed in accordance with the approved landscape and irrigation plan.
19. The developer shall be responsible for the maintenance of all the on-site landscaping within the project and shall maintain the landscape in proper growing condition for the life of the project to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director, consistent with (and not requiring an increase over) the amount of landscaping required in the plans approved by the Planning and Transportation Commission.
20. To the extent consistent with the Fire Code, all new Fire Department Connections and backflow devices proposed shall be as unobtrusive as possible. All fire water plumbing shall be aesthetically placed behind a design element to screened to the extent feasible. Final design and placement shall be subject to Planning Division review and approval prior to Building Permit issuance.
21. Efficient irrigation systems shall be used throughout all landscaped areas in accordance with the Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Zoning Ordinance Section 18.18.080.
22. Whenever feasible, and consistent with the landscaping plans approved for the project as referenced in Conditions #1 and # 2 above, the project shall incorporate landscaping that minimizes irrigation and runoff, promotes surface infiltration, minimizes the use of pesticides and fertilizers, and incorporates other appropriate sustainable landscaping practices such as BayFriendly Landscaping.
23. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a preconstruction meeting shall be held with Community Development Department staff, the architect, applicant, and contractor to review the plans and conditions of approval.
24. The project shall comply with all conditions and requirements of the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) and Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). The structure heights shall not exceed the heights approved by the ALUC or FAA at any time for the life of the project. At the time of Building Permit submittal, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with Airspace Protection Policy 6 of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan for the Environs of San Carlos Airport (SQL ALUCP).
25. A report, documenting the TDM activities undertaken and their results, shall be submitted to the Director annually at the responsibility of the applicant and/or its tenant(s). A three and five-year review shall evaluate the overall effectiveness of all of the TDM activities and may suggest new or modified activities or substitute activities to meet the program's objectives, per the Director's review and approval. The Director may impose reasonable changes to assure the program's objectives will be met. The applicant and/or its tenant(s) shall be required to pay for the costs associated with the City review of the annual and five-year review reports.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 706
5 26. All electrical, telephone, cable television, and similar distribution lines providing direct service to the project shall be installed underground (SCMC Section 18.15.120). Compliance shall be demonstrated in both architectural and civil plans.
27. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide documentation that Recology has reviewed and deemed adequate the proposed on-site trash and recycling accommodations. The Applicant shall provide a final Trash Management Plan confirming review and approval by Recology, including the final dumpster enclosure design.
28. The project shall install occupancy sensors for the building’s interior electric lights to minimize electric light trespass during nighttime hours. The project shall install interior automated roller shades for building facades that face the north exterior side of the site to block nighttime illumination. Roller shades and light controlling features shall have automated functionality that is responsive to sky conditions and solar positions to maximize daylight harvesting, maintain views, and limit electric light emanating from the building at night.
29. The project shall be constructed with exterior building glass that has anti-glare glazing or coatings to reduce the potential for sunlight glare from the buildings. The project site plans show the north and south buildings will be constructed with glass that would have an anti-reflective coating to reduce the amount of glare reflected off the building windows to a reflectivity rate of 15 percent or less which would prevent glare impacts. Prior to building permit issuance by the City, a qualified professional shall review the final site plans to confirm no changes to the project have occurred and the proposed glass and anti-glare glazing is sufficient to prevent sunlight glare to adjacent land uses and motorists on surrounding road.
Building Division Conditions of Approval
30. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Building Division.
31. Hazardous Materials: If required based on the use of future tenants, a list of hazardous materials and their quantities shall be submitted on a room-by-room basis with a comparison to the materials and quantities allowed by CBC Tables 307.1(1) and 307.1(2).
32. All mechanical and electrical equipment shall be incorporated into the design of buildings or screened to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director (SCMC Section 18.15.090) and shall comply with the approved screening as shown in the Plan Set as approved and referenced in Condition #1 above.
33. Consistent with plan check procedures for Building Permit consideration, proper foundation engineering and construction shall be performed in accordance with the recommendations of a Registered Geotechnical Engineer and a Licensed Professional Engineer. The structural engineering design, with supporting Geotechnical Investigation, shall incorporate seismic parameters compliant with the California Building Code.
34. Project plans shall include a note regarding the elevation and floodproofing of non-residential construction per City Ordinance 15.56.150.C.
35. All project plans and reports shall be stamped and signed by Engineer or Architect of record.
36. Construction Activities shall comply with the City’s noise ordinance (Chapter 9.30 of the San Carlo Municipal Code).
37. Code Edition: This project shall be designed to meet the applicable California Building Standards Code that is in effect at the time of building permit application. CBC 1.1.9.
38. Soils Report: A soils report shall be submitted with the construction drawings at the time of building permit application in accordance with CBC 1803.2.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 707
6 26. Open Flame Appliances in Assembly Spaces: Open flame fireplaces or fire pits are not permitted.
CFC 308.3
27. Gurney Sized Elevators: Elevator car shall be able to accommodate an ambulance stretcher, 24” x 84”, per CBC 3002.4 and 3002.4a.
28. Garage Vertical Clearance: A 98” minimum vertical clearance is required from the garage entrance to the accessible parking space per CBC 11B-502.5.
29. Accessible Means of Egress: CBC 1009.2.1 requires elevators to be part of the accessible means of egress in buildings where a required accessible floor is four or more stories above the level of exit discharge. Further, CBC 1009.4 requires standby power for the elevators. Provide compliance with these code sections or the exceptions to these code sections.
30. Accessible Electric Vehicle Parking: Provide accessible electric vehicle charging stations in accordance with CBC 11B-228.3.
31. Stair Handrail Extension: Stair handrails at the top and bottom of the stairs shall extend the full dimensions described in CBC 11B-505.10.
San Carlos and Redwood City Fire Department Conditions of Approval
32. Provide a building code summary analysis that includes the use and occupancy classification(s), type(s) of construction, occupancy separations or non-separated occupancy, number of stories, exterior opening analysis, maximum height above grade plane, floor area per floor, total floor area, and presence of and design standard for automatic sprinklers. [CFC 104.9]
33. Fire Flow - Prior to Building permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit a water system analysis showing required demand for project including fire flow calculations and existing water systems ability to handle domestic and fire demand for project.
34. Construction Permits. Individual Building and Fire code permit reviews will be required on all demolitions, repairs, remodels, tenant improvements, and new construction in accordance with the legally adopted codes and standards in place at the time of the permit application. The applicant shall indicate on all building permit plans that all construction shall meet current applicable local, state, and federal codes and standards at the time of building permit submittal.
The building permit plans are subject to review and approval by the Fire Marshal or his/her designee. CBC/CFC 105
35. Fire Apparatus Access: Aerial Fire Equipment - The building is greater than 30 feet tall, so aerial (ladder truck) access is required. The fire apparatus access aerial road must have a minimum unobstructed width of 26 feet and be located within a minimum of 15 feet and a maximum of 30 feet from the building and be positioned parallel to the long side of the building.
CFC D105
36. Fire Apparatus Access Roads - An approved fire apparatus access road must be provided for every facility, building or portion of all buildings and facilities. CFC 503.1.1
37. Exiting Analysis - A detailed means of egress analysis for the entire building that indicates the occupant load for all floors, including the roof terrace, the number of exits and exit access features, widths of exits, exit stairwells, the exit access travel distances, etc. from all points within the building, parking garage area, and the exterior terrace areas to be provided at the time of building permit application.
