Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

November the 20th, 2025. And we'll do a roll call. Council member Ngales here. Vice Mayor Adiego here. Commissioner Shihare here. Commissioner Faria here. Thank you. Okay. Um, any changes to our massive agenda as said? Okay. And uh first item well, for the record, we'll say uh we didn't receive any public comments for tonight's meeting. And we'll move on to administrative business item number one, which is a motion to approve the minutes of February 25th, 2025. Okay. Who'd like to make a motion? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes.

Second. Second by Commissioner Pereia. Roll call. I'm sorry. I heard Commissioner Shihare and Fore. Council member Ngales. Yes. Vice Mayor Adiego. Yes. Commissioner Shihare. Yes. Commissioner Faria. Yes. Thank you. And then we'll move on to item number two is a report regarding a study session on allowing accessory dwelling units to be sold separately through the implementation of state assembly bill 1033. Thank you. Gangos, you're gonna do the

Yes. So, um, good evening, Vice Mayor, Council Member Ngales, and Planning Commissioners. Stephanie Skenis, um, senior planner with the planning division. I'll pre, um, presenting the staff reports to you this evening. Um, essentially I will be presenting a brand new legislation that has been um, adopted by the state in regards to an accessory dwelling unit and the ability to um, allow an ADU to be sold separately. Um staff would just like to notate, you know, the um the state continues to adopt new legislation on ADUs um that local jurisdictions are required to incorporate into their ADU ordinances, but they also adopt legislation that they it is not mandated that a local jurisdiction um enforce. It's something that we could opt into um and it's something that's recommended by the state. So this that I will go into that a little into a little more detail shortly. Just wanted to um briefly notate that you know the current ADU ordinance for the city which is found in our zoning code in section 20350.003 003 um identifies an accessory dwelling unit as an attached, detached, or converted residential unit that provides complete independent living facilities. based on current regulations for

[snorts]

um ADUs and what was previously mandated by the state. ADUs are required to file a deed restriction that contains the requirement that an ADU cannot be sold separately from the primary dwelling. Um again that was a statemandated requirement. There was an exception for nonprofit organizations. Qualified nonprofit organizations that were developing potential ADUs could sell um through tenant in com um a TIC tenency in common. So, Assembly Bill um 1033 became effective on January 1st of 2024. It does allow an ADU um it doesn't allow an a local jurisdiction to adopt a local ordinance that would allow the separate sale of an ADU from the primary dwelling unit through a condo minium conversion process. Again, this is a state law that local jurisdictions would have to essentially opt into. so choose to make that as part of their ADU ordinance. If a local jurisdiction does opt into this, there are um six statemandated requirements that have to be included in the local ordinance. Um, and these include the requirement for compliance with um, excuse me, the subdivision map act and the Davis Sterling common interest development act as well as um, property owner must notify all relevant public

utility providers. um projects that are located with an existing um community homeowner association has to attain the HOA's approval. Um and the city must post um the entire process and how it's done on their local website. In addition to these statemandated requirements, a local jurisdiction is allowed to incorporate some additional provisions um that could cater to their community or or their um how they would like to run the program as long as they don't conflict with the statemandated requirements. And I'll chat a little more on that shortly as well. So again, this is a relatively new bill. Um the supporters behind this um legislation include affordable housing advocates, homeowners, and real estate and housing organizations. um support um they believe that the this would provide new opportunities for home ownership, increase um the housing supply in a jurisdiction. Um as well as potentially allow homeowners to monetize their ADUs. Um there's thoughts that this would allow for a more affordable entry point into the housing market. So, kind of ADUs would be potential starter homes for for new homeowners. And um it's a way to help build um equity for a homeowner. [snorts] There have only been a few jurisdictions throughout the state of California that have opted in and now have an approved ADU condo ordinance. These include San Jose, Berkeley, Santa

Monica, Santa Cruz, West Hollywood, San Francisco, and Oakland. Um, most of these jurisdictions have just adopted the statemandated requirements and have not implemented any additional provisions. of note there are um in San Diego they do require um I'm sorry in San Diego they do require that um they list the ADU um and that it's being on on um listed for sale through publicly accessible real estate websites um with a disclosure that the ADU is only offered um to those intending to use the ADU as their primary residence and this is a requirement for the initial 30 days of sale. Um, Santa Cruz has incorporated into their ADU condo ordinance um, the requirement that the [clears throat] these would comply with their inclusionary dwelling unit ordinance and that any displaced tenants, if it's an existing um, ADU, um, shall retain a first right of refusal for when the ADU is um, listed for sale. So those are a couple of examples of what other jurisdictions have done. This is again relatively new. We South San Francisco would be the first city um in Sanonteo County to adopt such an ordinance. Um there would be assistance from 21 elements to assist in researching potential additional provisions to cater the ordinance um to how the city would like to to see it implemented.

I just wanted to also touch upon one item in regards to impact fees. Um, per state law, development impact fees can be charged for any new ADUs, new constructed ADUs of 750 square ft or more in size. A local jurisdiction would have to decide this is how they wanted to um what they wanted to incorporate it into their their fee um requirements. Um, we do not, the city of South San Francisco does not currently um charge development or impose development impact fees on any ADUs of any size. [clears throat] I apologize. So, oh no, I'm okay. So, I am recovering from the flu as well. I apologize. Yeah, we missed you at a recent meeting. Maybe [laughter] the record uh will reflect that um Commissioner Evans came roughly 610 cuz she kind of snuck in there.

Yes. Anyways, so um the um essentially staff is recommending that the housing standing committee receive this staff report and provide feedback for next steps regarding permitting the separate sale of ADUs. And if the desire of the um committee is to move forward with a potential ADU condo ordinance, staff is suggesting that the um staff work with 21 elements under our current contract with them to um develop the zoning ordinance amendment that would permit ADU condoization um and additional provisions that you may want to incorporate into local ordinance.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Stephanie. Um I can please. Um Stephanie, thank you for the this report. Um so I I had some maybe I can frame the question and kind of help us here. How many ADUs have we've actually developed in South San Francisco? Um, I could let you know that on average, um, when we do the annual reporting for the housing element, we have an average of about 46 to 48 ADUs that are issued a building permit annually.

Annually. Okay. So, um, and typically what what what I understand from ADUs, it's family members who've kind of moved into the ADU. that that's kind of what I typically have seen with ADUs. Um yes, I would agree with that. Um in in reviewing the building permits when they come in for an ADU, it's been apparent that a lot of these ADUs are developed with the intention for it to be for aging parents or college student college student coming back home. So, it does tend to we tend to see it be more of a like used for family multi-generational use.

