The San Mateo County Planning Commission on Nov. 20 voted unanimously to approve an after‑the‑fact coastal and agricultural permit (PLN2023‑00112) that legalizes most of an existing multi‑container storage structure at 350 Madera Lane in unincorporated San Gregorio while requiring the removal of the structurethe building's upper story and other unpermitted features.

Staff planner Sonal Agrawal told commissioners the project is an "after‑the‑fact" coastal development/agricultural exemption to legalize a basement, associated storage uses, a 5,000‑gallon water tank and a small pond on about a 0.5‑acre parcel. Agrawal said the applicant has agreed to revise plans so the second‑story containers and illegal second‑story bathroom and kitchen units are removed, a new roof is installed and screening and a sound‑attenuating wall will be added near the freezer unit. Agrawal said the project was found consistent with cited county policies and that conditions and building permits will address outstanding grading, drainage and environmental‑health requirements.

Why it matters: Neighbors said the structure has been a persistent nuisance and safety concern for years and urged denial. Ronnie Cardoza, who owns property to the west, said runoff and ponding associated with the development have damaged his crops and that the refrigeration unit's noise has been audible at night. "It's flooding my crop more and more, and I'm losing every year," Cardoza said. Crystal Shea, who filed the original complaint with the county in June 2022, said the applicant has a long record of violations on the parcel and asked the commission to require removal and return the land to its prior state.

Owner's response: Applicant and property owner Eric Marquegard (appearing by Zoom) denied the allegations, saying there is "absolutely 0 septic on that property" and that he briefly used a composting/incinerating toilet years ago. Marquegard said he built the structure without permits after losing buildings in the CZU fire and apologized for that decision: "Am I sorry that I built it before getting the permit? Yes." He offered to remove the top stories and install sound walls, and disputed neighbors' claims that runoff from his property has flooded adjacent crops.

Commission concerns and conditions: Commissioners pressed staff and the applicant on habitability, waste disposal and drainage. Staff said environmental health requires permits for any water or sanitation facilities and that the county added conditions requiring removal of any bathroom infrastructure that could support overnight habitation, a construction verification report from a geotechnical engineer, a drainage plan at building‑permit review, and noise limits (conditioned to remain at or below 55 dB daytime and 50 dB nighttime). Staff also noted the project involves about 90 cubic yards of grading (below the 150 cubic yard threshold that would automatically trigger a separate grading permit) but that building permits and inspections will verify drainage and other safeguards. The staff recommendation (conditional approval with the terms in Attachment A of the staff report) was framed as an effort to balance agricultural use with neighbor protections.

Action taken: Commissioner [moved by Commissioner Nugent] made a motion to approve the after‑the‑fact permit and related coastal exemption for PLN2023‑00112, subject to the findings and conditions listed in Attachment A; the motion was seconded and carried on a unanimous vote (Commissioners Garcia, Gupta, Nugent and the Chair voted "Aye"). Staff told neighbors the decision is appealable to the Board of Supervisors.

What happens next: If the approval stands, the applicant must submit revised plans and obtain building permits; county inspectors will verify demolition of the second story, installation of required drainage/detention or other runoff controls if necessary, removal of any illegal bathroom plumbing, and installation of the sound attenuation and screening. Code compliance and environmental‑health follow‑up were described as ongoing responsibilities of county staff.

Quotes from the hearing: "The second story will be completely removed," planner Sonal Agrawal said. "Any bathroom facilities on the property will need to be removed or permitted," staff added. Owner Eric Marquegard said, "I will happily take the top stories down," and "I am sorry I built that double container barn."

Ending: The commission approved the conditional after‑the‑fact permit; neighbors were informed of appeal rights. The county will monitor permit compliance through the building‑permit inspection process.