38. Public Address System - Install a public address system for the exclusive use of Fire Department personnel, peace officers, or other City enforcement personnel according to specifications approved by the Office of the Fire Marshal. Controls for, and access to, such system shall be installed on the ground floor of the building at a location subject to the approval
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 708
7 of the fire marshal or his or her designee. Design system in accordance with applicable edition of NFPA 72, National Fire Alarm and Signaling Code as an in-building fire emergency voice alarm communication system. Voice appliances and systems shall be capable of 520 Hz ± 10 percent with the appropriate harmonics. City of San Carlos Ordinance 15.04.110(F)(5)(h)(c)
52. Addressing and Access - The following requirements apply:
a. Address Numbers. The applicant shall post temporary address numbers on each building at the project site that must be easily visible from the street or fire access road throughout construction.
b. Addresses must be logical, sequential numbers, i.e. First Floor 101, 102, 103, Second Floor 202, 203, 204, as opposed to F303, G401, etc.
c. Floor plan maps shall be submitted with unit numbers at all entrances, excluding fire exits. d. Provide a keypad with 24-hour access code for public safety personnel at the main entrance, as opposed to just RFID readers or similar devices.
e. Provide Approved Knox® key boxes adjacent to each building entrance. Public safety key boxes shall be recessed and installed adjacent to each entrance within 60 to 72 inches of the finished walking surface. There shall be four sets of keys: each set containing building access, fire equipment room access, fire cache room, elevator keys, utility room keys and other keys essential for emergency operations. CFC 506.1
53. Group L Occupancies - Where the project proposes separate phases, such as a Core and Shell Phase followed by a Tenant Improvement Phase, the applicant shall submit a detailed matrix schedule to the Fire Department during the Core and Shell phase. This matrix must describe all elements related to the L Occupancy classification and specify the phase (Core and Shell or Tenant Improvement) in which each element will be provided and submitted for review and approval. The matrix shall also identify any dependencies or coordination requirements between phases to ensure compliance with applicable fire and life safety standards.
54. Hazardous Materials. Ensure that a master building wide Hazardous Materials Inventory Statement (HMIS) and a tenant HMIS are kept on file with the building management for the lifetime of the use. The building management shall manage all tenant HMIS documents against the Master HMIS such that the total quantity of hazardous materials shall not exceed the Maximum Area Quantities (MAQ’s) as defined by the HMIS and CFC Chapter 50. Where hazardous materials are to be used or stored, increase fire sprinkler design density to 0.4gpm/sq ft/3,000 square feet. CFC 5001.5.1
55. Standpipe Hose Station Outlets - Class I and III standpipe hose station outlets shall be installed in the stairway intermediate landings. City of San Carlos Ordinance 15.04.110(F)(5)(g).
56. Fire Pump: Alternate Source of Power - Notwithstanding the availability of a public utility to provide electric service for a fire pump, should a fire pump be required by design, provide on plans electrically driven fire pumps with an alternate source of power in accordance with NFPA 20 due to foreseeable extended electrical service interruptions along the California Power Grid due to high demand, high heat, Public Safety Power Shutoffs, and damage to the power grid caused by destructive natural events such as wildfires, high winds, and earthquakes. City of San Carlos Ordinance 15.04.110(F)(4)(i)
57. Fire Hydrant and Sprinkler Feed Lines - All water mains that provide a water supply for fire protection (both to fire hydrants and fire service systems) shall not be less than eight inches in diameter. The applicant Owner is responsible for fulfilling this condition and shall submit plans to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and approval. Water supply for fire protection is required to be installed in accordance with water purveyor’s specifications. The water supply shall be
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 709
8 tested, flushed and approved operable prior to any combustible construction materials being placed on the site. Staged construction shall insure that the necessary water supply is maintained from stage to stage in the construction planning. At least one hydrant shall be located within 50’ of the main fire department connection (FDC). CFC 507.5.1.1 as amended by City of San Carlos Ordinance 15.04.110(F)(4)(d)
58. Fire Lane Marking/Signs - Mark fire apparatus access roads with permanent NO PARKINGFIRE LANE signs and/or painted curbs in accordance with state and local standards. Submit plans to the Office of the Fire Marshal for review and approval. CFC 503.3
59. Ambulance Cot (Gurney) Elevator. At least one elevator must accommodate an ambulance stretcher measuring 24 inches by 84 inches with not less than 5-inch radius corners in the horizontal, open position. This elevator shall be identified by the international symbol for emergency medical services (star of life), which must be at least 3 inches in height and placed inside on both sides of the hoistway door frame. The plans shall include the elevator make and model, along with dimensions and schematics. If this information is deferred, the plan shall clarify the timeline for submission to avoid delays. CBC 3002.4
60. Fire Resistive Construction Maintenance - The fire resistance rating of structural members, exterior walls, fire walls, fire barriers, fire partitions, horizontal assemblies and shaft enclosures, and the smoke resistance of smoke barriers and partitions, shall be maintained and repaired to equivalent fire or smoke resistance when damaged during demolition or alteration. Annual visual inspection and repair records shall be maintained. Annual inspections shall use The Compliance Engine website or approved single-point repository service vendor specified by the Fire Marshal.
CFC 701.2 and 701.6. City of San Carlos Ordinance 15.04.110(F)(4)(a)
61. Fire Equipment Enclosure - Provide a secure enclosed area for post-event overhaul supplies on the building permit plans. The room or cabinet shall measure not less than 8-feet by 6-feet and shall be stocked with the required items in accordance with CFC §907.2.12.3.1 as amended by the City of San Carlos Ordinance 15.04.110(F)(5)(h)(d)
62. Barricades or Obstructions across Emergency Access Roads. Fire access roads are to remain unobstructed at all times. Prior to the installation or use of barricades, fences, or gates across emergency vehicle access roads during construction, the applicant shall submit plans for review and approval by the Fire Marshal or their designee. CFC 503.5.
63. Site Safety Plans - Construction site safety plans for the construction process are to be approved by the Fire Marshal or his/her designee before Building Permit issuance. They must follow all requirements in Chapter 33 of the California Fire Code.
64. Construction egress and standpipes. The applicant shall maintain required egress for all adjacent buildings/properties. During construction, provide a temporary or permanent stairway.
As construction progresses, the stairway shall be extended to within one floor of the highest point of construction having secured decking or flooring. Not less than one Class I standpipe shall be provided for use during construction. Such standpipes shall be installed prior to construction exceeding 40 feet in height above the lowest level of fire department vehicle access. The standpipe(s) shall be provided with Fire Department hose connections at locations adjacent to the stairways and shall be extended to within one floor of the highest point of construction having secured decking or flooring. Plans and requests by letter shall be submitted to the Fire Marshal or his/her designee for review and approval. CFC §§3311.1 and §3313.1
65. Preconstruction Meeting. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall coordinate with the Fire Marshal to schedule and conduct a preconstruction meeting to discuss fire safety and code compliance during construction. The meeting shall be scheduled at a time when the Fire Marshal or their designated representative can attend and participate. The agenda for the meeting shall include, at a minimum, the following topics:
a. Project and Permits Overview: Including scope, construction type, occupancy
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 710
9 classification, number of stories, square footage, key milestones, expected timeline, and deferred submittals.
b. Roles and Responsibilities: Including points of contact and the roles of the Fire Marshal and Fire Department in inspections, plan review, and project oversight. c. Access for Emergency Responders: Including clear access for emergency vehicles, fire lane requirements, signage, staging areas for fire apparatus, and street closure reviews.
d. Temporary Fire Protection Measures: Including temporary systems and the phasing of permanent systems such as fire alarms, sprinklers, and standpipes. e. Construction Fire Safety Plan: Per California Fire Code Chapter 33, including fire extinguisher placement, hot work permits and monitoring, combustible material storage and handling, smoking restrictions and designated areas, and emergency procedures and evacuation plans.
f. Inspections and Testing: Including timelines for scheduling, scope, fees, and notification.
g. Communication and Coordination: Including pre-fire planning walkthroughs and drills with engine and truck companies.