It's good to know about the college kids when my kids eventually hit college age. Um, so let me kind of frame the kind of the conversation I want to have. So, I think ADUs are fantastic use of affordable housing stock. When I was working for a nonprofit, we would get phone calls from individuals living in ADUs and then they would be displaced because the homeowner would be selling the unit. And when they would try to look out on the market for a rent that was accomparable, they couldn't find it cuz they it was unbelievably affordable in in in terms of what they were looking for. So, in terms of the the legislation, it has to be a condo conversion for it to happen. Correct? So, let's just say I own uh my house and I have an ADU. If I don't convert it into a condo conversion, then the future buyer can actually have both properties. Is that correct?

Correct. Yeah. In order for the ADU and the primary dwelling unit to be sold or listed separately, they would have to the property current property owner would have to go through the condo conversion process and have that approved and then they'd be able to sell as two different properties. If a property owner doesn't choose to go that route and they're listing their property for sale, it would be for the primary unit and the ADU. to the entire property.

Okay. So, let's say I I I do the condo conversion. In order to do that, you have to have CCNRs and HOA. How does that work once the properties go on sale? But that you're pretty much excluding that all together at that point. Then that would run with the property. So, it would be the same way any condo organization um works. It would be recorded against the property. Okay. And then um how's how's how is the sale price of the ADU calculated? Is it by the market or is it by the the the primary homeowner? I just how does that work?

I believe that a lot of the jurisdictions that have implemented this ordinance have seen it be running with the market.

Okay. And so one of the things I I would like for 21 elements to look at is I I really want to see that it has to be owner occupancy involved in this cuz what I don't want is some developer coming in building a primary unit and an ADU and at some point sells and then it makes it really difficult in terms of selling ADU cuz now they want top dollar for it when it's supposed to be an affordable unit. So, I don't know if 21 elements if there's examples of those with these other jurisdictions is something we can take a look at. And I'm also interested in in in Santa Cruz's first right of refusal because if someone's living in this ADU and they're paying, you know, an affordable amount, they might be interested in purchasing the property, but it might be difficult because maybe for whatever reason. And so I think having that ability for the current tenants to at least have the first right of refusal to have that chance of purchase, I think you want you want to be able to do that. So those are the things I would like to see to elements kind of maybe hash out a little bit more in terms of making sure we add those layers of protections. Um because we want to be able to these if you're as a first as a person who bought their first-time home uh through a first-time home buyers loan, I know how expensive it is in terms of finding a a home out there. And so these ADUs are even more affordable. And the fact, you know, we're doing 40 ADUs a year. It's another ability to provide for middle-income, low-income families ability for home ownership, which we have talked as a city council that we wanted to see more of.

Uh, those are the kind of my questions I have right now, Mr. Mayor. It's a good start. Um, go ahead.

No. Would you like to weigh in? Yeah, please, Miss Evans. Um, this is kind of a maybe a stream of consciousness conversation that I'm having, but um, my first question was who monitors and how that the residents of the ADU is owner occupied? Who would be responsible to make sure that happens? It's something to think about. I don't necessarily need an answer today. I would imagine um that that there would have to be that that the city could have a requirement that the HOA andor CCNRs have a requirement that the unit is owner occupied. I know that that can be a requirement in condo organizations that a requirement in the CCNRs can be that um a condo owner is not allowed to rent out their unit. That can be a so that could so so we as a city could require that in terms of monitoring that's on the HO that would be on the HOA that wouldn't be something you know the city wouldn't go out and knock on doors and say do you own the unit

okay side issue there is what would be the consequences of a violation as far as the city's concerned something to think about Um, and if the original premise of ADUs was to provide primarily for family members, uh, and we get away from that, I'm concerned just like Mark mentioned that suddenly these people that we thought were we were helping are [clears throat] not able to keep themselves in an ADU I purchase. Again, that's just something to think about. And when you talk about an HOA and CCNRs, uh, that's a pretty complex process including CCNRs, budgets, reserves, which all have to be approved by the state and it would not be inexpensive to the property owner of the main property. So, how do you balance that? Does it make it more attractive or less attractive and would the state be happy to be doing that work? So, those are my initial concerns and ideas.

Okay. Thank you. That's an interesting perspective. Um, gentlemen, [clears throat] I agree with some of the questions they've had before because I'm kind of on the fence about this. It really has me concerned is because of the newness of the program, all the other cities have pretty much what you described probably implement in the last month or two. Like you said, Santa Cruz, even though this came out January 1st, 2024, when did most of these cities adopt this?

Um, it's actually been throughout the past two years. Um, I would say the city of San Jose was the first one to adopt and that was sometime in 2024. So, it's kind of been a staggered um optin of different jurisdictions.

I'd be curious what kind of history we have from how they've how they've seen what's occurred that they didn't foresee in that first year because it is new. Another question once if a city does adopt this this ordinance are they able to let's say repeal it if they wish or is it you're locked in for is it grandfathered in forever if they see there starts to be more issues than they foresaw. I would I mean I I'll provide an answer and then I'll ask our city attorney to you know check me. But um I would imagine that the ordinance could be repealed just as any you know ordinance that the council chooses to adopt could be repealed. However, if there were ADUs that were sold separately in the time period where it was permitted, they would continue. They wouldn't. Exactly. So, I would just ask Kimmy to kind of validate this.

Yes. Thanks. I do agree with the fellow commission. There's a lot of taxes and stuff how that would work. If you're partial property owner, you have the main property has the most square footage. Are they paying the whole percentage of the property tax? Will it be as they do in condors and things like that? So those are the kind of things I'd be concerned about. Mr. Shahada,

I mean just to follow up on that, if you have an HOA, usually they'll cover, you know, insurance probably uh roofing, painting, so on and so forth. But if they're detached units, how would that work? Do you have any idea how what's going to be the relationship between the main property owner and the condominium the ADU unit? They would both be condominiums.

They would even they would both be Yes. Yeah. After going through the going through the condo ordinance, both units would become condominiums on one lot. Okay. Including the original house.

Correct. Okay. So, we're seeing, you know, the state initially when the ADU idea came about is to help extended families. Basically, if you want your elderly or your kids to live in it, then we saw the change to it could be rented to anybody. And then now we're seeing that it could be con turned into condominium. Are we seeing any other changes that the state is foreseeing in order to expand the affordable housing because you know we're seeing that trend with the state.

