801 Grayson Street/800 Dwight Way - Berkeleyside...2014/09/11 · 801 GRAYSON STREET/800 DWIGHT WAY...

$Page 1: 801 Grayson Street/800 Dwight Way - Berkeleyside...2014/09/11 · 801 GRAYSON STREET/800 DWIGHT WAY ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD Page 2 of 16 September 11, 2014 File: C:\Users\mjacob\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary$
Z O N I N G

A D J U S T M E N T S

B O A R D

S t a f f R e p o r t

2120 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 Tel: 510.981.7410 TDD: 510.981.7474 Fax: 510.981.7420

E-mail: [email protected]

FOR BOARD ACTION SEPTEMBER 11, 2014

801 Grayson Street/800 Dwight Way

Use Permit 2014-0033 to expand existing pharmaceutical manufacturing uses at 801 Grayson Street by constructing an 80,000-square-foot product testing facility, and demolish 3 buildings at 800 Dwight Way (Buildings 28, 28A, and 50) with a total of 65,000 square feet of product testing space

I. Application Basics

A. Land Use Designations: General Plan: Manufacturing West Berkeley Plan: Mixed Manufacturing Zoning: MM, Mixed Manufacturing

B. Zoning Permits Required:

Use Permit to construct manufacturing uses over 40,000 square feet, under BMC Section 23E.76.030.A

Use Permit to demolish three non-residential buildings, under BMC Sections 23C.08.050.A and 23E.76.040.A

Administrative Use Permit to allow rooftop mechanical equipment to project above the main building height, under BMC Section 23E.04.020.C

Use Permit to allow parking requirement to be met with off-site parking located more than 300 feet from proposed building, under BMC Section 23E.28.030.B

C. CEQA Determination: Because an Initial Study identified potentially significant

effects on the environment, but project revisions agreed to by the applicant would avoid or mitigate these effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared (see Attachment 3). The public comment period on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration extended from August 8, 2014 to August 29, 2014. Responses to comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration are provided in the Key Issues section below.

801 GRAYSON STREET/800 DWIGHT WAY ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD Page 2 of 16 September 11, 2014

File: C:\Users\mjacob\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\6NNWAUI3\2014-09-11_ZAB_SR_801 Grayson_AS-v3.docx

D. Parties Involved: Applicant Victor Warren, Architect; Site Architect

880 Dwight Way, Berkeley, CA 94701

Property Owner Bayer HealthCare, LLC 880 Dwight Way, Berkeley, CA 94701

Figure 1: Location Map

ZONING ADJUSTMENTS BOARD 801 GRAYSON STREET/800 DWIGHT WAY September 11, 2014 Page 3 of 16


Figure 2: Site Map



Table 1: Land Use Information

Location Existing Uses Zoning District General Plan Designation

Buildings #28, #28A, #50 (Proposed for Demolition)

Subject Property Pharmaceuticals MM Manufacturing

Surrounding Properties (non-Bayer properties, unless indicated)

North Industrial MUR (2448 Sixth St.)

MULI (733 Dwight Way)

Manufacturing Mixed Use (2448 Sixth St.) Manufacturing (733 Dwight Way)

South Industrial MM Manufacturing

East Light Industrial MULI Manufacturing

West Pharmaceuticals (Bayer property)

MM Manufacturing

Building #88 Site (Proposed for Construction)

Subject Property Surface parking, vacant MM Manufacturing

Surrounding Properties (non-Bayer properties, unless indicated)

North Industrial MM Manufacturing

South Industrial, Manufacturing, Parking Lot

MM Manufacturing

East Light Industrial, Warehouse

MUR Manufacturing Mixed Use

West Pharmaceuticals (Bayer property)

MM Manufacturing

Table 2: Development Standards

Standard

Proposed for Building #88 Site

Permitted/Required under BMC Sections 23E.76.070 (or as indicated below)

Site Area (sq. ft.) 43,500 20,000 minimum

Gross Floor Area (sq. ft.) 80,000 n/a

Floor Area Ratio 1.8 2.0

Building Height (ft.) 45 average 45 average

Loading (BMC Sections 23E.32.030)

4 spaces 4 spaces (1 space/first 10,000 sq. ft. and 1 space/each additional 25,000 sq. ft.)