Public Works Department / Engineering Division Conditions of Approval
66. The applicant shall comply with all adopted requirements of the Public Works Department and Engineering Division.
67. A grading/hauling permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to start of construction. Grading shall only be permitted between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday and 9:00am to 5:00pm on Saturdays. No grading activities on Sundays and holidays as specified in San Carlos Municipal Code Section 9.30.070 (B). Dirt haul activities shall be limited to the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Monday through Friday. No dirt haul work shall be permitted on Saturday, Sundays and holidays, as specified in San Carlos Municipal Code Section 15.36. The City Engineer has the discretion to grant exceptions to the grading and hauling times. Trucks shall not travel north of the project site along Old County Road.
68. An encroachment permit must be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to the start of any work within the public right-of-way or a public utilities easements including, but not limited to, the installation of sewers and other utilities, sidewalk, curb and gutter, driveway, wall fence, or other construction. An encroachment permit is also required for the placement of debris boxes, storage containers, or construction materials within the public right-of-way.
69. Prior to demolition and/or permit issuance, Developer shall obtain approval from the City of the solid waste handling plan and demonstrate conformance with the City debris recycling regulation in accordance with the City Municipal Code Regulations, Title 8. Chapters 8.04 and 8.05.
70. A grading permit will be required from Public Works and the following condition shall apply:
a. The Developer’s civil engineer shall submit a drainage report, hydrologic study, hydraulic calculations, and drainage improvement plans. Storm water shall, under no circumstances, be introduced into the sanitary sewage system, but shall be confined to surface and subsurface drainage facilities provided. Applicant must provide pre11.a October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 711
10 improvement runoff and post-improvement runoff calculations. Post-improvement runoff totals cannot exceed pre-improvement runoff totals.
b. The Developer shall submit detailed earthwork quantity calculations that include total cut, fill and import or export quantities. Provide an earthwork quantities table on Grading plan sheet with the following:
i. Total displaced quantities, including cut and fill amounts ii. Total hauling quantities, including import and off-haul c. Based on the extent of the grading plan, a Grading Bond, in an amount to be determined by the City Engineer, shall be posted and remain in place until all grading is complete and approved.
d. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, the applicant shall submit a proposed haul route plan and obtain approval from Public Works Department.
71. Soils Report: The geotechnical report provided for this project is dated July 2, 2024 (Final Geotechnical Investigation (Revision 1) Report Proposed Life Science Building and Parking Structure 1026 Bransten Road) by Rockridge Geotechnical. Reports dated more than two years from the submittal date should be accompanied by a geotechnical update letter noting that the report is still valid, updating any code references and providing any additional recommendations that should be followed.
72. In addition, prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, Developer shall submit a design-level geotechnical investigation prepared by a qualified geologist. All recommendations in the approved geotechnical investigation shall be incorporated into the project design. The geotechnical investigation shall address, at a minimum, the following issues:
a. compressible soils,
b. liquefaction,
c. expansive soils,
d. loose surficial soils,
e. shallow groundwater
73. All plans shall be prepared using a benchmark based on City standards and datum provided on the City website.
74. Developer shall submit with the building permit application an existing condition plan showing the following information:
a. Topographic information, existing contours, elevations, trees, structures and aboveground features b. Resolved boundary
c. Existing public and private easements
d. Existing curb lines, sidewalk, signal pole, street light utility boxes, driveways, underground utilities or frontage streets
e. Existing lot line and lot areas
75. Developer shall submit a Storm Water Management Plan in accordance with the following timeline:
a) At the time of building permit plan check submittal or grading plan submittal, Developer shall submit a “final” Stormwater Management Plan and Report. Site grading, drainage, landscaping and building plans shall be consistent with the approved Stormwater Management Plan. The Plan and Report shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer and certify that measures specified in the report meet the C.3 requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Order, and shall be implemented as part
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 712
11 of the site improvements.
b) Prior to building permit issuance, Developer shall submit an Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Plan for the long-term operation and maintenance of C.3 treatment facilities. c) Prior to Final occupancy, Developer shall execute and record an O&M Agreement with the City for the operation, maintenance and annual inspection of the C.3 treatment facilities.
39. The Stormwater Management Plan shall be prepared and implemented in compliance with the San Mateo Countywide Water Pollution Prevention Program (SMCWPPP), Provision C.3 of the County’s Municipal Regional Stormwater NPDES Permit and any other required provisions of the City of San Carlos Municipal Code. The plan shall specify best management practices for the control and prevention of stormwater pollution. The plan shall address both construction-phase and post-construction pollutant impacts from development. Construction-phase measures shall include: erosion control measures such as installing fiber rolls, silt fences, gravel bags, or other erosion control devices around and/or downslope of work areas and around storm drains prior to earthwork and before the onset of any anticipated storm events; monitoring and maintaining all erosion and sediment control devices; designating a location away from storm drains when refueling or maintaining equipment; scheduling grading and excavation during dry weather; and removing vegetation only when absolutely necessary. Post-construction drainage controls shall be specified to capture and treat stormwater onsite.
40. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide an updated storm drain report. The report shall include hydraulics and hydrology, drainage area maps, sizing of on-site system and show post development run-off does not exceed pre-development runoff.
41. Prior to Building or Grading Permit issuance, the WDID # shall be shown on the building plan set as the total land disturbed proposed during construction is greater than one (1) acre. All sites that disturb in excess of one (1) acre of land shall demonstrate coverage under the State Construction Activity Stormwater General Permit, which includes a Notice of Intent, WDID #, and a SWPPP.
42. If at any time the stormwater treatment design is changed to in-ground treatment system, a supplemental geotechnical investigation may be required. In-situ percolation testing to be performed at representative locations throughout the site to determine characteristic infiltration rates and/or soil conditions are stable for the proposed bioretention areas may be required.
43. Prior to the issuance of any building, demolition, or grading permit, Developer shall submit an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan as a part of the improvement plan submittal. The erosion and sediment control plan shall show all construction best management practices (BMPs) and shall comply with the requirements of the NPDES, the Municipal Regional Permit Order R2-2009- 0074 (MRP), and the City's stormwater and urban runoff pollution control standards and guidelines (City's Clean Water Program). Developer shall ensure that all contractors and subcontractors install and regularly maintain all construction BMPs as required by the approved erosion and sediment control plan.
44. Prior to issuance of any demolition or building permits, the applicant shall demonstrate that any proposed permeable pavement system will drain at a rate, not to exceed the pre-development flow.
45. All storm water inlets shall be marked with appropriate stormwater pollution prevention message such as “no dumping – flows to bay.” Developer is responsible to add these markings upon construction.
46. Developer shall submit with the building permit application a landscape plan showing proposed landscape treatment within the C.3 storm water treatment areas for review.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 713
12 47. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide a roof slope and roof leader plans showing the location of downspouts and direction of flow associated with the drainage area for each leader with the civil drawings.
48. All existing utilities shall be properly disconnected before the existing building can be demolished.
Developer shall demonstrate to City Engineer how the existing water service(s), sewer service(s) and storm service(s) will be disconnected prior to doing so. All existing utilities shall be disconnected and/or abandoned as directed and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
49. A sewer permit shall be obtained from the Public Works Department prior to starting of any sewer construction work.
50. Developer shall submit with the building permit application projected sewer flow calculations and a sanitary sewer capacity study analyzing potential impact to the existing sanitary sewers as directed by the City Engineer. Any costs associated with the analysis shall be paid by the Developer.
51. Per City standard details, approved materials for sewer laterals are HDPE DR21 or better, and PVC SDR-26 or better; and a 2% minimum slope is required. VCP is not a City approved material and noting 1% minimum slope for new sewer laterals is not consistent with the City standard details. Revise and include inverts necessary to verify slopes with the building permit submit.
52. Project plans shall show a backflow prevention device for the sewer lateral which shall be onsite and owned and maintained by owner.
53. Prior to issuance of any grading and/or building permit, Developer shall obtain approval from the City Engineer of the water, sewer, and storm drain studies for this development. These studies shall provide detailed calculations to confirm adequate design of these utilities.
