Planning Commission - Special Meeting

CONDUCTING OUR MEETING TODAY. WE EXCUSE THE ABSENCE OF OUR CHAIR TODAY. WE HAVE MY FELLOW MEMBERS HERE WITH ME JOINING ME TODAY. FOR TODAY IS WEDNESDAY, JUNE 3, 2026. WE NOW START MEETING AT 7.01. here at city council chambers. For public participation, there are three ways to submit public comments. First, email your comment directly to the planning division. Second, submit comments, written comments via city website. And third, attend the meeting in person. To email your comment, simply email a comment to the planner, identify it in the public hearing notice or send the email to MVANLONK at HUYSEN at dailycity.org. Public comments may also be emailed to the same email by including planning commission public comments in the subject lines. To submit a comment via the city's website, please visit www.dailycity.org. Agendas to complete the public comments form in the comments field box include the item number and or title of the item, as well as your comments. To speak at the meeting in person, please submit a public card, speaker card, which some of you already filled it out, located at the entrance to the council chambers and submit it to the staff member as early as in the meeting possible. Please note that all comments received by 4 o'clock on the public meeting day will be provided to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. Comments are not read aloud into the record. Any reading comments received after 4 p.m. on the meeting date are not guaranteed to be received by the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. Okay, so we open this meeting at... 703, we're going to stand up for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, for liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Can I have the roll call, please?

Cote d'Ivoire? Cote d'Ivoire, present. Papua? Present. Norris? Panissa?

Here. Zattari?

Okay, our minutes are bending.

Yeah, they're pending. We'll have them the next time.

Okay, public hearing. So we have here, the first card here, name Andy Tan. Yes. Would you come forward?

I'm going to give a staff presentation first.

Oh, okay. And this is for that. Okay. So after this, then you will have your

Okay, good evening members of the Planning Commission. This is a request by the City of Daly City to change the zoning ordinance to amend Chapter 17, portion of Chapter 17 related to stormwater management and retention to require stormwater and infiltration in addition to stormwater treatment. I'm gonna give a presentation that explains the change and then of course there are several members of the public who have been informed of this meeting and then do wish to speak on it and we'll conduct a public hearing on the item after the staff presentation. So again, these are the proposal to amend the zoning ordinance. So just as a way of background, so currently when a development project Let's just say a larger development project is approved by the Planning Commission in the City Council as part of the plan check of that project the city has a contract with a outside plan checker Who reviews the plans against the city's? municipal regional permit what that permit is is is a permit that we have from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. The City of Daly City has it. And all of the cities in San Mateo have the same permit to discharge into San Francisco Bay or the Pacific Ocean. And that means stormwater. So rainwater falls on a site and the way down to the ocean there's of course everything we've built in the environment and we have a permit that requires that certain and there's different thresholds for the different kinds of treatment measures that are needed for stormwater that falls on a new development site so sometimes you'll see some of these treatment measures in like shopping center I have a photograph of that so that's a example of what stormwater treatment measures are. We operate under the San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program, and we're part of a collective of cities that participates in that program to implement our MRP, the Municipal Regional Permit, And there's a section called C3 inside that where the city has, again, stormwater treatment controls. And that's not what we're changing tonight. We're actually doing something different. But there's a context for what we're doing tonight. And it's provided in the C3 and the municipal regional permit. And so that's why we're giving you a lot of background on that, because that matters. So this is an example of a stormwater treatment measure that in Ceramonte Shopping Center, you may be familiar with this. If you're standing in the front of decks and you look toward World Market, you'll see a stormwater treatment measure. And what happens when the stormwater falls on the site, it all flows to these treatment planters. And before entering the before a sheet flowing to the ocean or percolating into the ground, the stormwater is treated by this system. It's an engineered system of base rock and plant material. And it's very intricately designed. It doesn't look like it, but it is. And there's a number of these. And I'm giving you an example in a large shopping center. But all the way down to small development sites, things like this are required. so what the regulation is the stormwater treatment requirements apply to most projects that create or replace 5,000 square feet or more of impervious surface and large single-family homes creating and replacing 10,000 square feet of impervious surface are also required to have treatment measures and so that's sort of what's brought us here tonight the city has received some comments from the public about the need for very, because a lot of the lots in Daly City, especially the ones that are redeveloped, are about 2,500 square feet. And even at their maximum lot coverage, they create or displace about 1,200, 1,300 square feet of impervious surface. So there's a question about when stormwater treatment needs to occur. And not only stormwater treatment, but stormwater detention. And the cities made the determination that it's an appropriate thing to do for us to codify, and that means to put in the zoning ordinance and the daily city municipal code, the regulations that we would like to see with regard to stormwater detention. And the difference between treatment and detention, so treatment is the treatment of the stormwater before it goes into the ground. has a more engineering-defined runoff coefficient that it tries to capture on the site before any of the stormwater is released. And there's a nuanced difference between the two. So where stormwater treatment measures are typically landscape features that are designed to disperse runoff, on-site retention seeks to stormwater infiltration into the ground or evapotranspiration which means that the water is captured on the on the property and then It evaporates so that it doesn't it does not actually enter into the storm drain system. So there's a very there's a again very small differences, but they're important because The stormwater treatment measures are covered by the MRP and the stormwater detention measures are which are again slightly different, are covered by the chapter that we're amending tonight. And we're clarifying when stormwater detention is required. So currently there is no codified requirement for the city to require stormwater retention measures. We've operated under policies in other parts of the city code to require these measures and have done that for a number of years. but again, members of the public have brought forth an issue where they think that their site shouldn't have to do this, and so the city staff, in trying to address these questions, has proposed amending the zoning ordinance. And I think I explained the last bullet where there's infiltration rates, and so that's why Some of the language you see in the code that we're proposing to amend has very specific rates of infiltration. So this is an example of stormwater detention measure. So there's an engineered structure, and sometimes they're in the backyard. If you're adding onto your home or building an ADU, and we're gonna specifically address those two construction proposals. And sometimes water, falls into the cistern and evapotranspiration, evaporation, or there's a tank that holds it before it, the idea is that there would be no stormwater released into the sheet flow, which means the flow of stormwater over the city sidewalk and into the street and down into the storm drain. So the goal has always been to try and have that be zero. And that is, you know, it actually is a very good goal. We don't really want to have a city where everything is paved and when the rainwater falls, it's all contributed to in a collective way. If this is hundreds and hundreds and thousands of homes, all goes into the storm drain system. So the idea is to capture it on the property. But as I mentioned, there's been a question of who should have to comply with us. And it's very clear in the city's MRP and in the C3 section of the municipal regional permit. It's called C3 because that's the section number that it is. It's very clear about who has to comply with stormwater treatment measures. It's not clear. in the MRP or in the city zoning ordinance, and that's what we're proposing to clarify tonight, who would comply with providing stormwater detention.