Parking (BMC Sections 23E.76.080)

Automobile None** 53 spaces (1 space/1,500 sq. ft.)

Bicycle 40 spaces 40 spaces (1 space/2,000 sq. ft.)

**Parking provided on a South Properties campus-wide basis



Table 3: Special Characteristics

Characteristic Applies to Project?

Explanation

Historic Resources No The Initial Study and Historic Resources Evaluation evaluated buildings proposed for demolition for eligibility and determined that no historic resources are present.

Soil/Groundwater Contamination

Yes New building site is located on former manufacturing site with the potential for presence of metals-impacted soils and chlorinated solvents in groundwater. The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration identifies mitigation measures to address potential adverse impacts associated with disturbance of residual contamination at the site.

Green Building Requirements

Yes As required for projects creating 10,000 sq. ft. or more of non-residential floor area, the applicant has completed the Green Building Checklist which identifies the project’s preliminary attainment of 61 points on the LEED checklist, potentially qualifying the project for LEED Gold status. As required, the project has applied for incentives and design assistance through Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s Nonresidential Energy Efficiency Program, and the project will be subject to conditions of approval requiring ongoing participation in this program.

Housing/Child Care Mitigation/In-Lieu Fees

Yes The project is subject to housing and child care mitigation/in-lieu fees because it creates over 7,500 sq. ft. of new floor area. (See conditions of approval in Attachment 1 for further information.)

Table 4: Project Chronology

Date Action

June 23, 2014 Application submitted

August 8, 2014 ZAB public hearing notice/notice of intent to adopt mailed/posted; Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration released

August 21, 2014 DRC meeting

August 28, 2014 Application deemed complete

August 29, 2014 Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration comment period ends

September 4, 2014 LPC meeting to review demolition as informational item (pursuant to the Development Agreement, the demolition sites are not subject to LPC requirements)

September 11, 2014 ZAB public hearing

II. Project Setting

A. Neighborhood/Area Description:

The project site is located on the Bayer Campus in West Berkeley, in an industrial area of the City. The Bayer Campus is bounded by Dwight Way on the north,



Seventh Street on the east, Grayson Street on the south, and the Union Pacific railroad on the west. Located in the Mixed Manufacturing (MM) Zoning District, the Campus is surrounded by a mix of industrial, commercial, artisan, and residential uses. Table 1 identifies the uses adjacent to or across the street from the new building and the demolition sites.

B. Site Conditions:

The project site includes two main components, as shown on Figure 2: (1) a site proposed for new construction at the intersection of Carleton Street and Miles Way (a private internal street on Bayer’s Campus), and (2) two sites (three buildings) proposed for demolition on the north portion of the Campus along Dwight Way. These components are described further below.

(1) The new construction site is primarily vacant. The site was developed as part

of the Colgate‐Palmolive facility from at least 1939 through 1980. Environmental investigation and cleanup activities were performed between 1983 and 1986. The site was certified by the Department of Health Services (predecessor to the Department of Toxic Substances Control) in 1988, indicating that shallow soil remediation was adequately completed. The site was vacant land from at least 1993 to 1998 following the demolition of the

former Colgate‐Palmolive Facility. The site has been used as parking lots by Bayer from at least 2005 through the present. The northern portion, Lot CC of the site, is occupied by a paved parking lot, with some limited vegetation, including trees and landscaping between parking aisles. Lot DD, the southern portion of the site is a vacant gravel lot, which is used informally for parking.

(2) Three buildings, which currently house product testing operations, are proposed for demolition as shown on Figure 2: o Building #28A is a large, 3-story, L-shaped building, constructed in 1973. o Building #28 is a small, single-story building that was constructed in 1967. o Building #50 is a mid-sized, single-story, L-shaped building. The main

body of the building was constructed in 1956; the east end was added in 1963.