We've seen quite a few. I mean, the the state legislation just this year has been um I'm not going to use the word overwhelming, but there's been quite a bit of it. Um you you know, there's the new um state bill, the SQUA, you know, budget writer that went into effect um that basically it's it's not focused on affordable housing, but it's about streamlining, which is about affordable housing. um the more recent SB79 which is about um you know focusing on densities around transit stations also is a focus on housing production. So, I think I mean we I guess like we I imagine that this is going to continue that we're just going to be seeing more and more legislation as long as there's a housing crisis. We'll be seeing more I think it'll be focused on um ADUs and other larger, you know, policy changes. I would say since we adopted our ADU ordinance that you know per state law ADUs are permitted ministerially and not discretionary. We have seen changes to our ordinance every I'd say every year. Some is small some you know some are are more substantive. So I think we can anticipate that continuing to happen. Some changes are statemate mandated, others like this are, you know, the choice of the jurisdiction.

My last question is, you mentioned there's a contract with 21 element and I know I've went to a few of their forums. What is the relationship you know in that contract? Would they help us mainly or guide us? Yeah, we have drafting or I mean I have the same concerns

they are. I mean we all of the cities all the jurisdictions in Sano County pay you know a certain amount to 21 elements to kind of get technical assistance throughout the year and this is definitely something that they've indicated they can assist with. Um we can also request assistance. Stephanie may have already reached out to them to the um Sanonteo County ADU center, which is a nonprofit organization that helps homeowners as well as jurisdictions. Um if the council and planning commission wishes to go forward with that, we would definitely explore those resources because um as Stephanie mentioned, we would be if we move forward, we would be the first jurisdiction in Sonteo County. So there's not a lot of immediate neighbors to, you know, look at to see what the um options are. Thank you.

I um I'm remembering sometimes um I think South City is really ahead of the curve on a lot of things. So it's not so many years ago. Adena, you probably remember when we looked at our downtown area, which is a collection of lots that tend to be very deep and very narrow, going back to the need to put your horse and buggy on the lane behind your house, so you didn't get to enjoy the horse and such. Um, and so we looked at the the lots and we um I guess changed the zoning so that we could actually um uh cut lots in half. And so we were creating we thought we were creating um opportunities for more home ownership. Uh because prior to that it was usually the primary residence on Grand Avenue and the little house on the lane was the rental. Um and and I thought there was a lot of brilliance in that when I first started thinking about this with HDUs and certainly when you look at a picture like the the one you have up on the screen. Um this to me would be ripe for a lot split as opposed to creating condom condominiums. Um I'm I'm aware of uh u there's some condominiums in the family and I can't imagine what a condo board meeting would be like with two people that aren't in agreement. I don't know how that would work. Um but um the bottom [clears throat] line is, you know, whether it's for your aging parents or it's for your children that are never going to move out.

Exactly.

Um it's really about increasing the housing stock. that that's why I thought we got interested in in ADUs was to create housing stock and to create housing stock that is owned by the individual in in the home is the ultimate because we we talk about that you know we're surrounded by all these um recent developments that are um uh rentals with churn of upwards of 30% a year. So, so the the new the new residents don't become very connected to the to the community and uh then this would change all that. So, I just think there's a lot of merit here. But I would like to challenge because I'm thinking of other properties I know in like the Paradise Valley neighborhood. Normally, we think of ADUs as being that house that they build behind cuz they have a very deep lot and nobody likes to play in the backyard anymore. So, use it for housing. Um, but there are some lots, especially in Paradise Valley on the corners, most especially where, um, there's a whole open side that would allow for a lot split. Um, this is outside of tonight's discussion, but I' I'd like to see the, um, planning staff look at the opportunity to do more lot splits to actually create um, you know, smaller lots that are large enough to accommodate something along the size of an ADU. Um, but back to this issue. Um, I'm not um if if you did a lot split on a home that was behind, you'd have to have a provision for an easement so they could get to the house.

Um, uh, might that be superior to having a condo setup?

Yes, I I would I would answer I I think I mean just my opinion that makes more sense. We do have there's another state bill called SB9 which does allow for lot splits and also allows for two single family dwelling units to be constructed on one lot. South San Francisco is in compliance with state law and permits SB9 units. That law went into effect I want to say in 2122ish. We've seen two which is way lower than ADU construction for example. The main reason is because of access. Um

I think I think that's one main reason because the easement diminishes the primary house

and there's comp and then it runs with the land and then that's on your deed forever. So that's one reason. Second reason, again this is completely anecdotal, is impact fees. Impact fees are charged for those units because they are considered new single family home whereas impact fees are not charged for ADUs. Um that being said, I think the p I would guess the primary reason is purely just the size of and lot configuration. It's just really different. It's really difficult um to get access on two sides. Yeah. Well, I mean, I certainly think it's something that needs to be um uh explored. [clears throat] Um the possibility is is uh of adding housing stock for sale is uh is too marvelous to walk by. Um but exactly, you know, exactly how it would be delivered.

To the church, you you actually triggered a question for me. If I was an ADU, I have an ADU in my yard. How many would be interested in selling off their ADUs or part of their property? I mean, that's a major question. You say we have like roughly Yes. 46. If you were to pull a 46, I'd be willing to bet probably 80 or 5% would not want to sell. If you got more than 10%, I'd be surprised cuz a lot of people don't want to, excuse the expression, bastardize their property by basically giving away equity. They get compensated. Yes. When they sell it, but it wouldn't appreciate then. Again, just in our community, what we tend to see for ADU development is really property owners wanting to develop it for family. And so, I don't know that interest in having it be two separate properties would be there, especially with the state requirement for the HOA and the CCNRs. Um, I know other jurisdictions that have opted in. They San Jose, for example, have se these a Oh my gosh, I'm sorry. That's my son. These ADU condos um sold, but they've been developed by developers.

They developed for that purpose. Yeah, developed for that purpose. They purchase a piece of property and they have the the single family um residence constructed as well as the ADU and they go through the ADU condo purpose or condo conversion and then both are sold at market rate. And could Mark said most of the lots here in South City, you just can't there's not room to build anything else because that's just the nature of the lot size. Please,

I'd like to ask another question. If we have whatever it is, 46 ADUs, has anybody surveyed the owners of those properties to see if this is something that they would even consider? Because we're launching off on this process and you may find that it's not something people want to do. I would not want to be involved in developing CCNRs and budget replacement reserves and all of that, but it would be nice to hear what the owners, the current owners feel and those that have permits pulled but haven't done anything yet in I mean, again, I can speak to this anecdotally. I can recall one or two conversations I've had with property owners who are interested in selling ADUs separately. Just people, you know, I talked to at the counter, that type of thing. Does that sound about right?