Oh, excuse me, Michael, sorry. What does MRP stand for, for the people?

It's Municipal Regional Permit. Okay. It's the name of the permit that the Regional Water Quality Control Board gives to the city of Daly City. And it's updated every five years or so. We have a planning staff member, it's not me, it used to be me, who specifically attends the city's meeting with regard to the MRP, I'm sorry, the San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Programs meetings with regard to the MRP. So anyway, yeah. So we're proposing zoning ordinance amendments and the exact amendments are an attachment to the Planning Commission staff report. to explicitly require compliance with the MRP. And in addition to MRP compliance, and this is the real meat of the change, require stormwater detention in the prescribed amount. And I won't get into the exact numbers of the prescription, but they're basically runoff coefficients that are contained. They're already actually in the city zoning ordinance. they're they're identified as being optional and we are making them requirements so there's a big change there and so one of the in addition to the amounts prescribed it also says or by the OR AS PRESCRIBED BY THE CITY ENGINEERS. SO CURRENTLY THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IS UPDATING THE STORM WATER MASTER PLAN AND THERE MAY BE SOME OF THESE COEFFICIENTS MAY BE CHANGING AND SO THAT'S WHY WE ADDED SOME FLEXIBILITY THERE. Most importantly, though, is the third bullet. And this is a specific exemption for homes that are, there's an addition proposed on the home. Unless the addition exceeds the amounts that we've prescribed, but in all the time, for example, I've worked here, we've never had an addition that's very large. It usually covers, you know, six, 700 feet of area. So they're very, the additions, when people add onto their home, are very small in Daly City. And so it specifically excludes those as well as ADUs. So a state planning law basically says to cities that you can't adopt regulations that are onerous to the construction of accessory dwelling units. That's the acronym, ADU. And so if we wanted to do that, we would have to request that the state approve that sort of a change. And it's very doubtful that they would. the cost of adding these systems to a backyard can get expensive, especially on sloping land. And so we are proposing that ADUs be excluded, be exempted from the regulations. So instead of complying with on-site detention, or actually on-site treatment, because the MRP also excludes small additions and ADUs, The applicants would be required to fill out the checklist that is provided for small projects by the San Mateo County Stormwater Pollution Prevention Program. And this is just a snippet of the top page of that. The whole checklist is included in your staff report. And there's if projects don't exceed a certain size then a lot of the things on this form actually become optional but they're very inexpensive to Comply with but they would become optional so that is essentially how we proposed addressing this one thing to clarify that if you're constructing a new home on a property that the that site even if it's 2500 square feet would be required to provide on-site detention measures but not stormwater treatment measures because again most homes in dilly city don't meet the threshold for providing that under the city's mrp so i'm sorry for mixing the mrp up in this but it is sort of um it provides some context for stormwater management on sites so yes so that's essentially the proposal before you we have when we had developed the ordinance we will include in the ordinance to whom the new regulations would apply and it's very likely that we'll include that it would apply to just new building permits so once a person applies for a permit or is about to receive a permit, rather, that the applicability would pertain to that. But we're still kind of working on that. And when the ordinance is written, we'll develop that more thoroughly. We want to make sure that, yeah, people who haven't applied yet, of course, wouldn't need to comply. Well, they would comply with this ordinance, but not provide stormwater detention. But there's a question about people who are in the pipeline, who have already got projects in, what their compliance would look like. And it's very likely that they would not need to provide on-site detention measures as well. So that's the way we're leaning on that topic. And so with that, I will conclude the presentation. And if there's any questions that you have of me, I'd be happy to answer those for you.

I have a question, Michael. What specific problems are we trying to solve with this amendment?

Well, there's a question of who needs to provide on-site detention features on their development. So some of the contractors and architects and designers of single-family homes or additions or ADUs have questioned the city's ability to require on-site detention. Okay, thank you for that. That's what's sort of brought this whole topic forward.

No, I get it.

And so to settle it, We're putting it, we're proposing amendments to the zoning ordinance and the municipal code to make it law so that we can all hopefully agree on what the law says. Okay.

I have another one, sorry. Is this a daily city thing, county, or state? Daily city thing. Okay. Yeah.

Does anybody else have a question?