III. Project Description A. Background:

In 1992, Miles Inc. (a pharmaceuticals company later acquired by Bayer HealthCare, LLC) and the City of Berkeley entered into a 30-year Development Agreement (the “DA”), outlining the long-term development program for the North Campus (the portion of the Bayer Campus north of Carleton Street) that allows for up to 1.167 million square feet of floor area. An EIR, certified in 1991, analyzed the potential



impacts of the development proposed as part of the DA. A Use Permit for the South Properties (the portion of the Campus south of Carleton Street) was approved and a Mitigated Negative Declaration adopted on July 21, 2000. While the north and south subareas are governed by two separate City entitlements, they are operated as one campus. The demolition of Buildings #28 and #50 is identified in the DA and was part of the project description analyzed in the 1991 EIR; however, the DA requires that Bayer obtain all otherwise required zoning approvals (e.g., Use Permits, Administrative Use Permits, and Design Review) for projects constructed pursuant to the DA. The demolition of Building #28A and development of Building #88 represent a new proposal not previously considered by the City. The current application encompasses demolition of all three buildings (#28, #28A, and #50) and construction of the new building. Therefore, the Initial Study evaluated each of these components.

B. Project Overview: Bayer HealthCare, LLC (“Bayer”) proposes modernization of its product testing facilities, since the existing testing infrastructure no longer supports new products. The product being tested is a blood clotting medication that treats Hemophilia A. The project includes two components:

1. Construction of a new building (#88) for product testing, with approximately 80,000 square feet within 3-stories on the South Properties. Building #88 represents modernization and consolidation of existing product testing facilities described in item 2 below. Project plans are provided as Attachment 2.

2. Demolition of three buildings (#s 28, 28A and 50), which currently house product testing and pharmaceutical operations, and total approximately 65,000 square feet on the North Campus.

The net increase in building area as a result of the new building and demolition components is approximately 15,000 square feet. This additional area will support new testing technologies, infrastructure, and is needed to meet current global regulatory requirements. While Bayer does not anticipate adding any employees due to this expansion, the new building would increase the capacity of the Campus. At an estimated 600 square feet per employee,1 the project could increase capacity by 25 employees. The applicant has provided a detailed statement in Attachment 6.

IV. Community Discussion A. Neighbor/Community Concerns:

On May 8, 2014, the applicant held a community meeting at the Kala Art Institute on San Pablo Avenue to introduce the proposed demolition and construction project and

1 This factor represents Bayer’s estimate of future employee generation rates based on the number of

employees per square foot for product testing work.



solicit community feedback. To promote the event, the applicant mailed 2,500 notices to addresses within the vicinity of the Bayer Campus. In addition, the applicant emailed invitations to City Councilmembers, staff, and Berkeleyside, with a request to disseminate the invitation to the public. A story appeared in Berkeleyside in advance of the meeting (see Attachment 8). Approximately 25 participants attended the meeting and asked questions about the number of employees that would be generated, the plans for the old lab buildings, and Bayer’s commitment to staying in Berkeley. The flyer, mailing area, sign-in sheet, and summary of the discussion are provided in Attachment 9. Prior to submitting the application to the City, a yellow pre-application poster was erected at the site by the applicant. On August 7, 2014, the City mailed 378 notices to property owners and occupants within 300 feet of the site, and to neighborhood organizations requesting notification of projects within this area. The notice is provided in Attachment 7. Comments submitted in response to the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration are provided in Attachment 4 and 5, and are discussed in the Key Issues section below.

B. Landmarks Preservation Commission:

Buildings #28 and #50 were evaluated by the Landmarks Preservation Commission (LPC) as part of the public review process for the DA, and the LPC took no action to initiate them as landmarks at that time. Further, Ordinance No. 6106-NS approving the DA states that the North Campus sites covered by the DA “shall not be subject to the requirements of Chapter 3.24 of the Berkeley Municipal Code, relating to the Landmarks Preservation Commission.” Therefore, although Building #28A was not included as a proposed demolition site in the DA nor in the LPC evaluation, it does not trigger LPC review at this time. As a result, the LPC is scheduled to receive the proposed demolition as an informational item on September 4, 2014, but will not be taking any action on the proposal. Staff will update the ZAB at the meeting about any LPC comments.