Yeah. I would say that after this um legislation um [clears throat] became effective, there were a couple phone calls about whether we South San Francisco was allowing separate sale.

Okay. Well, I understand how up to this point it really has been somebody wanting to accommodate other family members, but again, um if if some of us believe our charge is to create more housing stock, then then we have to pivot a little way away from that concept because that's only going to meet so much demand. And um I guess it's the overall concept of having smaller homes that are available for sale as starter homes. I mean, I think there's a lot of legitimacy, certainly a lot of need, and um, you know, whether whether it's it's the grandparents living in there or um, another little family, it's the same impact to the to the neighborhood in the community. So, um, I I'd like to explore it,

Mr. Mayor. I'm I'm also interested in how San Diego does it in terms of advertising because I think it's also about letting prospective first-time home buyers know, hey, there's a a lot or not a lot, but a ADU that's available that's more affordable than you probably would go out in the market. I think having those kind of abilities to like, hey, I this is something that we might take a look at as a starter home. Again, I think through 21 elements, that's something we can flush out through.

Now, actually, your comment just sparked a thought. Um, would we allow somebody who has a um We're not talking about lot division, though, are we? Um, where a developer could could come in and and build that second unit. Yeah. where a developer could come in and build a second unit and become the owner of that condominiumized unit. That that could occur with with this. Okay. That's with the owner occupacy um policy. I think I wanted to explore a little bit more that question. Could you expound on that cuz

Yeah. Yeah. So you the basically the the the primary owner would have to be the basically the developer let's say would have to move into the unit and be their primary homeowner and then convert that to ADU and then it would have to say I this is my primary residency. So instead of a developer coming in building the lot and then moving into the unit that person who developed it actually has to move in in order to convert this to that condo conversion. Does that like they might explain that better or

one of the units through the condo conversion process would need to be occupied by the property owner or owned by the property owner.

Yep. To to the housing standing committee Tony Rosie. I think what I want to flag though on that concept is that right now this represents an opportunity where someone buys a single home, builds an ADU in the basement, builds a standalone ADU. It's vacant. Now you have three units that they potentially condominiumize condo condom minimize and sell three units. They're small, but the people who buy them know they're buying a condo. there's an HOA with your provision that essentially wouldn't be allowed, right? You're saying that developer has to move in, live in one of the units, build an ADU, then you're allowed to do a condo, and I think that defeats the purpose of creating new ownership supply. That' be the only thing I'd flag. We can study both.

But I think, you know, ADUs get built either for family or I think this concept is realizing you've got these high resource neighborhoods where you can add one or two units in a really nice neighborhood. It doesn't feel like a new development, but you you're creating some small forale housing stock. And I think that's sort of the the thinking behind the state in in allowing the first sale. So just my two cents.

No, no, I appreciate that. I think where I get a little concerned and and we again this is all things we can flesh out more and is where a developer comes in and looks for the highest dollar in terms of develop which is their priority. be like every other developer which every other developer right and the ADU becomes somehow a million dollars to sell you know and that's not the case typically but I don't know if that's been the case in San Jose or other places can can you expand on that

I would just like to say that I I attended a session and the example was that in San Jose a developer purchased a property and constructed a new single family dwelling and a detached ADU and then listed them both for sale. Did the ADU condo conversion. The primary dwelling was 3 million and the ADU was about 1.5 cheaper than the primary, but still it sounds like a very nice neighborhood. [laughter] A large lot, too. So, of course, of course, the secondary home was going to be in that category. Yeah.

But I mean, we can we can definitely flush this out. And I think there's there's definitely a lot a lot of questions and terms that we still need to figure out. But I to the vice mayor's point, home ownership is has been unattainable for a lot of people and this is an entryway for those who are trying to get started so they get their first time home so that the next one would be bigger. But they were able to start that equity with a firsttime home. And that for a family, trust me, that means the world to them. The ability to say that we're homeowners.

The game changer.

Yeah, that is the game changer. And I I've said this story multiple times and that when I first bought my place, I bought it for like 400,000 for a two-bedroom one. [laughter] 3 or 4 months later, it doubled in value because other units the same size were selling for higher. And I I'm thinking to myself, my god, we just got double the equity in in the house. We're never moving, you know, but the ability for someone to come in as a first-time home buyer to get that, that is the key. And the the increase the housing stock, we have to do that. We have to do that because people are clamoring for the ability to own their own home.

So I agree with Mark and actually now you can take that equity, you know, that 800 and buy a three-bedroom or larger. Yeah. [laughter] But can I just chime in?

I agree. But with the same token, looking at it from a business angle, the only ones who are going to develop are developers who going to build for sale units. It's not going to be the independent homeowner that's going to spend the time, effort, and energy into building an ADU with the intention of selling it. It's going to be a minority, but mostly developers. And developers are going to put this stuff on the market. They're going to get market rate. it's not like they're going to care about the, you know, affordability, etc. So, the market is going to dictate the pricing, right? So, we just, you know, have to keep that in mind.

Go ahead, Michelle. And listening to that, my first response is that it sort of defeats what we were trying to do, which was to increase housing stock, rental or buying for people to have housing doesn't have. We get hooked on everybody needs to have a house that they own. Well, maybe, but it's we don't want to defeat the purpose of providing housing that's quality but doesn't cost a fortune for people. I'm I'm I'm a little concerned about that that we shuffle our perspective to home ownership and we'll sacrifice flexibility for those people who get into ADUs as rentals and can then save their money to buy it. It's a concern that I have, but we we still have some work to do to figure out what the best approach is in my opinion. Well, I mean, if we if we move in this direction, it doesn't it and and you and you can end up with a condo conversion on your property that that doesn't uh negate what's already been happening where people choose to add another unit behind for rental purposes, whether it's to family or to to anyone. So, you it's it's like you have two streams. And like the group says, even though I have my reservations on the success rate, any opportunity, no matter what the conduit is to owning a home, we have to explore it. Even though I may not agree with it or think it'll be successful to eliminate an avenue for home ownership, it' be a fault to the city not to explore that opportunity.

Can I also in addition to that, I recently had two employees who didn't have a penny for a down payment. They moved to Richmond without a penny down payment. They were able to buy a house. My recommendation we I'm for moving forward, but for the city to have resources to help some of the individuals who wish to stay in the area to basically guide them through resources. Where can the government help? Is there any county money? any, you know, any other resources for down payment to help them as firsttime home buyers as well as educating them about the ADU option, the condominium option, just to keep them in in the area because one, they're going to move to Richmond. Next thing you know, they're going to be looking for a job there. We're going to lose them here.