Good evening, Madam Chairman. I'm sorry I'm late. I was looking for my telephone. I got lost. Anyway, I'm here. Do we have a representative from wastewater management here? No. Only the planning staff is available. Here in the Daly City? No, no, no. At tonight's meeting. No. Do we have a representative here tonight? Only from the Director of Wastewater? No? Because I have a lot of questions, but that's okay. We can try to answer this for you. My concern is this, Your Honor. You should have mentioned about stormwater and the so-called sanitary resources. sewer system because these are interrelated. You have not touched that. That's why I'm asking if there is a representative. But anyway, I'm not going to excuse you on that.

Well, we do know some of the answers. Stormwater is not allowed to enter the sanitary sewer system unless it's for specific types of... Because, you know, I came from...

I used to be a state commissioner of the Board of Because I have so many technical questions that I want to know from them. Well, anyway, as much as we are here just to primarily to approve the so-called ordinance, this is the so-called routine, right? Now, in the impoundment of water, how big and how small do you have to determine it? You know, detention and impoundment is the same, right? You agree with me on that? Essentially, yes. Impoundment and detention. Because I can say Sacramento, the impoundment water is in Bisho, under the bridge of the Bisho Park. In Daly City, can you cite to me some important impoundment water or detention water? Here in the LCDD, can you speak?

Well, these regulations are- Big or small?

These regulations- So the people watching now can determine what are we talking about.

So these regulations are for private property only. So one of the things we had shown an example of, for example, at Saramati Shopping Center. Yes, I agree with that. Example of- I saw that, yeah. On-site treatment measure. And on-site detention measures are usually for large projects are buried underground, so we can't see them. Yeah.

You know, in the third world, we call it flood control, right? But here it's more of an impoundment of water, so to avoid any flooding. How many hours do you think that can last, the water they're impounding there, the one you're? You know, I honestly don't. You don't have any idea? I don't. Because there is a specific time. You're right. That can subside, but only to avoid flooding. flooding of the streets. That's the point.

These systems are engineered to they have overflow capacities and there's little outlets to them and you can see that right here. So while I don't know what the exact time is that their water is collected in there.

I can tell you now, two hours it's gone. But it prevents flooding within the area. That's the point.

but this is an engineered system.

That's why I'm asking if there is any representation from the Office of Director Joshua Cosgrove, right?

Oh, Josh Cosgrove.

No, he's not here tonight. That's why, because a lot of people also are watching this hearing. That's why they want to know, because there are some questions or issues that why are we going to charge homeowners

Can you justify that? Well, we're not going to. That's the whole reason that we're amending the zoning ordinance is that we're going to make it easier for people to add on to their house or build an ADU and not have to build stormwater detention measures. That's the very purpose of why we're here.

So you mean to say those letters that we receive here, like Brian or Lee, Lee? What's the name of the Lee? Lee Wing? Something like that. they're protesting about this so-called, the fee, or instead of them, the city doing it, why not the city do it for them? Can you explain that? Why this ordinance, we have to charge, they have to do it on their own, on their own volition, they have to do it, and that's very expensive to to have that on homeowners.

Can you explain that to us?

Because the city council, I know they will question you on that.

Well, this ordinance would make very clear that people who are adding onto their home or building an ADU in the backyard would not be required to provide on-site detention measures. The city's municipal regional permit already does not require treatment measures. Why are they protesting? What we can go through there's a couple of letters that the planning the emails the Planning Commission received and one of the emails is speaking to a stormwater Detention measure that was already installed and the suggestion in the email is that the the person in the email should be reimbursed by the city because the detention measure was never required and And so that's the essence of that email.

When it has been done, then that's it.

You don't have to. Whenever we issue a permit at the time for raising a dispute on something like that is before the permit is issued. And once the permit's issued, the city's been using policies to require this. And the very reason that we're here tonight is to try and move past with the people who have had some issues with this and put it into the city's municipal code. So hopefully it's in black and white and there's no disagreement in the future about whether it's required or not. But as a result of that, we've decided to exclude additions to homes or ADU construction. So some people naturally feel, well, I already put this in when I built my ADU and they're understandably upset about that. But at this point.

Is this stormwater management, is this the municipal drain? Is this the same?

It's related to the storm drain system, yes. Say that again? It's related to the city's storm drain system very much so. Same. How about the sanitary waste system? It's not related to that. Not related? No. No. Some development projects for a car wash is a good example. If you are washing cars, that has to be, that can't go into the storm drains.

How do you determine that when the water goes down?

Well, we haven't had a car wash proposed, but I just gave an example. We do, when we plan check it, we make sure that the water is going to the right place. We do have places that wash cars, and those all have to be tied to the sanitary sewer system.

Because, I don't know if some engineers can help me here. There is a so-called stormwater, and there is a so-called water that we drink from the faucet. How do you determine what drainage system are you in or out? That's why I'm asking you if you have a representation here from, because it's a very technical question. So the people... watching now and listening, can understand what we're talking about. Because we can talk here all night without understanding it. That's why I'm asking every time that we should have an issue like this, one of the representatives from the department should be present, at least to enlighten us what's going on in the city. Of course, anyway, you will say the Planning Commission is just more of just the regular thing. Because if I want to ask a lot of questions, how do I get the answer? I have to go to them?

No. That's why we have the so-called hearing here. The planning division manages the C3 regulations all by itself without any assistance from the Department of Water.

That's why I'm asking you. How do you determine what the press water and the storm water, where is it located, how it is located? You know, beneath the street, there are so many water pipes there. You have the Comcast, you have PG&E, you have, that's why I'm asking this question. The people should know this also. Because we're not here for us only, but for the people. That's why it's called public healing. We want to enlighten everybody here. So the moment it goes to the city council, more or less, they have already the idea. That's why we have been here as a precursor to what's going on. We cannot just say, oh, anyway, they will just approve it. No. We have several questions. Next time, probably, if we have some issues like this, invite the department head or anybody who can represent the department. If it is public works, public works. We'll invite both departments.

