Loading...
12-15-15 MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNIlVG COMMTSS�ON OF THE CITY OF RQLLING HILLS DECEMBER 15, 2Q15 CALL MEETING TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by Chairman Chelf at 6:30 p.m. on Tuesday,December 15, 2015 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Roliing Hills, California. ROLL CALL Commissioners Present: Cardenas, Gray, Kirkpatrick, Smitlz and Chairman Chelf. Commissioners Absent: None. Others Present: Yalanta Schwartz,Planning Director. Shahiedah Palrner, Assistant City Attorney. Heidi Luce, City Clerk. Myung Chung, CMC Archi�ects. Aaron Nichols,Kamus and Keller Architects. Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering. Ben Cauthen, Cauthen Design Group. Mazcia Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Driv�. Ken and Sandy Pickar, 11 Bowie Road. Criss Gunderson,Arthitect. Lyxm Gi11, 31 Chuckwagon Road. Gt�eg Keenan, Keenan Development. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane. APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA Approved as presented. PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA None. APPR�VAL OF MINUTES November 17, 2015,Adjourned Regula�r Meeting of the Planning Commission Vice Chairman Crray moved that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Cammission held on November 17, 2015. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion, which carried withaut objection. November 17, 2Q15, Regular Meeti.ng of the Planning Commission Commissioner Smith noted a correction on page 4 to change the word times to i�ems and on page 8 to change the word form to from. Planning Director Schwartz also noted a correction on p. 4 to correct the square footage of the raised patio to 117 sq. ft. Commissioner Cardenas moved that the Planning � - Commission approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning Commission held on November 17, 2015 as corrected. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion, which carried without objection. RESOLUTIONS ZOIVING CASE NO. 888. i7 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (LOT 5-MR), ROLLING HILLS, CA. (POST). Applicants requested continuance to Januaiy Z9, 2016 meetin�g to allow time for modification to the project. Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 12-IS-15 _ 1 _ At the request of the applicant, consideration of the Reso�ution of Approval in this case was continued to the next regu�ar meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, January 19, 2U16 at 6:30 p.m. RESOLUTION NO. 2015-23. A RESOLUTI�N OF THE PLANNING COMMISSI�N OF TI� CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPRQVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVTEW FOR AN ADDITION, AND CONSTRUCTION OF A POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE ON A PROPERTY WITH RESTRICTED DEVELOPMENT CONDITION; GRADIl�G FOR A GUEST PARKING AREA AND VARIANCES TO LOCATE 'THE EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE IN THE FRONT YARD AREA OF THE SITE, TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE, AND TO LOCATE A PORTION OF A 3' HIGH RETAINING WALL WITHIN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK IN ZONING CASE NO. 884 AT 13 �UTRIDER ROAD, (L�T 94-A-EF},ROLLING HILLS, CA. (HANG 3A Y00}. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staf�s comments. Planning Director Schwartz briefly re�iewed the applicant's request in Zaning Case No. 884 at 13 Outrider Road and stated that at the last meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request with canditians that the surface of the parking area be pervious and distinctly different than the surface of the driveway, that the area between the parking area and the roadway easement be landscaped and that there be no further development without Planning Commission review. Chauman Chelf called for public comment. Myung Chung, Architect addressed the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant ta request that the Planning Commission adopt the Resolution. Chairman Chelf expressed appreciatian to Mr. Chung for his willingness to make the necessary changes to address the Planning Commission's concems during its deliberations on this project. FoIlowing brief discussion, CoFnmissioner Smith mov�d that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2015-23 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zaning Case No. 884 at 13 Outrider Road. Vice Chairman Gray seconded tl�e motion which carried without objection. RES�LUTION NO. 2015-25. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY �F ROLLING HILLS GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND A SITE PLAN REVIEW TO FILL IN AND CONVERT AN EXISTING CABANA TO A GUEST HOUSE AND TO CONSTRUCT A RAISED DECK AT 7 CREST ROAD EAST IN ZONING CASE NO. 891 (LOT 3-F'1�, ROLLING HILLS, CA. (DOTY}. Chairman Cheif introduced the itern and asked for staff's commerits. Planning Directar Schwartz briefly reviewed the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 891 at 7 Crest Road East and stated that at the last meeting, the Planning Commission made suggestions to the applicant to address the Planning Comrnission concerns related to the proposed wall in the outdoor kitchen area so that the wall is a splash wall that would not require a Variance or Site Plan Review. She stated that the applicant submitted revised plans based on the Planning Commissior�'s direction and reviewed the plans which show the reduced trellis and reduced splash wa11 along the rea�r of the outdoar kitchen extending only 18" an each side of the kitchen. She further stated that the Planning Commission also considered the applicant's request for review of the proposed outdoor light plan to deterrnine if the proposal meets the intent of the Lighting Ordinance. She stated that based on the Planning Commission's direc�ion, staff prepared a Resolution for consideration which incorporated the app�icant's revised proposal and the Planning Commission's determination that the proposed lighting mee�s the intent of the lighting ordinance and will not be obtrusive. She stated that the Resolution is presented for consideration with additional conditions that the light bulbs in the proposed suspended fixtures do not exceed the propased wattage, that all other lights meet the City's lighting ordinance requirements, that the landscaping comply with the City's water efficient landscape ordinance and that the remaining trellis sides be left open.. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Aaron Nichols, Kamus and Keller Architects addressed the Planning Commission on behalf a£ the applicant to further explain the revised request and to request that the Planning Comtnission adapt the Resolution. Chai�nan Chelf expressed appreciation to Mr. Keller for his willingness to make the Minutes Pianning Commission Regular Meeting 12-15-�5 -2 ' nacessary changes to address the Planning Commission's concems during its deliberations an this project. Following brief discussion, Commissioner Cardenas rnoved that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2015-25 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 891 at 7 Crest Road East. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded the motion which carried without objection. RESOLUT'ION NO. 20�5-24. A RESOLUTI4N 4F TI� PLANNING COIVIlVIISSION RECONIlvIENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT ADMIIVISTRATIVE -- REGULATIONS INTERPRETING MEASURE B RELATING TO VIEW PRESERVATION. Chairman Chelf introduced the itemi and asked for staf�s comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that o�er the past several months, at the City Council's direction, the Pla�ning Commission has been considering and discussing administrative regulations interpreting Measure B related to View Preservation to address the ambiguity of certain pravision set forth in Measure B as adopted by the voters. She stated that the matters being discussed included issues related to the definition of"zAaature" �s. "maturing" and what is considered "acquisition" of property. She sta.ted that before the Plannir�g Commission this evening is a Resolution �recommending that t1�e City Councii adopt the Administ�ative Regulations interpreting Measure B as presented. She summarized the Administrative Regulations as proposed by the Planning Commission including the definition of xn.aturity, the criteria for acquisition and clarification of the retroactivity clause. She stated that included with the staff report is a coz•respondence from Lynn Gill addressing the "maturity" issue, which includes a suggestian that a tree be considered mature when it reaches 75% of its height as well as other suggestions. Chauman Chelf called for public comment. Marcia Schoettie, 24 Eastfield Dxive addressed the Planning Commission in opposition to the proposed Administrative Regulatians sta�ing that she does not feel it meets the spirit and intent of Measure B specifically with regard to the provision that a tree that has been previously pruned is considered sti11 maturing despite its age or height. In response to Ms. SchoettlE's comment regarding the provision that a tree that has been previously pruned is considered stil� maturing, Vice Chairman Gray commented that if a tree has been previously trimmed to mazntain a view based on mutual consent of the neighbors, it makes sense that the tree nat be exempted, despite its mahuity, if it is in the view corridor. He further commented that he feels that th� City should not be involved in view disputes. Following brief discussian, Cammissianer Smith moved that the Planning Comrnission adopt Resolution No. 2015-24 recommeriding �hat the City Council adopt Administrative Regulations interpreting Measure B relating to view preservation. Commissioner Cardenas seconded the motion which carried without objection. PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING ZONING CASE NO. $93. Request for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), Site Plan Review and Variances for a new 475 square foot cabana, grading, above grade deck, walls, pool and related s�ructures and for encroachment with a portian of the deck, walls, pool equipmen# area and fire place into the rear yard setback; to retain two e�cisting sheds,trellis and barbeque in the rear yard setback; to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of the lot; to exceed the m�imum permitted total coverage of the 1ot arid to s�t aside an area for a future stable and comal in the front yard area of the lat in Zoning Case No. 893, at 66 Eastfield Drive, (Lot 107-EF}, Rolling Hills, CA, (Thomas). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated that th.is is a continued public hearing where the Planning Commission visited the site earlier in the day. She reviewed the con�guration of the property at 66 Eastfield Drive stating that the property is almost square and has a very long driveway with the house located at the rear the property. She noted that a portion of the existing house is located in the rear yard setback. She stated that he applicant is proposing Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 12-15-15 -3 - to construct a 475 sq. ft. cabana ranging from I4 ft. to 19 ft. in heigl�t. Also proposed is a 5 ft. wall along the edge of the cabana toward the proposed swimming poo1, spa and deck. She reviewed the variances requested which include a variance to exceed the rnaacimurn disturbance, a variance to exceed total lot co�erage. She further reviewed the applicant's request for additional accessory str�ctures including a fire pit, pool equipment and a raised deck. She stated the prapased deck is located in the setback which requires a variance and the applicant is also proposing to retain an existing trellis constructed by a pre�ious owner, a portion is also in the setback. She further stated that there are additional structures existing on the lot located in the setback inciuding sheds and a barbeque which the applicant would also like to retain. She further reviewed the grading, which includes 565 cu. yds. of cut and 565 cu. yds. of fill. She stated that the applicant is also requesting a variance to locate the f�xture stable and corral in the front yard area of the property. She noted that the stable could not be tocated in the area of the proposed cabana and pool due to its proximity to the house. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Tavisha Nichotson, Bolton Engineering addressed the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant and offered to answer any question the Planning Corr�mission rnay have. Vice Chairman Gray expressed concern regarding the proposed out of grade condition and commented that he does not feel it meets the intent of the General Plan. He suggested that it could be nestled into the grade rather than being constructed out of grade. He expressed furkher concern regardizig the location of the sheds in that it ap�ears that they are on the property line. Commissioner Smith expresse� concern regarding the project stating that she does not feel it meets the intent of tl�e General Plan in that it does nat preserve the natural undeveloped state of the lot. In response to Vice Chauman Gray's suggestion, Commissioner Cardenas commented that there will need to be a wall either way, whether it is above or below the pool because of the change in grade. He further commented that he would not be opposed to dropping the cabana down 5 ft. or to some halfway paint to iessen the difference between the ho�se and cabana. He commented that he was also concerned about the height of the cabana so after the field trip he viewed the flagging from the easement of the property below and�eels that it is screened well enough and not as imposing as he suspected it might be. Brief discussion ensued cancerning the lot coverage. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that much of what is being requested was already existing when the current property owner purchased the property and he appreciates that the applicant is going through the proper channels in requesting approval. Regarding the sheds, he commented that he has a similar situation and given that the easement is not �sable, he understands the Community Association's decision to approve the location. He suggested that an option for addressing the height of the cabana may be to put a hi�raof on the front given that the house has a hip roof. Discussion ensued cancerning the optians far lowering the height of the cabana. Ms. Nicholson commented that an option may be to lower the plate height of the cabana and provide screening. Further discussion ensued concerning the disturbance;the propased pool azAd deck;the crowding on the properry and the challenges of the lot. Following public comments and discussion, consideration of this item was continued to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, January �9, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. to give the applicant azi apportunity to address the concerns raised by the Planning Commission. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS ZONING CASE NO. 892. Request for a Si#e Plan Review far minor grading and a 5' high retaining wall; Conditional Use Permit (CUP) ta consttuct a 704 square foot detached garage; and Variances to construct 61 sq. ft. addition to the residence in the front setback, a new one-car parking pad to be located closer than 30 feet from the roadway easement line, to located the garage partially within the front yard setback, to exceed the maximum permitted structural and tatal coverage of the lot and the disturbed area of the lot, and to locate a 5' high retaining wall in the front setback in Zoning Case No. 892, at 3 Eastfield Drive (Lot 58-EF), Rolling Hills, CA {Bennett}, The praject is exernpt from the California En�ironmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 exenrxption Guidelines. Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 12-15-15 -4- Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applican#'s r�quest in Zoning Case No. 892 at 3 Eastfield Drive stating that this properry is a smaller, square shaped lot. She stated that the applicant is requesting#o construct a new, d�tached 704 sq. ft. garage partially in the front yard setback to replace existing garage. She reviewed the setback lxne on the pro�erry noting that most of the hause and the existing garage are currently located in the setback. She stated that the applicant is also requesting a 51 sq. ft, addition to the front of the residence and a 195 sq. ft. addition to the rear of the house as well as a parking pad for one car in the front setback, 8 ft. froFn the roadway easement. She further reviewed the proposed garage and driveway configuration, which �-- includes widening the existing dri�eway and requires Traffic Commission re�iew. She further reviewed the applicant's request and the existing conditions af the pmperty. She revi�wed the proposed coverages stating that that structural lot coverage is currently at 24.1% and with tl�e additions is proposed at 25.9% which are both over the aliowed 30% m�imum and total lot coverage is currently at 36.7% with proposed coverage is 41.1% which are both over the allowed 35% maximum. She further re�iewed the additional variance requested. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Ben Cauthen, Cauthen Design Group addressed the Plannin.g Com�nission ox� behalf of the applicant to further explain the project. He sta.ted that the driving force behind rno�ing the garage is to make it more functional and to increase the parking space and the proposed location is the best location for the gaxage. Discussian ensued concerning the width of the driveway. Fol�owing public comments and brief discussion, the Planning Commission deterrnined that a site visit should be scheduled to provide the members of the Planning Commission with furkher understanding of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 892 at 3 Eastfield Drive. The public hearing was continued. ZONING CASE NO. 895. Request for a Site Pla�Review to construct a new 6,269 square foot single family residence, 983 square �oot garage, 6,000 square foot basement; 564 square foot swiFnming pool, various heights, but not to exceed S' high, retaining walls; grading of 4,033 cubic yards af excavated dirt and 1,400 cubic yards of fi�l and a new driveway; and Variances for fixture stable and corral locat�on in front yard and front setback, exceedance of the maxzmum permitted total lot caverage and of disturbed area of the lot, construction of retaining walls that encroach into the front and rea�r setbacks and that do not average out to 2.5 feet in height, and sexvice yard and basement light wells that encz�oach into the rear setback in Zaning Case No. 895, at 10 Bowie Raad, {Lot 4-CRA), Rolling Hills, CA (Patig Jui Yiu). The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA} pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines. Chairrnan Che�� introduced the item and asked for staff s cornrnents. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed th� applicant's request to construct a new house in Zonuag Case No. $95 at 10 Bowie Road. She reviewed the lot configuration including the buildable area of the lot. She stated that the applicant proposes to demolish the existing honrae and construct at new b,269 sq. ft. residex�ce with a 6,000 sq. ft. basement, a 983 sq. ft. gaxage as well as $ svvirnrning pool, covered porches, entryway, and pool equipmer�t area; and with an area for a fizture stable and corral lacated in the front yard area of the lot. She stated that the existing house encroach�s into the setback and the new house is also requesting a variance to encroach along with a proposed lightwell. She reviewed the proposed dri�eway and stated that the existing