54. Developer shall own, operate and maintain all on-site (private) utilities, except where located in public easements or approved by CalWater for the water system. The separation between public and private shall be indicated by water meters & backflows (potable water), cleanouts (sewer), and manholes as directed by the City Engineer.
55. Developer shall submit plans showing proposed water, sanitary sewer, and fire services for the proposed building connected to a public main in the public right-of-way to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Different types of water use (domestic, irrigation, or fire) should be served by separate water services each separately tapped at the water main.
56. Developer shall replace the existing curb, gutter, and sidewalk within the public right-of-way (to the nearest score mark) in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer or his designee. The extents of said replacement shall be at the discretion of the City Engineer or his designee. Engineering
57. The driveway approaches shall be constructed per City Standards.
58. The applicant shall pay the sewer connection, storm water fee and Transportation Impact Mitigation Fee prior to the issuance of a building permit as calculated by the Public Works Department.
59. A Construction Operations and Staging Plan, including traffic control, shall be submitted, reviewed, and approved by the Building Division, Planning Division, and City Engineer prior to building permit issuance and any work in the public right-of-way.
60. Prior to Demolition Permit issuance, a completed PCB screening form is required and Phase 1 Site Assessment.
61. Prior to Building Permit Issuance, the applicant shall provide a current (less than 6 month old) preliminary title report and all supporting documents.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 714
13 62. If necessary due to project phasing, the applicant shall submit a Parcel Map, showing the merger of existing parcels and dedication of required right-of-way and easements, for review and approval. The Parcel Map shall be recorded prior to building permit issuance.
63. Project plans shall indicate and show all existing and/or proposed private and public easements, including public easements for sidewalks.
64. Applicant shall submit for a dewater plan during construction for review during Building permit application.
65. Temporary shoring shall not encroach in the public right-of-way. Submit temporary shoring plan for review.
66. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit a current, signed and stamped topographic and boundary survey prepared by a registered land surveyor showing existing conditions and boundary information.
67. A separate off-site improvements plan for all work in public right-of-way along the project frontage shall be provided at time of Building Permit Application. Provide complete set of off-site improvement plans which shall include, but not limited to the following:
a. Existing conditions and demolition plans
b. Horizontal control plan
c. Grading, drainage, and utility plans
d. Cross section of the street showing existing and proposed utilities e. Erosion control
f. Signing and striping
g. All appropriate details for off-site construction
h. Grind and overlay, at City’s discretion.
68. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall demonstrate with appropriate sections and grade elevations at all property lines adjoining adjacent properties that project site does not drain towards neighboring properties. Cross lot drainage including overflow drainage is prohibited.
69. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall provide composite joint trench plans, onsite and off-site signing and striping plans. The joint trench plans shall show any new dry utilities to be place underground. In addition, any existing overhead utilities with the site or along the project street frontages shall be placed underground.
70. Project plans shall include, but not be limited to all applicable City Standard details and cross reference all City details for the driveways, sidewalks, storm drain, water service, sewer lateral connection, sewer cleanout, and junction box connection.
71. Project plans shall label and delineate all existing and proposed easements throughout the plan set.
72. Prior to Building Permit issuance, the Applicant shall demonstrate with truck turning and trash staging diagrams and any plans of necessary improvements as deemed necessary and appropriate by the City for the collection of waste and recycling.
73. PEDESTRIAN CROSSING: A HAWK Pedestrian/ Bicycle Signal or a Rectangular Rapid Flashing Beacon as approved by the Public Works Director shall be installed at the Old County Road/Terminal Way intersection at the interim north end of the Class IV bikeway.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 715
14 74. STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Street Improvements shall include reconstruction of all frontage improvements along the Bransten Street and Old County Road, in general conformance with the Preliminary Civil Site Plan prepared by BKF Engineers, dated April 1, 2025.
75. OVERHEAD UTILITIES: Existing overhead utilities along the development street frontages shall be removed or placed underground. This work may be coordinated with the utility undergrounding project to be completed by the 841 Old County Road development, provided the work is completed in advance of this development beginning construction.
76. BRANSTEN STREET: Bransten Street will be completely reconstructed along the project’s frontage per City standards. Reconstruction of the pavement done to the subgrade will make the pavement work a C.3 regulated project under the City’s stormwater permit, and treatment of the reconstructed pavement will be required. Offsite stormwater measures maybe provided on Bransten Street closer to Industrial Road in order to utilize the existing storm drain.
All work on Bransten Street shall be coordinated with the Sobrato Development at 800-851 Old County Road.
77. OLD COUNTY ROAD AT HOWARD STREET: The project shall be responsible for a proportionate payment, based on a City provided study demonstrating nexus and proportionality, of the cost of converting southbound right turn lane on Old County Road at Howard Street to a shared thru/ right turn lane
78. OLD COUNTY ROAD CLASS IV BICYCLE PATH: The Old County Road frontage shall be restriped to provide a Class IV bicycle lane on the west side of the street. The bicycle lane shall be extended north to Terminal Way. Striping shall be coordinated with and shall match the improvements along the Sobrato development to the south (800-851 Old County Road). Timing of improvements shall be coordinated with the Sobrato development and the Alexandria development at 987 Commercial Street.
79. OLD COUNTY ROAD/ BRANSTEN STREET CURB RAMP: The curb ramp at the Old County Road/ Bransten Road intersection shall provide continuous pedestrian access around the ramp to the Bransten Street sidewalk along the project frontage. Reconfiguration of the ramp and addition of a landing behind the ramp shall be provided as needed. This will likely require dedication of additional right-of-way or a sidewalk easement over the landing.
80. GROUNDWATER/ STORMWATER TREATMENT : The geotechnical report shows groundwater to be 4’ below the existing ground surface. The treatment swales will need to be isolated from the groundwater by a concrete floor.
81. FIRE ACCESS AGREEMENT: The Irrevocable License Agreement for fire access shall be recorded prior to issuance of building permits.
82. PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The Phase 1 Environmental Assessment notes that a change in use and/ or construction on the site requires approval of the San Mateo County Environmental Health Division. The approval should be obtained prior to issuance of a building permit.
83. CORROSION PROTECTION: The Geotechnical Report notes the need for possible corrosion protection of buried metal. Corrosion protection may be required, if the geotechnical consultant determines it is necessary during the course of construction.
84. BRANSTEN STREET STORM DRAIN: The Bransten Street storm drain hall be upsized from 12” to 15”.
85. BRANSTEN AND OLD COUNTY TRAFFIC SIGNAL. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy or Final Inspection, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall pay their fair share contribution towards the cost of installing the traffic signal at the intersection of Old County Road and Bransten Street.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 716
15 MITIGATION MEASURES IDENTIFIED IN THE IS/MND AND RESPONSE TO COMMENTS The applicant shall implement the Mitigation Measures identified in the Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) for the 789 Old County Road Project and as listed below (to the extent what is printed below is inconsistent with the MMRP, the MMRP shall control).
86. Air-1: Basic Construction Management Practices. The project applicant shall demonstrate proposed compliance with all applicable regulations and operating procedures prior to issuance of demolition, building or grading permits, including implementation of the following BAAQMD “Basic Construction Mitigation Measures”.
1. All exposed surfaces (e.g., parking areas, staging areas, soil piles, graded areas, and unpaved access roads) shall be watered two times per day.
2. All haul trucks transporting soil, sand, or other loose material off-site shall be covered.
3. All visible mud or dirt track-out onto adjacent public roads shall be removed using wet power vacuum street sweepers at least once per day. The use of dry power sweeping is prohibited.
4. All vehicle speeds on unpaved roads shall be limited to 15 mph.
5. All roadways, driveways, and sidewalks to be paved shall be completed as soon as possible. Building pads shall be laid as soon as possible after grading unless seeding or soil binders are used.