Yeah.

I have a lot of questions here. But I know I don't want to excuse you, but that's my point.

Mr. Satori, do you have any more questions? Do you have any more questions?

No, I'll let you go, but I have some more questions.

I sympathize with you and I do agree with you that maybe in the future, that Michael, if you felt like there is issue that requires into those departments, it will be nice if one of the representative can be here so that way we can address the questions accordingly and so that we are on time manually and respect everybody's time, please. Okay, I do, Commissioner Sherrill, Couture? None at this time.

Ready to hear public comment.

Okay. I do have one question. You mentioned the regulations are not yet ready. My question is when, and I feel like to me it's not fair for some of you, and you even mentioned prior regulations, What is considered prior? What's the timeline? Where exactly is the time cut out? So if prior was before the permit, you know, how do we rule that out so that everything is fair and transparent to all that are included?

The Planning Commission can actually make a recommendation.

Perfect. If that's something that we can do, why not in moving forward? I DIDN'T KNOW THAT I AS A PLANNING COMMISSION CAN DO THAT.

ANYTHING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT, THIS TOPIC ABOUT APPLICABILITY CAME UP AFTER WE WROTE THE STAFF REPORT AND RELEASED IT. If you have a recommendation for that, we can do that. There's essentially different phases of a development project where something could apply. There's permit application. So these regulations would apply upon application, or permit issuance, or permit final, which that last one is out. It's either going to be permit issuance, or it's going to be permit application. A contractor who did not want to provide a stormwater treatment measure would want what we're proposing tonight are these amendments to apply at permit issuance. Okay. So that they could say, well, my permit hasn't been issued yet. The city council, the planning commission, and the city council adopted a regulation. I want to comply with that. My permit hasn't been issued yet. Whereas if we make a permit application, they've already made an application. So these regulations would not apply. the old, what we had before, whatever that was, would apply.

Right.

So, and we're leaning, like I said, and if you'd like to make the recommendation to apply permit issuance, we're leaning that way ourselves.

Okay, so maybe that's something that we can discuss not now, but maybe we can hear from the public first, and then we'll make some recommendations after. Okay.

Yeah, I mean, I think this is in response to, you know, they heard the public. And so this is in response to that. So I think it's a good thing, yeah. Yeah, so this is AGU.

Are we okay? Okay. So I have here a speaker card for Andy Tan.

Good evening, members of the Commissioner and Michael. Thank you for the explanation. So I'm here today to just to give you, myself, I'm a civil engineer, so I do a lot of projects in the city. I help homeowners. I also develop myself. So I work with Mike very closely for many, many years and appreciate, you know, Mike's effort in the past. So... So basically, the way I understand is that the cities already have the mechanism from the regional permit that they can treat the stormwater in a large development, such as the Sacramento Center. So I think all this issue, today's issue, come up is only targeting small development, new single-family buildings, small lot. So the point is that, you know, for many, many years, ever since I work in Daly City, the city already using this, require this retention on small project, including ADU, small addition, and new single family. But the city does not have the legal authority to do that. So it applied on my project, and I took the issue to the city attorney's office. And I told them that, you know, based on my understanding, the city does not have the authority to require developer on small project to do detention. And after three months, no answer after three months, and they finally admit that the city does not have the authority to do that. So, of course, they want to come up with this ordinance so that in the future, somebody like me that come in a single-family development, they require you to do the retention. And think about this. It's only targeting a small amount of project. As far as I know, currently, there's only three projects in Daly City that apply. because of this ordinance. So we spent so much effort and just try to target three buildings in Daly City per year currently. So there's not that many small lot left in Daly City. Everything's already built. So to me, this is a completely waste of staff time. And it's not practical. Not all the lot is perfect condition be able to build a retention. If the lot is on steep hill, you cannot store the water there because it's going to flush down the slope. And if the lot is on a poorly drainage problem that the water cannot really percolated into the ground. It's going to stay there forever. It's going to collect, you know, mosquitoes. So, you know, engineering and also the Daly City lot, they are small compared to most of the houses in San Mateo County. When you build a house and you build an ADU, there's very little space in between to put in any detention system. It's very... you know, unpractical. And the cost is very expensive. And, you know, the building cost in this area is already very high. And adding additional cost to the homeowner, you know, is defeating the purpose of provide more housing for the community. So I strongly recommend the commissioners to reject this ordinance and not to, you know, make it in effect. Thank you very much.

Thank you.

I stay here if you guys have any questions.

Can I ask a question? Yes, sir. What is your name again, sir?

My name is Andy Tan.

Okay. When you say a small place like your construction, is it possible to put up an impoundment water?

Say that again. I'm sorry.

Is it possible in your project that you can put an impoundment water or detention water?

Well, it is, you know, in my case, you know, it is possible. Yeah.

Yeah, that's what I'm saying.

Yeah, but, you know, you have to look at what is the area. You know, some area is sandy soil. Some area they have a lot of rock. Some area have a lot of, you know, clay. So, you know, in my area, it's a sandy area. So, it's still okay.

Is there a playground in your area?

I will have to make a playground, yes.

Can you make the playground as impoundment water?

I don't, I haven't get into the engineering design of that yet.

Well, you better review it again because it's possible.

Yeah, it is possible.

The playground, you can build more or less, I would say a tunnel, put it above board, you can still have the playground.

Yeah, I mean, there are some... We do an impoundment of water. Yeah, but a lot of those, I don't think you have... You can use that water also for, say, like,

Using that for your plans.