Oh, that's the concern. I see. Of course. I see it all comes home. [laughter] So, um Adena and Stephanie, I think that um we've really offered nothing concrete for you except that I think there's a general concurrence that we want to explore these opportunities and how it might enhance what we're trying to do as far as housing in the community.

Um may I ask a clarifying question? First of all, that's great. Thank you for giving us direction to move forward. um as we explore this, we heard the um the theme of ownership, home ownership come up quite a bit. Is that something and also with a concern about um you know potentially displacing renters? But is that something that a focus of an ordinance should have that you know if these two condo units are created that they are that the HOA or the the CCNRs rather does require owner occupancy? Is that something the committee wishes to focus on?

I I think to Tony's point in terms of the concerns that maybe staff should flush it out more. Okay. Look at options. Yeah. And and see kind of to Tony's points that there might be some unintended consequences to it. I I think on the development side, yes. But the HOA could certainly decide, hey, we want to all make sure we're owners and we all live together. I don't think there's an issue there. The the only challenge I wanted to flag is that the purchaser of a vacant home that builds ADUs shouldn't necessarily be obliged to live on the property. Okay. If they develop into condos, they should be able to sell them. So, the developer doesn't have to actually live in there.

I think that's the only way you're going to see it happen. Like Norm said, this is good. Our rental ADU market is really healthy. It's going to be a pretty small part of the market. There's not a lot of people that want to encumber their single family home with condominium regulations and easements. Yeah. I think it's [clears throat] going to be sort of a new start. You know, if someone buys a home and develops it rather than a lot of ad existing ADUs getting sold. Okay.

That's what we think. But, you know, we're going to do some surveys, find out, ask people. Okay. Anyone else? Okay. Okay. And that's our only agenda item. So there's you've got some time to relax before the big meeting. Okay. So we'll go ahead and uh close this meeting and thank you everyone. Recording stopped. Thanks everybody.

Friends from We didn't chairman.

She's right there. She need You have a heavy

single family home.

Franklin the one up there behind you. You're right. You had some about a year and a half,000. Fix up your house and there's something in the bank. Listen I didn't hear

Come on, Michelle.

Why you got another meeting? Who was? Oh, Sharon was She's almost going to be gone. Where is she? Only a little bit. Are

We're going to run forward. Hello everyone. Welcome to the November 20th, 2025 meeting of the San Franc South San Francisco Planning Commission. I call this meeting to order.

Roll call, please. Commissioner Baker. Commissioner Perea. Yes. Here. Uh, Commissioner Shotti here. Commissioner Evans here. Commissioner Zang here. Vice Chairperson Pomaku here. Chairperson Funes here. Commissioner Baker is absent. Let's stand for the pledge of

allegiance to the flag to the republic for it stands nation and all. Commissioner Baker is walking in. Commissioner Baker has just walked in here. [laughter] Got a full panel. That's been a while.

Mhm. Does any member of the public wish to address the commission on an item that is not on the agenda tonight at this time? Please fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk. At this time, I will ask the clerk if there are any members of the public who would like to provide comments.

We have no public comments. Okay, thank you. Hearing no speakers, we will move on. Next on the agenda is the disclosure of exparte communications. If any commissioner has had any communication with applicants, did any site visits, site or project visits, had interactions with third parties, or has any conflicts regarding any items on the agenda, you may disclose them at this time. If you would like to recuse yourself for an item, you can do so at this time. Hearing none, I will move on to the next item. Next on the agenda is the consent calendar. May we have a listing of the consent calendar items, please?

We have one item on the consent calendar, consideration and approval of minutes from the October 16th, 2025 planning commission. Does any commissioner wish to pull an item from consent? Does any member of the public wish to address the commission on an item on the consent calendar at this time? Please fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk. At this time, I will ask the clerk if there are any members of the public who would like to provide comments. We have no public comments.

Thank you. Hearing no speakers, I will entertain a motion on the consent calendar. I move to approve the October 1625 uh agenda. Second. Roll call, please. Commissioner Faria, yes. Commissioner Shahade, yes. Commissioner Baker, yes. Chairperson Funes, yes. Commissioner Evans, yes. Vice Chair Pomaku, yes. Commissioner Zang. Yes.

Thank you. I will now open the public hearing for a hearing and a call for a staff report. Okay. U item number two is report regarding consideration of design review and initial study mitigated negative declaration to construct one new single family residential building at 52 Franklin Avenue. Assessor's partial number 012039180 in the lowdensity residential zoning district and items 2A and 2B are the resolutions and Billy Gross will give the staff report.

Good evening chair, vice chair and commissioners. Billy Gross, principal planner um and I am presenting an overview of the proposed residential project at 52 Franklin Avenue. So, we'll start with this highle aerial view that shows the general location of the subject lot on the north side of Sin Hill. Zooming in more closely, this aerial view shows the Franklin Avenue culde-sac and the vacant lot at 52 Franklin. This street view shows the existing lot with the previous foundation still apparent. The lot is vacant because of a debris flow that occurred in 1982 uh which moved the garage and a portion of the previous residence on the site into the street. Uh the yellow lines that you see on the graphic show how the debris flow impacted the subject lot and some of the surrounding lots. I will note this was the only property that had that significant of damage. Some other properties had slight damage, but this is the only one where the uh residence was displaced off of the foundation. So, the potential for a future debris flow still exists. Um the areas that are highlighted in pink in this graphic indicate the previous debris flow scars that are still evident on the site. [snorts] And so as an environmental mitigation measure to protect against such a future debris flow, the pro the project is proposing to construct a U-shaped debris barrier on the rear one-third of the site. This is a drawing of a earlier concept for the debris barrier which has been outlined in green. So this is the proposed site plan for the 52 residential Franklin 52 Franklin

residential project which is part of the project plans that you have again highlighting the debris barrier in green and then turning to the section view. This shows how the debris barrier is intended to protect the new single family home. Um drawing also shows how the rear portion of the lot has a much steeper slope than the front portion of the lot. Uh the proposed residence shown to the right will result in a small amount of cut and fill on the site. These are diagrams of the it's the capture wall profiles that basically show the debris barrier would consist of retaining walls to form a basin that would capture and enclose any potential future debris flow. The bottom one is uh looking at the the tallest portion of the wall that would be closest to the residence and then the two up above are side views. The walls are tallest about 12 feet closest to the residence and then taper down in height to three feet at the rear of the property. The proposed single family residence is designed to be similar in scale to neighboring properties with the ground floor consisting of a two-car garage directly off the street and all habitable space located on the second floor. The l the rendering on the left depicts the debris barrier wall kind of at the rear. The design team has used the barrier and the sloped roof to create a large roof deck that provides a significant amount of private open space. One other comment I will make is that as part of the design review board review of the project, uh, one of their conditions is that that

