The URL can be used to link to this page

CL_AGN_260323_CC_AgendaPacket_F_A1 City Council Monday, March 23, 2026, 7:00 PM Regular Meeting City of Rolling Hills The meeting agenda is available on the City’s website. The City Council meeting will be live-streamed on the City’s website. View both the agenda and the live-streamed video. Members of the public may submit written comments by emailing the City Clerk’s office at CityClerk@cityofrh.net. Your comments will become part of the official meeting record if received before 3pm on the meeting day. You must provide your full name, but please do not provide any other personal information that you do not want to be published. View recordings to City Council meetings online. AGENDA 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Pledge of Allegiance 4. Presentations/Proclamations/Announcements 5. Approve Order of the Agenda This is the appropriate time for the Mayor or Councilmembers to approve the agenda as is or reorder. 6. Blue Folder Items (Supplemental) Blue folder (supplemental) items are additional back up materials to administrative reports, changes to the posted agenda packet, and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file. 6.A. For Blue Folder Documents approved at the City Council Meeting RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 7. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items Page 1 of 122 2 This is the appropriate time for members of the public to make comments regarding items not listed on this agenda. Pursuant to the Brown Act, no action will take place on any items not on the agenda. 8. Consent Calendar Business items, except those formally noticed for public hearing, or those pulled for discussion are assigned to the Consent Calendar. The Mayor or any Councilmember may request that any Consent Calendar item(s) be removed, discussed, and acted upon separately. Items removed from the Consent Calendar will be taken up under the "Excluded Consent Calendar" section below. Those items remaining on the Consent Calendar will be approved in one motion. The Mayor will call on anyone wishing to address the City Council on any Consent Calendar item on the agenda, which has not been pulled by Councilmembers for discussion. 8.A. Approve Affidavit of Posting for the City Council Regular Meeting of March 23, 2026 RECOMMENDATION: Approve. 8.B. Approve Motion to Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading of All Ordinances and Resolutions Listed on the Agenda RECOMMENDATION: Approve. 8.C. Approve the following Minutes of March 9, 2026: City Council Regular Meeting RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 8.D. Payment of Bills RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 8.E. Approve the following Minutes of the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee Special Meetings for: April 28, 2025, March 9, 2026 RECOMMENDATION: Approve as presented. 9. Excluded Consent Calendar Items 10. Commission Items 10.A. Receive and file Zoning Case No. 25-111: Site Plan Review for construction of a new mixed-use structure with garage and storage, non-exempt grading and other improvements; Conditional Use Permit for a detached mixed-use accessory structure greater than 200 square feet, and finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act for location at 26 Caballeros Road (Ziegler) (Lot 11-SK) RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. 11. Public Hearings 12. Discussion Items 12.A. Receive and File Fiscal Year 2026-27 Preliminary Projections and Balancing Page 2 of 122 3 RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file a presentation from staff on preliminary General Fund revenue and expenditure projections for fiscal year 2026/27; provide direction regarding the increase to refuse rates starting July 1, 2026, and noticing requirements to City residents pursuant to Proposition 218. 13. Matters From the City Council 13.A. Consideration of the Fiscal Year 26/27 South Bay Cities Council of Governments annual membership dues RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Provide direction to staff. 13.B. Discussion and Direction on Structure Height Standards for Williamsburg Lane RECOMMENDATION: Receive and file. Provide direction to staff. 14. Matters From Staff 14.A. Consideration of Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter of Support for AB 2517 (Calderon) Regarding Improvements to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Mapping Process RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council provide direction on whether to support AB 2517 (Calderon) and, if so, authorize the Mayor to sign and submit a letter of support on behalf of the City. 15. Recess to Closed Session 15.A. Conference With Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(D)(1) The City Finds, Based on Advice from Legal Counsel, that Discussion in Open Session will Prejudice the Position of the City in the Litigation. (2 Cases) A. Name of Case: City of Rolling Hills v. SCE CPUC Docket No. C.24-10-008 B. Name of Case: City of Rolling Hills v. SoCalGas CPUC Docket No. C.24-10-009 RECOMMENDATION: None. 16. Reconvene to Open Session 17. Adjournment Next regular meeting: Monday, April 13, 2026 at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California, 90274. Notice: Public Comment is welcome on any item prior to City Council action on the item. Documents pertaining to an agenda item received after the posting of the agenda are available for review in the City Clerk's office or at the meeting at which the item will be considered. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting due to your disability, please Page 3 of 122 4 contact the City Clerk at (310) 377-1521 at least 48 hours prior to the meeting to enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility and accommodation for your review of this agenda and attendance at this meeting. Page 4 of 122 Item: 6.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: For Blue Folder Documents approved at the City Council Meeting Background: Discussion: Fiscal Impact: Recommendation: Receive and file. Attachments: 1. CL_AGN_260323_CC_Item14A Page 5 of 122 BLUE FOLDER ITEM (SUPPLEMENTAL) Blue folder (supplemental) items are additional back up materials to administrative reports, changes to the posted agenda packet, and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file. CITY COUNCIL MEETING March 23, 2026 14A. Consideration of Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter of Support for AB 2517 (Calderon) Regarding Improvements to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Mapping Process From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk CL_AGN_260323_CC_AB2517.pdf CL_AGN_260323_CC_AB2517_PVE_LetterOfSupport.pdf CL_AGN_260323_CC_AB2517_RHE_LetterOfSupport.pdf Page 6 of 122 Item: 8.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Approve Affidavit of Posting for the City Council Regular Meeting of March 23, 2026 Background: None. Discussion: None. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Approve. Attachments: 1. CL_AGN_260323_CC_AffidavitofPosting Page 7 of 122 Administrative Report 8.A., File # 2026-52 Meeting Date:3/23/2026 To: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL From: Christian Horvath, City Clerk TITLE APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING OF MARCH 23, 2026 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS CITY OF ROLLING HILLS ) AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING In compliance with the Brown Act, the following materials have been posted at the locations below. Legislative Body City Council Posting Type Regular Meeting Agenda Posting Location 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, CA 90274 City Hall Window City Website: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agendas_meetings.php https://rollinghillsca.portal.civicclerk.com/ Meeting Date & Time MARCH 23, 2026 7:00pm Open Session As City Clerk of the City of Rolling Hills, I declare under penalty of perjury, the document noted above was posted at the date displayed below. Christian Horvath, City Clerk Date: March 20, 2026 Page 8 of 122 Item: 8.C. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Approve the following Minutes of March 9, 2026: City Council Regular Meeting Background: None. Discussion: None. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Approve as presented. Attachments: 1. CL_MIN_260309_CC_F Page 9 of 122 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 9, 2026 Page 1 Minutes Rolling Hills City Council Monday, March 9, 2026 Regular Meeting 7:00 p.m. 1. Call To Order The City Council of the City of Rolling Hills met in person on the above date at 7:00 p.m. Mayor Dieringer presiding. 2. Roll Call Councilmembers Present: Pieper, Mirsch, Wilson, Black, Mayor Dieringer Councilmembers Absent: Staff Present: Karina Bañales, City Manager Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Samantha Crew, Management Analyst Reina Schaetzl, Willdan Contract Senior Planner Emma Montes, Assistant Planner Nicolas Papajohn, City Attorney 3. Pledge Of Allegiance – Councilmember Mirsch 4. Presentations / Proclamations / Announcements – None 5. Approve Order of the Agenda Motion by Councilmember Pieper seconded by Councilmember Mirsch to approve the order of the agenda. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Pieper, Mirsch, Wilson, Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 6. Blue Folder Items (Supplemental) – None 7. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Horvath read a letter from Roger Hawkins into the record. 8. Consent Calendar 8.A. Approve Affidavit of Posting for the City Council Regular Meeting of March 9, 2026 8.B. Approve Motion to Read by Title Only and Waive Further Reading of All Ordinances and Resolutions Listed on the Agenda 8.C. Approve the following Minutes of February 9, 2026: City Council Special Field Trip Meeting, February 23, 2026 City Council Regular Meeting 8.D. Payment of Bills Page 10 of 122 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 9, 2026 Page 2 8.E. Republic Services Recycling Tonnage and Complaint Reports for January 2026 8.F. Pulled by Mayor Dieringer 8.G. Consider and approve the Planned Expenditures for Fiscal Year 2026-2027 Safe, Clean Water (Measure W) Municipal Program Funds for submission to Los Angeles County Flood Control District 8.H. Receive and file the Annual Progress Reports for the General Plan and Housing Element Motion by Councilmember Pieper, seconded by Councilmember Wilson to approve the Consent Calendar except for item 8.F. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Pieper, Mirsch, Wilson, Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 9. Excluded Consent Calendar Items 8.F. Amendment to 2023 Professional Services Agreement with HQE Systems to install Fourth Siren Pole at Upper Blackwater Canyon / Portuguese Bend Road (Garden Triangle), increase compensation by $48,335.96, extend term by 1 year, find the same exempt from CEQA under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 (Class 3), and authorize City Manager to execute Amendment Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Black, seconded by Councilmember Pieper to approve as presented. Motion carried with the following vote: AYES: Pieper, Mirsch, Black NOES: Wilson, Mayor Dieringer ABSENT: None 10. Commission Items 10.A. Receive and file Zoning Case No. 25-091: Site plan review for new construction non-exempt grading and related improvements; variances for an attached garage within the side yard areas, and finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act for location at 3 Maverick Lane (Karatsu) (Lot 30-SK) Presentation by Assistant Planner Montes. Public Comment: Louie Tamaro Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Black, seconded by Councilmember Pieper to receive and file. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Pieper, Mirsch, Wilson, Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 10.B. Receive and file Zoning Case No. 25-115: Site plan review for new construction non-exempt grading and related improvements; variances for an attached garage within front yard, addition to home in side yard, and to exceed 40 percent disturbance; and finding the project Page 11 of 122 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 9, 2026 Page 3 exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act for location at 2 Williamsburg Lane (Paesano) (Lots 44, 45, & 46-A-RH) Presentation by Willdan Contract Senior Planner Schaetzl. Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Black, seconded by Councilmember Mirsch to receive and file. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Pieper, Mirsch, Wilson, Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 11. Public Hearings – None 12. Discussion Items 12.A. Adoption of Resolution No. 1404 approving Volume 1 and the Rolling Hills portion of Volume 2 within the 2026 Palos Verdes Peninsula Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Presentation by Management Analyst Crew Black & Veatch Consultant Megan Brotherton Public Comment: Judith Haenel Motion by Councilmember Mirsch, seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Black to adopt Resolution No. 1404 approving Volume 1 and the Rolling Hills portion of Volume II of the 2026 Palos Verdes Peninsula Multi- Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan with correction to typos as given to staff. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Mirsch, Pieper, Wilson, Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 13. Matters From the City Council Councilmember Black requested a future agenda item regarding revisiting building heights specific to Williamsburg Lane. Mayor Dieringer also requested that staff provide information regarding Williamsburg area architecture style differences and possible justifications for any proposed height exception(s). Councilmember Black expressed his disappointment with the new City Hall landscaping. 14. Matters From Staff 14.A. Receive a verbal report regarding Bennett Landscape's invitation to participate in their 2026 Arbor Day tree planting and provide direction to staff Presentation by Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Horvath. The City Council directed staff to evaluate possible locations for participation in 2026, but short of a suitable location, to pass and reconsider next year. 15. Recess To Closed Session – 8:07 P.M. Page 12 of 122 MINUTES – CITY COUNCIL MEETING Monday, March 9, 2026 Page 4 15.A. Conference with Legal Counsel—Initiation of Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4) The City finds, based on advice from legal counsel, that discussion in open session will prejudice the position of the City in the litigation. (1 case) 16. Reconvene To Open Session – 8:53 P.M. 17. Adjournment: 8:53 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 8:53 p.m. on March 9, 2026. The next regular meeting of the City Council is scheduled to be held on Monday, March 23, 2026 beginning at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php All written comments submitted are included in the record and available for public review on the City website. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Christian Horvath, City Clerk Approved, ____________________________________ Bea Dieringer, Mayor Page 13 of 122 Item: 8.D. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Payment of Bills Background: None. Discussion: None. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Approve as presented. Attachments: 1. CL_AGN_260323_CC_PaymentofBills_E Page 14 of 122 Page 15 of 122 The following checks were re-issued for the reasons as noted below:1. MV Cheng - did not receive check. Stop payment issued2. Rolling Hills Estates - did not receive check. Stop payment issued3. COX Communications - did not receive check. Stop payment issued4. CoLA Animal Care & Control - returned check to bank. staff determining why.5. PVS - did not receive check. Stop payment issued Page 16 of 122 Item: 8.E. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Approve the following Minutes of the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee Special Meetings for: April 28, 2025, March 9, 2026 Background: None. Discussion: None. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Approve as presented. Attachments: 1. CL_MIN_250428_FBA_F 2. CL_MIN_260309_FBA_F Page 17 of 122 MINUTES – FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, April 28, 2025 Page 1 Minutes Rolling Hills Finance/Budget/Audit Committee Monday, April 28, 2025 Special Meeting 6:00 p.m. CALL TO ORDER The Finance/Budget/Audit Committee of the City of Rolling Hills met in person on the above date at 6:02 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Black, Mayor Pieper Members Absent: None Staff Present: Karina Bañales, City Manager Robert Samario, Finance Operations Lead Consultant Christian Horvath, City Clerk / Executive Assistant to the City Manager 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. ROLL CALL 3. PUBLIC COMMENT ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS – NONE 4. CONSENT CALENDAR 4.A. APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE SPECIAL FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING OF APRIL 28, 2025 Motion by Councilmember Black, seconded by Mayor Pieper to approve Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Black, Mayor Pieper NOES: None ABSENT: None 5. DISCUSSION ITEMS 5.A. RECEIVE AND FILE FISCAL YEAR 2025/2026 PROPOSED GENERAL FUND REVENUE PROJECTIONS AND EXPENDITURES BY DEPARTMENT Presentation by Finance Operations Lead Consultant Samario Motion by Mayor Pieper, seconded by Councilmember Black to receive and file. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Black, Mayor Pieper NOES: None ABSENT: None 6. ITEMS FROM THE FINANCE BUDGET AUDIT COMMITTEE – NONE Page 18 of 122 MINUTES – FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, April 28, 2025 Page 2 7. ITEMS FROM STAFF – NONE 8. ADJOURNMENT : 6:40 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 6:40 p.m on April 28, 2025. The next regular meeting of the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee is to be determined beginning at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php All written comments submitted are included in the record and available for public review on the City website. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Christian Horvath, City Clerk Approved, ____________________________________ Jeff Pieper, Mayor Page 19 of 122 MINUTES – FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 9, 2026 Page 1 Minutes Rolling Hills Finance/Budget/Audit Committee Monday, March 9, 2026 Special Meeting 6:00 p.m. Call to Order The Finance/Budget/Audit Committee of the City of Rolling Hills met in person on the above date at 6:00 p.m. ROLL CALL Members Present: Black, Mayor Dieringer Members Absent: None Staff Present: Karina Bañales, City Manager Robert Samario, Finance Operations Lead Consultant Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk 1. Call to Order 2. Roll Call 3. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items – None 4. Consent Calendar 4.A. Approve Affidavit of posting for the special Finance/Budget/Audit Committee Meeting of March 9, 2025 Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Black, seconded by Mayor Dieringer to approve Consent Calendar. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 5. Discussion Items 5.A. Fiscal Year 2026-27 Preliminary Projections and Balancing Presentation by Finance Operations Lead Consultant Samario Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Black, seconded by Mayor Dieringer to receive and file. Motion carried unanimously with the following vote: AYES: Black, Mayor Dieringer NOES: None ABSENT: None 6. Items from the Finance Budget Audit Committee – None 7. Items from Staff – None Page 20 of 122 MINUTES – FINANCE/BUDGET/AUDIT COMMITTEE MEETING Monday, March 9, 2026 Page 2 8. Adjournment: 6:25 P.M. The meeting was adjourned at 6:25 p.m. on March 9, 2026. The next regular meeting of the Finance/Budget/Audit Committee is scheduled to be held on April 27, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. It will also be available via City’s website link at: https://www.rolling-hills.org/government/agenda/index.php All written comments submitted are included in the record and available for public review on the City website. Respectfully submitted, ____________________________________ Christian Horvath, City Clerk Approved, ____________________________________ Bea Dieringer, Mayor Page 21 of 122 Item: 10.