6. All excavation, grading, and/or demolition activities shall be suspended when average wind speeds exceed 20 mph.
7. All trucks and equipment, including their tires, shall be washed off prior to leaving the site.
8. Unpaved roads providing access to sites located 100 feet or further from a paved road shall be treated with a 6- to 12-inch layer of compacted layer of wood chips, mulch, or gravel.
9. Publicly visible signs shall be posted with the telephone number and name of the person to contact at the lead agency regarding dust complaints. This person shall respond and take corrective action within 48 hours. The Air District’s General Air Pollution Complaints number shall also be visible to ensure compliance with applicable regulations.
87. Bio-1: Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Survey. Initiation of construction activities during the avian nesting season (February 15 through September 15) shall be avoided to the extent feasible. If construction initiation during the nesting season cannot be avoided, pre-construction surveys for nesting birds protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 and/or Fish and Game Code of California within 100 feet of a development site in the project area shall be conducted within 14 days prior to initiation of construction activities. If active nests are found, a 100-foot buffer area shall be established around the nest in which no construction activity takes place. The buffer width may be modified upon recommendations of a qualified biologist regarding the appropriate buffer in consideration of species, stage of nesting, location of the nest, and type of construction activity based upon published protocols and/or guidelines from the U.S. or California Fish and Wildlife Services (USFWS, CDFW) or through consultation with USFWS and/or CDFW. The biologist may also determine that construction activities can be allowed within a buffer area with monitoring by the biologist to and stoppage of work in that area if adverse effects to the nests are observed. The buffer shall be maintained until after the nestlings have
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 717
16 fledged and left the nest. These surveys would remain valid as long as construction activity is consistently occurring in a given area and would be completed again if there is a lapse in construction activities of more than 14 consecutive days during the nesting season.
88. Avian Collision Risk. Pursuant to the requirements to prevent avian mortality of protected birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and exterior materials design review requirements per San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, the project design shall include design features to reduce the potential for avian collisions, which may include the following: Low-reflectivity glazing (<15% reflectance) on all buildings; features that reduce the extent of transparent glazing that can be seen as a clear path, including opaque wall panels, screens, spandrel glazing, and perforated metal panels; features that help the buildings appear as solid structures from a distance such as mullions, shadow boxes, fins, and overhangs; and minimal vegetation that could act as an attractant to birds along potentially dangerous flight paths including in between most buildings and adjacent to transparent glass corners.
89. Culture-1: Further Site Assessment. Prior to ground disturbance, a qualified consultant shall conduct further archival and field study research to determine the appropriate locations for cultural or tribal cultural resource (historic/archaeological/paleontological/Native American) monitoring during removal of asphalt or concrete, fill, vegetation, or structures. Field study may include, but is not limited to, hand auger sampling, shovel test units, or geoarchaeological analyses as well as other common methods used to identify the presence of buried archaeological resources.
90. Culture-2: Archaeological Sensitivity Training. In anticipation of discovery of unknown archaeological resources during construction, Archaeological Sensitivity Training shall be carried out by a qualified archaeologist for all personnel who will engage in ground disturbing activities on the site. The training shall be conducted at the start of construction and prior to ground disturbance.
The training shall include suitable photographic materials showing the kinds of artifacts and evidence of prehistoric archaeological sites likely to be found in the area, as well as written and verbal descriptions for archaeological resources and signs of potential archaeological discovery.
The training shall also include written materials describing what to do in the event of a discovery, or suspected discovery of archaeological resource.
91. Culture-3: Protection of Accidentally Discovered Cultural Resources. In the event that any previously undiscovered cultural resource (historic/ archaeological/paleontological/Native American) are uncovered during ground disturbing activities, all such activity shall cease until these resources have been evaluated by a qualified consultant and specific measures can be implemented to protect these resources in coordination with the City and in accordance with Sections 21083.2 and/or 21084.1 of the California Public Resources Code.
92. GP-MM TRIB-1: Consider all Native American Archaeological Discoveries to be Significant Resources. All Native American artifacts (tribal finds) shall be considered as a significant Tribal Cultural Resource, pursuant to PRC 21074 until the lead agency has enough evidence to make a determination of significance. The City shall coordinate with an archaeologist who meets the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications, as well as an appropriate tribe or tribes, as determined by the NAHC, to develop an appropriate treatment plan for the resources.
The plan may include implementation of archaeological data recovery excavations to address treatment of the resource along with subsequent laboratory processing and analysis. An archaeological report shall be written detailing all archaeological finds and submitted to the City and the Northwest Information Center.
93. Haz-1: Site Management Plan and Health and Safety Measures. The applicants shall develop and implement a Site Mitigation Plan and relevant contractor health and safety measures
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 718
17 to provide procedures and protocols during construction in the event of a new discovery of previously unknown impacts such as impacted soil, underground storage tanks, or other underground features during site disturbance.
94. Noise-1: Construction Vibration Reduction and Monitoring. Wherever feasible, operation of vibration inducing equipment shall be avoided within the distance to existing buildings specified below.
Clam shovel drop – 18 feet (ft)
Hydromill (slurry wall) in soil – 1 ft
Hydromill (slurry wall) in rock – 2 ft
Vibratory Roller – 19 ft
Hoe Ram – 9 ft
Large bulldozer – 9 ft
Caisson drilling – 9 ft
Loaded trucks – 8 ft
Jackhammer – 4 ft
Small bulldozer - <1 ft
If this equipment must operate closer to existing buildings than specified above, a vibration monitoring plan shall be prepared, submitted to the City, and implemented to monitor construction vibration at the nearest structures, including at a minimum the following:
• A list of all heavy construction equipment to be used for this project known to produce high vibration levels (e.g., tracked vehicles, vibratory compaction, jackhammers, hoe rams, clam shovel drop, and vibratory roller, etc.).
• An indication of what efforts will be implemented for reducing vibration levels below the thresholds, such as location of equipment away from adjacent building as possible and use of alternative methods or equipment that would produce less vibration. • A designated contact responsible for registering and investigating claims of excessive vibration. The contact information of such person shall also be clearly posted on the construction site. Any damage to adjacent buildings shall be addressed by the applicant team.
• Document conditions at all structures located within 20 feet of construction prior to, during, and after vibration-generating construction activities. Perform a photo survey, elevation survey, and crack monitoring survey prior to any construction activity, at the end of each phase of construction, and after project completion, and shall include internal and external crack monitoring in structures, settlement, and distress, and shall document the condition of foundations, walls and other structural elements in the interior and exterior of said structures. If vibration generated by project construction results in damage to adjoining structures, repairs shall be completed to restore structures to pre-construction conditions.
Examples of efforts to minimize vibration could include use of a smaller vibratory roller, such as the Caterpillar model CP433E vibratory compactor, and use of alternative methods for breaking up existing pavement, such as a pavement grinder, instead of dropping heavy objects, when work must occur within 20 feet of the adjacent buildings.
Andrea Mardesich, Assistant
Community Development Director
Effective Date: _____, 2025
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 719
If you require translation for this notice, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at 650-802-4222.
CITY OF SAN CARLOS
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT the San Carlos City Council will hold a Public Hearing at its regular meeting on Tuesday, October 14, 2025 7:00 p.m., for the purpose of hearing and considering all comments of all persons interested in or concerned with the application submitted by The Minkoff Group to adopt the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopt the Planned Development Zoning, approve the Planned Development Plan, Master Sign Program and approve the Development Agreement to develop two new office / research and development buildings and an above ground parking garage at 789 Old County Road (APN 046-131-610 and 046-131-630). The request is pursuant to San Carlos Municipal Code Chapters 15.36, 18.29, 18.25, 18.35, 18.36, and 18.37.