wall and similar walls that are adjacent to other properties have the ability to point to plant vines or something similar that can grow on that to help soften the aesthetic. This rendering shows a proposed house with existing neighboring homes. Um, as proposed, the proposed project meets all applicable development standards within the residential low density zoning district, all of the applicable hillside uh, overlay district requirements and all objective design standards. As stated in the staff report, typically the construction of one single family residence in a residential zone would be considered categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and would not be subject to planning commission review. However, there are exceptions to those exemptions, including if a project is located in a particularly sensitive environment. Uh for instance, if a project may be located in a biological habitat or on steep or potentially unstable slopes, a lead agency is required to complete initial study. With this location, knowing of the previous debris flow, also being in close proximity to sign hill and some of the habitat there, um we had to look at this in more detail. So a draft initial study mitigated negative declaration was prepared by RCH group and Allison Nap consulting. The ISM andd identified the potential for significant environmental impacts related to biological resources and geology and soils. All of which can be mitigated to a less than significant impact with the implementation of a specific mitigation measures. For the biological resources topic, it was found that the large trees located at the rear of the property could be

habitat for raptors or other protected birds to nest on or for hybats to roost within. So the two biological resources mitigation measures basically require preconstruction surveys to determine if either species are present and if they are to take appropriate identified measures that are detailed in the uh staff report and in the ISMND for the geology and soils topic. It was determined that ongoing maintenance of the debris barrier is required to prevent damage to the proposed residence. So the debris basin now it's on the right side of this graphic um is designed to accommodate approximately 543 cubic yards of material which is which exceeds the recommendation by the applicant's geotechnical consultant which was confirmed by the city's geotechnical peer review. um that amount is in keeping with the estimated amounts from the 1982 debris flow. So if a similar debris flow were to occur, the site has been designed to allow equipment to access the debris barrier. This site plan shows the 8ft setback on the west side which is at the bottom of this graphic highlighted in blue. loading equipment would be able to use this pathway pathway to access the rear to the debris barrier. That corner that is highlighted in yellow, that's designed to be removed um and allow equipment access into the debris barrier so they can remove debris within the basin as needed. Returning to the street front is rendering this uh required debris access barrier is again highlighted in blue.

So the way the mitigation measure works, prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant would be required to submit a debris basin maintenance plan for city approvals and ultimately to be recorded on the title of the property. With the implementation of these three mitigation measures, the project would not have any significant environmental impacts. I will note that this city did not receive any comment letters related to the draft ISM and D from the public or from reviewing agencies. Um, I will go back to this graphic on you. You all have a hard copy of a comment that was received this evening from a property owner to the east. Um, speaking towards a V ditch that is on the rear of five to eight properties in this area. You can see that in the dashed lines that kind of go through the middle of this lot. Um, typically it's an open V ditch for all the other properties. With the construction of this house, the house will just enclose that on their property, but it won't preclude drainage from continuing from the property that's uphill immediately to the west and going down. And so the issues that the letter brought up in terms of debris coming into the V ditch, this will actually preclude that from happening on this property and but it this project will not impact the rest of the properties in terms of the functionality of that V ditch. So, just wanted to note that in conclusion, staff believes that the proposed residential project is well designed to fit into the existing neighborhood um and to protect against future debris slides. I actually find

that this is a a nice solution to incorporate all of this together in a way that isn't readily visible um but still is in keeping with the surrounding homes. And so based on this, staff is recommending that the planning commission make the two uh motions on the screen. First, to adopt the resolution making findings and adopting the initial study mitigated negative declaration. And second, to adopt to make a motion to adopt the resolution making findings and approving the entitlements request for the 52 Franklin Avenue residential project. Um that ends my presentation. Happy to answer any questions. The property owner and design team are also here this evening. They don't have a presentation, but they're happy to answer any questions that the commission might have. Thank you.

Does any member of the or any of the commissioners have a question for staff by the applicant? Go ahead, Commissioner Baker. Uh, you can go first. Great.

Thanks. Um my concern my question is um were the circumstances that led to the slide debris slide in 1982 thank you unusual I mean are have they been is is the hillside stable now is basically my question there's no definitive way for us to say that. So, I'm going to go back to um the graphic. The debris flow happened on private property. One anecdotal note is we've had some very large rain events in the last obviously in the 40 years since this happened and there hasn't been a recurrence. Um at some point there's a there's definitely the possibility that something like this could happen again. I don't know that it would be to the same extent. Um so for this project basically the the we're trying to solve for if a similar event happened could we protect a residents from that? Um, and that's the way the debris barrier is designed is to protect from if the same event happened again, that uh debris barrier is is large enough to be able to hold the the breeze flow that happened in 1982. I'm cuz I'm looking on this overhead and on the uh one taken I guess probably during the spring or summer on on on Google and there's not a lot of vegetation behind that line of trees. So, I was just that's was one of the my concerns. Uh you did answer the other question out that I was going to have of you know is this going to be the debris catch right for is is that going to be continually um cleaned out because I'm assuming it

would be cumulative over the years and at some time it's going to have its weight. Um, is it is there going to be a certain schedule the city's going to retire require like clean it out like at least once a year whether there's been a slide or not or is it just going to be as needed? The uh that's actually I don't have a slide for it but the debris basin maintenance plan basically asks for all of that. like they'll have to put together a a timing of when they would look at it, probably at least annually, so that it's preventative and not just if something happens that they're only taking it out um after the fact. It will have to be preventative as well, but we would um look for all of that detail to be in that maintenance plan that would be required before we issue building permits for any work on the site.

Great. Thank you. That's all. Yeah, that's your thing.

There sure uh Billy, can you go back to that uh site plan where you show the V ditch with the dash line? I mainly I just want to understand how is the building over that not blocking the flow from one property to the other like how how how is this construction over it not blocking? The reason why I asked is like I had I have quite a few like hillside jobs and stuff like that where they have the V ditch and eventually basically even the side fans are are are clipping those ditch and stuff like that. So So I just wonder how how what what you just mentioned that this building will not pre prevent the flow. What does that mean? uh the building would be designed to enclose it within the property itself, property lines and so it will enclose it already.