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Benjamin Johnson , Code Compliance Officer / Planning Technician Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Receive and file Zoning Case No. 25-111: Site Plan Review for construction of a new mixed-use structure with garage and storage, non-exempt grading and other improvements; Conditional Use Permit for a detached mixed-use accessory structure greater than 200 square feet, and finding the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act for location at 26 Caballeros Road (Ziegler) (Lot 11-SK) Background: Applicant Request On October 8, 2025, an application was duly filed by Louis de Moraes, agent for Michael and Natalie Ziegler, requesting approval of the following proposed improvements (collectively referred to as the “Project”): • A 516 square foot addition to the existing structure • Converting the structure into a mixed-use building An ADU is part of the mixed-use structure but is not subject to discretionary review. It is important to highlight the timeline for the application's submission, processing, and approval by the Planning Commission. The project was submitted to Planning Staff for review on October 9, 2025. The project was not ready for either the November Planning Commission meeting or the December Planning Commission meeting, which had been moved to December 2, 2025 due to a noticing error. There were two projects that were identified for the Planning Commission in January, and in light of this information, this project was subsequently presented to the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026 to avoid having to conduct three site visits in one day. Zoning, Location, and Lot Description The property is a rectangular-shaped parcel zoned RAS-1, located on the west side of Caballeros Road with one frontage on Caballeros Road. The rear of the property also abuts the Purple Canyon trail. The lot size is 55,791 square feet net (1.28 acres) and includes a 50-foot-wide roadway easement along Caballeros Road. Page 22 of 122 There are three building pads located on the lot. The first building pad measures 5,590 square feet and contains the existing house (4,125 sq. ft), the garage (610 sq. ft), a service yard (90 sq. ft), and a fire feature (13 sq. ft). The second pad measures 1,495 square feet and contains the swimming pool (625 sq. ft) along with a structure housing pool equipment (17 sq. ft). The third and final building pad is 5,433 square feet and contains the existing structure (1,124 sq. ft). The parcel width is 150 feet across, as per RAS-1 zoning code minimum. The topography of the land is such that all the building pads are on the south side of the property due to the steeply sloping driveway north of the existing residence. These topographical characteristics are consistent with other parcels in the area, which follow similar patterns of lot development regarding accessory structures. Previous Approvals Located on the property is a primary residence that was built in 1964, a stable that was built in 1967, and a garage (attached to the stable) that was constructed in 1971. Planning Commission Approval February 17, 2026 On February 17, 2026, the Planning Commission held a morning field trip at the subject property, with three commissioners present, as well as resident Mike Ziegler (homeowner) and resident V'etta Virtue (4 Maverick Ln). The applicant's team was not in attendance. No major questions or concerns were reported and the field trip proceeded to the public hearing meeting later that evening at City Hall. Three Commissioners were present. During the evening public hearing, staff presented the project. The applicant and the architect attended the evening meeting, and one member of the public was present. After review and discussion, the Commission voted unanimously (3-0) to approve the project and adopted Resolution number 2026-03 (Attachment A). Discussion: Site Plan Review Site Plan Review is required for construction of any new building or structure pursuant to Rolling Hills Municipal Code (“RHMC”) Section 17.46.020. The applicant is proposing an addition to the existing structure, resulting in approximately 1,640 square feet of total floor area. The Project also includes the proposed stable and corral set aside areas of 1,000 square feet total, alongside a proposed access path set aside area located on the west side of the property leading to the proposed set aside area. There is no grading as a result of this project. Conditional Use Permit Section 17.16.040(A)(3) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) permits construction of a mixed- use building that exceeds 200 square feet and is subject to the conditions in Section 17.18.210. The applicant is proposing a mixed-use structure of 1,640 square feet. Given the size of the structure, a Conditional Use Permit is required. MUNICIPAL CODE COMPLIANCE Lot Coverage and Building Pad Coverage As seen in Attachment B, the Project complies with the remainder of the Development Standards in the RHMC. The existing structural lot coverage is 6,755 square feet (12.1%), and the project proposes a net removal of 472 square feet (-0.8%) for a total of 6,283 square feet (11.3%) structural lot coverage. This is well below the maximum allowed 20% structural coverage. Page 23 of 122 The existing flatwork coverage is 7,026 square feet (12.6%). The flatwork onsite will be reduced by 385 square feet (-0.7%) upon approval of the structure and the new reduced flatwork area will be 6,662 square feet (11.9%). The maximum allowable is 15% flatwork coverage. See the “Development Table” attachment for further details. Finally, the total overall structural and flatwork coverage will result in 12,945 square feet or 23.2%, which is within the 35% structural and flatwork coverage guideline. Neighbor Concerns There have been no responses to the public hearing notices mailed to residents within a 1,000 ft radius (Attachment C) of the development on February 5, 2026. Review by RHCA The Rolling Hills Community Association reviewed and conceptually approved the detached mixed- use accessory structure in September 2025, subject to City approvals. Environmental Review The Project has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), which exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including single family residence and accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Receive and file. Attachments: 1. Attachment A - 2026-03_PC_Resolution_26CaballerosRd_ZC25-111_F_A_E 2. Attachment B - PL_ADR_260217_26CaballerosRd_ZC25-111_DevelopmentTable_F_A 3. Attachment C - PL_ADR_260203_26CaballerosRd_ZC25-111_RadiusMap 4. Attachment D - PL_ADR_260311_26CaballerosRd_ZC25-111_VicinityMap 5. Attachment E - PL_ADR_251218_26CaballerosRd_ZC25-111_Plans Page 24 of 122 1 RESOLUTION NO. 2026-03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MIXED-USE STRUCTURE WITH GARAGE AND STORAGE, NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED MIXED-USE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE GREATER THAN 200 SQUARE FEET, AND FINDING THE PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR LOCATION AT 26 CABALLEROS ROAD. (LOT 11-SK) (ZIEGLER) THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. On October 9, 2025, an application was duly filed by Louis de Moraes, agent with respect to real property located at 26 Caballeros Rd, Rolling Hills (Lot 11-SK) requesting Site Plan Review and a Conditional Use Permit for a mixed-use accessory building. Section 2. The property is zoned RAS-1 and is 1.28 acres net and 55,791 square feet net, as calculated for development purposes. The property is located on the west side of Caballeros Road. There is one street frontage for the property along Caballeros Road. The property is regularly shaped and the topography is above grade off Caballeros Road and becomes sloped along the north side and rear of the lot towards the Purple Canyon Trail. There is a 50-foot-wide roadway easement along Caballeros Road and 25-foot-wide trail easement along the rear property line. Section 3. The Planning Commission conducted duly noticed public hearings to consider the application at its field trip meeting and regular meeting on February 17, 2026. Neighbors within a 1,000-foot radius were notified of the public hearings and a notice was published in three public places on February 5, 2026. The applicants and their agent were notified of the public hearings in writing by first class mail and the agent was in attendance at the hearings. Evidence was heard and presented from all persons interested in affecting said proposal. Section 4. The Planning Commission finds that the project qualifies as a Class 3 (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures), which exempts the construction and location of a limited number of new, small facilities or structures, including accessory structures, including but not limited to garages, carports, patios, swimming pools and fences. Here, the proposed Project is the construction of an attached garage and single-family residence, and is therefore categorically exempt from environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 5. Site Plan Review Findings. Site Plan Review is required for construction of any new structure pursuant to RHMC Section 17.46.020. With respect to the Site Plan Review for the proposed development, the Planning Commission hereby makes the following findings: A. The project complies with and is consistent with the goals and policies of Page 25 of 122 2 the General Plan and all requirements of the zoning ordinance. The proposed development is compatible with the General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance and surrounding uses because the proposed structures comply with the General Plan requirement of low profile, low-density residential development with sufficient open space between surrounding structures. The project conforms to Zoning Code setback requirements with the Conditional Use Permit approved by this Resolution. The lot is 1.28 acres net and 55,791 square feet net, as calculated for development purposes. The size of the existing and proposed structures will be 6,283 square feet, which constitutes 11.3% of the net lot area, and the flatwork and driveways will be 6,662 square feet which equals 11.9% of the net lot, and the total structural and flatwork is 12,945 square feet or 23.2% which is within the 35% maximum overall lot coverage permitted. B. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. Lot coverage requirements are regarded as maximums, and the actual amount of lot coverage permitted depends upon the existing buildable area of the lot. The project substantially preserves the natural and undeveloped state of the lot by minimizing building coverage. The topography and the configuration of the lot, has been considered, and it was determined that the proposed development will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed construction will be constructed on an existing building pad, will be the least intrusive to surrounding properties, will be screened and landscaped with mature trees and shrubs, is of sufficient distance from nearby residences so that it will not impact the view or privacy of surrounding neighbors, and will permit the owners to enjoy their property without deleterious infringement on the rights of surrounding property owners. C. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain and surrounding residences. The proposed development, as conditioned, is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, and is consistent with the scale of the neighborhood when compared to properties in the vicinity. The proposed garage will be consistent with the pattern and style of the proposed residence. D. The project preserves and integrates into the site design, to the greatest extent possible, existing topographic features of the site, including surrounding native vegetation, mature trees, drainage courses and land forms (such as hillsides and knolls). The development plan incorporates existing trees and native vegetation to the maximum extent feasible. Specifically, the development plan will supplement the existing vegetation with landscaping that is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community. E. Grading has been designed to follow natural contours of the site and to minimize the amount of grading required to create the building area. The development plan has no proposed grading. Page 26 of 122 3 F. Grading will not modify existing drainage channels nor redirect drainage flow, unless such flow is redirected into an existing drainage course. The property will still maintain the existing terrain and existing drainage will remain as there will be no grading taking place. Drainage will continue to flow in the existing drainage course. G. The project preserves surrounding native vegetation and mature trees and supplements these elements with drought-tolerant landscaping which is compatible with and enhances the rural character of the community, and landscaping provides a buffer or transition area between private and public areas. Landscaping will meet the requirements of the water efficient landscape ordinance and incorporate low impact development practices. Surrounding native vegetation and mature trees will not be affected and new landscaping will be considerate of the environment and will enhance the rural character of the community. H. The project is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles. The proposed development is sensitive and not detrimental to the convenience and safety of circulation for pedestrians and vehicles because the proposed project will not alter the existing circulation pattern. I. The project conforms to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The project is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Section 6. Conditional Use Permit. Section 17.16.040(A)(3) of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) permits construction of a mixed-use accessory building that exceeds 200 square feet and is subject to the conditions in Section 17.18.210. With respect to the Conditional Use Permit, the Planning Commission finds as follows: A. That the proposed conditional use is consistent with the General Plan. The granting of Conditional Use Permits for the Project is consistent with the purposes and objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan because the use is consistent with similar uses in the community, and meets all the applicable code development standards for such use. The property is adequately sized to accommodate such use. The mixed-use accessory building is 1,124 square feet and the project will add 516 square feet (for a total of 1,640 square feet) once the addition is completed. The proposed use is appropriately located in that the building will serve as a mixed-use accessory structure with storage and a garage. Development would be constructed in furtherance of the General Plan goal of promoting and encouraging equestrian uses. Page 27 of 122 4 B. The nature, condition and development of adjacent uses, buildings and structures have been considered, and that the use will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, building or structures. The nature, condition, and development of adjacent structures have been considered, and the project will not adversely affect or be materially detrimental to these adjacent uses, buildings, or structures because the proposed uses are of sufficient distance from nearby residences so as to not impact the view or privacy of surrounding properties. Development will be constructed on portions of the Property that are already graded and developed. C. That the site for the proposed conditional use is of adequate size and shape to accommodate the use and buildings proposed. The project is harmonious in scale and mass with the site, the natural terrain, and surrounding residences because the proposed uses comply with the low-profile residential development pattern of the community and areas will remain open and unobstructed. The lot is sufficient to accommodate the proposed development. D. That the proposed conditional use complies with all applicable development standards of the zone district. The proposed conditional uses comply with all applicable development standards of the zone district, including the specified conditions for a mixed-use accessory structure has been identified in Section 17.18.210 of the Zoning Ordinance. E. That the proposed use is consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting and siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities. The proposed conditional uses are consistent with the portions of the Los Angeles County Hazardous Waste Management Plan relating to siting criteria for hazardous waste facilities because the project site is not listed on the current State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List. F. That the proposed conditional use observes the spirit and intent of this title. The proposed development meets the spirit and intent of this title in that it is a residential amenity enjoyed by other properties in the City. The use is consistent with the residential character of the City. Section 7. Based upon the foregoing findings, and the evidence in the record, the Planning Commission hereby approves Zoning Case No. 25-111 subject to the following conditions: A. The Site Plan and Conditional Use Permit approvals shall expire within two years from the effective date of approval as defined in RHMC Sections 17.46.080 and 17.38.070 of the Zoning Ordinance unless otherwise extended pursuant to the requirements of these sections. Page 28 of 122 5 B. If any condition of this resolution is violated, the entitlement granted by this resolution shall be suspended and the privileges granted hereunder shall lapse and upon receipt of written notice from the City, all construction work being performed on the subject property shall immediately cease, other than work determined by the City Manager or his/her designee required to cure the violation. The suspension and stop work order will be lifted once the Applicant cures the violation to the satisfaction of the City Manager or his/her designee. In the event that the Applicant disputes the City Manager or his/her designee’s determination that a violation exists or disputes how the violation must be cured, the Applicant may request a hearing before the City Council. The hearing shall be scheduled at the next regular meeting of the City Council for which the agenda has not yet been posted; the Applicant shall be provided written notice of the hearing. The stop work order shall remain in effect during the pendency of the hearing. The City Council shall make a determination as to whether a violation of this Resolution has occurred. If the Council determines that a violation has not occurred or has been cured by the time of the hearing, the Council will lift the suspension and the stop work order. If the Council determines that a violation has occurred and has not yet been cured, the Council shall provide the Applicant with a deadline to cure the violation; no construction work shall be performed on the property until and unless the violation is cured by the deadline, other than work designated by the Council to accomplish the cure. If the violation is not cured by the deadline, the Council may either extend the deadline at the Applicant’s request or schedule a hearing for the revocation of the entitlements granted by this Resolution pursuant to Chapter 17.58 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC). C. All requirements of the Building and Construction Ordinance, the Zoning ordinance, and of the zone in which the subject property is located must be complied with unless otherwise a variance to such requirement has been approved. D. The lot shall be developed and maintained in substantial conformance with the site plan on file at City Hall and approved by the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026 except as otherwise provided in these conditions. The working drawings submitted to the Department of Building and Safety for plan check review shall conform to the approved development plan. All conditions of the Site Plan Review and Variance approvals shall be incorporated into the building permit working drawings, and where applicable complied with prior to issuance of a grading or building permit from the building department. The conditions of approval of this Resolution shall be printed onto a separate sheet and included in the building plans submitted to the Building Department for review and shall be kept on site at all times. Any proposed modifications and/or changes to the approved project, including resulting from field conditions, shall be discussed with staff so that staff can determine whether the modification is minor or major in nature. Minor modifications are subject to approval by the City Manager or his or her designee. Major modifications are subject to approval by the Planning Commissioner after a public hearing. Applicant shall not implement modifications or changes to the approved project without the appropriate approval from the City Manager or designee or the Planning Commission, as required. Page 29 of 122 6 E. Prior to submittal of final working drawings to Building and Safety Department for issuance of building and grading permits, the plans for the project shall be submitted to City staff for verification that the final plans are in compliance with the plans approved by the Planning Commission. F. A licensed professional preparing construction plans for this project for Building Department review shall execute a Certificate affirming that the plans conform in all respects to this Resolution approving this project and all of the conditions set forth herein and the City’s Building Code and Zoning Ordinance. Further, the person obtaining a building and/or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. G. The person obtaining a building and/ or grading permit for this project shall execute a Certificate of Construction stating that the project will be constructed according to this Resolution and any plans approved therewith. H. The project must be reviewed and approved by the Rolling Hills Community Association (“RHCA”). I. The total structural coverage on the building pad shall not exceed 6,734 square feet or 12%. J. Total lot coverage of structures and paved areas shall not exceed 13,396 square feet, or 24%. K. The disturbance of the net lot shall not exceed 33,374 square feet of surface area or 59.8% of the net lot area. L. Prior to any further grading activity, the Applicant shall inform the City and RHCA staff of the date and time of this activity. Workers shall implement Best Management Practices to assure that streets and adjacent properties are not impacted. M. Prior to issuance of a grading permit a detailed landscaping plan shall be submitted to City staff for review. The landscaping plan shall utilize to the maximum extent feasible, plants that are native to the area, are water-wise and are consistent with the rural character of the community. A final inspection shall not be granted unless the slopes are vegetated. N. The graded areas shall be landscaped and continually maintained in good condition. Any trees and shrubs used in the landscaping scheme for this project shall be planted in a way that will not result in a hedge like screening and will not impair views from neighboring properties. O. If applicable, the Applicant shall be required to conform to the City of Rolling Hills Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance, Chapter 13.18 of the Municipal Code. Page 30 of 122 7 P. The Applicant shall submit a detailed drainage plan to the City’s drainage engineer. This project shall meet the requirements of the City’s Low Impact Development portion of the Storm Water Management and Pollution Control ordinance, if applicable. The applicant shall comply with grading requirements relative to submittal of grading and construction reports as required by the Building Official. In order to prevent sediments and water run-off from reaching the canyon from the disturbed slopes and an erosion control plan shall be submitted to the Building Department and implemented, even if grading permits have not been issued by that time. Q. The Applicant shall secure all permits from the Department of Building and Safety prior to commencing any work. Consult with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife for additional requirements. R. Minimum of 65% of the construction material spoils shall be recycled and diverted from landfills. The hauler shall obtain a Construction and Demolition permit from the City and provide proof of recycling. S. There shall be no discarding of any debris, trash, soil and construction spoils or any other material into the canyon or deposited anywhere on the property, including easements. No grading, planting, structures, drainage devices or hardscape, including driveways, or storage of any objects including building materials shall take place in the easements, unless approved by the RHCA. T. The City or the Building Department may require a construction fence for the duration of the grading for this project. Such fence shall not be located in any easement or cross over trails or natural drainage course and shall be removed immediately upon completion of the grading work. U. In addition, any construction facility, such as a construction trailer/office or portable toilets, to a maximum extent practicable, shall be located in a manner not visible from the street, and be in a location satisfactory to City staff. V. Prior to construction, an on-site inspection and site walk-through, including through all existing structures as needed, shall be scheduled with City Staff and the applicant. W. During construction, the property owners shall be required to schedule and regulate construction and related traffic noise throughout the day between the hours of 7 AM and 6 PM, Monday through Saturday only, when construction and mechanical equipment noise is permitted, so as not to interfere with the quiet residential environment of the City of Rolling Hills. X. Construction vehicles or equipment, employees’ vehicles, delivery trucks shall not impede any traffic lanes to maximum extend practical; if traffic must be blocked in order to aid in the construction, no more than a single lane may be blocked for a short period of time and flagmen utilized on both sides of the impeded area to direct traffic. Y. During construction, to the extent feasible, all parking shall take place on the project site, on the new driveway and, if necessary, any overflow parking may take place within Page 31 of 122 8 the unimproved roadway easements along adjacent streets, and shall not obstruct neighboring driveways, visibility at intersections or pedestrian and equestrian passage. During construction, to the maximum extent feasible, employees of the contractor shall car-pool into the City. To the extent feasible, a minimum of 4’ wide path, from the edge of the roadway pavement, for pedestrian and equestrian passage shall be available and be clear of vehicles, construction materials and equipment at all times. Z. During construction, dust control measures shall be used to stabilize the soil from wind erosion and reduce dust and objectionable odors generated by construction activities in accordance with South Coast Air Quality Management District, Los Angeles County and local ordinances and engineering practices. AA. During construction, an Erosion Control Plan containing the elements set forth in Section 7010 of the 2022 County of Los Angeles Uniform Building Code shall be followed to minimize erosion and to protect slopes and channels to control storm water pollution. AB. The property owners shall be required to conform to the Regional Water Quality Control Board and County Health Department requirements for the installation and maintenance of storm water drainage facilities and septic tank. AC. The applicant shall pay all of the applicable Building and Safety and Public Works Department fees and Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District fees, if any. AD. Prior to final inspection of the project, “as graded” and “as constructed” plans and certifications shall be provided to the Planning Department and the Building Department to ascertain that the completed project is in compliance with the Planning Commission approved plans. In addition, any modifications made to the project during construction, shall be depicted on the “as built/as graded” plan. AE. The applicants shall execute an Affidavit of Acceptance of all conditions of the Conditional Use Permit approval, or the approval shall not be effective. AF. All conditions of this Resolution, when applicable, must be complied with prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit from the Building and Safety Department. AG. Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. AH. To the extent permitted by law, Permittee shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of Rolling Hills, its City Council, its officers, employees and agents (the “indemnified parties”) from and against any claim, action, or proceeding brought by a third party against the indemnified parties and the applicant to attack, set aside, or void any permit or approval for this project authorized by the City, including (without limitation) reimbursing the City its actual attorney’s fees and costs in defense of the litigation. The City may, in its sole discretion, elect to defend any such action with attorneys of its choice. The permittee shall reimburse the City for any court and attorney's fees which the City may be required to pay as a result of any claim or action brought against the City because of this permit. Although the Page 32 of 122 Page 33 of 122 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) §§ CITY OF ROL LING HILLS ) I certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 2026-03 entitled: A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF SITE PLAN REVIEW FOR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW MIXED-USE STRUCTURE WITH GARAGE AND STORAGE, NON-EXEMPT GRADING AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS; CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A DETACHED MIXED-USE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE GREATER THAN 200 SQUARE FEET, AND FINDING THE PROJECT EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT FOR LOCATION AT 26 CABALLEROS ROAD. (LOT 11-SK) (ZIEGLER) was approved and adopted at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on February 17, 2026, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Cardenas, Douglass, Chair Chelf NOES: ABSENT: Soo, Kirkpatrick ABSTAIN: and in compliance with the laws of California was posted at the following: Administrative Offices. C 10 Page 34 of 122 Development Table Zoning Case No. 25-111 26 CABALLEROS ROAD Site Plan Review & Conditional Use Permit EXISTING PROPOSED TOTAL RAS-1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, POOL, STABLE & GARAGE MIXED-USE STRUCTURE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, POOL, MIXED-USE STRUCTURE Net Lot Area 55,791 SF 0 SF 55,791 SF Residence 4,125 SF 0 SF 4,125 SF Garage 610 SF 0 SF 610 SF Swimming Pools/Spa 625 SF 0 SF 625 SF Pool Equipment 17 SF 0 SF 17 SF ADU 0 SF 796 SF 796 SF Cabana 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF Stable minimum: 450 SF 450 SF 0 SF 450 SF Corral minimum: 550 SF 550 SF 0 SF 550 SF Recreation Court 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF Attached Covered Porches 152 SF -152 SF 0 SF Attached Trellises 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF Fire Pit 13 SF 0 SF 13 SF Service Yard 90 SF 0 SF 90 SF Other – Mixed Use Building 1,124 SF -320 SF 804 SF Basement Area 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF Primary Driveway 910 SF 0 SF 910 SF Paved walkways/Patio Areas/Courtyards 2,904 SF -364 SF 2,540 SF Pool Decking 663 SF 0 SF 663 SF Other Paved Driveways, Road Easements, Parking Pads 2,549 SF 0 SF 2,549 SF Grading (balanced onsite) 0 CY CUT 0 CY FILL 0 CY TOTAL Structural Lot Coverage (20% Maximum) 6,755 SF (12.1%) -472 SF ( -0.8%) 6,283 (11.3%) Flatwork Lot Coverage (15% Maximum) 7,026 SF (12.6%) -364 SF (-0.7 %) 6,662 SF (11.9%) Total Lot Coverage (Structures and Flatwork) (35% Maximum) 13,781 SF (24.7%) -836 SF ( -1.5%) 12,945 SF (23.2%) Building Pad 1 Coverage 5,590 SF Existing Pad Area 4,838 SF (86.6%) 0 SF (0%) 4,838 SF (86.6%) Building Pad 2 Coverage 1,495 SF Existing Pad Area 642 SF (42.9 %) 0 SF (0 %) 642 SF (42.9%) Building Pad 3 Coverage 5,433 SF Existing Pad Area 1,124 SF (20.7 %) 516 SF (9.5%) 1,640 SF (31.2%) Total Disturbed Area (40% maximum) 33,374 SF (59.8%) 0 SF (0 %) 33,374 SF (59.8%) Building Heights 21 FT Maximum 12 FT 0 FT 12 FT Page 35 of 122 1000 ft. 1000 ft. Page 36 of 122 NEW PROPOSED ADDITION (E) POOL (E) RESIDENCE NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 7 BUCKBOARD LN NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 9 BUCKBOARD LN NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 28 CABALLEROS RD NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 30 CABALLEROS ROAD NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 23 CABALLEROS RD NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 24 CABALLEROS RD136'-1"436'- 0 " 4 0 5 ' - 9 " 1 4 6 ' - 2 "87'-10"248'-1"NEIGHBOR PROPERTY: 20 CABALLEROS RD SUBJECT PROPERTY: 26 CABALLEROS RD (E) M I X E D U S E B L D G . NORTH NEIGHBOR VICINITY MAP SCALE: N.T.S. Page 37 of 122 NORTH 1 2 0 5 12 1 0 1185 1180 1175 1170 1165 1160 1155 1150 1145 1140 11351130111511201125113011351140114511501155116011651170117511801185119011951200120512101215119511901185118011751170116511601155 1150115511701160 1175 1180 118511901195120 0 12 0 5 12 1 0 1215 12201 2 2 5 1 2 3 0 12351235 12 3 0 1 2 2 0 12 1 5 1195 1200 1205 121011951200120512051200 119511901 2 1 0 1 2 1 5 1 2 2 0 12 1 5 12 1 0 12 0 5 12 0 0 3030603026 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, CA 90274SCALE: 1" = 30'INDEX OF SHEETSOVERALL SITE PLANSCALE: 1" = 250'VICINITY MAPLEGENDACRONYMS1235ENGINEERING CORP.For Planning Review 10/9/2025C0CABALLE R O S R O A D GRADINGSITE DATASCOPE OF WORKPage 38 of 122 800 LHJHQGE[LVWLQJ 20 20 40 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' EXISTING CONDITIONS ENGINEERING CORP.For Planning Review 10/9/2025 C1CABALLEROS ROADPage 39 of 122 LHJHQG3URSRVHG 120512101170 1175 1180 1185 1190 119512001205121012151195 1190 1185 1180 1175 1170 1165 1160 1155 1150 1155 117011601175118011851190119512001205121012151220 12251230123 5 123512301220 1215119512001205121011 9 5 12 0 0 12 0 5 1205 1200 1195 1190 12101215 1220 1215121012051200ENGINEERING CORP.For Planning Review 10/9/2025 C2 20 20 40 20 SCALE: 1" = 20' PROPOSED CONDITIONS CABALLEROS ROADPage 40 of 122 UP W/D STORAGE GREAT ROOM KITCHEN UTILITY ROOM BATH OUTDOOR CLOSET BATH REF DW BEDROOM 1 (2) CAR GARAGE WORKSHOP AREA TABULATION BREAK-DOWN (E) FLOOR PLAN AREA STABLE AND GARAGE(PREVIOUSLY APPROVED): 1,124 SQ.FT. CONVERSION TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) 694 SQ.FT. NEW HABITABLE AREA ADDITION TO NEW ADU (UNDER EXISTING ROOF (PORCH): 102 SQ.FT. NEW AREA TOTAL PROPOSED ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) : 796 SQ.FT. EXISTING GARAGE/STORAGE AREA TO REMAIN: 260 SQ.FT. NEW WORKSHOP/BATHROOM ADDITION (UNDER EXISTING ROOF/PORCH): 49 SQ.FT. CONVERSION TO WORKSHOP: 130 SQ.FT. TOTAL PROPOSED WORKSHOP/STORAGE AREA: 179 SQ.FT. NEW GARAGE ADDITION: 365 SQ.FT. TOTAL GARAGE/WORKSHOP/STORAGE AREA: 804 SQ.FT. (E) RETAINING WALL LINE TO REMAIN NEW ADDITION AREA PARTIALLY UNDER EXISTING ROOF HALLWAY WALL LEGEND: EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND:WALL LEGEND: EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND: NEW STUD WALL WALL LEGEND: EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND: NEW STUD WALL 24'-10"15'-9"4'-6"36'-0" 1 A-7.0 2 A-7.0 3 A-7.0 4 A-7.0 PROPOSED PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"NORTH EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVEDEXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED AREA SUMMARY: TOTAL: ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) - PARTIALLY CONVERTED (694 SQ.FT.): 796 SQ.FT. STORAGE AREA CONVERTED FROM PREVIOUS GARAGE: 260 SQ.FT. (EXISTING SQ.FT.) TOTAL PROPOSED WORKSHOP/RESTROOM/STORAGE AREA - PARTIALLY CONVERTED: 179 SQ.FT. (49 SQ.FT. NEW + 130 SQ.FT. EXISTING CONVERTED) NEW GARAGE ADDITION: 365 SQ.FT. (NEW) TOTAL GARAGE/WORKSHOP/STORAGE AREA: 804 SQ.FT.TOTAL MIXED USE (260+179+365= 804 SQ.FT. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) (TO BE EXCLUDED FROM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION) ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGN ENVIROTECHNO JOB NO: DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY: 25.019 LdM 06-13-2025 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10-09-2025Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.LdM 3635 NEWTON STREET SUITE B TORRANCE, CA. 90505 voice: 310.379.9716 e-mail: luis@envirotechno.com website: envirotechno.com D E M OSEDA NO VEMBER 2ST A T EOF CA L I F O R NLIC # C32440ENLUISLICRA E SRC HI T EC0 ,2 02IA,AIAT5AS NOTEDCONVERSION-ADDITIONMR. & MRS. ZIEGLER26 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, 9027426 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, 90274MIXED-USE STRUCTUREA-1.0PROPOSED &DEMOLITON PLANCALCULATIONPage 41 of 122 (E) RETAINING WALL LINE TO REMAIN (EXISTING (3) CAR GARAGE (EXISTING STABLE WALL LEGEND: EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND:WALL LEGEND: EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND:WALL LEGEND: EXISTING WALL TO BE REMOVED EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND: 1 A-7.0 2 A-7.0 3 A-7.0 4 A-7.0 NORTH NORTH PROPOSED DEMOLITION PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) (TO BE EXCLUDED FROM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION) UP W/D STORAGE GREAT ROOM KITCHEN UTILITY ROOM BATH OUTDOOR CLOSET BATH REF DW BEDROOM 1 (2) CAR GARAGE WORKSHOP (E) RETAINING WALL LINE TO REMAIN NEW ADDITION AREA UNDER EXISTING ROOF HALLWAY WALL LEGEND: EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND:WALL LEGEND: EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND: NEW STUD WALL WALL LEGEND: EXISTING STUD WALL TO REMAIN WALL LEGEND: NEW STUD WALL 24'-10"15'-9"4'-6"36'-0" 1 A-7.0 2 A-7.0 3 A-7.0 4 A-7.0 PROPOSED PLAN SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"NORTH NORTH NORTH ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT (ADU) (TO BE EXCLUDED FROM CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION) ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGN ENVIROTECHNO JOB NO: DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY: 25.019 LdM 06-13-2025 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10-09-2025Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.LdM 3635 NEWTON STREET SUITE B TORRANCE, CA. 90505 voice: 310.379.9716 e-mail: luis@envirotechno.com website: envirotechno.com D E M OSEDA NO VEMBER 2ST A T EOF CA L I F O R NLIC # C32440ENLUISLICRA E SRC HI T EC0 ,2 02IA,AIAT5AS NOTEDCONVERSION-ADDITIONMR. & MRS. ZIEGLER26 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, 9027426 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, 90274MIXED-USE STRUCTUREA-2.0DEMOLITION PLANFLOOR PLANPage 42 of 122 SLOPE4 : 12SLOPE4 : 12 SLOPE 4 : 12 SLOPE 4 : 12 SLOPE 4 : 12 SLOPE 4 : 12(E) LINE OF WALL BELOW(E) LINE OF WALL BELOW(N)LINE OF WALL BELOW(E) LINE OF WALL BELOW(E) LINE OF WALL BELOWNEW ROOF AREANEW ROOFEXISTING ROOFGENERAL LEGEND(N)LINE OF WALL BELOW1A-7.02A-7.03A-7.04A-7.0NORTHPROPOSED ROOF PLANSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGNENVIROTECHNOJOB NO:DATE:SCALE:DRAWN BY:SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY:25.019LdM06-13-2025CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10-09-2025 Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.LdM3635 NEWTON STREET SUITE BTORRANCE, CA. 90505voice: 310.379.9716e-mail: luis@envirotechno.comwebsite: envirotechno.comDEMOSEDANOVEMBER2STATEOFCALIFORN LIC # C32440E NLUIS LIC RAESRCHITEC0,20 2 IA ,AIAT5 AS NOTEDCONVERSION-ADDITION MR. & MRS. ZIEGLER 26 CABALLEROS ROAD ROLLING HILLS, 90274 26 CABALLEROS ROAD ROLLING HILLS, 90274 MIXED-USE STRUCTURE A-3.0ROOF PLAN Page 43 of 122 PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION 1185.80 EXISTING GRADE 1186.00 UPPER LEVEL F.F.E. 1185.61 EXISTING GRADE 1183.29 EXISTING GRADE 1183.40 EXISTING GRADE 1198.01 EXISTING RIDGE 12'-1"8'-4"1194.33 EXISTING TOP PLATE 1195.18 EXISTING RIDGE 1192.13 EXISTING TOP PLATE 1183.80 LOWER LEVEL F.F.E.8'-4"12'-3"PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION 1186.00 UPPER LEVEL F.F.E.12'-1"8'-2"1195.18 EXISTING RIDGE 1192.13 EXISTING TOP PLATE 1183.80 LOWER LEVEL F.F.E.8'-4"12'-3"1186.00 UPPER LEVEL F.F.E.12'-1"8'-2"8'-2"1198.01 EXISTING RIDGE 1194.33 EXISTING TOP PLATE 1192.13 EXISTING TOP PLATE 8'-4"1195.18 EXISTING RIDGE 1192.13 EXISTING TOP PLATE 1183.80 LOWER LEVEL F.F.E.8'-4"12'-3"PROPOSED GARAGE ADDITION NORTH ELEVATION (REAR)2 1/4" = 1'-0" ARCHITECTURAL STAMP:PROJECT TITLE:CLIENT NAME:INTERACTIVE ARCHITECTURE + INTERIOR DESIGN ENVIROTECHNO JOB NO: DATE: SCALE: DRAWN BY: SHEET NO:SHEET TITLE:CHECKED BY: 25.019 LdM 06-13-2025 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 10-09-2025Drawings and specifications as instruments of service are and shall remain the property of the design professional. Copies of the drawings and specifications retained by the client may be utilized only for his use and for occupying the project for which they were prepared, and not for the construction of any other projects. Any use or reproduction of these drawings in whole or part by any means whatsoever is strictly prohibited except with specific written consent of EnviroTechno Architecture.LdM 3635 NEWTON STREET SUITE B TORRANCE, CA. 90505 voice: 310.379.9716 e-mail: luis@envirotechno.com website: envirotechno.com D E M OSEDA NO VEMBER 2ST A T EOF CA L I F O R NLIC # C32440ENLUISLICRA E SRC HI T EC0 ,2 02IA,AIAT5AS NOTEDCONVERSION-ADDITIONMR. & MRS. ZIEGLER26 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, 9027426 CABALLEROS ROADROLLING HILLS, 90274MIXED-USE STRUCTUREA-7.0EXTERIORELEVATIONS Page 44 of 122 Item: 12.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Robert Samario, Finance Operations Lead Consultant Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Receive and File Fiscal Year 2026-27 Preliminary Projections and Balancing Background: Over the next several months, staff will be working with the Finance, Budget, and Audit Committee and City Council to develop the fiscal year 2026-27 budget, which is scheduled for adoption in June 2026. One of the first steps in the budget process is to determine, based on preliminary revenue estimates and baseline (status quo) expenditures, whether the General Fund is expected to be either balanced, realize a surplus, or whether cuts and or other measures may be needed to address a projected deficit. While this exercise uses very preliminary estimates, it is nonetheless useful to establish an order of magnitude understanding of the financial picture for the upcoming fiscal year. Discussion: Please refer to Attachment A for a detailed discussion. Attachments B through D include revenue and expenditure schedules containing current fiscal year projections and preliminary projections for fiscal year 2026-27. A brief summary is provided below. Revenues Revenues are projected to increase by approximately $100,000 next fiscal year. Most of the increase is attributable to property taxes, which is based on an assumed 3% growth from the current projected year-end total. Building revenues are also projected at $500,000 versus the current year's adopted budget of $450,000. This is based on revenues received through December 31, 2025, and projections for the entire fiscal year. All other revenues for the next fiscal year are essentially projected at the same level as the current fiscal year. Expenditures At this stage, the goal is to develop a baseline budget before staff proposes any discretionary budget recommendations to determine the initial balancing. As such, fiscal year 2026-27 estimated expenditures are essentially the same as the current year, with the exception of three items. The first relates to personnel costs. There have been a few staff changes that have been reflected in Page 45 of 122 next year's baseline costs, such as the addition of a Code Compliance Officer/Planning Technician position that replaced a part-time clerical position. Prior to the recent change, code enforcement work was performed by private contractors, and thus, the baseline budget for the next fiscal year eliminates the budget of $62,000 in the current year's budget for contracted code enforcement. The second adjustment is for contracted law enforcement services provided by the L.A. County Sheriff. The County has advised the City that the cost of their services will increase by 2.3%, which amounts to an $11,721 increase to the General Fund. Lastly, staff has increased the budget for the cost of contracted planning and building services provided by the County of Los Angeles. This is to better align the budget with projected revenues and to provide some cushion to the budget, given that the contract with the County expires this fiscal year, and the City will need to find a new contractor starting July 1, 2026, which may result in higher costs. Preliminary Balancing Based on the preliminary revenue estimates and the baseline expenditure budget for the next fiscal year, it appears the General Fund budget may provide a small operating surplus of approximately $95,000. Fiscal Impact: None Recommendation: Receive and file a presentation from staff on preliminary General Fund revenue and expenditure projections for fiscal year 2026/27; provide direction regarding the increase to refuse rates starting July 1, 2026, and noticing requirements to City residents pursuant to Proposition 218. Attachments: 1. Attachment A - CL_AGN_260323_CC_FY2026-27_NarrativeAnalysis 2. Attachment B - CL_AGN_260323_CC_BudgetSummary 3. Attachment C - CL_AGN_260309_FBA_GeneralFundRevenues 4. Attachment D - CL_AGN_260323_CC_GeneralFundExpenditures 5. CL_AGN_260323_CC_PPT_Presentation Page 46 of 122 Attachment A CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Fiscal Year 2026-27 Preliminary Projections and Balancing General Fund BACKGROUND Over the next several months, staff will be working with the Finance, Audit, and Budget Committee and City Council to develop the fiscal year 2026-27 budget, which is scheduled for adoption in June 2026. One of the first steps in the budget process is to determine, based on preliminary revenue estimates and baseline (status quo) expenditures, whether the General Fund is expected to be either balanced, realize a surplus, or whether cuts and or other measures may be needed to address a projected deficit. While this exercise uses very preliminary estimates, it is nonetheless useful to establish an order of magnitude understanding of the financial picture for the upcoming fiscal year. REVENUES The table below shows each General Fund revenue account along with the adopt budget estimate, revenues through December 31, 2025, the preliminary fiscal year-end estimate, and the preliminary fiscal year 2026-27 projection. An analysis of the key revenues is provided below. Actuals Adopted Thru YE FY 2026-27 Budget 12/31/25 Projections Projections 401 Property Taxes 1,501,494$ 696,684$ 1,523,159$ 1,568,854$ 405 Sales Taxes 15,000 3,779 10,000 10,000 410 Property Transfer Tax 62,400 30,675 60,000 60,000 420 Motor Vehicle In Lieu 290,265 - 296,358 298,000 440 Building & Other Permits 450,000 334,888 600,000 500,000 441 C&D Permits 10,000 3,300 7,920 8,000 450 Variance, Planning & Zoning 30,000 10,850 26,040 26,000 455 Animal Control Fees 300 115 300 300 460 Franchise Fees 13,000 3,465 10,000 10,000 480 Fines & Traffic Violations 4,000 2,713 5,500 5,000 482 Cost Recovery - Publications 3,000 1,500 3,000 3,000 600 RHCA Lease Revenue 69,000 28,746 69,000 69,000 650 Public Safety Aug Fund 1,800 518 1,100 1,100 670 Interest on Investments 160,000 77,767 150,000 150,000 671 PARS Earnings 44,000 33,879 50,000 45,000 675 Miscellaneous Revenue 1,000 116,327 120,000 1,000 699 Transfers In - Refuse Fund 24,000 12,000 24,000 24,000 TOTALS 2,679,259$ 1,357,206$ 2,956,377$ 2,779,254$ Fiscal Year 2025-26 Page 47 of 122 2 Property Taxes. At mid-year, property tax revenues totaled $696,684. This is $31,522 above the seasonally adjusted budget of $665,162. Note that the adopted budget reflects only a 1.3% growth from fiscal year 2024-25 final revenues. Historically, property taxes have grown between 4-6%; however, with a reduction in property sales as a result of the September 2024 land movements, which likely contributed to the more moderate growth in fiscal year 2024-25 of 3.3% growth, staff is using a 3% growth rate for fiscal year 2025-26 and fiscal year 2026-27 as a preliminary estimated growth rate. However, given the recent activity thus far with Real Property Transfer Taxes as discussed below, sales of property may be normalizing, thus creating some potential for a stronger growth next fiscal year than suggested by the 3% assumed growth rate. Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT). RPTT, also referred as a documentary tax, is assessed when a property is sold. The tax is $1.10 per thousand dollars in sales value. Revenues collected by County are shared 50- 50 with the city where the property is located so that cities effectively receive $0.55 per thousand dollars of sales value. Revenues are driven, first, by the number of properties sold and, second, the sales price. The accompanying table to the right presents a five-year history of RPTT revenues for the City of Rolling Hills starting with fiscal year 2021. After a slight increase in fiscal year 2023- 24 to $63,040 compared to $49,160 in fiscal year 2022-23, revenues fell back to an historic low of $43,833 last fiscal year, which appears to be the result of the land movement of September 2024 in the Palos Verdes Peninsula. As shown in the accompanying table to the left, the City of Rolling Hills received $23,503 in RPTT in the first three months of the fiscal year 2024-25. However, only $19,308 was received after the land movement for the rest of the fiscal year. Fortunately, it appears sales activity has picked up during the first part of the current fiscal year with payments for July – December 2025 totaling $35,242. Staff has projected $60,000 for both the current fiscal year and next fiscal year on a very preliminary basis. Building and Other Permits. Revenues from this category are the General Fund’s second-largest revenue, with current fiscal year budgeted revenues of $450,000. The revenues are generated through two independent contractors providing building and planning services, one with the Los Angeles County Public Works Department (LACPWD) and the other with a private engineering and consulting firm, The Willdan Group. Last fiscal year we saw a dramatic decline in revenues collected by LACPWD on behalf of the City of Rolling Hills, going from $398,898 in fiscal year 2023-24 to $242,422 in fiscal year 2024-25. Including revenues collected by Willdan, total revenues were $354,300 in fiscal year 2024-25 as shown in the accompanying schedule. Fiscal Total Year Revenues 2021 132,888$ Actual 2022 80,719 Actual 2023 49,160 Actual 2024 63,040 Actual 2025 43,833 Actual 2026 62,400 Budget 2026 60,000 Projected 2027 60,000 Projected Real Property Transfer Taxes July 2024 - Sept 2024 23,503$ Oct 2024 - June 2025 19,308 July 2025 - Dec 2025 35,242 Real Property Transfer Taxes Building Revenues FY 2022-23 640,184$ FY 2023-24 537,787 FY 2024-25 354,300 FY 2025-26 Thru Nov 2025 273,846 FY 2025-26 Year-End Proj 600,000 FY 2026-27 Projected 500,000 Page 48 of 122 3 In the current fiscal year 2025-26, revenues collected through November 2025 (5 months) by LACPWD totaled $154,062 and revenues collected by Willdan totaled $119,785, for a total of $273,846. For now, it appears revenues from LACPWD may have normalized somewhat. Assuming the current trends continue, we could end the year with total revenues of roughly $600,000. However, given the uncertainty with building revenues and their general volatility, the preliminary estimate for fiscal year 2026-27 is set at $500,000. STATUS QUO EXPENDITURES The development of fiscal year 2026-27 status quo expenditures starts with the current amended budget. From there, we add known changes, usually cost increases, to the budget for next year. In total, status quo costs are expected to increase nominally by a total of $65,691 as shown in the table below. The major adjustments included in the status quo budget are discussed below. CPI Increase to Contract with L.A. County Sheriff Each year, the Los Angeles County Sheriff increases it contracted costs by a CPI factor. The County has advised the City that there base costs will increase by 2.3% and their liability insurance rate increased from 13% to 14.5%. This represents an overall increase of $16,744 of which $11,721 is attributable to the General Fund and the balance is attributable to the COPs Fund. Increase to Contracted Building Services The budget for the contracted services provided by LA County has remained at $250,000 for the last five years, despite the fact that costs fluctuate generally in tandem with revenues. However, staff adjusted the budgeted costs for fiscal year 2026-27 by $50,000 to $300,000 to more precisely align with projected revenues of $500,000. Changes to Personnel Costs In total, salaries and benefits will increase by a total of $65,734 (from $1,023,673 to $1,089,407). This is a net increase from adjustments that result in both increases and decrease to costs at the line-item level. Specifically, the net increase in costs stems from (1) an estimated 3.5% CPI increase to salaries pursuant to the M.O.U. between the City and employees and (2) changes to staffing. FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 Amended Status Quo Increase Department Budget Budget (Decrease) City Administrator 875,874$ 900,205$ 24,331$ Finance 160,000 160,000 - Planning & Development 894,681 923,224 28,543 Public Safety 339,324 351,045 11,721 Non-Departmental 149,600 149,600 - City Properties 200,540 200,540 - Total Operations 2,620,019$ 2,684,614$ 64,595$ Page 49 of 122 4 1. CPI Increase – Pursuant to the MOU between the City and employees, staff receive a cost-of-living adjustment to their base salary based on the increase in the CPI. This resulted in an increase to the budget by approximately $25,000. 2. Changes to Staffing – In the current fiscal year, the part-time Bookkeeper/Administrative Clerk position was eliminated and replaced by a full-time Code Compliance Officer/Planning Technician. Code enforcement was previously contracted out with a corresponding budget of $62,000. This change resulted in a net decrease in budgeted costs of approximately $10,000. Another change was the creation of a Planning Manager position to underfill the vacant Planning Director position. Although the budgeted salary remains at the Planning Director level in order to achieve salaries savings this year and potentially next fiscal year, there are some savings in the budgeted benefit costs. PRELIMINARY BALANCING The table below provides an overall summary of revenues and expenditures, including the current year adopted budget and year-end projections, and the preliminary estimates for fiscal year 2026-27. FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 FY 25-26 FY 26-27 Salaries 453,862$ 475,798$ 232,520$ 284,472$ 686,382$ 760,270$ Part-Time Salaries - - 26,889 - 26,889 - Temporary Salaries 7,000 7,000 - - 7,000 7,000 Retirement - CalPERS 37,204 38,626 19,234 23,094 56,438 61,720 Group Insurance 92,036 84,603 42,997 58,377 135,033 142,980 Retiree Medical 40,000 42,000 - - 40,000 42,000 Employer Payroll Taxes 35,309 37,326 20,000 21,781 55,309 59,107 Deferred Comp 4,141 8,530 4,681 - 8,822 8,530 Auto Allowance 3,600 3,600 1,200 1,200 4,800 4,800 Phone Allowance 2,400 2,400 600 600 3,000 3,000 675,552$ 699,883$ 348,121$ 389,524$ 1,023,673$ 1,089,407$ City Administration Planning Totals Preliminary FY 2026-27 Amended Actuals at Year-End Preliminary Budget 12/31/2025 Estimates Estimates Operating Revenues 2,679,259$ 1,357,206$ 2,956,377$ 2,779,254$ Operating Expenditures 2,620,019 1,266,640 2,620,019 2,684,614 Operating Surplus (Deficit)59,240 90,565 336,358 94,640 Capital Transfers (1,180,515) - - - Surplus (Deficit) - Total (1,121,275)$ 90,565$ 336,358$ 94,640$ Page 50 of 122 5 Based on very preliminary revenue estimates and baseline expenditures, it appears the General Fund will not be facing a deficit next fiscal year and reflects a budget surplus of approximately $95,000. This is consistent with the message over the last few years that the General Fund is structurally balanced, meaning ongoing revenues are adequate to cover ongoing costs. The only downside is that the City does not generate enough revenues to also fund needed capital improvement projects, requiring the use of reserves to fund them as needed. NEXT STEPS Over the next few months, City staff will carefully go through all of the line-item expenditure accounts to more precisely determine what the expected costs for next fiscal year may be and develop recommended adjustments to the budget based on that analysis. In addition, staff will continue to monitor revenues and then finalize the revenue estimates for next fiscal year by May. Page 51 of 122 ATTACHMENT B Preliminary FY 2026-27 Amended Actuals at Year-End Preliminary Budget 12/31/2025 Estimates Estimates Operating Revenues 2,679,259$ 1,357,206$ 2,956,377$ 2,779,254$ Operating Expenditures 2,620,019 1,266,640 2,620,019 2,684,614 Operating Surplus (Deficit)59,240 90,565 336,358 94,640 Capital Transfers (1,180,515) - - - Surplus (Deficit) - Total (1,121,275)$ 90,565$ 336,358$ 94,640$ CITY OF ROLLINGS HILLS Fiscal Year 2026-27 Preliminary Balancing General Fund Page 52 of 122 ATTACHMENT C Actuals Adopted Thru YE FY 2026-27 Budget 12/31/25 Projections Projections 401 Property Taxes 1,501,494$ 696,684$ 1,523,159$ 1,568,854$ 405 Sales Taxes 15,000 3,779 10,000 10,000 410 Property Transfer Tax 62,400 30,675 60,000 60,000 420 Motor Vehicle In Lieu 290,265 - 296,358 298,000 440 Building & Other Permits 450,000 334,888 600,000 500,000 441 C&D Permits 10,000 3,300 7,920 8,000 450 Variance, Planning & Zoning 30,000 10,850 26,040 26,000 455 Animal Control Fees 300 115 300 300 460 Franchise Fees 13,000 3,465 10,000 10,000 480 Fines & Traffic Violations 4,000 2,713 5,500 5,000 482 Cost Recovery - Publications 3,000 1,500 3,000 3,000 600 RHCA Lease Revenue 69,000 28,746 69,000 69,000 650 Public Safety Aug Fund 1,800 518 1,100 1,100 670 Interest on Investments 160,000 77,767 150,000 150,000 671 PARS Earnings 44,000 33,879 50,000 45,000 675 Miscellaneous Revenue 1,000 116,327 120,000 1,000 699 Transfers In - Refuse Fund 24,000 12,000 24,000 24,000 TOTALS 2,679,259$ 1,357,206$ 2,956,377$ 2,779,254$ Fiscal Year 2025-26 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS Fiscal Year 2026-27 Preliminary Projections GENERAL FUND REVENUES Page 53 of 122 ATTACHMENT D FY 2026-27 Adopted Amended Actuals at Status Budget Budget 12/31/25 Quo 01 - CITY ADMINISTRATOR 702 Salaries -Full Time 453,862$ 453,862$ 220,486$ 475,798$ 705 Temporary Salaries 7,000 7,000 - 7,000 710 Retirement CalPERS-Employer 37,204 37,204 15,612 38,626 712 CalPERS Unfunded Liability - - 54,086 - 715 Workers Compensation Insurance 9,100 9,100 8,296 9,100 716 Group Insurance 92,036 92,036 50,787 84,603 717 Retiree Medical 40,000 40,000 21,643 42,000 718 Employer Payroll Taxes 35,309 35,309 16,025 37,326 719 Deferred Compensation 4,141 4,141 2,124 8,530 720 Auto Allowance 3,600 3,600 1,800 3,600 721 Phone Allowance 2,400 2,400 1,200 2,400 740 Office Supplies 8,000 8,000 2,318 8,000 745 Equipment Leasing Costs 10,000 10,000 3,032 10,000 750 Dues & Subscriptions 14,822 14,822 13,695 14,822 755 Conference Expense 1,500 1,500 1,143 1,500 757 Meetings Expense 2,100 2,100 312 2,100 759 Training & Education 4,000 4,000 - 4,000 761 Auto Mileage 700 700 515 700 765 Postage 18,500 18,500 5,562 18,500 775 City Council Expense 7,500 7,500 1,524 7,500 776 Miscellaneous Expenses 1,500 1,500 269 1,500 780 Comm./Newsletters & Outreach 3,500 3,500 - 3,500 785 Codification 3,000 3,000 1,817 3,000 790 Advertising 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 795 Other Gen Admin Expense 3,300 3,300 1,422 3,300 801 City Attorney 90,000 90,000 27,840 90,000 802 Legal Expense - Other 3,000 3,000 - 3,000 804 Legal Expense -CPUC - - 35,074 - 820 Website 3,900 3,900 - 3,900 890 Consulting Fees 10,000 10,000 289 10,000 891 Records Management 3,900 3,900 3,622 3,900 Total City Administrator 875,874 875,874 490,493 900,205 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS FY 2026-27 Status Quo Budget GENERAL FUND Department/Object Account FY 2025-26 1 Page: 1 Page 54 of 122 ATTACHMENT D FY 2026-27 Adopted Amended Actuals at Status Budget Budget 12/31/25 QuoDepartment/Object Account FY 2025-26 05 - Finance 750 Dues & Subscriptions 4,500 4,500 1,888 4,500 810 Annual Audit 35,000 35,000 - 35,000 890 Consulting Fees 120,500 120,500 43,106 120,500 Total Finance 160,000 160,000 44,994 160,000 15- PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 702 Salaries 232,520 232,520 41,099 284,472 703 Salaries - Part-Time 26,889 26,889 - - 705 Temporary Salaries - - 101,214 - 710 Retirement CalPERS-Employer 19,234 19,234 3,156 23,094 715 Workers Comp. Insurance 3,900 3,900 3,556 3,900 716 Group Insurance 42,977 42,977 17,280 58,377 718 Employer Payroll Taxes 20,000 20,000 3,076 21,781 719 Deferred Comp 4,681 4,681 - - 720 Auto Allowance 1,200 1,200 - 1,200 721 Phone Allowance 600 600 - 600 750 Dues & Subscription 15,000 15,000 9,930 15,000 755 Conference Expense 3,000 3,000 - 3,000 759 Training & Education 1,000 1,000 - 1,000 761 Auto Mileage 300 300 30 300 776 Miscellaneous Expenses 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 790 Publication/Advertising/Noticing 10,000 10,000 6,795 10,000 802 Legal Expenses-Other 10,000 10,000 7,958 10,000 872 Property Development-Legal Exp 37,000 37,000 21,869 37,000 875 Willdan Building 45,000 45,000 30,700 45,000 878 Build Inspect. LA County 250,000 250,000 107,280 300,000 881 Storm Water Management 88,000 88,000 60,756 88,000 884 Special Project Study & Consult.5,000 5,000 - 5,000 886 Code Enforcement 62,880 62,880 11,970 - 890 Consulting Fees (Onward)7,500 7,500 - 7,500 928 Traffic Engineering 6,000 6,000 2,450 6,000 Total Planning & Development 894,681 894,681 429,118 923,224 2 Page: 2 Page 55 of 122 ATTACHMENT D FY 2026-27 Adopted Amended Actuals at Status Budget Budget 12/31/25 QuoDepartment/Object Account FY 2025-26 25 - Public Safety 830 Law Enforcement 320,424 320,424 133,510 332,145 831 Traffic Enforcement - - 682 - 833 Other Law Enforcement Exp 2,400 2,400 709 2,400 837 Wild Life Mgmt & Pest Control 10,000 10,000 342 10,000 838 Animal Control Expense 6,500 6,500 2,779 6,500 Total Public Safety 339,324 339,324 138,021 351,045 65 - NON-DEPARTMENTAL 895 Insurance & Bond Expense 55,000 55,000 45,287 55,000 901 South Bay Comm. Organization 17,600 17,600 - 17,600 915 Community Recognition 8,000 8,000 3,463 8,000 917 Emergency Preparedness 69,000 69,000 13,569 69,000 Total Non-Departmental 149,600 149,600 62,320 149,600 75 - CITY PROPERTIES 892 IT Services 72,000 72,000 39,565 72,000 893 Granicus Services 6,600 6,600 6,570 6,600 894 Computer Hardware Fund 5,000 5,000 4,183 5,000 925 Utilities 65,000 65,000 34,307 65,000 930 Repairs & Maintenance 21,200 21,200 9,497 21,200 932 Area Landscaping 13,740 13,740 7,572 13,740 946 Buildings & Equipment 15,000 15,000 - 15,000 947 Non-Building Improvements 2,000 2,000 - 2,000 Total City Properties 200,540 200,540 101,694 200,540 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENDITURES 2,620,019$ 2,620,019$ 1,266,640$ 2,684,614$ 3 Page: 3 Page 56 of 122 CITY OF ROLLING HILLS PRELIMINARY PROJECTIONS AND BALANCING FISCAL YEAR 2026 -27 Page 57 of 122 Purpose of Report ▪To provide preliminary revenue projections for FY 2026/27 ▪Projections based on revenues through 12/31/25 and projections for FY 2025/26 ▪Revenues will continue to be monitored through the next few months and will be refined further ▪To provide a preliminary glimpse of the balancing of revenues and expenditures ▪Do we have a projected deficit or surplus? Page 58 of 122 GENERAL FUND REVENUES Page 59 of 122 FY 2025-26 Revenues Adopted Actuals YE FY 2026-27 Budget 12/31/25 Projections Projections Property Taxes 1,501,494$ 696,684$ 1,523,159$ 1,568,854$ Sales Taxes 15,000 3,779 10,000 10,000 Property Transfer Tax 62,400 30,675 60,000 60,000 Motor Vehicle In Lieu 290,265 - 296,358 298,000 Building & Other Permits 450,000 334,888 600,000 500,000 C&D Permits 10,000 3,300 7,920 8,000 Variance, Planning & Zoning 30,000 10,850 26,040 26,000 Animal Control Fees 300 115 300 300 Franchise Fees 13,000 3,465 10,000 10,000 Fines & Traffic Violations 4,000 2,713 5,500 5,000 Cost Recovery - Publications 3,000 1,500 3,000 3,000 RHCA Lease Revenue 69,000 28,746 69,000 69,000 Public Safety Aug Fund 1,800 518 1,100 1,100 Interest on Investments 160,000 77,767 150,000 150,000 PARS Earnings 44,000 33,879 50,000 45,000 Miscellaneous Revenue 1,000 116,327 120,000 1,000 Transfers In - Refuse Fund 24,000 12,000 24,000 24,000 TOTALS 2,679,259$ 1,357,206$ 2,956,377$ 2,779,254$ Page 60 of 122 Property Taxes ▪3 components to P/T growth ▪Annual CPI (2% max) ▪Supplemental assessments ▪Re -assessments from P/Y sales to MV ▪Growth from re-assessments generally the largest component ▪3% projected for current and next fiscal year ▪Will re-evaluate in April given revenues in RPTT through 12/31/2025 Fiscal Year Revenues Growth 2021 1,222,948$ 1.8% 2022 1,323,001 8.2% 2023 1,380,891 4.4% 2024 1,432,117 5.0% 2025 1,478,795 3.3% 2026 1,501,494 1.5%Budget 2026 1,523,159 3.0%YE Projections 2027 1,568,854 3.0%Projected Page 61 of 122 Real Property Transfer Tax Presumed Impact of Land Movement ▪Land movement occurred in September 2024 ▪RPTT revenues through September 2024 totaled $23,503 ▪Subsequent 9 months RPTT revenues totaled $19,308 ▪Revenues in 1st half of FY 2025-26 totaled $35,242 July 2024 - Sept 2024 23,503$ Oct 2024 - June 2025 19,308 July 2025 - Dec 2025 35,242 Real Property Transfer Taxes Page 62 of 122 Real Property Transfer Tax Fiscal Total Year Revenues 2021 132,888$ Actual 2022 80,719 Actual 2023 49,160 Actual 2024 63,040 Actual 2025 43,833 Actual 2026 62,400 Budget 2026 60,000 Projected 2027 60,000 Projected Real Property Transfer Taxes Page 63 of 122 Building & Other Permit Revenue Page 64 of 122 GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES Page 65 of 122 General Fund Expenditures by Department FY 2025-26 FY 2026-27 Amended Status Quo Increase Department Budget Budget (Decrease) City Administrator 875,874$ 900,205$ 24,331$ Finance 160,000 160,000 - Planning & Development 894,681 923,224 28,543 Public Safety 339,324 351,045 11,721 Non-Departmental 149,600 149,600 - City Properties 200,540 200,540 - Total Operations 2,620,019$ 2,684,614$ 64,595$ Page 66 of 122 Summary of Status Quo Adjustments ▪Personnel Costs ▪3.5% COLA per MOU (Estimate) -~$25,000 ▪Addition of full-time Code Compliance Officer/Planning Tech and elimination of part-time Bookkeeper/Admin Clerk –net savings of ~$10,000 (including elimination of $62,000 budget for contracted CE ▪2.3%CPI increase to Sheriff contract -~$13,000 ▪$50,000 increase to contracted building services Page 67 of 122 PRELIMINARY BALANCING Preliminary FY 2026-27 Amended Actuals at Year-End Preliminary Budget 12/31/2025 Estimates Estimates Operating Revenues 2,679,259$ 1,357,206$ 2,956,377$ 2,779,254$ Operating Expenditures 2,620,019 1,266,640 2,620,019 2,684,614 Operating Surplus (Deficit)59,240 90,565 336,358 94,640 Capital Transfers (1,180,515) - - - Surplus (Deficit) - Total (1,121,275)$ 90,565$ 336,358$ 94,640$ Page 68 of 122 Next Steps ▪March/April 2026 ▪City staff develop proposed FY 26-27 expenditure budget ▪Public notice sent to all property owners for refuse rate increases ▪April 27, 2026 -FBA Committee receives FY 26-27 staff- proposed GF line-item expenditures ▪May 11, 2026 –Council budget workshop Page 69 of 122 QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION Page 70 of 122 Item: 13.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Christian Horvath, Assistant to the City Manager / City Clerk Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Consideration of the Fiscal Year 26/27 South Bay Cities Council of Governments annual membership dues Background: The South Bay Cities Council of Governments (SBCCOG) is a joint powers authority government agency comprised of 16 cities and Los Angeles County that share the goal of maximizing the quality of life and productivity of the Los Angeles South Bay subregion. South Bay cities and the county maintain the qualities and characteristics that make them unique and independent, while coming together collectively to address issues of common interest for a greater good. Members are motivated by the collective vision of what the SBCCOG can do for individual communities by working together to foster cooperation, collaboration and innovation. The SBCCOG members are Carson, El Segundo, Gardena, Hawthorne, Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale, Lomita, Manhattan Beach, Palos Verdes Estates, Rancho Palos Verdes, Redondo Beach, Rolling Hills, Rolling Hills Estates, Torrance, and the Harbor City/San Pedro/Wilmington communities of the City of Los Angeles, along with the unincorporated areas of the County of Los Angeles District 2 and 4. Overseen by a board of directors made up of member delegates, the SBCCOG conducts business through committees and working groups made up of city and county elected officials, city and county staff, government partners and community members. These groups focus on areas of regional concern, including but not limited to: • Conservation of energy and water, along with waste reduction and shared mobility, through the South Bay Environmental Services Center (SBESC) • Senior and homeless services through Social Welfare, Equity and Access initiatives • Transportation, particularly administration of Measure R and Measure M funding • Land use and climate action planning through Sustainable South Bay initiatives • Broadband access with the South Bay Fiber Network (SBFN) • Geographic information systems (GIS) mapping through Technology initiatives and Advocacy on legislative positions that address these issues. Page 71 of 122 The SBCCOG mission is to provide a leadership forum for South Bay local governments to act collaboratively and advocate for regional issues with a focus on improving transportation, the environment, and strengthening economic development. As part of their stated Guiding Principles, the SBCCOG shall: • Promote cooperation among member agencies in the discussion of issues of mutual interest. • Act collaboratively on programs or activities that can be better accomplished collectively than by any one jurisdiction. • Acknowledge each jurisdiction’s independence while advocating for the South Bay with one voice. • Support member proposals that further the mission, vision and goals of SBCCOG. • Identify challenges and opportunities that transcend jurisdictional boundaries. • Seek solutions to issues of common concern without duplicating or harming other agencies’ efforts. • Represent the interests of the South Bay with other governing bodies and organizations. • Seek resources from county, regional, state, and federal agencies that will benefit the South Bay. On March 11, 2024, the City Council received a report regarding the SBCCOG's proposed restructuring of their membership dues calculation formula. At that time, the proposed City of Rolling Hills' FY24/25 membership dues were $8,091. On a motion by Councilmember Dieringer and seconded by Mayor Mirsch, the City Council voted to remain as members under the new proposed dues structure, with Councilmembers Black and Pieper dissenting. In April 2024, the SBCCOG Board approved a policy stating that each year’s dues from 2024 forward would include an annual CPI increase based on the previous calendar year, with a cap (maximum increase limit) of 5%. At the August 25, 2025 City Council meeting, Councilmember Black requested an item be agendized in the new year regarding the SBCCOG membership dues. On February 23, 2026, the City Council received and filed a report on the SBCCOG and directed staff to prepare an analysis on