Project Description. The applicant proposes two new office / research and development buildings consisting of 326,648 square feet with above ground parking consisting of 225,921 square feet, for a total project area of 552,569 square feet. The west building is proposed at four stories at a height of 69’ to the roof parapet and 83’ to the top of the mechanical screen and the east building is proposed at five stories at a height of 99’ to the top of the roof parapet and 99’ to the top of the mechanical screen.
The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the site to Planned Development and approval of a Planned Development Permit and Development Agreement. The Planning and Transportation Commission held a public hearing on September 2, 2025 and voted 5-0 to adopt a Resolution to recommend to City Council approval of the Planned Development Zoning, Planned Development Permit, and Development Agreement.
Additionally, the Planning Commission approved the project’s Transportation Demand Management Plan, Design Review for the new building design, and Grading and Dirt Haul Certificate. An Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the 789 Old County Road development. The public review and comment period on the MND was from February 26, 2025 through March 28, 2025. The Planning and Transportation Commission, at its September 2, 2025 meeting, voted 5-0 to adopt the Resolution recommending the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration and adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
Agenda. The agenda and relevant materials for this item will be available online:
www.cityofsancarlos.org/agenda; at the City Clerk’s Department in City Hall – 600 Elm Street; and at the San Carlos Library – 610 Elm Street, beginning Thursday, October 9, 2025.
Ways to Observe the Meeting. You may observe the meeting and address the City Council in–person in City Hall’s Council Chambers and may also have a remote option via Zoom. Details and instructions will be available on the meeting agenda.
Questions and Comments: Questions regarding the project may be directed to Lisa Costa Sanders, Principal Planner at [email protected] or mailed to the San Carlos Planning Division at 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070. Comments may be sent to the City Council via email at [email protected]; mailed to City Hall - 600 Elm Street, San Carlos, CA 94070; or made inperson at the public hearing.
All persons interested in the above are hereby invited to attend this public hearing and be heard. If you challenge this proposal in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council and/or City Clerk prior to the public hearing.
Crystal Mui, City Clerk
Mailing and Publication Date: September 30, 2025
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 720
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
SAN MATEO DAILY JOURNAL
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of San Mateo
The undersigned declares: That at all times hereinafter mentioned, affiant was a permanent resident of the United States, over the age of eighteen years old, and was at and during all said times. The Office Manager of the San Mateo Daily Journal, a newspaper published daily in the County of San Mateo, State of California. The notice mentioned was set in type no smaller than nonpareil and was preceded with words printed in black face type not smaller than size 6, describing and expressing in general terms, the purpose and character of the notice intended to be given; that the
PUBLIC NOTICE
Of which the annexed is a printed copy was published and printed in said newspaper on the 30th Day of September 2025.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
________________________________
JP Uganiza
Dated at San Mateo, California,
This 26th Day of September 2025
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 721
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 722
© Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.
0.14 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere
0.14 Miles This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.
0 0.07
4,514
San Mateo map
1:
San Mateo County
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 723
© Latitude Geographics Group Ltd.
0.04 THIS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION
WGS_1984_Web_Mercator_Auxiliary_Sphere
0.04 Miles This map is a user generated static output from an Internet mapping site and is for reference only. Data layers that appear on this map may or may not be accurate, current, or otherwise reliable.
0 0.02
1,128
San Mateo map
1:
San Mateo County
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 724
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619
LAMPHIER-GREGORY
MEMO
TO: Lisa Costa Sanders, Principal Planner
City of San Carlos Planning Division
600 Elm Street
San Carlos, CA 94070-3085
650.802.4207
[email protected]
FROM: Rebecca Auld, Vice President
Lamphier-Gregory, Inc
SUBJECT: 789 Old County Road Project IS/MND – Review and Discussion of Comments DATE: August 13, 2025
PURPOSE OF THIS MEMO
This memo provides a brief discussion of comments received in response to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (“IS/MND”) for the 789 Old County Road Project (“project”). Though the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) does not require a Lead Agency to formally respond to written comments received on an IS/MND, this memorandum is being provided by the IS/MND preparer to demonstrate that the comments do not present substantial evidence supporting a fair argument that the project may have a significant environmental impact or that the IS/MND should be revised and recirculated for public review.
COMMENTS RECEIVED
The comment period ran from February 26, 2025, through March 28, 2025. Four comment letters were received via email, as listed below and attached.
Department of Toxic Substance Control, dated March 7, 2025 California Department of Fish and Wildlife, dated March 13, 2025 Greater East San Carlos Board, dated March 24, 2025
Elisabeth Rossi, dated March 28, 2025
CONCLUSIONS
No revisions to the IS/MND are necessary to address these comments.
The information in this document does not identify new significant impacts or mitigation measures or changed impact conclusions. The comments received and this response do not require recirculation of the IS/MND or preparation of an environmental impact report under section 15073.5 of the CEQA Guidelines.
Attachment 6
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 725
8/13/2025 PAGE 2 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619
DISCUSSION OF COMMENT LETTERS
Department of Toxic Substance Control
The responses here reference the numbered comments in the comment letter.
Comment 1 recommends a Phase I Environmental Site Investigation and/or oversight from a regulatory agency related to analysis of potential contamination at the site.
As indicated in the IS/MND pages 49 through 53 of the IS/MND, detailed technical Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments were indeed conducted for the project site and incorporated by reference in the IS/MND, which indicates that as of the analysis for this project, there is currently no known soil contamination of concern at the site, but that given the history of industrial uses at the site, Mitigation Measure Haz-1, detailed on page 52 of the IS/MND, requires implementation of a Site Management Plan, which would require appropriate handling and clean-up in the event of any discovery of previously unknown impacted soil, underground storage tanks, or other underground hazardous features during site disturbance. Prior leaking underground storage tank cases at the site were handled under San Mateo County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD) as the regulatory agency and following removal of the tank and impacted soils and groundwater and subsequent testing of soil and monitoring wells, were closed.
Comment 2 relates to testing and appropriate handling of imported soil and fill materials.
Appropriate handling of soil and fill material will be specified in the required Site Management Plan (Mitigation Measure Haz-1 discussed above and detailed on page 52 of the IS/MND).
Comment 3 relates to the potential for hazardous building materials to be present in existing buildings proposed for demolition and the need for appropriate surveys / sampling.
Appropriate assessment and handling of potentially hazardous building materials in existing structures to be demolished is a standard requirement per applicable requirements, as outlined in the following condition that would be applicable to the project.
Hazardous Building Materials. Pursuant to BAAQMD Regulation 11, Rule 2 and California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 1529 and Title 22, Division 4.5, prior to demolition buildings shall be assessed for asbestos containing materials, lead-based paint, or other suspected hazardous building materials, and during demolition, any suspected such materials shall be abated by a licensed abatement contractor and disposed of according to all state and local regulations.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife
This comment letter conveys the role and process related to California Department of Fish and Wildlife and relates to the potential for glass exteriors to result in bird strikes and minimizing such potential.
The greatest potential for bird collisions at a development occur where a feature-related hazard is located adjacent to a location-related hazard. A feature-related hazard is a design feature that represents a high-risk collision hazard such as free-standing clear glass walls (balustrades), vegetated terraces surrounded by freestanding glass railings, and transparent glass corners with clear sight lines through a building. Where these features are located along potential flight paths that birds may use
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 726
8/13/2025 PAGE 3 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619 when traveling to and from landscape vegetation on the site or in nearby areas, the risk of bird collisions is higher because birds may not perceive the intervening glass and may therefore attempt to fly through it to vegetation on the far side of the glass. Feature-related hazards include vegetated or landscaped open space or riparian habitat.
The project is located in a historically industrial and commercial area that does not include substantial vegetated or landscaped open space or riparian habitat and proposes a site that would be mostly developed with buildings and circulation elements and other hardscape, with perimeter trees and no large landscaped open spaces, so does not involve substantial location-related hazard for bird collisions.
That being said, as a standard requirement per City design review requirements (San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29), the City will review exterior materials (see pages 11 and 22 of the IS/MND), which will include implementation of the following condition related to bird safe design.