So what happened is on the counties.

That's why I'm asking here the director of the planning. If we should invite or any hearing like this, we should have a department people representation because they're the one doing this. They're the one approving. They're the one trying to apply this regulation or permit. They're the one implementing this. Now, what you are here, just talk without any, I don't know what to say, really.

Mr. Wilson?

There are so many solutions, but coming from those people implementing this project, because the moment you apply for a building permit, there are about 25 permits, and one of them is the water, waste and water.

Right, right, yeah.

Now, he's the only one here. I'm not saying that, but I would like to get this information coming from them. because we have so many questions, and the people watching now, they're also trying to absorb this, to discern this, what's going on in the city. The city is too small compared to other cities, but at least that's the only way we can avoid flooding in the city.

Commissioner Couture, Commissioner, do you have a question for Mr. Tan?

No question here.

Thank you, Mr. Tan. Thank you so much. Next one is Ben Bermudez.

Hello, everybody. Yes, I recently actually finished my ADU was finally signed off. And this is back in May of this year. Initially, I started the project four years ago. And yeah, and this water retention system that I was required to build took a lot of time and a lot of money. During the process, I actually emailed several people within the building department asking them, because I had actually checked on several different addresses that had been finalized that did not require a water retention system. And these systems, these buildings were similar to mine. And mine was just a 700 square foot ADU, two bedroom, so my son and his family could live in. But because the city said, well, you're going to have to build this water retention system. Like it or not, you want to pass? This is what needs to be done. Period. I even asked for a face-to-face meeting with the people within the building division. And I showed them, and I was emailing them the addresses where some of the ADUs had been finalized that were not required to have any sort of water retention system. So it's very selective. So it's being selective. So again, if anything, you know, again, it took longer than it should have, and it took a lot more money than it should have. And it was something that, again, some people were required and some people were not. I came to the meeting and they all just shook their head and said, well, if you want to proceed, you're going to have to build that. And again, it took a huge amount of space in the back of the yard. And again, it took a lot of money as well. This project should have been completed in two years. from start to finish, and it took, again, over four years, and part of the reason was because this water retention system, they kept saying, you have to build something that retains the water, and I kept showing them. I said, look, I have addresses. And, I mean, even one of my, you know, close friend of mine, a family friend, just built something in his yard. And they signed off without, you know, the requirement. So, again, if you want to be selective, that's not cool. Again, we're hardworking people, you know. We're not rich people that, you know. Again, I just thought, you know what, if I can build something in the back of my house and have my son and his family live there, that's beautiful, you know. When we started the project, you know, initially it was around $300,000 for the whole project. And because of all the extra expenses, it ballooned.

How much is estimated for the water retention that is being asked from you? It was over $8,000 plus the labor. Yeah.

Yeah. And again, they have to dig a big old hole.

Madam Chairman, may I interject this? Let me manifest this because there is a draft here regarding... stormwater management, and rainwater retention. And one of the draft is letter E. It says, let me read it. This regulation shall not apply to additions to single-family homes or duplexes. The construction of attached or detached ADUs or residential paving projects where such projects create or replace less than 2,500 square feet of impervious surface. What does it mean, Mr. Director? Will you kindly explain it to him?

Impervious surface or...

Yes, so impervious surface means that surface like concrete or houses or something that can't absorb stormwater is impervious surface. So in the case of the ADU that this gentleman is mentioning, very likely under the new regulation, there would not be stormwater detention required.

Yes. Yes.

My question, another question is, why 8,000? Why not 20,000 or 2,000?

What, cost?

The cost.

Well, you got to talk to the contractor. The contractor is the one that actually had to dig the big old three foot by four feet hole on the whole side of the building so they could, you know, comply with the city because that's what the retention system needed to look like or be. And again, you either build it or we don't go forward. It's that simple. So what did I do? I said, let's build it. Let's build it because I had no other choice, right? I'm already in. The structure's already there. You know, I took out a loan four years ago, four years ago. My son couldn't even put a foot in there for over four years, and he's paying for it. He's paying for it because we agreed, you know what, we're going to go halves. We're going to build you a nice little two-bedroom, 750 square foot, which, as I understand, they're not going to be required to do that no more. But again, some of the addresses were not required. And mine was.

Did the city government ever tell you that the beneficial effect of this? Anybody? No. Just do it. Do it or you don't go forward. That's what I'm saying, Mr. Director.

Do it or you don't go forward. Again, again. Emails, chains with addresses. And they all even asked to face me.

We cannot be arbitrary on this, Mr. Director. So we have to hear the voice of the people also.

Madam Chair, I have a comment. So Michael I have a question pertaining to what the gentleman just said that Is that something you can speak on on why some are required and some were not required?

I cannot speak on that.

I was not a part of that Chair would like you to Sure for everybody's

Thank you.

So my background, I used to work for the Department of Public Works. So I know a lot of stuff inside the city. So, this issue comes in when the new director, public board director is in charge. So, in the past, this regulation is required on the subdivision use permit variance. It never apply on small permit, and it should not apply on small permit. So one time, one day, somebody thought, oh, it's a good idea. So they apply it to everybody, including addition, small ADU, such as this. But you have to look at the time. So my thinking was in the last eight years, they have been doing it without legal authority. But prior to the eight years, our project was not required. So it's only happening recently. And that's why it brought to my attention that, hey, the city are not supposed to do that. You have not been doing this for the last, let's say, 80 years. And all of a sudden, you want to do it. But where is your base of this requirement? And as Ben say, when he bring that issue up, everybody is shaking their hand. They say, I don't know. Don't talk to me. You just have to do it. Sir, did you ask?

This was just in May, in May of this year?