driveway will be abandoned and blended into the natural tenain. She further stated that the proposed driveway requires 5 ft. wails aiong both sides which do not average out to 2.5 ft. in height and require a variance. She further reviewed the grading plan stating that t1�e building pad will be enlarged by approxirnately 5,800 sq. ft. and requires cut and fill. She suminarized the variances requested which include: encroachment of the house into the rear setback, exceedance o£the maxirnum --- perinitted total lot coverage, exceedance of the maximum structural lot coverage and exceedance of tl�e maximum permitted distwrbance which is proposed at 96.5% where the disturbance was at 91% as tl�e lat currently exists. She further reviewed the grading which includes 4,033 cu. yds. of excavation mostly frorn the basement which will be exported with 1,400 cu. yds. to be used for the fiil and backfill of the wa11. Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 12-15-15 �5 - Chairtnan Chelf called for public comment. Ken Pickar, 11 Bowie Road addressed the Planning Commissian to express concern that the proposed hause it taa large and does not fit the neighborhood. Criss Gunderson, Architect addressed the Planning Cammission to further explain the praject and to address Mr. Pickar's concerns stating that they are doing their best to reduce the overall impact o�the mass of the house afFecting the naighbors. In response to Commissioner Cardenas,Mr. Gunder�on stated that the finished floor af the house�w�ill be within 3-6 inches of the fmished grade and the basement will be a full basemen#as shown by the elevations listed on Sheet 1.2 of the plans. Chairman Chelf suggested that Mr. Gundersan reach out to Mr. Pickar in an attempt to address his concerns. Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the Planning Commission to ask if this properry is lacated in the Overlay Zone District. Planning Director Schwartz responded that this property is not in the Overlay Zone District and explained the provisions set forth for praperties in the Overlay Zone District. Following public comments and brief discussion, the Planning Commission determined that a site visit should be schedu�ed to provide the members af the Planning Commission with further understanding of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 895 at 10 Bowie Road. The public hearing was continued. ZONING CASE NO. 896-A. Request for a Lot Line Adjustment to merge two existing parcels, having an APN: 7569�004-22 and 75b9-004-23, inta one parcel, which will result in a lot having 3.25 acres gross and 2.258 acres net, a.s calculated by the City for development purposes in the RAS-1 Zoning District, at �1 Saddleback Road, Rolling Hills, CA, {Warren). Project ha.s been d�termined to be exempt fr�nm th� California Environrnental Quality Act, {CEQA) pursuant to Section I53D5(a) (Lot line adjustment). AND ZONING CASE NO. 89b. Request far a Conditional Use Permit to conslruct a 13,860 square foot dressage arena, 2,415 square foot stable w�th a 625 square foot loft and 1,685 square foot corral; 5ite Plan Review for a 4,745 square foot residence, 659 square foot garage and 324 square foot wine cellar, 9,3�0 cubic yards of grading, various walls, pool patio and pool deck, and swirnming pool; and Variances ta lacate�he equestrian facilities in the frant yard area of the iot andlor in setbacks and to exceed the maximum permitted �ot distu�rbance at 11 Saddleb�ck Road (Lots 48-RH 1 and 48-RH-2), (Warren). The project has been determined ta be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Sec�ion 15303 (New construction of single famnly residence and accessory structures), and Section 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exernption) of the CEQA Guidelines. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staffs comrnents. Planning Director Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request stating that the Planning Commission is asked to consider two separate applications — one to merge two existing lots and the second to construct a 4,745 sq. ft. residence, garage, swimming pool, dressage arena, stable and corral at 11 Saddleback Road. Ms. Schwartz reviewed the detaxls of the applicant's request to merge the two existing parcels into one parcel resulting in a parcel having 3.25 acres gross and 2,25 acres net as calculated for development purposes. She s#ated that the two parcels were created by a subdivision in 1477 where one lot was developed and the second lat remained undeveloped. She further stated that fhe undeveloped lot has several constraints and there is a recorded restricted use area at the rear of the property that was recorded as a condition of the subdivision. She stated that there is also a Southern California Edison easement across the property where no construction can take place. Ms. Schwartz sta�ed �hat the �econd request is dependent upon the lot merger being approved and reviewed the