C. Design Review Committee:

The Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed the proposed new building on August 21, 2014 and made a favorable recommendation. Additionally, the DRC recommended that bike parking and loading spaces be adjusted for a more pedestrian-friendly site plan (i.e., bike parking at other locations than just Miles Way). The Committee also requested that alternate colors and materials--that better reflect older industrial buildings—be reviewed at Final Design Review. A minority of DRC members recommended that rooftop mechanical screens be a design feature for the building.



V. Issues and Analysis A. Key Issues:

1. Historic Resource Evaluations: As described in the LPC section above, the

demolition sites were previously reviewed by the LPC at the time of the DA preparation and the LPC took no action to initiate the sites as landmarks. Moreover, the DA states that the DA site is not subject to the City’s landmarks ordinance. The demolition of Building #28A represents a new proposal not previously considered by the City as part of the DA. The demolition of Buildings #28 and #50 are identified in the DA and were evaluated in the 1991 EIR. For purposes of CEQA review, the Initial Study reviewed the potential for historic resources at the site since circumstances may have changed since the 1991 EIR evaluation and preparation of a DA. Therefore, an Historic Resources Evaluation (Appendix B of Attachment 1) was prepared to analyze the potential historic value of the three buildings proposed for demolition. This evaluation determined that none of the structures are potentially eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources, and therefore the proposed demolitions would have no significant impacts to historical resources under CEQA.

2. Transportation Demand Management: The DA requires Bayer to implement a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program to reduce the use of single-occupant vehicles (SOVs) by Bayer employees. The TDM program includes a variety of measures including transit subsidies, an employee BART shuttle, bicycle parking and showers, and off-peak employee shifts. As part of this program, Bayer is required to submit an annual trip reduction strategy plan for the City’s approval and reimburse the City’s costs for conducting on-street parking surveys every five years. Although the TDM program is only required for the northern DA portion of the Campus, Bayer currently applies the program to the South Properties portion as well, and intends to apply it to the proposed Building #88. In order to ensure that SOV trips and greenhouse gas emissions from the project are reduced to the extent feasible, staff has included a condition of approval in Attachment 1 requiring the applicant to include the proposed project and the employees that it generates as part of the DA’s TDM program.

3. Vehicle Parking: Parking on the Bayer Campus is consolidated into several parking lots. These lots serve the Campus as a whole (as opposed to providing parking for specific individual buildings), and the total parking supply is adequate to meet the Campus’ total parking needs, including the proposed project. As a result, no parking is provided as part of the proposed construction project. Rather, parking will be accommodated through existing parking lots throughout the Campus. Since the majority of the parking supply is provided in the North



Campus, the applicant has requested a Use Permit to provide required parking for this project 300 feet or more from the new building site, as required under BMC Section 23E.28.030.B. Because most the parking on the North Campus is located within easy walking distance of the proposed building, staff recommends approval of this Use Permit. Parking demand and supply are described in more detail for the South Properties and the Bayer Campus as a whole, below.

Overall Bayer Campus: The Bayer Campus has approximately 1,250

parking spaces. The project would remove 29 designated stalls (as well as the vacant gravel lot informally used for parking), resulting in a supply of 1,221 spaces following implementation of the project. Bayer estimates that the parking demand from existing facilities is 1,003 spaces, based on parking ratios of 500 to 1,000 sq. ft./parking stall, depending on the building function. As a conservative estimate,2 the proposed building could generate demand for 160 spaces (80,000 sq. ft./500 sq. ft.) and the net new square footage could generate a demand of 30 spaces (15,000 sq. ft./500 sq. ft.). As a result, the project could increase Campus-wide parking demand to1,033 spaces, which would be accommodated within the 1,250 spaces available. This calculation is more conservative than the MM District parking standard, which requires one space per 1,500 sq. ft., resulting in a requirement of 53 spaces for the gross new floor area (80,000/1,500), or ten spaces for the net floor area (15,000/1,500). Under either calculation, there would be an adequate parking supply for the project.