Yeah, they finally signed off in May.

But after we spent so much time, two more years.

Madam Chairman, can I ask a question? Did you ask the city what is the legal basis in imposing that? Did you ask the city?

Yes, I sent my email to the city clerk's office, sent it to the city attorney's office, and finally the city attorney, after three months of my email, they finally come back and say they was doing it wrong before for all those years. And it was wrong. Yes. Right. This is a correction to their mistake for the last eight years.

This is funny, huh?

It is funny. It's expensive for this homeowner.

I mean, think about this guy. I would say funny for those managing this kind of affair in government.

Yeah. I mean, it's completely unfair to somebody like Ben that has to spend so much money and they don't even have the legal base to require this guy to do what he's supposed to do.

Thank you. Thank you so much. Can we table this and maybe come back or maybe we need to. I rent I have never owned a home, but coming where I've come from, I own a home there. I don't deal with all these problems that we're dealing with. I understand and I hear what you're saying, Mr. Promoutis, and I sympathize with you. And on behalf of the Planning Commission, I do apologize for all that you went through into building a home for your son. Perhaps we can, I'm not promising anything, but we would like to dig more into and have more conversation to avoid this situation happening again. And as you stated, it's not fair. I do hear what you're saying. I understand what you're feeling. And thank you for coming today.

I can concur with you, Madam Chairman. I fully concur with your sentiments.

we can look into more into this on your time maybe I mean he has receipts he has proof of everything that he has submitted to the city and everything and he also submitted some addresses that were not you know the chair the city attorney's office can look into this and we do recommend that this item be tabled at this time right yes Thank You mr. promoters okay

What do we do? Do you mean to say, Madam Chairman? Have we read all the speakers? No, not yet.

Okay, well, I think we need to do that. We have two more. Let's continue the public hearing. Yes, and then you.

Are you inclined to say that we can lay this on the table until probably we are satisfied with their answer?

We might not have any answers to it, but it's good to look into it, to revisit it. But we can table it. Yes.

It is just a public. I so move on that, Madam Chair.

Prior, we should have the public hearing and allow the public to speak. Yes, so we'll just finish the public hearing. Thank you.

I do apologize. We're usually supposed to do two minutes per public hearing, but... Each speaker, yeah. Each, each. But for today, we have exception for today. David Williams, come on up.

I'll try to be quick. Thank you. I'm an architect here in Daly City. And I guess I have a real life story not as bleak as yours, but... And I think this is a good thing because all we're trying to do here, it seems like, is put some definition to when the stormwater retention is required. And it's really, as outlined, as you had mentioned, specific to size of lot, additions. You know, we all know Ceramonte and all these developments need it. So my story is a project for a client. It was an ADU addition, 643 Gellert. the lot of existing home, and then a stabilized flat area, and then a hillside. So not plenty of residential lots like this around the city. We submitted the plans, had the geotech done and everything, submitted the plans, and they got kicked back out. And one of the things was you need to retain the stormwater. And at that point, there was nothing to do. You put that in your things, comply if you want to get your permit. So we went through the process of you have to hire a civil engineer who engineers the size of the retention. It doesn't have anything to do with treating the water. On a residential lot, Anything that's not developed that's permeable, that treats the water per se. But retain the water that was being shed from the ADU and any permeable surfaces, non-permeable surfaces that were put in. So the owner went through the expense of the civil engineer, designed it. The cost that he spent at that point were about $15,000 because we had to bring the geotech back in. The geotech engineer, again, because of the lot, not an unusual one in Daly City, said, absolutely not. You cannot dig this and retain this water on any kind of hillside site like this. It'll totally destabilize it. And he just said, no. And so we had to go back and, you know, got involved with Andy and the city to kind of fight this through that it just wasn't feasible. You know, we wanted to build the ADU. What they were asking us in the stormwater, it didn't make sense for this little tiny lot, just what we're trying to solve here. And eventually, unfortunately, we were able to get it through without it. So I can't speak to why he didn't, why we were. But maybe it had to do with our lot had no choice. If they denied it, then we couldn't build the ADU. They can't stop you from building an ADU. So it got in a big circle. But it's just, I mean, I think the premise of what we're talking about here is focusing on just residential small developments and not creating this burden, which really doesn't make sense in the scheme of things about how much stormwater is being saved and not being put out into the street, the system. So that's it. Two minutes.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay. I apologize if I put your name or if I said it right.