the value the City receives from participation in SBCCOG as related to the annual membership fee, communicate what joint programs are required for the City to utilize, and what the repercussions would be should the City withdraw. In the event the City Council would like to re-consider its membership, the section of the SBCCOG's JPA agreement that addresses withdrawal is below. Section 21. Members. a. Withdrawal. A member may withdraw from the Council by filing its written notice of withdrawal with the Chair of the Governing Board 60 days before the actual withdrawal. Such a withdrawal shall be effective at 12:00 o’clock a.m. on the last day of that 60-day period. The withdrawal of a Member shall not in any way discharge, impair or modify the voluntarily-assumed obligations of the withdrawn Member in existence as of the effective date of its withdrawal. Withdrawal of a Member shall not affect the remaining Members. A withdrawn Member shall not be entitled to the return of any funds or other assets belonging to the Council, until the effective date of termination of this Fourth Amended and Restated Agreement, except that a withdrawn Member shall be entitled to the balance of the Page 72 of 122 annual dues paid for the year by that Member which were intended for the remaining part of that year. Withdrawal from any Implementation Agreement shall not be deemed withdrawal from the Council. Discussion: Value the City receives from SBCCOG participation as related to the annual membership fee: Staff has updated a brief analysis (Attachment A) depicting topics and areas where the City currently utilizes the SBCCOG. The analysis also communicates whether an item is mandated legislatively or is related to areas of concern that the City must comply with for other purposes, and whether it has a direct or indirect benefit. Some examples include: • The Planning Department has received direct support in recent years for housing legislation / new requirements, including an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) study, Climate Action Planning (CAP), and assistance with local planning assessments. • Senate Bill 1383 (SB1383) compliance efforts — CalRecycle, the state agency responsible for implementing and enforcing SB1383, provided initial Local Assistance Grant funding to support program startup. The City received $75,000, which has been administered by SBCCOG to deliver direct compliance support. These efforts have included: o Two community composting workshops o An educational video series o Website content o Distribution of free compost bins and kitchen pails to residents o Grant management, administration and reporting • Additional access to local Transportation Funding — while the City does not have public roads, it does: o Receive local return funding via Metro that allows the City to help supplement the general fund via selling of funds (Prop A), donate to neighboring cities for projects that can positively impact Rolling Hills / Peninsula residents (Prop C), and potentially allow for City campus related mobility upgrades (Measure R/M/TDA-3) o Aside from the above, the SBCCOG, in 2025, implemented a new Local Allocation Program that would allocate 10% of additional Measure M funds to member cities, without any local project competition, towards eligible projects. Starting in 2029/30, this amount for Rolling Hills each year will be approximately $67,733 and would help supplement current Measure R & M monies the city is saving in a Metro capital fund to help execute potential campus projects (assuming eligibility). • Staff participates quarterly in Energy Efficiency meetings and has utilized services and information to stay abreast of opportunities that may continue helping lower current monthly energy costs. • Staff participates in monthly City Manager meetings, bi-monthly City Clerk meetings, as well as Community Development meetings and other topics / areas as needed. There are no joint programs that the City is required to utilize. But as stated above, many of the programs serve some benefit or another for participation or awareness, and additional staff support from the SBCCOG. Potential impacts of withdrawing membership would include: • Lack of access to information, updates, and educational meetings/forums that aid staff in ensuring the City of Rolling Hills remains in compliance with state law, finding best practices Page 73 of 122 for administrating city business, or finding cost-saving opportunities via initiatives and programs where cross-jurisdictional collaboration via the SBCCOG can offset City general fund obligations • Loss of access to the Local Allocation Program funding of $67K per year starting in FY 29/30 as this is managed directly via the SBCCOG for member cities • Loss of access to SBCCOG staff and consultants in specific situations would require the City to allocate funding when and if necessary. • A gap in staff capacity, as the City relies on the SBCCOG to supplement limited internal resources From a staff perspective, the SBCCOG provides localized programs, forums, and meetings that are generally included as part of membership. By comparison, participation in events and conferences offered by the League of California Cities, Southern California Association of Governments, and California Contract Cities Association may involve additional registration or attendance fees. Staff recommends continuing membership with the SBCCOG and requests the City Council provide direction and guidance. Fiscal Impact: The City of Rolling Hills FY26-27 SBCCOG membership dues will be $8,625. This reflects an adjustment of 3.2% based on the average CPI for 2025 per the SBCCOG Board’s approved policy. Recommendation: Receive and file. Provide direction to staff. Attachments: 1. Attachment A - GV_GVO_260323_COG_Services_Estimates Page 74 of 122 City of Rolling Hills Cost Estimates for Work Performed by SBCCOG South Bay City Council of Governments - Sevices provided to RH SBCCOG Funds In-House Consultant (Estimate) Opt Out Legislative Mandate Benefit Comments SBCCOG maintains the facitlity equipment inventory for City Hall / RHCA and identified ongoing cost- saving opportunities.Direct SBCCOG worked on behalf of the City with the Southern California Regional Energy Network (SoCalREN) to try to get the 2023 HVAC unit installation incentivized post project completion - but was unsuccessful. Direct SBCCOG conducted study on cool roof technologies which included criteria assessment of city campus buildings.PT Employee $5,292.20* $120,056 -Indirect While RH does not meet the current requirements to participate, studies like this are helpful to learn about ways to potentially save costs when undertaking future roof repairs or replacements and help meet energy efficiency goals which ultimately lower energy costs. Dependent on city size Direct No Direct SBCCOG submitted a Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC) Grant on behalf of Rolling Hills and other South Bay cities to develop a South Bay biodiversity plan.PT Employee $5,292.20* $30,000.00 No Direct SBCCOG monitors Housing issues, transportation, etc.Monitoring is not mandated, but compliance with housing laws is Direct SBCCOG monitors legislation and reports on recommendations and lobbies for member cities in coordination with CalCities as well as other agencies to protect local control.Some legislation is mandated Direct Metro Deputy to support Board Member.$103,954.00 - - -No, but required to support South Bay Metro Board member Indirect South Bay Fiber Network (SBFN) creation, implementation and ongoing support.SBCCOG employee - $5,000 - No Direct Rolling Hills is part of the SBFN, which vastly improves the City's ability to host a virtual server and conduct daily operations. SBCCOG monitors the service levels to ensure ongoing month-to-month savings and it provides redundancy to critical city infrastructure. Met with staff to discuss thecurrent status and goals for future fiber / offerings in the city. Monitors subregional issues to help ensure the sustainability - housing (RHNA), transportation, homelessness, energy efficiency, water conservation, waste reduction, etc.SBCCOG employee --No Direct SBCCOG proactively anticipates needs in future years to help secure resources, including funding and education, that ensure member cities meet future needs.SBCCOG employee --No Direct SBCCOG works with staff and other agencies in supporting educational events like the recent collaboration with West Basin Municipal Water District on Transforming Lawns Event which supports both the ongoing city goals of removing fire prone vegation / home hardening and reducing water use. SBCCOG employee / volunteers --No DIrect In 2025, SBCCOG implemented a Local Allocation Program (LAP) to allocate 10% of Measure M funds to cities by a formula comprised of a city's dues to the SBCCOG and their proportion of public centerline road miles. This funding is dedicated to each city and does not need to be competed for. Projects must still be Measure M eligible. Funding is allocated each year. Approx. $67,733 annually starting in 2029/30 available directly to the City (non-competitive) -No Direct Although Rolling Hills has no public centerline roadmiles, it still receives LAP funds due to their proportion of SBCCOG dues. The city can choose to collaborate with other Peninsula cities to implement projects using their LAP funds or utilize for projects realted to the City Hall campus with an allowable nexus. The City could choose to request acceleration of monies prior to 2029, but would require available South Bay funds at that time. $30,000.00 General support SBCCOG wrote the application for SB1383 CalRecycle Funding. California's overarching greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals (e.g., SB 32, carbon neutrality by 2045) are not direct, legally binding mandates for cities to adopt specific Climate Action Plans (CAPs), but they act as state- level requirements that necessitate local compliance through land-use planning, building codes, and transportation policies. Staff utilizes resources and information shared for potential operational cost savings or service improvements. Legislative Lobbying Services Grant Application/Writing Information Technology $30,000.00 In 2021 RH, RPV,RHE and PVE considered a joint professional service agreement with a consulting firm to monitor legislation as it pertains to Peninsula cities. Ultimately, RPV was the only agency that decided to proceed with this action. While CalCities provides similar services at a statewide level, the SBCCOG focuses on direct impacts to the South Bay and hosts quarterly meetings with all legislators to discuss and share PT employee $8,228** Facility Equipment Inventory/Energy Efficiency - $5,292.20* PT Employee & technical support from outside consulting firm at a cost of $25,000 - While identifying incentives is not mandated, the state continues to mandate equipment refrigerants and energy consumption. The SBCCOG's partnership with the SoCalREN (energy efficiency) goes out 8 years where a lot can change within that time period. This partnership helps ensure that cities have access to technical resources and incentives now and in the future. - Transportation - In addition to completing the applications, the SBCCOG seeks opportunities to bring funding to South Bay subregion and member cities PT Employee $5,292.20* Page 75 of 122 City of Rolling Hills Cost Estimates for Work Performed by SBCCOG South Bay City Council of Governments - Sevices provided to RH SBCCOG Funds In-House Consultant (Estimate) Opt Out Legislative Mandate Benefit Comments Climate Action Plan (CAP) including assessing city progress to 2020 goals 75K-100k - $75,000.00 - While creating a CAP is voluntary, it is heavily encouraged and, for many, practically necessary to meet state-mandated environmental impact (CEQA) requirements and to align with regional targets. agencies request demonstration of sustainability actions as requirements in city planning documents, funding, etc. Direct The City's current CAP was created by the SBCCOG. Future iterations will also rely heavily on data and SBCCOG staff time to update and be then used in future RH Planning documents. Planning Assessment $110,000 - - No Direct Helps save RH staff time in preparation Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) study to assess the current use and affordability of ADUs in Rolling Hills $382,660.00 - California state mandates for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) require cities to streamline approvals, approving permits within 60 days. Key laws mandate minimum size allowances (up to 850-1000+ sq ft), limit setbacks to 4 feet, permit detached heights of at least 16 feet, and allow separate condo sales, largely overriding restrictive local zoning. Direct Local ordinances must comply with state standards; the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) actively reviews local rules to ensure compliance. The SBCCOG helps RH and other South Bay Cities Planning Department in a currently ever-changing world of housing law changes. Housing education forums - conducted by bench of experts $101,250.00 - - - No Direct Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification for city staff $30,000.00 DIrect Committees and Working Groups - Best practices (City Managers, City Clerks, Community Development, Climate Action & Adaptation Planning, Energy Managers, Parks & Rec., )PT employee ---No Direct Rolling Hills staff attend regularly Legend: SBCCOG Funds: 88% grants, 7% dues, 4% Other GF Revenues, 1% Special Assessment In-House: Rolling Hill staff performing work Consultant: Estimated cost for consultant to perform work (hired by city) Opt Out: Cost if City does not perform the work Legislative Mandate: Various legislation City is required to complete Direct/Indirect: Work that directly/indirectly impacts RH * City Clerk hourly rate (fully burdened) $66.19 at 80 hours a month **Planning Director hourly rate $103.53 (fully burdened) at 80 hours a month Examples of the COG facilitating learning/training and growth opportunities for City Staff. $75,000- $100,000 Training / Education for Staff Planning Page 76 of 122 Item: 13.B. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Karina Bañales, City Manager Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Discussion and Direction on Structure Height Standards for Williamsburg Lane Background: At the March 9 City Council meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Black requested that staff agendize a discussion regarding structure height limits, specifically as they relate to Williamsburg Lane in the City. On June 23, 2025 (First reading), the City Council approved amendments to the City’s development standards establishing a maximum building height of 21 feet for residential structures and 23 feet for barns (Attachment A). These standards were intended to promote consistency, preserve the City’s rural character, and maintain compatibility among properties. The adopted standards were subsequently codified through the Municipal Code in August 2025. Discussion: In response to City Council direction, staff has prepared this item to facilitate a policy discussion on whether the current, citywide height standards remain appropriate for Williamsburg Lane or if modifications should be considered. The Rolling Hills Community Association (RHCA) has submitted two documents for consideration: building regulations specific to Williamsburg Lane (Attachment B) and a 2025 design study of existing residences (Attachment C). The RHCA Building Regulations outline architectural and development standards intended to maintain a consistent Colonial-style aesthetic, including requirements related to symmetry, roof pitch, materials, and overall design compatibility. The regulations also include provisions related to building massing, such as limitations on plate heights, restrictions on creating a two-story appearance, and other design elements intended to preserve the neighborhood’s character. The RHCA Williamsburg Design Study (2025) provides an analysis of existing homes along Williamsburg Lane, including data on residence size, roof pitch, ridge heights, and plate height distribution. The study illustrates that while many homes generally align with established guidelines, there is variation in building heights and massing, including some instances where structures exceed typical expectations. This information provides context for understanding how existing development compares to both RHCA guidelines and the City’s recently adopted height limits. Page 77 of 122 In considering this matter, the City Council may wish to evaluate several factors, including neighborhood compatibility, preservation of views, maintenance of the City’s rural character, and the benefits of maintaining consistent development standards across all neighborhoods. Additionally, the Council may consider the administrative and policy implications of introducing area-specific regulations. At this time, staff is seeking direction from the City Council on how to proceed. Options for consideration include maintaining the existing height limits as currently codified, directing staff to explore amendments specific to the Williamsburg Lane area, or requesting additional analysis prior to making a determination. Should the City Council consider amending the language, staff will return the proposed ordinance language to the Planning Commission for review and approval first, then bring it back to the City Council for approval. This is in accordance with the Rolling Hills Municipal Code 17.50.020 Initiation and application and 17.50.030 Proceedings - Planning Commission. Any amendments will require public notice and must be considered through both a first and second reading before adoption. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Receive and file. Provide direction to staff. Attachments: 1. Attachment A - CL_AGN_250623_CC_Item11A 2. Attachment B - RHCA Building Regulations - Williamsburg Lane 3. Attachment C - RHCA Williamsburg Design Study Page 78 of 122 Agenda Item No.: 11.A Mtg. Date: 05/28/2025 TO:HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER THRU:KARINA BAÑALES, CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 386 AMENDING CHAPTER 17.16 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE REGARDING THE HEIGHT LIMITS OF SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL HOMES, STABLES AND BARNS; AND FINDING THE ACTION TO BE STATUTORILY EXEMPT FROM CEQA UNDER SECTION 21080.17 OF THE PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE DATE:May 28, 2025 BACKGROUND: Over the past several months, the Planning Commission has been reviewing the City’s regulations related to building height limitations for residential structures, barns, and stables. The intent of this review was to clarify standards and ensure consistency with the City’s rural character and development goals. On October 15, 2024, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a report on the City's regulations related to building height limitations. At that time, the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) did not specify numeric height limits for these structures. However, the RHMC did state that “a building or structure shall have no more than one story, meaning that there shall be no story on top of another” (Attachment 3). The staff report from this meeting is included as Attachment 9. At its March 18, 2025 meeting, the Planning Commission reviewed staff’s report on existing development patterns and relevant RHMC provisions. Following discussion, the Commission directed staff to prepare a code amendment establishing maximum ridge heights of 18 feet for single-family residences and 20 feet for barns and stables. The staff report from this meeting is included as Attachment 10. On April 15, 2025, the Planning Commission reviewed and approved the draft ordinance (Attachment 1) and voted 4-0 (with Commissioner Kirkpatrick absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2025-04 (Attachment 2), recommending that the City Council adopt an ordinance amending Chapter 17.16 of Title 17 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code to codify these height limits. The staff report from this meeting is included as Attachment 11. 26172 Page 79 of 122 This evening, staff is requesting City Council consideration of Ordinance No. 386 (Attachment 1), which proposes clear regulations regarding maximum allowable structure heights. This ordinance is intended to preserve the scenic beauty, natural landscape, and residential character of the community. As the City continues to grow, the proposed height limits would help ensure that new development remains consistent with the community’s established aesthetic values and overall harmony. DISCUSSION: In recent years, there has been a trend toward increased structure heights and overall massing. At both the October 15, 2024 and March 18, 2025 Planning Commission meetings, staff presented relevant sections of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code (RHMC) addressing height regulations. This allowed the Commissioners to consider these provisions and develop a recommendation for City Council review. To further support the Commission’s efforts, staff conducted research on building heights within the City. The data, compiled from approved plans between 2017 and 2024, includes both residences and stables. Heights ranged from 11 to 25 feet, with some newer structures exceeding 25 feet (Attachment 4). Notably, in 2023 and 2024, there has been a trend toward taller stables, many of which fall within the 20 to 25-foot range. The following sections from the RHMC were reviewed and considered as part of this effort: Basements - RHMC Chapter 17.12 – Definitions Basements are located below ground and are often not visible. Homes may include multiple basement levels. Basement walls—except those within light wells—may not exceed 5 feet in height and must maintain an average height of no more than 2.5 feet at any point immediately adjacent to the exterior of the basement (Attachment 5). Stables & Lofts Stables are considered a valuable asset to each property and contribute significantly to the City’s rural, equestrian character. Based on staff research, the RHMC does not establish a specific height limit for stables. Over the past five years, stables have been trending taller. While the average height of buildings in Rolling Hills is approximately 17 feet, the tallest stable recorded was 25 feet. Many stables also include lofts, as defined in RHMC Section 17.18.060. These lofts, which may resemble second stories, must have a plate height that does not exceed 7 feet. They are intended for hay and equipment storage or use as a tack room and may not contain sleeping quarters (Attachment 6). Aviaries (Bird Homes) Aviaries larger than 200 square feet may not have a roof peak height that exceeds 16 feet (Attachment 7). Storage Areas RHMC Section 17.12.190 defines a storage area as "a space within a building or structure, including attics, used for storing items." Storage areas may be located above or below a story but are not intended to be livable spaces. As such, they cannot include exterior doors, window openings, heating, or air conditioning. The height of a storage area may not exceed 6 feet at any point. Attics may have ceilings that follow the angle of the roofline, which can exceed 6 feet at the peak; however, staff reviews plans to ensure that staircases are not shown leading 27173 Page 80 of 122 to attic storage areas (Attachment 5). Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) – RHMC Chapter 17.28.050 For detached ADUs on lots with an existing or proposed single-family or multifamily dwelling, the maximum height is limited to 16 feet. This height is measured from the existing legal grade or the level of the lowest floor—whichever is lower—to the structure’s peak. If the ADU is attached to the primary dwelling, it may not exceed 25 feet in height or the height limitation imposed by the underlying zone, whichever is lower (Attachment 8). Based on the information presented, the Planning Commission discussed building heights for residential structures, barns, and stables. At the conclusion of these discussions, the Commissioners agreed that a maximum residential building height of 18 feet was reasonable. For barns and stables, the Commissioners shared the heights of stables on their own properties and used a practical approach to estimate the necessary height to accommodate stall areas and tack room or loft space. This resulted in a consensus that a 20-foot height was appropriate for barns and stables. Below is language that the City Council is considering this evening: Municipal Ordinance No. 386 The amendment to the Rolling Hills Municipal Zoning Code Chapter 17.16, Sections 17.16.060 & 17.16.080 are as follows: Section 17.16.060 (Lot area and dimensions) of Title 17 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended, with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough, as follows: Development Standard Zone District RA-S-1 & RA-S-2 4. Height Limited One story, no greater than 18’ (mezzanines and lofts are not permitted) except for stables and barns which shall be no greater than 20’ Section 17.16.080 (Height limitation) of Title 17 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended, with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough, as follows: 17.16.080 - Height limitation. A. General Limitation. A building or structure shall have no more than one story, meaning that there shall be no story on top of another, except as specified in subsection (B) below. The maximum height permitted from finished floor to the peak of the structure shall be no greater than eighteen (18) feet except that the maximum height permitted for stables and barns shall be no greater than twenty (20) feet measured from the finished floor to the highest peak of the structure, exclusive of accessory architectural features as determined by the City. The maximum height permitted from finished floor of any structure to finished grade is five feet. The difference between the finished grade and the finished floor level across any elevation shall average no more than two and one-half feet, with maximum difference of five feet. B. Exceptions: 1. A one-story primary residence is permitted over a basement. For the purpose of this section primary residence includes a garage attached to the main residence by 28174 Page 81 of 122 a solid wall. 2. Stables may have a loft, subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.18 of this title. 3. A storage area, as defined in Section 17.12.190 "S" may be located above or below a story. Notice of Public Hearing This item was publicly noticed in the Daily Breeze on May 1, 2025 (Attachment 11). Public Comment As of the date of this report, no public comments have been received. FISCAL IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATION: Open the public hearing, receive public testimony, close the public hearing, and by motion: Find that the adoption of the proposed ordinance is statutorily exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under Public Resources Code section 21080.17; and introduce for first reading by title only Ordinance No. 386 regarding the height limits of single-family residential homes, stables and barns. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 01 - 386_HeightLimit_Ordinance_D.pdf Attachment 02 - 2025-04_PC_Resolution_ResidentialHeightLimit_F_E.pdf Attachment 03 - PL_SUB_BH_BuildingHeightsReport_Chart.pdf Attachment 04 - PL_SUB_BH_STAFF REPORT OF HEIGHTS.pdf Attachment 05 - PL_SUB_BH_RHMC_Chapter_17.12_Code_Definitions_Basements.pdf Attachment 06 - PL_SUB_BH_RHMC_Section_17.18.060_Stable.pdf Attachment 07 - PL_SUB_BH_RHMC_Section_17.18.070_Aviaries.pdf Attachment 08 - PL_SUB_BH_RHMC_Chapter17.28_Section17.28.050_GeneralADUandJADURequirements.pdf Attachment 09 - CL_AGN_241015_PC_Item12A_SR.pdf Attachment 10 - CL_AGN_250318_PC_Item12A_SR.pdf Attachment 11 - CL_AGN_250415_PC_Item10C_SR.pdf Attachment 12 - CL_PBN_250528_CC_HeightLimitOrdinance_Affidavit.pdf 29175 Page 82 of 122 ORDINANCE NO. 386 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS AMENDING CHAPTER 17.16 OF TITLE 17 OF THE ROLLING HILLS MUNICIPAL CODE TO AMEND THE RESIDENTIAL HEIGHT LIMIT, AND FINDING THE ORDINANCE TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM CEQA. WHEREAS, the City of Rolling Hills, California (“City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the California Constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, the City is a semi-rural hillside community, characterized by predominantly single- story California ranch-style homes, large parcels with open space, and an abundance of equestrian facilities; and WHEREAS, one of the unique features of the City is the uniformity of homes throughout the years, which are typically limited to one story in height; and WHEREAS, in recent years, many homes have been constructed to maximize the building area on the lot, including increased height and a greater amount of grading to prepare many of the steeper properties for a structure; and WHEREAS, these trends have significantly altered the community’s character and affect surrounding properties, creating a high level of concern among residents related to development and design compatibility issues; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to preserve and enhance the community’s character, particularly as it relates to residential building height; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority granted to the City by Article XI, Section 7 of the California Constitution, the City has the police power to regulate the use of land and property within the City in a manner designed to promote public convenience and general prosperity, as well as public health, safety, and welfare; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend the Rolling Hills Municipal Code to impose height limits on residential developments in the City; and WHEREAS, on April 15, 2025, the Planning Commission conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Ordinance, wherein it considered the staff report, supporting documents, public testimony, and all appropriate information submitted with the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on May 28, 2025, the City Council conducted a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Ordinance, wherein it considered the staff report and supporting documents, Planning Commission’s recommendation, public testimony, and all appropriate information submitted with the Ordinance; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of the Ordinance have occurred. 30176 Page 83 of 122 2 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The recitals above are incorporated by reference and adopted as findings by the City Council. Section 2. CEQA. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is determined to be categorically exempt from CEQA under Section 15061(b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, which applies to projects where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. The proposed Ordinance does not involve physical changes to the environment but rather regulates the height of residential developments. Since it does not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment, there is no possibility that it could have a significant environmental impact. Section 3. General Plan. The City Council finds that this Ordinance is consistent with the goals and policies of the Rolling Hills General Plan. The proposed Ordinance is consistent with Housing Element Goal 2 “Maintain and enhance the quality of residential neighborhoods in Rolling Hills,” in support of the following policies: Policy 2.1: Encourage and assist in the maintenance and improvement of existing homes to maintain optimum standards of housing quality and design. Policy 2.3: Require compatible design to minimize the impact of residential redevelopment on existing residences. By imposing a height limit on residential development in the City, this Ordinance will ensure future development is compatible with the surrounding neighborhood and environment. Section 4. The Development Standard table in Section 17.16.060 of Title 17 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended, with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough, as follows: Development Standard Zone District RA-S-1 RA-S-2 4. Height Limitation One story, no greater than 18’ (mezzanines and lofts are not permitted) except for stables and barns which shall be no greater than 20’ Section 5. Section 17.16.080 of Title 17 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code is hereby amended, with additions in underline and deletions in strikethrough, as follows: 17.16.080 - Height limitation. A. General Limitation. A building or structure shall have no more than one story, meaning that there shall be no story on top of another, except as specified in subsection (B) below. 31177 Page 84 of 122 3 The maximum height permitted from finished floor to the highest peak of the structure shall be no greater than eighteen (18) feet except that the maximum height permitted for stables and barns shall be no greater than twenty (20) feet measured from the finished floor to the highest peak of the structure, exclusive of accessory architectural features as determined by the City. The maximum height permitted from finished floor of any structure to finished grade is five feet. The difference between the finished grade and the finished floor level across any elevation shall average no more than two and one-half feet, with maximum difference of five feet. B. Exceptions: 1. A one-story primary residence is permitted over a basement. For the purpose of this section primary residence includes a garage attached to the main residence by a solid wall. 2. Stables may have a loft, subject to the requirements of Chapter 17.18 of this title. 3. A storage area, as defined in Section 17.12.190 "S" may be located above or below a story. Section 6. The City Council’s actions are made upon review of the Planning Commission’s recommendation, the Staff Report, all oral and written comments, and the documentary evidence presented on the Ordinance.. Section 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance takes effect 30 days following its adoption. Section 8. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid, such invalidity has no effect on the other provisions or application of the Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this extent, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any portion thereof. Section 10. Custodian of Records: The documents and materials associated with this Resolution that constitute the record of proceedings on which these findings are based are located at Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California 90274. The Director of Planning and Community Services is the custodian of records for the record of proceedings. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS __th DAY OF ________ 2025. JEFF PIEPER, MAYOR 32178 Page 85 of 122 4 ATTEST: ____________________________________ CHRISTIAN HORVATH, CITY CLERK Any action challenging the final decision of the City made as a result of the public hearing on this application must be filed within the time limits set forth in Section 17.54.070 of the Rolling Hills Municipal Code and Civil Procedure Section 1094.6. 33179 Page 86 of 122 34180 Page 87 of 122 35181 Page 88 of 122 36182 Page 89 of 122 37183 Page 90 of 122 38184 Page 91 of 122 39185 Page 92 of 122 Building Heights Report RESOLUTION ADDRESS ROOF HEIGHT STRUCTURE TYPE 2023-15 8 Quail Ridge Road N 25' Stable (Plus 7' Cupola) 2024-09 1 Morgan Lane 24' 8" Stable 2023-02 9 Portuguese Bend Road 21' 5" Stable 2024-03 4 Spur Lane 21' Home 2023-06 20 Upper Blackwater Canyon 21' Home 2018-01 20 Upper Blackwater Canyon 20' Stable 2021-05 15 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road 20' Stable 2017-10 5 Pine Tree Lane 20' Home 2024-14 2 Possum Ridge 19' 6" Stable 2024-05 2 Possum Ridge 18' 9" Home 2019-10 1 Poppy Trail Lane 18' 8 1/4" Home 2023-16 11 Flying Mane 18' 1 1/2" Home 2023-13 19 Portuguese Bend Road 18' Home 2023-04 17 Crest Road East 17' 6" Home 2019-13 8 Middleridge Lane south 17' 4" Home 2022-14 2 Flying Mane Road 16' 9 5/8" Home 2021-02 3 Open Brand Road 16' 8" Home 2018-16 26 Middleridge Lane South 16' 2" Home 2018-03 11 Saddleback Road 16' Stable (Plus 5' Cupola) 2023-11 4 Poppy Trail Lane 15' 5" Home Going to PC 2 Quail Ridge Road South 14' 11 1/2" Home 2022-17 21 Chuckwagon Road 14' 11" Pool House 2024-06 23 Crest Road East 14' 6" Home 2017-10 5 Pine Tree Lane 14' Stable (Plus 5' Cupola) 2025-02 1 Pinto Road 13' 7 3/16" Garage 2024-02 29 Crest Road West 13'6" Stable 2024-05 29 Eastfield Drive 13'3" Home 2023-11 4 Poppy Trail Lane 13' 11" ADU 2023-14 7 Pine Tree Lane 13' 2" House 2017-20 16 Pine Tree Lane 12' 11 1/2" House 2021-09 23 Chuckwagon 12' 3" ADU 2019-10 1 Poppy Trail Lane 12' 1/4' Stable 2023-03 74 Portuguese Bend Road 11' Stable Average 17 High 25 Low 11 40186 Page 93 of 122 Building Heights Report RESOLUTION ADDRESS ROOF HEIGHT STRUCTURE TYPE 2023-15 8 Quail Ridge Road N 25' Stable (Plus 7' Cupola) 2024-09 1 Morgan Lane 24' 8" Stable 2023-02 9 Portuguese Bend Road 21' 5" Stable 2024-03 4 Spur Lane 21' Home 2023-06 20 Upper Blackwater Canyon 21' Home 2018-01 20 Upper Blackwater Canyon 20' Stable 2021-05 15 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road 20' Stable 2017-10 5 Pine Tree Lane 20' Home 2024-14 2 Possum Ridge 19' 6" Stable 2024-05 2 Possum Ridge 18' 9" Home 2019-10 1 Poppy Trail Lane 18' 8 1/4" Home 2023-16 11 Flying Mane 18' 1 1/2" Home 2023-13 19 Portuguese Bend Road 18' Home 2023-04 17 Crest Road East 17' 6" Home 2019-13 8 Middleridge Lane south 17' 4" Home 2022-14 2 Flying Mane Road 16' 9 5/8" Home 2021-02 3 Open Brand Road 16' 8" Home 2018-16 26 Middleridge Lane South 16' 2" Home 2018-03 11 Saddleback Road 16' Stable (Plus 5' Cupola) 2023-11 4 Poppy Trail Lane 15' 5" Home Going to PC 2 Quail Ridge Road South 14' 11 1/2" Home 2022-17 21 Chuckwagon Road 14' 11" Pool House 2024-06 23 Crest Road East 14' 6" Home 2017-10 5 Pine Tree Lane 14' Stable (Plus 5' Cupola) 2025-02 1 Pinto Road 13' 7 3/16" Garage 2024-02 29 Crest Road West 13'6" Stable 2024-05 29 Eastfield Drive 13'3" Home 2023-11 4 Poppy Trail Lane 13' 11" ADU 2023-14 7 Pine Tree Lane 13' 2" House 2017-20 16 Pine Tree Lane 12' 11 1/2" House 2021-09 23 Chuckwagon 12' 3" ADU 2019-10 1 Poppy Trail Lane 12' 1/4' Stable 2023-03 74 Portuguese Bend Road 11' Stable Average 17 High 25 Low 11 City of Rolling Hills Building Heights Report 41187 Page 94 of 122 Created: 2024‐05‐03 17:45:25 [EST] (Supp. No. 28) Page 1 of 2 DEFINITIONS 17.12.020 "B" words, terms and phrases. Barn. See "stable." "Basement" means any floor level below the first story of the primary residence, except that a floor level in a building having only one floor level shall be classified as a basement unless such floor level qualifies as a first story as defined herein. Except for walls within light wells, basement walls across any elevation may not exceed a height of five feet above finished grade at any point immediately adjacent to the basement exterior, and shall have no greater than an average of two and one‐half feet exterior height. Basements shall comply with the Los Angeles County Building Code requirements. Basement well(s) shall be incorporated into the overall design of the building so that it does not give an appearance of a separate story. "Building" means any structure having a roof supported by columns or walls and intended for the shelter, housing or enclosure of any individual, animal, process, equipment, goods or materials of any kind or nature. 17.12.030 ‐ "C" words, terms and phrases. Cellar. See "basement." 17.12.120 "L" words, terms and phrases. "Loft" means an area above a stable utilized for storage of feed and hay, saddles, bridles, other horse equipment and similar equestrian or agricultural related items, or tack room uses, but excludes sleeping quarters. 17.12.160 ‐ "P" words, terms and phrases. "Plate height" means the height of a building measured from the finished floor level to the top of the wall. 17.12.190 "S" words, terms and phrases. "Stable" means the same as "barn" and is a building or a portion of a building designed and constructed to shelter permitted domestic animals and store farm implements, hay, grain, equestrian and horticultural related items and equipment. Stable may include agricultural space, loft and tack room space. Stable shall not be a place for human habitation, except for uses specifically permitted in the tack room; it may not be rented out or be used for human sleeping or commercial purposes. 42188 Page 95 of 122 Created: 2024‐05‐03 17:45:25 [EST] (Supp. No. 28) Page 2 of 2 "Storage area" means space within a building or structure, including attics, used for storing of items. It includes spaces located below or above a story and may not exceed six feet in height at any one point. Attics may have a ceiling that follows the shape and the angle of the roofline, which could be more than six feet high at the peak of the ceiling. Attics and storage areas shall not have doors to the exterior, window openings, heating or air conditioning. "Storage room, free standing," shall mean an accessory structure used exclusively for storage of household, equestrian, garden and similar items. "Story" means that portion of a building included between the upper surface of any floor and the ceiling or roof above it. There shall be no story on top of another, except as permitted in Section 17.16.080(B) of this title. "Structure" means a combination of materials assembled in a form for use, occupancy or ornamentation whether installed on, above or below the surface of land or water and requiring a fixed location or attached to something having a fixed location. Structure shall also include, but not be limited to, fences, retaining walls, covered porches, entryways, porte cochere, latticework, trellises, pilasters, fountains, pools, spas, pool/spa equipment, gazebos, garden walls, decks, and subterranean structures other than basements. 43189 Page 96 of 122 Created: 2025-02-10 14:50:23 [EST] (Supp. No. 29, Update 1) Page 1 of 3 17.18.060 Requirements for stables requiring conditional use permit. All stables over two hundred square feet shall meet the following requirements: A. General requirements and uses: 1. The building occupied by a stable shall be designed for rural and agricultural purpose only. 2. Stable structure shall not be permitted in the front yard, and shall be located no less than twenty-five feet from side property line in the RAS-1 zone, no less than thirty-five feet from side property line in the RAS-2 zone and no less than twenty-five feet from side roadway easement line and from the rear property line. 3. Minimum of sixty percent of the entire structure shall be maintained for agricultural space as defined in Chapter 17.12 of this title, except as specified in Section 17.18.060(A)(5). 4. Maximum of forty percent, but not to exceed eight hundred square feet, of the entire structure may be maintained as tack room space as defined in Chapter 17.12 of this title, except as specified in Section 17.18.060(A)(5). Tack room may be detached from the main stable structure. 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, an existing stable, legally constructed prior to the effective date of the ordinance from which this chapter derives (August 12, 2010), which has a loft area that is maintained as a tack room and the loft area comprises more than forty percent of the size of the first floor may continue to be maintained provided that the area of the loft used as a tack room does not exceed eight hundred square feet, that no other tack room exists on the property and the remaining of the structure and its uses are in compliance with the remaining sections of this chapter. 6. When calculating the size of the stable, the entire footprint including the loft area shall be included, as measured from the exterior of the walls. 7. If there is more than one stable building on a lot, the tack room space shall be calculated as a percentage of the entire square footage of the structures and such tack room space may only be located in one of the structures; notwithstanding the above, it may not exceed eight hundred square feet. 8. Covered porch shall not be included in the size of the stable for the purpose of calculating the agricultural and tack room space of the stable. 9. Stables shall not be used as sleeping quarters for humans. 10. Stables shall be used for the exclusive purpose of keeping permitted domestic animals and related storage and uses, unless otherwise permitted by this chapter. Commercial uses shall not be permitted. B. Exterior appearance of stables and areas immediately adjacent thereto: 1. Whether or not the stable is used for keeping permitted domestic animals, the exterior of the stable structure shall continue to appear as a stable. 2. Areas adjacent to the agricultural space entrance/exit of a stable may have a porous, roughened surface but may not be paved. It shall remain such or may be covered with grass or other low growing ground cover during the time when the agricultural space is not used for keeping of horses or other animals. 3. A porous surface (not paved) may be provided by the access to the tack room space of the stable. 44190 Page 97 of 122 Created: 2025-02-10 14:50:23 [EST] (Supp. No. 29, Update 1) Page 2 of 3 4. The surface area of a corral, pen, paddock, turnout or riding ring shall be covered with dirt or sand surface. It shall remain such or be planted with grass or other low growing ground cover during the time when the stable structure is not used for keeping of horses or other animals. C. Tack Room Space. 1. Tack room shall only be used for activities that impact the senses in a manner similar or less than that of traditional stable activities. Furthermore, all activities that are loud, raucous, annoying, or that produce unusual noises, lighting or other impacts that offend the peace and quiet of persons of ordinary sensibilities and interferes with the comfortable enjoyment of life or property of any neighboring property are prohibited. Such permitted activities shall be deemed to be "passive activities" for the purpose of this chapter. 2. Tack room shall not be used as sleeping quarters for humans. 3. Tack room shall not exceed forty percent of the size of the stable, including the size of the loft, if any, except as specified in Section 17.18.060(A)(5) and may not exceed eight hundred square feet. 4. Tack room may contain furniture, excluding beds. 5. Tack room may have finished floors, walls and ceiling. 