Avian Collision Risk. Pursuant to the requirements to prevent avian mortality of protected birds under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act and exterior materials design review requirements per San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29, the project design shall include design features to reduce the potential for avian collisions, which may include the following: Low-reflectivity glazing (<15% reflectance) on all buildings; features that reduce the extent of transparent glazing that can be seen as a clear path, including opaque wall panels, screens, spandrel glazing, and perforated metal panels; features that help the buildings appear as solid structures from a distance such as mullions, shadow boxes, fins, and overhangs; and minimal vegetation that could act as an attractant to birds along potentially dangerous flight paths including in between most buildings and adjacent to transparent glass corners.
Greater East San Carlos Board
The responses here reference the numbered comments in the comment letter.
Comment 1 relates to land use and planning.
This memo is focused to assessment of comments related to the environmental analysis under CEQA and this comment is not a CEQA issue. The following response is provided for information only.
The project site is currently zoned Heavy Industrial and is located 418 feet from the rear property line of the single-family homes located on Hall Street (property line to property line). The site is within the Industrial Core Subarea of the East Side Innovation District Vision Plan (“Plan”) area. The project is designed to adhere to Principle B.ii of the Plan (page 42) to “locate more moderate development heights along Old County Road.” The project is designed at four (4) stories and 69 feet tall to the roofline along Old County Road, then steps up to five (5) stories and 83 feet tall to the roofline on the interior portion of the site away from Old County Road.
As indicated in the Plan (Principle B.iii) and the San Carlos Municipal Code (Section 18.07.030.A), specific transitional standards apply where an industrial district adjoins an RS (single-family residential) district, which is not the case for the project site. This site is 418 feet away from the closest RS district and there are several industrial properties as well as Terminal Way located between the project site and residential properties.
The Plan (Principle C) also calls for new buildings to “enhance the character of the street and embody a superior quality of architecture and urban design”. City staff finds the project to meet this Principle with
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 727
8/13/2025 PAGE 4 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619 glass storefront windows along the street frontage and vertical breaks in the elevation. The project also includes a vibrant and pedestrian-oriented street experience as called for in the plan with new lighting, street trees and sidewalks. Although the project is not located within a designated “activity hub”, it does provide for a central plaza that would be publicly accessible. At the request of the GESC, the applicant redesigned the buildings to include tree planting at the second level along the rear elevation (facing the neighborhood) and light/view corridors between the buildings and the parking structure. The project also invests in multi-modal streets (page 54 of Plan) by implementing the “East Side Connect” (an ongoing multi-modal streetscape and green infrastructure improvement program) improvements along the property frontage and completing the off-site segment north to Terminal Way. The project also proposes to provide community benefits and incorporates sustainability measures as outlined in the Plan.
Comment 2 relates to contamination at the site and questions proposed clean-up procedures and funding.
As discussed on pages 49 through 53 of the IS/MND and summarized from more detailed technical Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments incorporated by reference, there were two previous leaking underground storage tank cases at the site related to petroleum hydrocarbons (fuel). In both cases, the tank and surrounding impacted soil and groundwater were removed (in 1997/98 and 2001 respectively) and groundwater monitoring wells were installed, and in both cases, following sampling to demonstrate successful clean-up, case closures were granted (in 2014 and 2015 respectively) by the regulatory agency, the San Mateo County Environmental Health Department (SMCEHD). As of the analysis for this project, site soil and soil vapor sampling found no soil contaminants or soil vapors above screening levels, again confirming successful previous removal and clean-up of prior leaking underground storage tanks at the site. Testing of the groundwater at the site indicated tetrachloroethylene (PCE) and trichloroethylene (TCE) concentrations were above the environmental screening levels related to vapor intrusion, but as this is due to off-site sources, abatement cannot be effectively addressed at this site.
Despite the analysis indicating that there is currently no known soil contamination of concern at the site, given the history of industrial uses at the site, Mitigation Measure Haz-1, detailed on page 52 of the IS/MND, requires implementation of a Site Management Plan, which would require appropriate handling and clean-up in the event of any discovery of previously unknown impacted soil, underground storage tanks, or other underground hazardous features during site disturbance.
Comment 3 relates to air quality, and specifically construction-related dust and emissions from construction equipment, as well as emissions from vehicular traffic.
As discussed on pages 25 through 32 of the IS/MND and summarized from the more detailed technical Air Quality & Greenhouse Gas Assessment included as Attachment A to the IS/MND, a detailed projectspecific analysis of operational and construction period emissions and health risks was completed. In addition to compliance with regulations, Air District-recommended construction management practices are required to be implemented to reduce construction-period dust and emissions per Mitigation Measure Air-1. The IS/MND considered the topics mentioned in this comment and determined through a quantified analysis that with the required construction management practices, construction activities would not cause significant emissions or health risk impacts (see especially Tables 3, 5, and 6 in the IS/MND), nor would operational activities, including project vehicular traffic (see especially Tables 4, 5, and 6 in the IS/MND).
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 728
8/13/2025 PAGE 5 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619 Comment 4 relates to noise, and specifically construction and operational noise and mitigation.
As discussed on pages 59 through 63 of the IS/MND and summarized from the more detailed technical Noise and Vibration Assessment included as Attachment D to the IS/MND, a detailed project-specific analysis of operational and construction period noise and vibration was completed.
As shown on Table 9 of the IS/MND, proposed construction activities would not reach excessive volumes at even the nearest residential receivers and as noted in the IS/MND (pages 13 and 60), the project would be required to comply with the City’s standard condition related to construction noise, including compliance with the City’s noise ordinance (Chapter 9.30 of the San Carlo Municipal Code), which includes restricted hours for construction activities, and the requirement for noise reduction measures during construction.
As noted in the IS/MND (page 61), operational noise levels were also quantified, including on-site noise given the specifics of the proposed project and noise from increased traffic, and noise increases at even the closest residential receivers were calculated to be minimal (1 to 2 decibels) and below City thresholds for noise impacts (at least 5 decibels).
Comment 5 relates to transportation, including specifically increased project and cumulative traffic congestion and related commute times, diversion of traffic onto residential streets, and potential safety hazards to pedestrians and cyclists.
As explained in the IS/MND page 69, state law now requires that CEQA analysis not rely on congestionbased metrics (“traffic”) for evaluation of transportation impacts and instead that a metric based on the amount of driving (VMT) is used for assessment of vehicle-related environmental transportation impacts. Increased traffic congestion, including cumulative traffic congestion, is considered by the City as part of project entitlement considerations outside of the CEQA process, so is not further discussed in the IS/MND or this CEQA-focused response. The separate Traffic Operations Analysis includes detailed consideration of project specific and cumulative traffic topics.
With respect to diversion of traffic on residential streets, the IS/MND indicates on page 69 that analysis of the number of cars projected to use local residential streets - including potential vehicles from this and other area projects - would not exceed capacity standards for this type of local street and therefore would not be considered a significant environmental impact.
With respect to pedestrian and bicycle safety, the IS/MND indicates on pages 68 and 71 to 72 that with the proposed project and associated improvements (see response to comment 6 below), conditions for pedestrians and bicyclists would be improved in the area and the project would not cause negative safety impacts.
Comment 6 relates to extending bike lanes and sidewalks.
In addition to on-site facilities for pedestrians and bicycles including all new sidewalks, as detailed in the project description on page 5 of the IS/MND, the applicant has proposed to complete the Old County Road “East Side Connect” improvements both along the project frontage and continuing off-site to Terminal Way. These improvements include undergrounding electrical lines, new sidewalks, street trees, street lights, and green infrastructure.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 729
8/13/2025 PAGE 6 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619 Comment 7 relates to increased emergency response and specifically increased emergency response times related to congestion and construction activities, and coordination with emergency services.