Okay. Hello, commissioners and Michael. I've worked with Michael for a few years as well. He's very helpful and very knowledgeable. And I've worked with Andy as well. So I've been working in the city 10, 15 years more. And I'm a contractor, so I'm the guy who does that kind of stuff. And I can say you actually... Even though it was 8,000, it's a lot of money. You know, 15,000 is more like the going rate. And like if you're talking about building something like that, it's like taking out eight loads of dirt. Eight loads of dirt is going to Tracy. It's not getting dumped in someone else's yard. It's got to go a long way to get dirt out of here. And you've got to bring in this, you know, permeable material. You've got to have filter fabric around it, all that kind of stuff. But I have a few points. Anyway, that's just a side on the comments that have already been made. But I just have a few points to make. With the bioswales or, you know, retention pits, something like that, they take a lot of space. You can see the amount of space there in Cerro Monte, you know, and that's only taking up a little bit of that big space. But if you have a typical lot in Daly City, as you probably know, is 100 feet deep, 25 foot wide, it's not going to need... It's not going to have room for a retention pit as such. And the reason for that is you're going to have, for example, if you want to have your retention pit at the front of the house, you're going to have your sewer coming in, your electric, your gas, your communications. And the gas meter has to be in a specific spot and you might have to have your house line going over to there. And these retention pits are like just the ones that we're dealing with at the moment. They're like three or four foot deep and they could be 15 foot wide. It's like it's a 25 foot lot. So it's taken up a lot of room. So they're not practical in that way. And then another point I would make in Daly City, a lot of the soil in Daly City, as Andy alluded to, is sand. It's a very permeable sand base. And so what you probably did is your guy dug out a big pit that was full of sand, which is a permeable material, and put in a class two permeable rock there. So it's quite similar. So it might be better served. And they actually do already do pervious surfaces. So instead of digging a big pit and getting the water to run into the pit, a pervious surface that the water just runs over and runs down into the ground, into the sand. It's pretty much doing the same job. Yeah. So you have things like fake grass, real grass, pavers, all of those are permeable surfaces. And, you know, you're taking out a load of sand and putting in a similar kind of material that would do the same job. Whereas you could put in your bioretention, you could concrete over that. you know, technically. So I just think it's a bit of an overkill, especially for a lot that's 100 by 25. And to that point, I just, you know, I get what Michael's trying to do. It seems like a good thing that you're letting off ADUs and, you know, other small things like that. That's completely reasonable. I would just wonder, and maybe it's something we can talk about another time, why you would stop at, it's less than $2,500. which is the exact size of a Daly City lot. Why isn't it 2,501? Why are we penalising someone who's trying to, you know, do something on a small lot in Daly City? I feel that at least if that does go through, at least that could be a little amendment. It should be bigger than... Well, a little bit bigger, you know, like a typical lot in Daly City, 2,500. That's if it's 100 foot deep. I believe, Andy, you're 150 deep. So we're not penalizing people, but we are penalizing other people. And that's back to the unfairness again. Both of those lots would be single family, you know, residential, small builder, you know, just something like that. So that's maybe something to think about. Yeah. Another thing is, I think one of the reasons, and you were talking about water wastewater guys being here and not being here and i have a bit of experience with them and i know what they don't want is more water coming in to their storm facility that's that's what they don't want and when you have a big lot like this or a big project like that it's completely understandable but when you have a 100 by 25 area and with a lot of pervious surfaces that are already required The effect is going to be negligible, you know, and you're putting a not a negligible cost, 8,000, 15,000. I actually know one is 20,000. You're putting in a big cost. for a negligible return on homeowner. So I think, you know, I get it with this. Bioswales, I get the idea. California want to get water back in the ground. I get it. But I think you're just penalizing the small guy for a negligible returns. And then I think that's it. The other thing I would say is that we're talking about when, if you were implementing this, just say it goes through and, you know, that's up to you guys. But if you were implementing something like that, you're talking about, I think your recommendation, Michael, maybe was when the permit's been issued. But in your case, when he's got to the place where the permit's been issued, he already has budgeted what he needs to do. He's already got the loan from the bank. He's already made the plans, you know, if he has to spend 20 grand extra. And maybe said, you know what, I'm not going to do it because there's 20 grand here. I just can't afford that. So I think if you said, okay, when the permit was being applied for, that's where all the groundwork's being done. And you can see, okay, can I afford this? Can I not afford this? Because if it comes in when the permit's been issued, you're like, oh, I just budgeted for everything. And now this has been thrown at me. So I think that's a bit late in the game. I think If you are going to implement something like that, I'd recommend doing it at the application stage. And that's it. Thanks for your time.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. Who decides the number 2500?

The number 2500 comes from the MRP, and it's not the size of the lot. It's the amount of surface that is being replaced that's impervious.

Okay. Does anybody else have any questions? I just have some points.

Well, I mean, at least it's still in a draft form and every comment, you know, we heard, we considered. So thank you for your input and for being here today.

Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you for taking the time to be here.

I mean, hopefully, you know, I don't know if a remedy is even possible for...

This hearing isn't about whether to reimburse somebody. That's the ability of the Planning Commission. Yes.

So I want to say that in Daly City, this matters because stormwater management matters because of steep hills, aging drainage systems, erosions, risk, and periodic flooding, especially during heavy winter storms. Some of the pros that I was able to find out is that It reduced flooding in low-lying areas. Neighborhoods like West Lake, Ceremony, and parts of Mission Street can experience pulling during heavy storms. Retention systems slow runoff, reducing street flooding and property damage. It can help with less erosion of hill sites. Daly City's steep terrain example around Skyline Boulevard St. Francis and Westmore is pruned to erosion. Capturing water helps stabilize slopes and protects homes. It also improved water quality. Stormwater often carries oil, trash, and pollutants into Coma Creek and the Pacific. Retention systems filter water naturally before it enters waterways. Lower pressure on aging drainage infrastructure. Daily City's storm drains were not built for today's extreme rainfall patterns. Retention reduces strain, lowering the risk of backups and costly repairs. And potential of greener neighborhoods, that's my favorite, rain gardens, you know, bioswales and permal payments can add greeny greenery and improve Curipa Pier, cooler streets and more shade in summer, and possible long-term cost savings, fuel floods, related repairs for homeowners, and reduce city spending on emergency drainage fixtures. Some of the cons and challenges that some of the residents might run into is construction disruptions, maintaining responsibilities, potential fees of funding adjustments, space limitation, and upfront costs. So I heard all of that today, and those are some of the concerns that also in the emails that I was hearing myself. So those are some of the points in regards to this. that we're all facing today. Does anybody else have anything else before we move into recommendation and action? Yes, sir.

I would like to ask Director Mike here, based on your experience here in Daly City, How many catastrophic floodings have been witnessed in daily series? How many?

Catastrophic flooding.