6. Tack room may have glazed (glass) window openings. 7. Tack room may have standard size doors. 8. Tack room may have amenities such as air conditioning, heating, electrical and phone outlets. 9. Tack room may have a kitchenette and sanitary facility, including shower, sink and toilet. 10. Building and Safety Department review and building permits shall be required for all modifications. 11. All modifications and retrofitting of the tack room space shall be made in such a manner so that it could be convertible to a tack room, at such time as the structure is to be used for keeping of animals. 12. Tack room may be detached from the main stable structure, however it shall meet all the requirements for a tack room as specified in this section. D. Agricultural Space Within the Stable. 1. Agricultural space shall be no less than sixty percent of the size of the stable including the size of the loft, if any, except as specified in Section 17.18.060(A)(5). Agricultural space may contain, but not be limited to stalls, wash racks, feed room, hay storage room, grooming area, tools and utilities storage area and other equestrian and agricultural spaces. The agricultural space may be used for storage of vehicles and general household items, but shall have a stable like appearance. 2. Entry doorways to the stalls shall be a minimum of four feet wide and seven and one-half feet high. 3. The exterior doors shall provide the appearance of a stable door. 4. Roll up or overhead doors are prohibited. 5. Ventilation and drainage facilities shall be subject to building code requirements. 6. Safety electrical outlets with covers may be installed, however they shall be located out of horses' reach when the space is used for keeping of horses. 45191 Page 98 of 122 Created: 2025-02-10 14:50:23 [EST] (Supp. No. 29, Update 1) Page 3 of 3 7. Glazed (glass) window openings may be permitted during a time when the stable is not used for keeping of animals, but shall be removable for easy conversion to animal keeping uses. E. Loft Space within a Stable. 1. Loft may be permitted above a stable structure. 2. Loft may be used and counted as part of the agricultural space or as a tack room space, provided it meets the agricultural or tack room space requirements of Section 17.18.060(C) and (D)). 3. Loft may not be used as a tack room, if another tack room exists within the stable structure or elsewhere on the property. 4. Glazed (glass) window openings shall not be allowed in a loft if a loft is used for storage of hay, feed or other agricultural use. Notwithstanding the above, if the loft is used as other storage or working area or as a tack room, then removable glazed openings may be allowed. 5. The plate height for the wall of the loft shall be no greater than seven feet. 6. If a loft is constructed in such a way that access is provided from the exterior, the area immediately adjacent to the exterior of the loft shall not be paved, but may have a porous surface. 7. The area immediately adjacent to the exterior of the loft shall not be used for parking of vehicles, except for vehicles delivering agricultural goods and equipment. (Ord. No. 319, § 22(Exh. A, Pt. A), 7-15-2010; Ord. No. 324, § 9 (Exh. A, Pts. H, I, K), 8-8-2011; Ord. No. 332, §§ 8C, D, 1-14-2013) 46192 Page 99 of 122 Created: 2025-02-10 14:50:23 [EST] (Supp. No. 29, Update 1) Page 1 of 1 17.18.070 Requirements for aviaries requiring conditional use permit. All aviaries over two hundred square feet shall meet the following requirements: 1. Shall not be located on lots of less than 3.5 acres, as measured by excluding roadway easements. 2. The roof shall not exceed a peak height of sixteen feet. 3. Shall not be located on a portion of the lot where the slope is greater than 4:1. 4. Shall not be permitted in the front yard or in the rear yard setback, shall be located no less than twenty-five feet from side property line in the RAS-1 zone, no less than thirty-five feet from the side property line in the RAS-2 zone and no less than twenty-five feet from side roadway easement line. 5. Shall be located a minimum of thirty-five feet from any residential structure including attached garage or a guest house, located on the same lot, and a minimum of one hundred feet from a residential structure, including attached garage or a guest house located on adjoining lots. 6. Shall be used for the exclusive purpose of keeping permitted birds and small animals indigenous to the State of California. Commercial uses shall not be permitted. 7. Shall be counted towards structural, total, building pad coverage or disturbed area of the net lot for purposes of Chapter 17.16. 8. May be permitted in addition to the construction of a stable and shall not be counted towards the size of the stable for purposes of this chapter. (Ord. No. 319, § 22(Exh. A, Pt. A), 7-15-2010; Ord. No. 343, § 8, 6-22-2015) 47193 Page 100 of 122 Created: 2025-02-10 14:50:24 [EST] (Supp. No. 29, Update 1) Page 1 of 1 17.28.050 General ADU and JADU requirements. B. Height. 1. Except as otherwise provided by subsections (B)(2) and (B)(3) below, a detached ADU created on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit may not exceed sixteen feet in height. 2. A detached ADU may be up to eighteen feet in height if it is created on a lot with an existing or proposed single family or multifamily dwelling unit that is located within one-half mile walking distance of a major transit stop or high quality transit corridor, as those terms are defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code, and the ADU may be up to two additional feet in height (for a maximum of twenty feet) if necessary to accommodate a roof pitch on the ADU that is aligned with the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit. 3. A detached ADU created on a lot with an existing or proposed multifamily dwelling that has more than one story above grade may not exceed eighteen feet in height. 4. An ADU that is attached to the primary dwelling may not exceed twenty-five feet in height or the height limitation imposed by the underlying zone that applies to the primary dwelling, whichever is lower. Notwithstanding the foregoing, ADUs subject to this subsection (B)(4) may not exceed two stories. 5. For purposes of this subsection (B), height is measured from existing legal grade or the level of the lowest floor, whichever is lower, to the peak of the structure. 48194 Page 101 of 122 RHCA BUILDING REGULATIONS – WILLIAMSBURG LANE b. There shall be no Williamsburg or Colonial style homes, except on Williamsburg Lane. Additions to existing residences on Williamsburg Lane must conform to designs on that street. Such houses: i. Are Colonial dwellings, white in color with clapboard siding, have white, earth tone, or Association approved trim. ii. Are generally symmetrical in design with evenly balanced windows around a single front door. iii. Have steeply pitched roofs with narrow rake overhangs and boxed in eaves. iv. Have true divided lite windows. c. Design must be of a type or kind as will, in the opinion of the Architectural Committee, be appropriate to its site, harmonize with the surrounding environment, and maintain the quality of the neighborhood. d. The design must be viewed as reasonably good of its kind. e. Any improvement, whether proposed to be temporary, portable, or permanent, shall meet the standards set forth for permanent structures. f. Plans for new residences shall provide a minimum living space of 1300 square feet of fioor space, exclusive of garages, porches, and terraces. g. Each residence shall have a fully enclosed garage with a minimum capacity for two cars. Garages may not exceed 25% of the footprint of the living area and must be proportionate to the residence. Porte cocheres do not fulflll the two car requirement. Carports are not permitted. Guest houses require additional garage space in the above-referenced garage, attached to the main dwelling. Residences over 4500 square feet, excluding basement area, are required to have a fully enclosed garage with a minimum capacity for three cars. h. The construction or erection of an accessory building, swimming pool, or tennis court may not precede construction of the residential building. i. Building designs which create a two -story appearance are not allowed. j. Basement walls, foundations, or retaining walls must be of a height and design which harmonizes with the proposed residence or addition. k. There shall be no habitable space under any accessory building. Page 102 of 122 l. The maximum height permitted from flnished fioor level of residence to flnished grade is 5’. The difference between the flnished grade and flnished fioor level across one elevation should average no more than 2-1/2’ with maximum difference of 5’. m. To help maintain the low rambling nature of ranch architecture, plate heights are limited and strictly enforced. While the recommended plate height for a residence is 8’6”, taller plates are allowed on a case by case basis if harmonious with the design and massing of the overall residence. i. Plate heights are measured from the flnished fioor level to the top of the wall. If a porch is present, the plate height is measured from the flnish fioor to the top of the beam. (See Appendix L “Illustrations of Plate Height”) ii. The following percentages are the allowable limits for plate heights above 8’6”: (Percentages of plate height are calculated by the linear footage of the perimeter.) 1) Minimum of 50% of the residence must have plate heights of 8’6” or lower, 2) Up to 30% of the residence may have a plate height up to 9’6, ** 3) Only 20% of the residence may have a plate height up to 10’6. ** ** Maximum plate heights may be limited and are considered on a case by case basis to assure the massing of the overall residence is good of its kind. iii. RHCA approvals shall be on a case by case basis and one or more of the above may be modifled by the Architectural Committee with the intent of promoting reasonably good of its kind. n. All residences must have an enclosed service yard, not less than 8’ x 12’, or an approved shape, not less than 96 square feet, which shall be enclosed by a fence or wall at least 6’ high. Such yards are to be inconspicuous to neighbors and streets and located so as to be convenient for trash storage and collection. Page 103 of 122 Williamsburg Lane Residence Study 2025 Ridge Height Address Residence Size (including garage)Main Pitch Other Max Height Front Rear Recent Remodel 8'6"9'6"10'6"OVER 1 Williamsburg 5,062 11:12 4:12 20' 0 0 1986 29%55%16% 2 Williamsburg 3,630 12:12 4:12 21'0 0 1986 81%19% 3 Williamsburg 4,383 10:12 4:12 18'6"2 1 1982 72%28% (8'9") 4 Williamsburg 4,617 7:12 23'6"0 0 2004 63%37% (9'9") 5 Williamsburg 4,997 12:12 4:12 29'4 0 1989 4%79%17% (11') 6 Williamsburg 3,377 8:12 3 or 4:12?21'0 0 1996 100% 7 Williamsburg 4,653 11:12 ? 20' 0 0 1987 92%8% 8 Williamsburg 4,739 9:12 7:12 18'0 0 1981 94%6% 9 Williamsburg 4,327 8:12 4:12 20'4 6 2022 100% 10 Williamsburg 3,173 8:12 19'0 0 2020 57%30%13% 12 Williamsburg 5,655 10:12 23'6"0 0 1999 52%48% 14 Williamsburg 3,701 8:12 17'6"0 0 2002 100% 16 Williamsburg 3,175 12:12 4:12 25' 0 5 2022 42%55%3% Plate heights comply w/ regulations Plate heights do not comply Roof Pitch Dormers Plate Heights 2025-03-07 Page 104 of 122 Item: 14.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Karina Bañales, City Manager Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Consideration of Authorizing the Mayor to Sign a Letter of Support for AB 2517 (Calderon) Regarding Improvements to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone Mapping Process Background: The League of California Cities (Cal Cities) has issued an action alert (Attachment C) urging member cities to support AB 2517 (Calderon), which seeks to improve how the Office of the State Fire Marshal (OSFM) develops and updates Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps in Local Responsibility Areas (LRAs). While FHSZ maps are required to be reviewed periodically, there is no statutory requirement for comprehensive updates. The most recent LRA update occurred in 2025, following more than 15 years without revisions. The 2025 update raised concerns regarding the accuracy of land use classifications, including split parcels receiving multiple designations and developed areas, such as parking lots and bodies of water, being categorized as very high fire hazard zones. Cities are required to adopt these maps by ordinance within 120 days of receipt; however, there is currently no formal process for local agencies to review or provide input on the data, methodology, or modeling used prior to adoption. Discussion: Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps are a critical tool for guiding local wildfire preparedness, land use planning, and development standards. Timely, accurate, and transparent updates are essential to ensure local governments can rely on current information when making policy and public safety decisions. AB 2517 would establish a more consistent and predictable update process by requiring a mandatory five-year review cycle for LRA FHSZ maps. The bill would also introduce a public review period and regional workshops, allowing local agencies and residents to better understand and provide feedback on proposed designations before they are finalized. Increased transparency in the data, assumptions, and methodology used by the State Fire Marshal would further support informed local decision-making and improve public confidence in the mapping process. The Cities of Rolling Hills Estates and Palos Verdes Estates have scheduled this item for City Council Page 105 of 122 consideration at their March 24 meetings. Additionally, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes submitted a letter of support for AB 2517 on March 10 (Attachment D), demonstrating growing regional support for improvements to the FHSZ mapping process. The League has also shared its letter of support (Attachment B). Supporting AB 2517 would align with the City’s interest in improving wildfire preparedness, ensuring access to reliable hazard data, and enhancing public engagement in State- led processes that directly affect local communities. For the City of Rolling Hills, AB 2517 would improve transparency, predictability, and public trust in fire hazard severity zone designations while helping ensure that maps more accurately reflect local terrain, open space, and proximity to wildland areas. Early access to draft maps and greater disclosure of the State’s methodology would allow the City to apply local knowledge of parcel characteristics, vegetation, and land use before designations are finalized. Because these maps directly influence defensible space requirements, building standards, and wildfire mitigation policies, the proposed changes would strengthen local implementation and better support public safety for Rolling Hills residents. Bill Summary – AB 2517 (Calderon) AB 2517 proposes to improve the OSFM’s process for developing and updating Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps within Local Responsibility Areas. Specifically, the bill would: • Establish a mandatory five-year update cycle for LRA FHSZ maps. • Require a preliminary release of updated maps prior to formal adoption. • Mandate public disclosure of the data, modeling assumptions, and methodology used in determining fire hazard designations. • Provide opportunities for public engagement, including regional workshops and a public comment period, before maps are finalized and transmitted to local jurisdictions. The intent of AB 2517 is to create a more transparent, consistent, and collaborative process that enables local agencies and the public to better understand and provide input on wildfire risk designations before they are adopted into local ordinance. A draft letter of support is included for City Council review and consideration (Attachment A). Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: Staff recommends the City Council provide direction on whether to support AB 2517 (Calderon) and, if so, authorize the Mayor to sign and submit a letter of support on behalf of the City. Attachments: 1. Attachment A - CC_AGN_260323_DRAFT Rolling Hills AB2517 Letter of Support 2. Attachment B - CC_AGN_260323_League Letter in Support 3. Attachment C - CC_AGN_260323_League Action Alrt 4. Attachment D - CC_AGN_260323_RPV AB 2517 Fire Safety Support 5. Attachment E - CL_AGN_260323_CC_AB2517_PVE_LetterOfSupport 6. Attachment F - CL_AGN_260323_CC_AB2517_RHE_LetterOfSupport 7. Attachment G - CL_AGN_260323_CC_AB2517 Page 106 of 122 City of Rolling Hills INCORPORATED JANUARY 24, 1957 NO. 2 PORTUGUESE BEND ROAD ROLLING HILLS, CA 90274 (310) 377-1521 FAX (310) 377-7288 March 23, 2026 The Honorable Lisa Calderon Member, California State Assembly 1021 O Street, Suite 4650 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: LETTER OF SUPPORT FOR AB 2517 (Calderon) Fire Hazard Severity Zones (As Introduced on February 20, 2026) Dear Assemblymember Calderon, The City of Rolling Hills is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon), which would improve the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designation process by ensuring consistent updates to Local Responsibility Area (LRA) maps and establishing a more transparent, publicly accessible process for developing and releasing these critical designations. Under current law, fire hazard severity zone designations are applied in both state responsibility areas and local responsibility areas to reflect the state’s best available science regarding environmental conditions such as slope, vegetation, and wind patterns, that influence wildfire spread. While LRA FHSZ maps are required to be periodically reviewed, statute does not require a comprehensive update, and prior to the most recent release in 2025, the LRA maps had not been updated for more than 15 years. With the 2025 release, significant concerns were raised regarding the accuracy of underlying land use information, including split parcels with multiple designations and the classification of developed areas such as parking lots and bodies of water as very high fire hazard severity zones. Cities are required to adopt these maps by ordinance and conduct public hearings locally yet currently have no formal opportunity to meaningfully engage in or respond to concerns about the state’s model, data, or methodology before adoption. AB 2517 would clarify how and when FHSZ maps are updated and ensure meaningful public engagement prior to local adoption. Specifically, the bill would establish a five-year update cycle for LRA FHSZ maps, require a preliminary public release of updated map s, mandate disclosure of the data, models, and methodology used to develop the designations, and provide opportunities for regional workshops and public comment before the maps are transmitted to local agencies for ordinance adoption. Page 107 of 122 Letter of Support for AB 2517 Fire Hazard Severity Zones (As Introduced on February 20, 2026) Page 2 of 2 -2- For the City of Rolling Hills, AB 2517 would improve transparency, predictability, and public trust in the fire hazard severity zone designation process while ensuring maps more accurately reflect the City’s hillside terrain, open space, and proximity to w ildland areas. Earlier access to draft maps and greater disclosure of the State’s methodology would allow the City to apply local knowledge of parcel characteristics, vegetation, and land use conditions before designations are finalized. Because these maps directly affect defensible space requirements, building standards, and wildfire mitigation policies, the proposed changes would strengthen local implementation and better support public safety for Rolling Hills residents. For these reasons, the City of Rolling Hills is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon). Sincerely, Bea Dieringer Mayor City of Rolling Hills cc. Senator Ben Allen Assembly Member Al Muratsuchi Jeff Kiernan, Regional Public Affairs Manager, League of California Cities City of Rolling Hills City Council Page 108 of 122 1400 K Street, Suite 400, Sacramento, CA 95814 • 916.658.8200 • calcities.org February 23, 2026 The Honorable Lisa Calderon Member, California State Assembly 1021 O Street, Suite 4650 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: AB 2517 (Calderon) Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Notice of SPONSOR AND SUPPORT (As Introduced on February 20, 2026) Dear Assemblymember Calderon, The League of California Cities (Cal Cities) is pleased to sponsor and support AB 2517, which would improve the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designation process by ensuring consistent updates to the FHSZ maps and establishing a more transparent, publicly accessible process for developing and releasing these critical designations. Under current law, fire hazard severity zone designations are applied in both the state responsibility areas and local responsibility areas to provide the state’s best available science related to what environmental conditions, such as slope, vegetation, and wind patterns, can spread a wildfire. The LRA FHSZ designations are only required to be periodically re-reviewed every five years and statute does not require a comprehensive update to the designations. Prior to the most recent release earlier in 2025, the LRA FHSZ maps had not been updated since between 2007 and 2009. With the 2025 map release, important concerns were raised to the State Fire Marshal, including the accuracy of land use information, including split parcels with multiple designations and the classification of developed areas such as parking lots and bodies of water as very high fire hazard severity zones. These issues create practical challenges for cities who are required to adopt these maps by ordinance and host public comment locally without any ability to respond to the public concerns regarding the model and data. AB 2517 would address these concerns by clarifying how and when the FHSZ maps are updated, specifically how the public can engage meaningfully in the process. The bill would establish a five-year update cycle for the LRA FHSZ maps, require a preliminary public release of the maps, mandate disclosure of the data, models, and methodology used to develop the designations, and provide opportunities for regional workshops and public comment before maps are transmitted to the local agency for local ordinance adoption. For these reasons, Cal Cities supports AB 2517 (Calderon) and is pleased to sponsor the bill. If you have any questions, please contact Legislative Advocate Melissa Sparks-Kranz at msparkskranz@calcities.org at 916-658-8232. Sincerely, Melissa Sparks-Kranz Legislative Advocate League of California Cities Page 109 of 122 Cal Cities Action Alert Support AB 2517 (Calderon) Fire Hazard Severity Zone Maps Action Requested: Submit a letter of support for AB 2517 (Calderon), a Cal Cities- sponsored bill that would improve the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designation process conducted by the Office of the State Fire Marshal. It would do this by ensuring consistent and timely updates to the local responsibility