Correct. But it wouldn't it wouldn't pro drainage is still going to have to so drainage in this sense would come from the bottom um the uphill property. So, it has to be designed in a way that allows the drainage to still go into the ditch that then is enclosed through this property and then it would allow to go underneath the house and then it opens back up on the property to the downhill. And so, I don't know exactly what that final condition is going to look like. That is one of the conditions of approval from our engineering public works division is show a detail of what that will be. Um, but my thought is that it basically still allows for the V underneath. It'll have a cap on top of it, but water would still be able to flow from the uphill property through underneath this house to the downhill portions. I I I think that that that probably would be a critical uh critical item to to uh uh ensure or enforce uh in that case. Um but sure, I I I trust you guys.

There's a lot of details that have to be figured out for all of this engineering when when this project moves forward to construction. Any other commissioners? Commissioner Pumpkin. Thank you. Um, apologies if I missed this. The maintenance of the wall, is that the responsibility of the property owner? Correct. Yeah. This everything that is part of this project would be a maintenance requirement for the property owner.

Yeah. Okay. Um, and then, um, Commissioner Baker kind of touched on it, but have you all, um, been able to do any, uh, modeling for, you know, if there were to be like increased storm intensity, uh, if this setup could withstand um, you know, maybe more extreme weather events, which seems like, you know, is a possibility. I am definitely not a geotechnical engineer, but what what I can say is that there have been a lot of different geotechnical engineering groups that have looked at this. This this project has been some version of this project on this property has been mulling around for longer than I've been with the city now. Um, and so there's been a lot of potential um, solutions being looked at. And I know there's been a lot of boring trying to figure out where the scar are, what where areas that could um, be potential future debris slides. And so what they provided is their best educated kind of calculations of what a a slide would be. um like the amount of material that would come down and so I don't know that that would increase if there were larger storm events as as we're saying there have been quite a few really large atmospheric rivers that have gone through in the last 10 years and there haven't been any slides um and so I'll just end by saying the design as proposed

is what um licensed geotechnical engineers have come up with as being kind of the best designed to withstand what they would foresee happening on the site. Thank you. Yes.

Yeah. Through the chair, maybe I can chime in. I built the house and I presently live in the house right on sign hill. So my backyard have the same issues. But when I built mine, there's big retaining wall to prevent that. plus the water and I have, you know, it's because all the homes on the hill, the water goes underneath the homes and a lot of them flood and some of them have the foundation's been impacted. I put a French drain on the sides whereby the water doesn't bypasses underneath the house. So [snorts] that could be a recommendation for them. But the past few years with the massive rains, we've had a lot of debris, a lot of chunk come from the hillside and the city does I think last year I believe we had big rainstorms and the city came, you know, the city parks and wreck and that cleared the debris because it got up to the storm drains on the on Roa where I live. So it would be the same conditions for you know Franklin in that area. So I don't think anybody can gauge it. It's nature some of the mitigation measures once the trees were cut from the hill. Remember a few years back we had the fires. So, a lot of trees were cut, which is going to prevent a lot of debris from gathering on the hillside and they're not coming down when we when we do have rainstorms. So some measures

have been taken by the city mitigation and I know recently in the city often like recently we all have that drain in the back where the water comes down those we have to clean as residents but the city also helps out in that in that measure. So I think it's a collaborative effort but primarily the the homeowner has the main responsibility. One of the items I'll note with this, so the debris barrier basically goes almost from property line to property line. So any debris that would be coming down the hill is likely to go into the barrier. Um and then so that'll be a big part of as Commissioner Baker was talking about the maintenance plan. You'll have to check it after storms and such. Maybe you need to clean things out. Um there is a drainage plan that takes things that come into the debris barrier deals with that. Um for the residence itself um it will basically block from most of that debris because of the barrier behind it and so it has its own drainage system. I think a lot of it basically goes underground and takes it down to the street to the to the storm system. Um, so the last thing I was going to say is all the trees that are in the rear will be removed to be able to construct the the barrier and to do some of the regrading. And so, um, that is one of the byproducts of of this design. But yeah, there there all the trees that you see in the photos that are there at the lot, those won't be on this lot anymore with the construction of this Great. Thank you so much.

My sorry, my last comment is relative to the neighbor's comments. Yes. You know, if one area behind a certain house is all clogged, the water is going to drain and debris is going to go to the neighbor's house. So, that is issue that needs to be addressed, but it's beyond their control and everybody has to, you know, do their share. Thank you. Any other commissioners?

Yeah, of course. Um, this isn't something you necessarily need to answer today, but I'm wondering because there's been so much uh rigorous research and looking into kind of what it would take to make this right like safer for the property, for the neighbors. um kind of like how everyone has to cooperate to to make this area safe. I'm just curious because there are so many other homes on slopes and there are like some similar contexts if there are learnings from this that could be useful to other property owners in similar situations. Um just wondering if there's an opportunity there to, you know, if there's any information here that would be useful to other folks. All of the documents, all the geotechnical reports are part of the public record. And so neighboring property owners could come look at that. But I will preface that by saying all this was looking at the impacts to this property. They weren't looking at uh joining properties other than we did receive a inquiry from the property owner to the west which is uphill on the downside of this one of this graphic asking could the debris walls cause a debris slide to basically ricochet off and go onto their property. and the geotechnical um engineering team was able to say that no that that would not the way it's designed it would not cause them to do that. But in otherwise there's been no there might be some information about where the site's likely to come from on the uphill property on the side property but uh other improvements for other lots probably would be minimal from this. Yeah.

Just a quick question on that one. The lots and the ditches on other properties. Is it part of the their personal property or is it county property or is it I'm just asking in general for my own part of their personal properties. Okay. Um so then there's some response but I just want to ask for my own identification. The the the person who provided the letter is at the very downhill of that. So all of the drainage ends on their property.

Yes. Commissioner Shahedi said, I mean, you have drainage. I know with my property at home that we have drainage in back and we had one neighbor decided to put different piping in. So, it kind of just created like a funnel. So, it back up on the others, but that's the result of something done improper. It sounds like this property they've at least got a plan. So, can we hear from the property owner about the issues that we've been addressing and the designer maybe?

We've addressed several issues. My parents are the owners of the Welcome. See? Okay. So, hi, my name is Bring. Okay, good. Yeah.

Okay. My name is Karen. My parents are the owners of the property. Um, I'm here to answer any questions that you may have, but we also have Jeff here who is part of the design team who has more knowledge of the technical side of things as well. So, come up. Jeff, if you can come up. Hi, my name is Jeff. I'm sorry. What's your questions again? What's your questions again? to address some of the concerns that we've raised here.