Flooding. Catastrophic floods? Mm-hm. Gosh, I don't know. A couple. Catastrophic is defined as what, though?

Heavy flooding, soil going down to the streets. Water is stagnant for several days. You will be here because I have been here almost so long. So I know those flooding that occurred in Daly City. So do you remember it? I do. So can you name those three catastrophic flooding?

I can't. No, I can't. I don't know the dates of them. I do remember flooding, though. But you don't know the place, specific place?

Oh, there was some around City Hall. 87th Street, 89th Street. I don't know the dates. Yeah.

You don't know anybody else, anything else?

No, he was asking where, where.

I know we had a flood around City Hall.

That's...

Like soil coming down from Olympic Club. Do you remember that?

No.

Oh, come on. I don't remember that. And also soil coming down from San Bruno going to the streets for almost a month. They have to clean up the street. I remember that because as a member of the Lions Club also we helped. And also the West Lake, I remember that. So in order to have a valid, really, to have expertise on this, you should witness at least because of the climate change. And people are saying that for not so long. So what is the downturn when you say There is a flooding. What happened? What are the consequences? Would you know?

The consequences of flooding? Well, there's a lot of property damage. Like what? I don't know. This item has not got to do with that particular thing, though.

I'm going to give you one, like sinkhole. There could be a big sinkhole. Did you witness that in Daly City?

So can we move on with the recommendation of the action? Do we have a vote?

Well, somebody needs to make a motion.

Do we need a motion to table the item?

Do we need to make a motion for staff recommends adopting the findings as outlined hearing? find that proposed rezonings are exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, CBQA, pursuant to CEQA guidelines section of 15061, review for exception and recommend to the City Council the approval of zone change. ZC0526017062, amending chapter 417.41150, stormwater management.

I motion for approval, please.

Any seconds?

I thought all the while this, I have the impression that we're going to table this.

Were you tabling the public hearing of the gentleman?

The moment we approve this, then it's gone, Your Honor.

I don't think that was, that was, he was... WE'RE POSING FOR.

PLANNING COMMISSION CAN TABLE THE ITEM, WHICH MEANS THAT IT COMES BACK AT AN UNSPECIFIED DATE. IT CAN CONTINUE THE ITEM TO A DATE CERTAIN. LET THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE IT WITHOUT US DOING SOMETHING. PLANNING COMMISSION CAN MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL WITH SOME CHANGES THAT ADDRESS PUBLIC COMMENTS.

SOME CHANGES WITH THE SIZE.

So just to summarize what the public's comments are, and you can correct me if you feel differently, there was a concern that the ordinance didn't go far enough, that it only excluded ADUs and additions. Correct. And that you shouldn't exclude single family homes construction on small lots in their entirety. That's what I gathered. Yes. So that could be a recommendation to the city council.

Yes.

I don't know if there was anything else.

THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THE PLANNING COMMISSION COULD DO. THEY COULD RECOMMEND MOVING FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH THOSE AMENDMENTS. AND THE APPLICABILITY. THE APPLICABILITY WOULD BE AT THE TIME OF APPLICATION.

TIME OF APPLICATION.

THAT'S WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WOULD RECOMMEND AS WELL. YES.

I THINK WE WERE STILL KIND OF WORKING ON THIS. YES. IN TERMS OF THE TO KIND OF JUST PUT IT IN REGULAR WORDS.

IT'S GOOD THAT WE HAD THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

YES. It sounds like the flavor is that it would not be applicable to any person who has not yet received. So it's kind of complicated. So right now, we're requiring full compliance for all lots, stormwater detention measures. So...

This will... So in that sense, we would probably pause all of the pending applications and not make this applicable. But moving forward, when this ordinance was adopted, it would only apply to at the time the building application is submitted. That's right. That would be correct. So we would hold those in abeyance, so to speak, and they would not have to be part of this. But because of the timeframe to adopt an ordinance, this won't become effective until end of summer. So we would want to capture the time for people who have pending building applications and sort of put that in abeyance.

That's right. So the ordinance would be written essentially that way.

Yeah, it would be written that way. This is in response to, yes. So you could only be, it would only apply once it's effective to new applications. So everybody understands what the rules are going forward.

Right. So those were the two things the Planning Commission could recommend to the City Council if it desired to advance the ordinance forward, which we recommend that it do. This ordinance essentially provides some deregulation from what we have today.

Right. And it provides clarity and consistency, which is something that we're striving for.

I mean, it's always been about who, right? Like who... it falls under so this is kind of giving you know smaller projects smaller Lots not to have your issue that's essentially true so all those recommendations will be

in a document for... That is correct.

And at that time, the city attorney's office will prepare a draft ordinance that we would make available to the public, make a comment on.

Right, okay. Thank you. So now we go back to... You can make a motion as amended. To make a motion to go on with this.

To include the adoption, I mean the adopt amendments. Yes. Essentially, it's still a draft. IT'S STILL WORKING. IT'S A BREAKING PROCESS.

SO YOU... WITH THE INCLUDED RECOMMENDATION. OKAY.

I MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE INCLUDED ADOPTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. DO WE NEED A ROLL CALL ON THAT? YES. OKAY.

KATWAR?

YES.

FAHPUA?

YES.

Nurse is absent. Panisa? Yes. Satori? Abstain.

Okay. So that's it for today. We thank you for everybody participating today and coming in and listening to us. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you for your staff. And have a good evening. Meeting is adjourned.

Wait a minute. I have something to say. Regarding on June 13, we are inviting you to the Kamaian Festival at Pacele, in case you have the time, and June 16 also for the Philippine Independence Day Plagiaristic Ceremony at the ground. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.