Partly cloudy this evening then becoming windy with rain developing after midnight. Low around 60F. S winds at 10 to 15 mph, increasing to 20 to 30 mph. Chance of rain 100%. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph..
Tonight
Partly cloudy this evening then becoming windy with rain developing after midnight. Low around 60F. S winds at 10 to 15 mph, increasing to 20 to 30 mph. Chance of rain 100%. Winds could occasionally gust over 40 mph.
Millbrae is taking steps to approve bioscience use of land — bordered by Highway 101 and Old Bayshore Highway — for laboratories and research up to biosafety level two against Airport Land Use Committee recommendation.
Andrew Mogensen
The City Council adopted a resolution declaring its intent to consider overriding the Airport Land Use Committee of the City/County Association of Governments recommendation at its March 26 meeting and declined to take further steps in approving facilities up to biosafety level three, characterized as having the potential to cause serious or lethal infections.
Biosafety level one and level two facilities are categorized as having low-risk agents not known to cause human disease and infectious agents with moderate risk, respectively.
The city will now move into a 45-day mandatory public comment period on the decision before formally adopting a resolution overriding the ALUC determination that the designation is inconsistent with the San Francisco International Airport’s land use plan.
“This is something that happens within a lot of cities in the Bay Area,” Community Development Director Andrew Mogensen said. “We have a lot of bioscience within airport safety zones, you see them in Burlingame, you see the situation in South San Francisco, you see them in San Bruno, so it is something cities have to do for land use in those airport safety zones.”
Part of the land is located within an airport safety compatibility zone, and if reclassified as compatible for bioscience use, would join other land parcels in Millbrae already redesignated.
A majority of discussion on the item revolved around whether councilmembers should move forward with approving facilities up to biosafety level three. Facilities at both the two and three safety levels both require review and a commercial use permit, designated by the Planning Commission or City Council.
“We’re in the business of trying to improve the lives of our people and give more opportunity to the people of Millbrae,” Mayor Anders Fung said. “I want to make sure we don’t take our own opportunities away, especially in situations where we have complete control over what gets done.”
If the City Council decided to redirect and approve biosafety level three laboratories, staff would have to go through the process — which includes a recommendation from the Planning Commission, Airport Land Use Committee and the Board of Directors of the City/County Association of Governments as well as two public hearings — again.
The ALUC can only give recommendation, not direction, for the land use, although it found biosafety level three “incompatible” with the site and that biosafety level two should be avoided unless a feasible alternative is unavailable.
Recommended for you
Councilmember Gina Papan was a strong advocate against higher safety-level science, laboratory and research uses and remained unswayed by the argument that the city would retain ultimate control over what companies used the land, which could potentially generate greater economic revenue for Millbrae.
“I think that’s false advertising. That location is right on the Bay,” she said. “I would only consider a level two, and not a three.”
It’s common for communities who have approved higher levels of biosafety laboratories to pay fees to enhance emergency responses, which in turn lowers the fees of city residents, Fung said. Mogensen added that seeing biosafety level three facilities in general is fairly uncommon, although within the county the San Mateo Medical Center is designated at a three.
But a majority of the council still held concerns, with Councilmember Ann Schneider also bringing up worries that the biotech land use designation could be harmful for the city’s plans to place a new hotel in the area to bring in transient occupancy tax.
“This is the only place in Millbrae without height restrictions — this is actually extremely valuable land. I understand we’re only doing one designation, but that’s what the developers hear from this,” she said. “The city of Millbrae, because of the county allowing the airport to come in, we have so little land that we have to approve things that bring in revenue.”
There were also considerations around if the biosafety level three designation would prevent successful mixed-use development for commercial and community use from Councilmember Angelina Cahalan.
City Manager Tom Williams maintained that retaining a hotel on the site was “essential,” but a biosafety level three designation would simply provide more options for the city to consider alongside it.
Note to readers:This story has been changed to correctly quote Schneider as saying the county, not the city, allowed airport land usage.
If Millbrae builds BSL-3 labs, they will come. If Millbrae doesn’t, they’ll look elsewhere. Perhaps in Redwood City? Or was RC still trying to limit the BSL-rating to 1 or 2?
For the record, the City of Burlingame adheres to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, and does not allow bioscience uses within the SFO Safety Compatibility Zone that would be inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
To my knowledge, none of the cities next to SFO have BSL facilities a few feet from an active (yes, lesser used for arrivals and departures, but used nonetheless, for that purpose) runway. This irresponsible act suggests that the parties wanting to approve such overrides of the ALUC determination of inconsistency are betting (with the taxpayers money and lives) that they will be long off the council if something bad happens down the line. That is a bad bet and truly irresponsible. Other cities have overridden, and the are equally as responsible, but the closer to that runway you are, the more important it is to abide by the ALUC determination. What makes citizens vote for these folks?
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
If Millbrae builds BSL-3 labs, they will come. If Millbrae doesn’t, they’ll look elsewhere. Perhaps in Redwood City? Or was RC still trying to limit the BSL-rating to 1 or 2?
For the record, the City of Burlingame adheres to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, and does not allow bioscience uses within the SFO Safety Compatibility Zone that would be inconsistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
To my knowledge, none of the cities next to SFO have BSL facilities a few feet from an active (yes, lesser used for arrivals and departures, but used nonetheless, for that purpose) runway. This irresponsible act suggests that the parties wanting to approve such overrides of the ALUC determination of inconsistency are betting (with the taxpayers money and lives) that they will be long off the council if something bad happens down the line. That is a bad bet and truly irresponsible. Other cities have overridden, and the are equally as responsible, but the closer to that runway you are, the more important it is to abide by the ALUC determination. What makes citizens vote for these folks?
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.