San Carlos commission approves design review and recommends council certify EIR for Alexandria life‑science campus

The San Carlos Planning and Transportation Commission on April 21 approved design review and related permits for the proposed Alexandria Center for Life Sciences and voted to recommend that the City Council certify the project’s environmental impact report and adopt plan‑development (PD) zoning and the development agreement.

The actions covered design review for Phase 1 (two buildings), a tentative parcel map, the transportation demand management (TDM) plan, grading and dirt‑haul certificate, a master sign program, and a protected tree removal authorization. Commissioner Castaneda moved the first recommendation; Commissioner Anand and Commissioner Bundy joined subsequent motions. The commission’s roll call recorded four votes in favor (Commissioners Anand, Bundy, Castaneda and Chair Clements); Vice Chair Garvey was excused. The third motion (design review, tentative parcel map and related permits) is a planning commission action and is subject to a 10‑day appeal to the City Council.

Why it matters: the project would redevelop roughly 25½ acres in the city’s East Side Innovation District into a multi‑building life‑science campus, with the applicant and staff saying the design changes made since the original 2020 submittal—lowered and stepped massing, relocated garage entries and expanded ground‑floor activation—were intended to improve neighborhood compatibility. Staff presented new pedestrian and landscape improvements on Commercial Street, public access to campus open space, a publicly available café and a proposed creek‑edge trail along Poulgus Creek.

Project and benefits: Lisa Costa Sanders, the city’s principal planner, told the commission the campus would include six research‑and‑development buildings ranging from five to seven stories, two parking structures (one with about 1,980 spaces), and an overall site floor area the staff described as approximately 2,400,000 square feet including above‑grade parking (about 1,600,000 square feet of R&D space as a narrower measure). The development agreement includes an estimated $43,000,000 fiscal contribution paid across phases, a $2,000,000 contribution to the local school district, on‑site public parking (60 spaces during nights and weekends), and commitments to public access for plazas, a café, restrooms and community use of amenity space for qualifying organizations.

Environmental and remediation assurances: community representatives raised hazardous‑materials and groundwater concerns given the site’s industrial history. The applicant’s environmental consultant, Nick Walchek, told the commission, “capping is not the planned remedy for this site,” and said groundwater remediation has already been conducted in portions of the property and that soil excavated during construction will be characterized and, if necessary, removed for off‑site disposal under regulatory oversight. Staff also pointed to routine groundwater monitoring conducted under the San Francisco Regional Water Quality Control Board.

Transportation, TDM and parking: the commission pressed the applicant on the Transportation Demand Management program. Traffic consultant Mark Spencer summarized the TDM requirement under CEQA: each phase must achieve a trip reduction sufficient to avoid a significant transport impact, with the plan’s modeled outcome about a 23% reduction in trips (exceeding the 20% requirement). Applicant representatives said they anticipate forming or participating in a Transportation Management Association (TMA) to coordinate shuttles, incentives and monitoring; formation actions are required within one year after project approvals become final and non‑appealable.

Community response and workforce commitments: Tony Urbina, a Sheet Metal Workers union representative, urged approval, saying the developer has a history of working with signatory contractors and apprentices, and Alexandria representatives said they expect to partner with contractors and trade apprenticeship programs during construction. The development agreement also secures certain community benefits and credits for on‑site creek improvements, public art, and TMA formation support.

Next steps and appeal rights: the two motions recommending City Council action (EIR certification and PD zoning/development agreement) will go forward to the council for its consideration. The planning commission’s approval of design review, parceling and the associated permits is effective immediately but may be appealed to the City Council within 10 calendar days by filing a written appeal with the city clerk.

Commissioners and staff said they would continue to monitor remediation, air‑quality and TDM performance as the project advances through permit and construction phases.