area FHSZ maps. AB 2517 is awaiting a committee assignment and will be heard this spring. What the Bill Does: AB 2517 would clarify that this process happens every five years and would require the State Fire Marshal to provide a preliminary release of the maps with a public comment period and regional workshops. This improved process would allow local governments and the public the opportunity to better understand the designations. Additionally, the bill would require the state to make the data and methodology for the fire hazard model publicly available, which increases transparency and understanding of the environmental conditions that may cause hazard. Why this is Important to Cal Cities Members: Under current law, FHSZ designations in local responsibility areas must be “periodically” reviewed by the State Fire Marshal. This vague timeline often leaves local governments without the scientific data they need to fully understand which areas are at greatest risk for fires. These designations correlate with defensible space and home hardening requirements and are critical for ensuring communities can mitigate wildfires. Additional Background: Fire hazard maps identify environmental conditions — including slope, vegetation, wind patterns, and others — that can spread wildfires. Local jurisdictions are already required under existing state law to adopt ordinances with the FHSZ designations within 120 days of receiving them from the State Fire Marshal. This bill would improve the process preceding the transmittal of the maps. Links and Attachments: Cal Cities support letter. Sample city support letter. Where to Send Letter: See sample letter for legislative portal link. Send copy to cityletters@calcities.org and RPAM email. Questions? Please contact your RPAM or Legislative Advocate Melissa Sparks-Kranz, msparkskranz@calcities.org Page 110 of 122 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Paul Seo , Mayor Stephen Perestam , Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Ferraro, Councilmember George Lewis, Councilmember David L. Bradley , Councilmember 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD. / RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275-5391 / (310) 544-5207 / FAX (310) 544-5291 / WWW.RPVCA.GOV March 10, 2026 The Honorable Lisa Calderon Member, California State Assembly 1021 O Street, Suite 4650 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: SUPPORT FOR AB 2517 (Calderon) Fire Hazard Severity Zones (As Introduced on February 20, 2026) Dear Assemblymember Calderon, The City of Rancho Palos Verdes is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon), which would improve the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designation process by ensuring consistent updates to Local Responsibility Area (LRA) maps and establishing a more transparent, publicly accessible process for developing and releasing these critical designations. Under current law, fire hazard severity zone designations are applied in both state responsibility areas and local responsibility areas to reflect the state’s best available science regarding environmental conditions such as slope, vegetation, and wind patterns, that influence wildfire spread. While LRA FHSZ maps are required to be periodically reviewed, statute does not require a comprehensive update. Prior to the most recent update released in 2025, the LRA maps had not been updated for more than 15 years. With the 2025 release, significant concerns were raised by local jurisdictions, regarding the accuracy of underlying land use information, including split parcels with multiple designations and the classification of developed areas such as parking lots and bodies of water as Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Cities are required to adopt these maps by ordinance and conduct public hearings locally yet currently have no formal opportunity to meaningfully engage in or respond to concerns about the state’s model, data, or methodology before adoption. Page 111 of 122 City of Rancho Palos Verdes Paul Seo , Mayor Stephen Perestam , Mayor Pro Tem Barbara Ferraro, Councilmember George Lewis, Councilmember David L. Bradley , Councilmember 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD. / RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275-5391 / (310) 544-5207 / FAX (310) 544-5291 / WWW.RPVCA.GOV AB 2517 would clarify how and when FHSZ maps are updated and ensure meaningful public engagement prior to local adoption. Specifically, the bill would establish a five -year update cycle for LRA FHSZ maps, require a preliminary public release of updated maps, mandate disclosure of the data, models, and methodology used to develop the designations, and provide opportunities for regional workshops and public comment before the maps are transmitted to local agencies for ordinance adoption. For cities like ours, greater transparency and predictability in the FHSZ process would improve public trust, enhance local implementation, and ensure that wildfire risk designations are based on accurate and up-to-date information before being codified into local law. This bill will provide greater transparency for residents and property owners in Rancho Palos Verdes, improve public engagement and education before new wildfire maps are adopted locally, create predictability for the City’s planning and emergency preparedness efforts and help ensure wildfire hazard designations reflect the most current local conditions. For these reasons, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon). Sincerely, Mayor Rancho Palos Verdes cc. Senator Ben Allen & Assembly Al Muratsuchi Jeff Kiernan, League of California Cities Page 112 of 122 IN CORPORATED 1939 340 PALOS VERDES DRIVE WEST PALOS VERDES ESTATES , CALIFORNIA 90274-1299 (3 1 0) 378 0383 FX: (3 10) 378·7820 March 24, 2026 The Honorable Lisa Calderon Member, California State Assembly 1021 O Street, Suite 4650 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: AB 2517 (Calderon) Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Notice of SUPPORT (As Introduced on February 20, 2026) Dear Assemblymember Calderon, The City of Palos Verdes Estates is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon), which would improve the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designation process by ensuring consistent updates to Local Responsibility Area (LRA) maps and establishing a more transparent, publicly accessible process for developing and releasing these critical designations. Under current law, fire hazard severity zone designations are applied in both state responsibility areas and local responsibility areas to reflect the state’s best available science regarding environmental conditions such as slope, vegetation, and wind patterns, that influence wildfire spread. While LRA FHSZ maps are required to be periodically reviewed, statute does not require a comprehensive update, and prior to the most recent release in 2025, the LRA maps had not been updated for more than 15 years. With the 2025 release, significant concerns were raised regarding the accuracy of underlying land use information, including split parcels with multiple designations and the classification of developed areas such as parking lots and bodies of water as very high fire hazard severity zones. Cities are required to adopt these maps by ordinance and conduct public hearings locally yet currently have no formal opportunity to meaningfully engage in or respond to concerns about the state’s model, data, or methodology before adoption. AB 2517 would clarify how and when FHSZ maps are updated and ensure meaningful public engagement prior to local adoption. Specifically, the bill would establish a five-year update cycle for LRA FHSZ maps, require a preliminary public release of updated maps, mandate disclosure of the data, models, and methodology used to develop the designations, and provide opportunities for regional workshops and public comment before the maps are transmitted to local agencies for ordinance adoption. Page 113 of 122 Honorable Lisa Calderon – AB 2517 March 24, 2026 Page 2 For cities like ours, greater transparency and predictability in the FHSZ process would improve public trust, enhance local implementation, and ensure that wildfire risk designations are based on accurate and up-to-date information before being codified into local law. As a coastal hillside community with steep canyons, dense vegetation, and limited evacuation routes, the City of Palos Verdes Estates is directly affected by the accuracy and reliability of Local Responsibility Area Fire Hazard Severity Zone maps. With 28% of the City designated as Open Space, clear and reliable maps are critical for City Emergency Preparedness efforts and brush clearance requirements. For these reasons, the City Palos Verdes Estates is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon). Sincerely, Michale Kemps Mayor CITY of PALOS VERDES ESTATES cc. Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi Senator Ben Allen Jeff Kiernan Regional Public Affairs Manager, jkiernan@calcities.org League of California Cities, cityletters@cacities.org Page 114 of 122 4045 Palos Verdes Drive North, Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 | (310) 377-1577 | www.RHE.city March 24, 2026 The Honorable Lisa Calderon Member, California State Assembly 1021 O Street, Suite 4650 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: AB 2517 (Calderon) Fire Hazard Severity Zones. Notice of SUPPORT (As Introduced on February 20, 2026) Dear Assemblymember Calderon, The City of Rolling Hills Estates is pleased to support AB 2517 (Calderon), which would improve the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) designation process by ensuring consistent updates to Local Responsibility Area (LRA) maps and establishing a more transparent, publicly accessible process for developing and releasing these critical designations. Under current law, fire hazard severity zone designations are applied in both state responsibility areas and local responsibility areas to reflect the state’s best available science regarding environmental conditions such as slope, vegetation, and wind patterns, that influence wildfire spread. While LRA FHSZ maps are required to be periodically reviewed, statute does not require a comprehensive update, and prior to the most recent release in 2025, the LRA maps had not been updated for more than 15 years. With the 2025 release, significant concerns were raised regarding the accuracy of underlying land use information, including split parcels with multiple designations and the classification of developed areas such as parking lots and bodies of water as very high fire hazard severity zones. Cities are required to adopt these maps by ordinance and conduct public hearings locally yet currently have no formal opportunity to meaningfully engage in or respond to concerns about the state’s model, data, or methodology before adoption. AB 2517 would clarify how and when FHSZ maps are updated and ensure meaningful public engagement prior to local adoption. Specifically, the bill would establish a five-year update cycle for LRA FHSZ maps, require a preliminary public release of updated maps, mandate disclosure of the data, models, and methodology used to develop the designations, and provide opportunities for regional workshops and public comment before the maps are transmitted to local agencies for ordinance adoption. City of Rolling Hills Estates Frank V. Zerunyan Mayor Pam Brown Schachter Mayor Pro Tem Britt Huff Council Member Velveth Schmitz Council Member Debby Stegura Council Member Page 115 of 122 For cities like ours, greater transparency and predictability in the FHSZ process would improve public trust, enhance local implementation, and ensure that wildfire risk designations are based on accurate and up-to-date information before being codified into local law. For these reasons, the City of Rolling Hills Estates is pleased to support your measure AB 2517 (Calderon). Sincerely, Frank V. Zerunyan Mayor City of Rolling Hills Estates cc: Senator Ben Allen, 24th CA Senate District Assemblymember Al Muratsuchi, 66th CA Assembly District League of California Cities, (via email: cityletters@calcities.org) Page 116 of 122 california legislature—2025–26 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 2517 Introduced by Assembly Member Calderon (Coauthor: Assembly Member Lackey) February 20, 2026 An act to amend Sections 51178, 51179, and 51181 of the Government Code, relating to fire safety. legislative counsel’s digest AB 2517, as introduced, Calderon. Fire safety: fire hazard severity zones. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to identify areas in the state that are not state responsibility areas, commonly known as local responsibility areas, as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to periodically review and make recommendations relative to very high fire hazard severity zones within local responsibility areas. Under existing law, this review is required to coincide with review of state responsibility area lands every 5 years and, when possible, fall within the timeframes for each county’s general plan update. Existing law requires a local agency to designate, by ordinance, moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in its jurisdiction within 120 days of receiving the recommendations from the State Fire Marshal. Existing law authorizes a local agency to, at its discretion, include areas within its jurisdiction not identified as very high fire hazard severity zones by the State Fire Marshal as very high fire hazard severity zones and areas not identified as moderate and high fire hazard severity zones by the State Fire Marshal as moderate and 99 Page 117 of 122 high fire hazard severity zones. Under existing law, a local agency is required to transmit a copy of an adopted ordinance to the State Board of Forestry and Fire Protection within 30 days of adoption. Existing law provides that changes made by a local agency to the recommendations made by the State Fire Marshal are final. This bill would require the State Fire Marshal to, no fewer than 180 days before finalizing the designation of local responsibility areas as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones, post specified information on its public internet website, conduct regional public workshops to receive oral public comments and consider those comments, host a 30-day public comment period to receive written comments from interested stakeholders and respond to all written comments by local agencies within 30 days of the end of the public comment period, and coordinate with other state agencies to help educate the public during the public workshops, as specified. The bill would also require, on or before January 1, 2030, and every 5 years thereafter, the State Fire Marshal to review the local responsibility area lands designated as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones and to recommend changes. The bill would no longer require this review to, when possible, fall within the timeframes for each county’s general plan update. The bill would authorize a local agency to, at its discretion, increase the level of fire hazard severity applicable to a parcel in its jurisdiction if a parcel contains 2 or more designations, so that the higher level of fire hazard severity would apply to the entire parcel. The bill would require the State Fire Marshal to publish within 60 days the local ordinance transmitted to the board, as described above, on its internet website. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: no. The people of the State of California do enact as follows: line 1 SECTION 1. Section 51178 of the Government Code is line 2 amended to read: line 3 51178. (a) The State Fire Marshal shall identify areas in the line 4 state as moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones line 5 based on consistent statewide criteria and based on the severity of line 6 fire hazard that is expected to prevail in those areas. Moderate, line 7 high, and very high fire hazard severity zones shall be based on line 8 fuel loading, slope, fire weather, and other relevant factors 99 — 2 — AB 2517 Page 118 of 122 line 1 including areas where winds have been identified by the Office of line 2 the State Fire Marshal as a major cause of wildfire spread. line 3 (b) The State Fire Marshal shall, no fewer than 180 days before line 4 finalizing the designations pursuant to subdivision (a), do all of line 5 the following: line 6 (1) Post draft maps of preliminary designations on its public line 7 internet website to ensure the preliminary designations are line 8 available for public review and comment. line 9 (2) Post the data inputs, model, and methodology used to line 10 develop the preliminary designations on its public internet website. line 11 (3) (A) Conduct regional, public workshops on the draft maps, line 12 before initiating the public comment period pursuant to paragraph line 13 (4), to receive oral public comments. line 14 (B) Provide at least one online virtual option for public line 15 participation in a workshop pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this line 16 paragraph. line 17 (C) Consider, within 30 days of a public regional workshop line 18 pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, all oral public line 19 comments received. line 20 (4) (A) Host a 30-day public comment period for interested line 21 stakeholders to provide written comment on the draft maps. line 22 (B) Respond to, within 30 days of the end of the public comment line 23 period pursuant to subparagraph (A) of this paragraph, all written line 24 comments received from local agencies regarding land use and line 25 zoning matters. line 26 (5) Coordinate with other state agencies to help educate the line 27 public during the public workshops pursuant to paragraph (3) on line 28 the following topics related to the preliminary designations: line 29 (A) Mitigation activities. line 30 (B) Fire insurance. line 31 (C) Other related maps and models. line 32 (c) After the process described in subdivision (b), the State Fire line 33 Marshal shall finalize the designations and transmit the maps line 34 identifying the fire hazard severity zones, pursuant to subdivision line 35 (a), to the appropriate local agency. line 36 SEC. 2. Section 51179 of the Government Code is amended line 37 to read: line 38 51179. (a) A local agency shall designate, by ordinance, line 39 moderate, high, and very high fire hazard severity zones in its 99 AB 2517 — 3 — Page 119 of 122 line 1 jurisdiction within 120 days of receiving recommendations from line 2 the State Fire Marshal pursuant to Section 51178. line 3 (b) (1) A local agency may, at its discretion, include areas line 4 within the jurisdiction of the local agency, not identified as very line 5 high fire hazard severity zones by the State Fire Marshal, as very line 6 high fire hazard severity zones following a finding supported by line 7 substantial evidence in the record that the requirements of Section line 8 51182 are necessary for effective fire protection within the area. line 9 (2) A local agency may, at its discretion, include areas within line 10 the jurisdiction of the local agency, not identified as moderate and line 11 high fire hazard severity zones by the State Fire Marshal, as line 12 moderate and high fire hazard severity zones, respectively. line 13 (3) A local agency may, at its discretion, increase the level of line 14 fire hazard severity applicable to a parcel in its jurisdiction if a line 15 parcel contains two or more designations, so that the higher level line 16 of fire hazard severity would apply to the entire parcel. line 17 (3) line 18 (4) A local agency shall not decrease the level of fire hazard line 19 severity zone as identified by the State Fire Marshal for any area line 20 within the jurisdiction of the local agency, and, in exercising its line 21 discretion pursuant to paragraph (2), may only increase the level line 22 of fire hazard severity zone as identified by the State Fire Marshal line 23 for any area within the jurisdiction of the local agency. line 24 (c) The local agency shall transmit a copy of an ordinance line 25 adopted pursuant to subdivision (a) to the State Board of Forestry line 26 and Fire Protection within 30 days of adoption. line 27 (d) Changes made by a local agency to the recommendations line 28 made by the State Fire Marshal shall be final and shall not be line 29 rebuttable by the State Fire Marshal. line 30 (e) The State Fire Marshal shall publish within 60 days the line 31 local ordinances transmitted pursuant to subdivision (c) on its line 32 internet website to ensure they are publicly available. line 33 (e) line 34 (f) The State Fire Marshal shall prepare and adopt a model line 35 ordinance that provides for the establishment of very high fire line 36 hazard severity zones. line 37 (f) line 38 (g) Any ordinance adopted by a local agency pursuant to this line 39 section that substantially conforms to the model ordinance of the 99 — 4 — AB 2517 Page 120 of 122 line 1 State Fire Marshal shall be presumed to be in compliance with the line 2 requirements of this section. line 3 (g) line 4 (h) A local agency shall post a notice at the office of the county line 5 recorder, county assessor, and county planning agency identifying line 6 the location of the map provided by the State Fire Marshal pursuant line 7 to Section 51178. If the agency amends the map, pursuant to line 8 subdivision (b) or (c) of this section, the notice shall instead line 9 identify the location of the amended map. line 10 SEC. 3. Section 51181 of the Government Code is amended line 11 to read: line 12 51181. The On or before January 1, 2030, and every five years line 13 thereafter, the State Fire Marshal shall periodically review the line 14 areas in the state identified as review the local responsibility area line 15 lands in the state, including areas identified as moderate, high, line 16 and very high fire hazard severity zones pursuant to this chapter, line 17 and as necessary, shall make recommendations relative to very line 18 high fire hazard severity zones. recommend changes in accordance line 19 with Sections 51178 and 51179. This review of local responsibility line 20 area lands shall coincide with the review of state responsibility line 21 area lands every five years and, when possible, fall within the time line 22 frames for each county’s general plan update. Any revision of line 23 areas included in a very high fire hazard severity zone shall be line 24 made in accordance with Sections 51178 and 51179. years. O 99 AB 2517 — 5 — Page 121 of 122 Item: 15.A. Meeting Date: 3/23/2026 To: City Council From: Nicolas Papajohn, City Attorney Thru: Karina Bañales, City Manager Subject: Conference With Legal Counsel - Existing Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(D)(1) The City Finds, Based on Advice from Legal Counsel, that Discussion in Open Session will Prejudice the Position of the City in the Litigation. (2 Cases) A. Name of Case: City of Rolling Hills v. SCE CPUC Docket No. C.24-10-008 B. Name of Case: City of Rolling Hills v. SoCalGas CPUC Docket No. C.24-10-009 Background: None. Discussion: None. Fiscal Impact: None. Recommendation: None. Attachments: None Page 122 of 122