South Properties (801 Grayson St.): Parking on the South Properties is

currently regulated through the South Properties Use Permit (issued in 2000), which consolidates parking into three main lots—AA, BB, and CC as shown on Figure 2. The South Properties Use Permit allowed a parking reduction for carpooling and multi-shift employment—such a reduction is not requested as part of this project application, as there is adequate parking on the Campus as a whole to meet the standard parking requirements, as discussed above.

Development of the new building will reduce the number of designated parking spaces on the South Properties from 293 to 264. These spaces are currently providing parking for the existing South Properties Buildings

2 The South Properties Use Permit assumed a range of parking ratios depending on use: 500 sq. ft. for office

uses, 1,000 sq. ft. for warehouse uses, and 1,500 sq. ft. for manufacturing uses, before taking reductions. For analysis purposes, this staff report reviews a low and high parking ratio estimate, 500 sq. ft. and a 1,500 sq. ft., respectively.



#80 and #81. In the future, they are also intended to provide parking for Buildings #83, #84, and #85, which are currently vacant but have been approved for office and warehouse use under the South Properties Use Permit. Prior to occupancy of Buildings #83, #84, and #85, there would be adequate parking spaces on the South Properties site to meet the parking requirement for the new building. After occupancy of these buildings, off-site parking located elsewhere on the Bayer Campus would need to be used to meet the parking requirement. As discussed above, the total supply on the Bayer Campus is adequate to meet this requirement.

4. Response to Comments on the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration: The

City received two comments on the Initial Study which are addressed below:

i. Letter from [email protected] (no name provided). The commenter expresses concern that Mitigation Measure NS-1 represents a code violation by allowing higher noise levels than are permitted by the City’s Municipal Code. See Attachment 4 for the full letter.

Response: We appreciate the commenter's concerns. First, we would like to point out that the Mitigation Measure NS-1 does not propose a code violation. While the City of Berkeley Noise Ordinance does specify maximum allowable construction noise levels in Tables 13.40-3 and 13.40-4, it does note that these levels are applicable only to projects where it is "technically and economically feasible" to meet these goals. The mitigation measure requires construction noise to be reduced to the maximum extent technically and economically feasible and therefore does not conflict with the Noise Ordinance.

Second, the minimum measures that are to be included in the noise

reduction program do not simply involve maintaining equipment and eliminating unnecessary noise. For example, one minimum measure requires that internal combustion equipment must be muffled so that the maximum noise levels generated are 80 dBA at 50 feet; typical equipment, as noted in Table XII-4 of the Initial Study, generates noise levels above 80 dBA at 50 feet. The mitigation measure also calls for a disturbance coordinator that must promptly respond to all complaints and report them to the City, the placement of stationary equipment and staging areas as far as possible from sensitive receptors, and the use of noise barriers to provide acoustical shielding. Furthermore, while NS-1 does use the same construction hour limits as the City of Berkeley Noise Ordinance, it also notes that the noise reduction program must be approved by the City prior to issuance of the building permit, and that the City may require more restrictive hours. No changes are proposed to the Initial Study as a result of this comment.



ii. Letter from East Bay Municipal Utility District (EBMUD). EBMUD identifies requirements for the provision of new water service and for maintaining the integrity of existing water mains surrounding the project site and Bayer Campus. See Attachment 5 for the full letter.

Response: The EBMUD letter was provided to the applicant on August 28, 2014. The letter stipulates requirements for construction and new service to be completed by the applicant and does not address the adequacy of the CEQA document. Therefore, no changes are proposed to the Initial Study.

5. Mitigation Measures: The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration

(Attachment 3) identified several potentially significant impacts to air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, geology, hazardous materials, hydrology, and noise, which could degrade the quality of the natural environment. However, each potential impact would be mitigated to a less-than-significant level through implementation of mitigation measures identified within each section. All other required topics were discussed in the Initial Study and determined not to involve any significant and unavoidable impacts from the project.