Emergency services are included as a standard in all plan review and plan check processes and have and will continue to review and comment on any necessary inclusions in project plans. As indicated on page 72 of the IS/MND, all driveways and internal circulation would be designed and constructed to meet current City standards including those related to emergency access. While project-generated traffic would be added to area roadways, all roadway users must yield the right-of-way to emergency vehicles and would not substantially impact access for emergency vehicles.
The project does not propose any permanent road closures and any temporary roadway encroachments or closures during construction of the project or related roadway improvements require prior review and permitting from the City including review by associated emergency services.
The Closing Comment (unnumbered) also mentions concerns related to aesthetics and parking. CEQA specifically provides in Section 21099(d) that potential aesthetic and parking effects of an employment center project on an infill site within a transit priority area – descriptions that apply to the project, as explained on pages 20 and 70 of the IS/MND - are not considered significant impacts on the environment. Aesthetics and parking are considered by the City as part of project entitlement considerations outside of the CEQA process, so are not further discussed in this CEQA-focused document.
Elisabeth Rossi
The responses here reference the underlined topics in the comment letter.
The Noise comment relates to operational project noise at their residence.
With respect to noise from “compressors on the building,” a Noise and Vibration Assessment was completed by Illingworth and Rodkin, which assessed the noise levels of proposed equipment factoring in specifics of location, equipment specifications, and shielding. As noted on page 61 of the IS/MND (and further supported by pages 40 through 42 of the Noise and Vibration Assessment and pages 2 through 4 of the Noise and Vibration Assessment Addendum, both included as Attachment D of the IS/MND), noise levels at the nearest residences from operational noise levels of proposed mechanical equipment would be de minimis – meaning below measurable and detectable levels, so would not increase noise levels at the commenter’s residence.
With respect to noise from people on the terraces, noise from people talking, or “social noise,” is considered standard ambient noise and is not considered an environmental impact under CEQA.1 That being said, noise is reduced over distance, and social noise (which reaches 90 decibels only in extremely loud circumstances), would be less than 50 decibels and quieter than ambient noise levels at residences in the area including the commenter’s, which are over 450 feet from the project site. However, while not anticipated to be a concern in this situation, as with house parties causing a disturbance, if loud 1 As supported by case decision from Make UC A Good Neighbor v. Regents of University of California (2023) 88 Cal.App.5th 656, 665
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 730
8/13/2025 PAGE 7 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619 parties are being held at an office, such excessive noise disturbance would be addressed through standard code enforcement activities consistent with Municipal Code noise ordinance requirements.
The Privacy comment relates to the potential for proposed building users to see into the commenter’s second floor bedroom.
Privacy is not an environmental impact under the law of CEQA so is not discussed in the IS/MND or this CEQA-focused response. For informational purposes, it can be noted that the project site is about 450 feet away from the subject home and the following details would relate to privacy. As a condition of project approval, the buildings would be required to install automatic window shades along the elevation facing the neighborhood (north facing). As a community benefit, the applicant has offered to pay for resident tree planting.
The Light comment relates to concerns about shadowing at the commenter’s home.
Shadows are not generally considered an environmental impact under CEQA so are not discussed in the IS/MND or this CEQA-focused response. The following response is provided for information only.
The applicant provided a shadow study (included in the project files that are available for review online at https://www.cityofsancarlos.org/business_detail_T10_R94.php and at the Planning Division at 600 Elm Street), which demonstrate that even during the worst case event (early morning winter solstice), shadows from the building would not reach the rear properties of the residential homes.
The Other comment relates to light and glare, bird strikes, construction noise, and use of hazardous materials.
With respect to the potential for light and glare, as indicated on pages 20 and 22 of the IS/MND, aesthetics (including light and glare) is not considered an environmental impact for a project of this type in this location and these considerations are addressed by City standards and design review requirements (San Carlos Municipal Code Chapter 18.29), including those related to exterior materials and lighting (see also pages 11 and 22 of the IS/MND). The following response is provided for information only. Existing lighting standards would not allow for proposed lighting that would have the potential to substantially increase nighttime light levels at a property about 450 feet from the project site (the location of the commenter’s home). As a condition of project approval, the buildings will be required to install automatic window shades along the elevation facing the neighborhood (north facing), which would reduce light levels from indoor lighting.
With respect to bird strikes, please see the response to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife comments above.
With respect to construction noise, As discussed on pages 59 through 32 of the IS/MND and summarized from the more detailed technical Noise and Vibration Assessment included as Attachment D to the IS/MND, a detailed project-specific analysis of operational and construction period noise and vibration was completed. As noted in the IS/MND (pages 13 and 60), the project would be required to comply with the City’s standard condition related to construction noise, including compliance with the City’s noise ordinance (Chapter 9.30 of the San Carlos Municipal Code), which includes restricted hours for construction activities (limited to 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM on weekdays and 9:00 AM to 5:00 PM on Saturdays), and the requirement for noise reduction measures during construction. As shown on Table 9
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 731
8/13/2025 PAGE 8 of 8
LAMPHIER-GREGORY 4100 REDWOOD ROAD, STE 20A - #601 OAKLAND, CA 94619 of the IS/MND, proposed construction activities would not reach excessive volumes at even the nearest residential receivers, including the commenter’s property.
With respect to the use of hazardous materials at the site, the IS/MND includes a discussion of the use of hazardous materials at the site on pages 49 through 50 as follows: “R&D laboratories additionally are likely to handle materials considered to be biological hazards and/or chemical hazards. The San Mateo County Environmental Health Division enforces regulations pertaining to safe handling and proper storage of hazardous materials to prevent or reduce the potential for injury to health and the environment. Occupational safety standards exist in federal and state laws to minimize worker safety risks from both physical and chemical hazards in the workplace. The California Division of Occupational Safety and Health Administration is responsible for developing and enforcing workplace safety standards and ensuring worker safety in the handling and use of hazardous materials. Future tenants of this proposed project would be required to follow any City regulations on Biosafety levels and activities.
With compliance with applicable regulations, project construction and operations are not anticipated to create a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials (less than significant).” Biosafety Levels (BSL) are defined for four tiers of relative hazards from BSL-1 (least hazard) to BSL-4 (most hazard). The handling for different BSLs requires different practices, safety equipment, and facilities. San Carlos City Council adopted Ordinance 1597 in August 2023, which amended the Municipal Code to disallow BSL-3 and BSL-4 in all areas of the city.
BSL-1 and BSL-2 facilities are permitted uses under the project site zoning and would follow applicable regulations for safe handling per the above.
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 732
dtsc.ca.gov
SENT VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
March 7, 2025
Lisa Costa Sanders
Principal Planner
City of San Carlos
600 Elm Street, Planning Division
San Carlos, CA 94070
[email protected]
RE: MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE 789 OLD COUNTY ROAD PROJECT DATED FEBRUARY 26, 2025, STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2025020976
Dear Lisa Costa Sanders,
The Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) reviewed the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the 789 Old County Road Project (Project). The proposed Project would involve the construction of two new office/research and development (R&D) buildings: a 5-story, 179,665 square foot building, and a 4-story, 146,983 square foot building, with maximum heights of approximately 85 and 69 feet to the roof respectively.
DTSC recommends and requests consideration of the following comments:
1. According to the Initial Study (IS)/MND, EnviroStor and GeoTracker, the Site and surrounding locations are impacted by historical contamination due to the historical use of manufacturing, plating, commercial fueling facilities, etc. Due to these contaminations, there are multiple cleanup agreements with DTSC and the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board for the surrounding locations. The IS/MND also notes that Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessments and/or Investigations for the surrounding locations were completed, and the findings were incorporated into the IS/MND. Due to the ongoing contaminations nearby, DTSC recommends the City of San Carlos address the
11.a
October 14, 2025 Packet Pg. 733
Lisa Costa Sanders
March 7, 2025