Oh, okay. How you going to prevent all that debris, the water, how it's going to be captured and the impact on the neighbors. Okay. We do have a a drainage design for this particular lock. And I believe there's like I believe we sent out a most updated drainage plan to believe I think this today. Is that right? The M just have the design finish having like a drainage. Um can you

we do share it with us? Uh yes, we do have like a whip hose on the uh debris catchment wall and it drain out to uh a pipe and connect to a catch basin and to a uh a big facilities like storm drain system and the city's catch basin. Yes. Okay.

Yeah. to a catch basin and connect to a uh storm water system. And if you see this plan on the back of the lawn, you also see those like a fencing like restraint cables like those cables uh it's kind of like a uh um uh what's it called like a barrier like in case of this there's a debris coming from the hill it that's deflect all these like energy so so it won't have a lot of uh um like rocks or goes into the uh the catchment zone. So that's part of the design team has that and uh and I believe the design we we have a so many variation of design and this is the last one and I think the cities requires like uh uh somehow build it as the way that can catch as much as dirt or soil from wherever lands lie or wherever you have like like the history that you have like a

sorry excuse me you name it it comes down big rocks Big trees. Yes. We'll catch it. Yeah. Garbage, you name it. Yes. Yes. You know, soil, etc., whatever. And and then the uh the owners have to That's why we create another like access at the uh bottom of the uh the um highlighted in yellow and the owner or the city might have to uh have access to access to maintains that area. Let's say if the debris or source of food, they be able to to clean it up and things like that. But that's the homeowner's responsibility. Home. I'm sorry. Not the city.

Yes. Yes. Right. Uh do you guys have any other questions? Mr. Evans, have you um talked or presented to the surrounding property owners what's going on? No, not directly, but they've uh they've had comments that have been addressed, right? Yes. I mean, this has been so long. I think it was like a we I don't know we because uh um I think the the uh uh previous owner did contact the uh neighbors. Okay.

Yes. just

I can just say that um so for this meeting for the publishing of the initial study made a negative declaration we sent a mailing to all property owners and tenants within 300t radius. Um otherwise, like for most single family homes, there's no requirement for um reaching out to neighbors for this. And so, uh I did have conversations with the proper the uphill property owner, but no other property owners reached out except for the letter you have today. Um that property owner reached out today. Um, no one else approached the city with any questions either. Just as a FYI,

thank you. Thank you. Does any member of the public wish to address the commission on this item at this time? Please fill out a speaker card and give it to the clerk. At this time, I will ask the clerk if there are any members of the public who would like to provide comments. We have no members of the public wanting to provide comment. Okay. Thank you. So, I'm going to close the public hearing and turn the matter over to the commission for discussion. Roll call, please. Or sorry, Commissioner Baker. Any comments?

No, I I thank you. Um, I'm kind of surprised it took 43 years to to get a new project here. Um, but it does sound like there been a lot of challenges in the terrain and the the uh mitigation, etc. Um, I I was a little hesitant until I heard about the uh maintenance plan. Um, and and with that, I think my concerns are addressed. I'll be fine with this. Commissioner Zang.

Uh, sorry, Chair. Uh, yeah, normally single family homes uh don't need our approval. So I'm just literally focusing on uh whether this is creating, you know, adverse impact to neighbors. Like I I don't care how much they spend money on the on the retaining wall, it's going to be costing them a lot. Um uh so I I do find that the the solution is more than adequate and uh I do trust engineering and planning and building department in determining that I mean they they will be the expert the plan checker will be the expert to say that this is good like so so with you know I I just need to uh ensure that you know source report is being done uh which is done and then there's a maintenance plan so everything is pointing to uh me uh supporting this project. Thanks,

Commissioner Pico. Um thank thank you uh staff and uh for all the the the work and research that has gone into this. Um I think it's a good use of a very difficult lot and um I appreciate that the solution is uh very safety minded um and you know can be an improvement for the the whole neighborhood in addition to the specific property. Thank you Commissioner

Brian. I think um I got to comment them because as you say you when mother nature wants to raise up and make make a plan. She can be very hard. At least they're showing they've attempted to at least have some resource there to minimize the impact if there is damage. The other neighbors that's just part of where they live and uh at least there's a plan there to address uh another incident. So I comment on that commen. Commissioner Zade.

Yeah. No, I I elude I salute you for you know a job well done because I built a house and I know the challenges and there are many and I hope you try your best to mitigate you know all the issues I agree with mission mother nature is mother nature yeah we haven't had any major but We do every couple years. We had the fires that got to almost our homes with the rainstorm last year. All the debris got to the streets, bypassed our homes. Imagine some it went to the backyards, but the ones who had fences, it g all the way down to the street. So the city does a great job of maintenance as much as they can with the limited resources, but homeowners have a responsibility as well cuz it's a team effort. So I appreciate your understanding and see where we're coming from.

Thank you, Commissioner Evans. Um, I echo what Commissioner Shadow was talking about that this is a big undertaking and there's a reason why it's been vacant for so long and we I personally wish you very well. I've dealt with devastating debris flows uh particularly in Santa Barbara. But hopefully that'll never happen to you. But the maintenance is going to be key to make sure that there's no bigger issues for you. Thank you. Um, can I get a roll call or can I get a motion, please?

I can do the first motion. I move to adopt the resolution adopting the initial study mitigation negative de declaration. I can second. Roll call, please. Commissioner Zang, yes. Vice Chair Pomaku, yes. Commissioner Shahade, yes. Chairperson Funes, yes. Commissioner Baker, yes. Commissioner Evans, yes. Commissioner Faria, yes. Motion passes.

Move on the second one. Move to adopt the resolution approving design review and other planning entitlements subject to the attached draft findings and draft conditions of approval. I'll second that one as well.

Roll call, please. Commissioner Faria. Yes. Yes. Commissioner Straad. Yes. Commissioner Baker. Yes. Chairperson Funes. Yes. Commissioner Evans. Yes. Vice Chair Pomaku. Yes. Commissioner Zang. Yes. Motion passes. Congratulations. Congratulations.

It's been approved if you're curious. I'll wrap it up. Yes. At this time, I'll ask the clerk if there are any other members of the public who would like to provide comments on the item. No members of the public from us. Any other comments from fellow commissioners?

Chairman, Commissioner Evans, this is sort of off topic, but it's not. And uh we won't be meeting again anytime soon. But I do want to state for the record that the city manager has done a fabulous job in shephering and resourcing and building South City. And I want everybody to understand 40 years of commitment to the city has made her uh [clears throat] a prize for our city and a tough act to follow. But I just want to acknowledge that

on pending retirement here at the end of exactly. Wonderful. Any other announcements or items from anyone? Nope. Well, I hereby adjourn this meeting of the South San Francisco Planning Commission for November 20th, 2025. I was