The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment 1: Exhibit A) will be implemented as a condition of project approval. Mitigations are summarized below:

Mitigation Measure AQ-1 reduces air quality impacts and emissions of fugitive dust particulate matter, as well as ozone precursors and exhaust particulate matter through construction best management practices

Mitigation Measure BIO-1 reduces impacts to potential nesting birds or raptors by avoiding construction-related impacts on nesting birds through the construction schedule or conducting pre-construction surveys

Mitigation Measure CULT-1 outlines the required process to reduce impacts to any archaeological resources discovered during construction

Mitigation Measure CULT-2 outlines the required process to reduce impacts to any paleontological resources discovered during construction

Mitigation Measure CULT-3 outlines the required process to reduce impacts to any human remains discovered during construction

Mitigation Measure GEO-1 requires a design-level geotechnical assessment to address fill conditions and prevent hazards and damage due to liquefaction



Mitigation Measure HAZ-1 reduces potential health impacts from residual hazardous materials, contamination through a soil vapor investigation, and soil and groundwater management plan

Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 requires a hazardous materials building survey and implementation of all its recommendations to ensure abatement of asbestos-containing materials and lead-based paint

Mitigation Measure HYD-1 requires compliance with the Construction General Permit, including the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan

Mitigation Measure HYD-2 requires compliance with Provision C.3 of the Municipal Regional Permit and implementation of a Stormwater Control Plan

Mitigation Measure NS-1 requires a project-specific noise reduction program to reduce demolition and construction noise

B. General and Area Plan Consistency: General Plan Policy Analysis: The 2002 General Plan contains several policies applicable to the project, including the following: Industrial Protection: 1. Policy LU-33 West Berkeley Plan: Implement the West Berkeley Plan and take

actions that will achieve the three purposes of the Plan: (1) Maintain the full range of land uses and economic activities including residences, manufacturing, services, retailing, and other activities in West Berkeley. (2) Maintain the ethnic and economic diversity of West Berkeley's resident population. (3) Maintain and improve the quality of urban life, environmental quality, public and private service availability, transit and transportation, and aesthetic and physical qualities for West Berkeley residents and workers.

2. Policy LU-34 Industrial Protections: Protect industrial uses in West Berkeley.

3. Policy ED-2 – West Berkeley Industry: Continue to implement the West Berkeley

Plan, with its central emphasis on protecting and strengthening the city's manufacturing sector.

Staff Analysis: The proposed project would contribute to the protection and expansion of industrial uses and the diversity of economic activities in West Berkeley, as envisioned in the West Berkeley Plan, by modernization and replacement of existing facilities. The project would not create a substantial



number of new jobs, so would only contribute modestly to the economy, although the new construction could generate new short-term jobs. However, the new building would improve the aesthetic and environmental quality of the area through new high-quality construction materials and more energy and water efficient appliances and designs.

Compatibility with Design and Scale of Surrounding Area:

4. Policy UD-16 Context: The design and scale of new or remodeled buildings should respect the built environment in the area, particularly where the character of the built environment is largely defined by an aggregation of historically and architecturally significant buildings.

5. Policy UD-17 Design Elements: In relating a new design to the surrounding area,

the factors to consider should include height, massing, materials, color, and detailing or ornament.

6. Policy UD-24 Area Character: Regulate new construction and alterations to

ensure that they are truly compatible with and, where feasible, reinforce the desirable design characteristics of the particular area they are in.

7. Policy UD-25 Facades and Exterior Features: Buildings should have significant

exterior features and facades that stimulate the eye and invite interested perusal.

Staff Analysis: As noted earlier, the project received a favorable recommendation from the DRC. The proposed project is consistent with the rectilinear building forms found in the industrial and warehouse buildings throughout the Bayer Campus and in West Berkeley. The project incorporates more contemporary materials, including matte metal panels, glazing, and metal louvers that are consistent with more recently constructed buildings on the Campus.

Sustainability and Environmental Quality:

8. Policy EM-15 Environmental Investigation: When reviewing applications for new development in areas historically used for industrial uses, require environmental investigation as necessary to ensure that soils, groundwater, and buildings affected by hazardous material releases from prior land uses would not have the potential to affect the environment or the health and safety of future property owners, users, or construction workers.