details of the applicant's reque�t to construct a 4,745 sq. ft. residence (in place of the existing residence), garage, swimming pool, dressage arena, stable and corral and various other amenities. She stated that the applicant propases to construct a 2,4�5 stable by adding to the existing detached garage. �he fixrther stated Yhat the applicant also proposes a 1,685 sq. ft. coz�ral in the reaz of the stable and to construct a 13,860 dressage arena on the portion of the property that is currently the vacant tot of which a partion is proposed to encroach into the front yard setback. She further stated that a �ariance is also requested to locate the proposed stable in the front yard area of the property. She further reviewed the proposed grading and 7he proposed access from�he stable to the arena. Ms. Schwartz stated that included in the staff report is a list of house sizes on the nearby, developed lots as well as a list of Minutes Planning Commissian Regular Meeting 12-15-IS -6 - stables tha� have been approved since 2011. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the driveway access to the sta,ble stating that the applicant is requesting a variarice to allow the driveway to be paved more than is allowed given the unique circumstances that exist ar� the property. She re�viewed �he details of the proposed stable and stated that other than the driveway, the propased stable meets thc requirements of the �table Qrdinance. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the develapment standards which meet the building code guidelines with the exception of the disturbed area which is praposed at 46.45% where the m�imum is 40%. She further reviewed the unique configuration of the lot stating that there is roadway on three sides of the — properiy resulting in a large roadway easement area as well as a Sd ft. setback on the front and rear of the property. Brief discussion ensued concerning what is permitted to be done on the restricted area as well as th� SCE easement. In response to Commissioner Kirkpatrick, Planning Director Schwartz stated that applicant is warking with the Building Dept. #o answer those questions. Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Greg Keenan, Keenan Develapment addressed the Planning Commission to fixrther explain the project. He stated with regard to the house z�nd stable, that they are using the existing structures to the best advantage of the property. He further sta.ted with regard ta the dressage arena that it was designed to rnaintain an open appearance without any retaining wa11s. Carole Hoffman, 3 Hillside Lane addressed the Planning Commission in support of the project stating that she feels the property lends its�lf perfectly to a great equestz�an facility. Fol�owing public comments and brief discussion concerning the disturbance and the merits of considering the projects separately, the Planning Commission determined that a site visit should be scheduied to provide the members of the Planning Commission with fixrthe:r understanding of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 896 & 896-A at 11 Saddleback Road. The public hear�ng was continued. SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS Planning Director Schwarz stated that there is an outstanding project at 38 Portuguese Bend Raad for which a field trip needs to be scheduled. On behalf of the applicant, Tavisha Nicholson from Bolton Engineering stated that the applicant is going to withdraw the application. Followiz�g brief discussion, the Planning Commission scheduled a field trip to the following properties to be canducted on Tuesday, January 19, 2016 beginning at 7:30 a.m. 3 Eastfield 10 Bowie 11 Saddleback ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMiSSION None. ITEMS FR�M STAFF City Manager Cruz reported that the Palos Verdes Peninsula Unified School District is planning to install solar panels at some o�their properties and they plan to hold community meeting an the subjec�. He stated that additional information will be provided as it becomes available. He also reported that the City hired an Associate Planner, Wendy Starks and she will start with the City on Monday, December 28, 2015. ADJOURNMENT Hearing no further business before the Cammission, Chairman Che1f adjourned the meeting at $:40 p.m. to an adjaurned regular meeting of the PZanning Commission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, January 19, 2Q16 beginning at 7:30 a.m. for the purpose of conducting field trips to 3 Eastfield Drive, 10 Bowie Minutes Plar�ning Commission Regular Meeting 12-15-15 -7 - Road and 1� Saddleback Road. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commissian is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, January 19, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California. Respectfully submitted, i , Heidi Luce City Clerk Approved, ��� w.�;'��° �f, Bra h Cha rman Minutes Planning Commission Regular Meeting 12-15-15 - g -