9. Policy EM-26 Water Conservation: Promote water conservation through City

programs and requirements. Encourage drought-tolerant landscaping and low-flow irrigation systems. Consider participation in the East Bay Municipal Utility District’s East Bay-shore Recycled Water Project to make recycled water available for irrigation and other non-potable uses.



10. Policy EM-43 Noise Reduction: Reduce significant noise levels and minimize new sources of noise.

11. Policy EM-44 Noise Prevention and Elimination: Protect public health and welfare by eliminating existing noise problems where feasible and by preventing significant future degradation of the acoustic environment.

12. Policy EM-46 Noise Mitigation: Require operational limitations and all feasible

noise buffering for new uses that generate significant noise impacts near residential, institutional, or recreational uses.

13. Policy EM-47 Land Use Compatibility: Ensure that noise-sensitive uses, including, but not limited to, residences, child-care centers, hospitals, and nursing homes, are protected from detrimental noise levels.

Staff Analysis: The project will comply with the City’s Noise Ordinance and the California Energy Code, one of the nation’s strictest codes in terms of energy efficiency. In addition, the project includes a number of features that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help achieve the City’s climate action goals, including site planning techniques, transportation demand management, shared parking, bicycle parking, drought tolerant landscaping, bioretention features to manage stormwater flow, and construction waste management.

West Berkeley Plan Analysis: The West Berkeley Plan contains several goals, policies, and actions applicable to the project, including the following: 1. Land Use Goal 2: Channel development--both new businesses and residences

and the expansion of existing businesses--to districts various which are appropriate for the various existing elements of the West Berkeley land use mix.

2. Land Use Policy 2B: Create a Mixed Manufacturing district as a general industrial district, where both heavy and light manufacturers can function, along with "biotech" industries and office users which can recycle the upper stories of buildings.

3. Land Use Goal 4: Assure that new development in any sector is of a scale and

design that is appropriate to its surroundings, while respecting the genuine economic and physical needs of the development.

4. Urban Design Goal 5: Development on major sites of 1 acre or more should be both internally cohesive and sensitively designed on the site's publicly used edges. Staff Analysis: The proposed project supports the West Berkeley Plan goals and policies by facilitating the expansion of an existing industrial business and providing an architectural design that is compatible with the aesthetic setting



found in contemporary industrial buildings in the area. On its most public façade, the south elevation facing Grayson Street, the building design incorporates transparency into the interior stairwell, glazing and a variety of building materials that create visual interest from the street.

VI. Recommendation

Because of the project’s consistency with the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan, staff recommends that the Zoning Adjustments Board: A. Make the CEQA findings in Attachment 1, Finding 1; B. ADOPT the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration (within Attachment 3); and C. APPROVE Use Permit #2014-0033 pursuant to Section 23B.32.040 and subject to

the attached Findings and Conditions (see Attachment 1). Attachments:

1. Findings and Conditions

Exhibit A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 2. Project Plans, stamped received September 4, 2014 3. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (website link only; hard copies available upon request)

http://www.cityofberkeley.info/uploadedFiles/Planning_and_Development/Level_3_-_Land_Use_Division/2014-08-08_IS-MND_Public%20Review%20Draft_801%20Grayson.pdf

4. Comment on the Initial Study from [email protected] 5. Comments on the Initial Study from East Bay Municipal Utility District 6. Applicant Statement 7. Notice of Intent to Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Notice of a Public Hearing 8. May 6, 2014 Berkeleyside Article “Bayer invites public comment on new building proposal” 9. May 8, 2014 Community Meeting Notice and Materials Staff Planner: Aaron Sage, AICP, [email protected], (510) 981-7410



mailto:[email protected]

Date post:	21-May-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	5 times
Download:	0 times

801 Grayson Street/800 Dwight Way - Berkeleyside...2014/09/11 · 801 GRAYSON STREET/800 DWIGHT WAY...

Documents