01-19-16 MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLANNING CONIMISSI�N
OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
JANUARY 19, 2016
CALL MEETING TQ ORDER
--- A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hills was called to order by
Chairman Chelf at 6:35 p.m. on Tuesday, January 19, 2015 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall, 2
Porluguese Bend Road,Rolling HiZls, California.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Cardenas, Gray, Kirkpatrick, Smith and Chairman Che�f
Commissioners Absent: None.
Others Present: Yolanta Schwartz,Planning Director.
Raymond Cruz, City Manager.
Natalie Karpeles, Assistant City Attorney.
Heidi Luce, City Clerk.
Dave Dennee, � Lower Blackwater Canyon Road.
Ben Cauthen, Cauthen Design Group.
Terry McDonald and Ceceiia, 10 Bowie Road(tenants).
Jack Ng, 10 Bowie Road(applicant's representa.tive).
Tavisha Nicholson,Bolton Engineering.
Greg Keenan,Keenan Development.
Tany Inferrera, Architect.
Geoff Sumich,Designer.
� Cathy Nicho�s, 14 Crest Road West.
Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MiNUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
City Manager Cruz introduced the City's new Assistant City Attorney,Natalie Karpeles.
APPR4VAL OF TvIINUTES
December 15, 2015,Adjourned Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission
Vice Chairman Crray moved that the Planning Commission approve the rninutes of the adjaurned regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on December 15, 2015. Commissioner Kirkpatrick seconded
the rnotion, which carried without objection.
December 15, 2Q15,Regular Meeting of the Planning Cammission
� Commissioner Smith noted two typographical errors iri the minutes. Commissioner Smith moved that
the Planning Cornrnission approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning Cammissian held
on Decernber 15, 201 S as carrected. Vice Cha.ixman Gray seconded the mation, which carried without
objection.
NEW BUSINESS
Request to amend Resolution No. 2010-03 to rernove a condition of "no fu.rther development
without Planning Commission review" at 1 Lower Biackwater Canyon Road, (Dennee).
Minutes
Planning Commission Regula�r Meeting
01-�9-16 - 1 -
Commissioner Cardenas recused himseif frorn consideration of�his item due to the proximity of his
property to the subject property and left the dais. Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for
s�af�s comments. Planning Directar Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request to have the "no further
development without Planning Commission review" conditian removed from Resolution No. 2010-03 in
a pro}ect previously appraved with certain conditions at 1 Lower Blackwater Canyon Road. She
reviewed the constraints on the property as well as the background regarding why the "no further
developrnent" condition was originally placed on the Resolution, stating that the previously approved
project was not constructed and the entitlement has �ince expired. She stated that the applicant c�ently
proposes to construct a lOS sq. ft. addition to the residence, which could be appraved administratively if
not for the "no further develapment" conditian.
Chairman Chelf called for public camment.
Dave Dennee, 1 Lower Blackwater Canyon Road addressed the Piarming Commission to fiirther explain
the request. He stated that he feels that if the entitlement expired then ihe "r�o further development"
condition should have also expired.
Following brief discussion, Vice Chauman Gray rnoved that the Planning Commission direct staff to
prepare a REVISED Resolution to remove the "Na further development without Planning Cammission
review" condition on Resolution No. 20I Q-03 at 1 Lower Blackwater Canyon Road. Commissioner
Smith seconded the motion, which carried withaut objection. Commissioner Cardenas returned to the
dais.
RE�OLUTIONS
None.
PUBLIC HEARFNGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
Z�NING CASE NO. 892. Request for a Site Plan Review far a detached garage, grading and a
5' high re�aining wall; Canditional Use Permit (CUP) to construct 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 ba located closer than 30 feet from the roadway easement Iine, to locate
the gaxage partially within the front yard setback, to exceed the rn�imum permitted structural
and total 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 project is exempt from the California Environmental Qualrty Act
(CEQA)pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 exemption Guidelines.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for sta#�s comments. Planning Director Schwartz briefly
reviewed the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 892 at 3 Eastfield Drive and stated that the
Planning Commission visited the site earlier in the day. She reviewed the praposed lot coverage stating
that the existing lot coverage exceeds the maximums and with the proposed improvements, the numbers
will increase. She stated that during the site �isit, it was discovered that a portion of the garage is
currently constructed out of grade and with the improvements, will be exposed by more than 5 ft. which
requires a variance and will need to be re-advertised and noticed.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Ben Cauthen, Cauthen Design Group addressed the Planning Commission to further explain the
appiicant's request stating that he feels the ou# of grade condition of the garage can be addressed with a
planter. Discussion ensued concerning the aut-of-grade condition and ways to soften the appearance
without impacting the existing Pine tree.
Commissioner Cardenas commented that he fe�ls the proposed praject is an improvement but that the
out-of-grade condition needs to be addressed.
Commissioner Smith commented that she feels the pro�erty is crowded and overbuilt and does nat rneet
the intent of the General Plan in that it does not feel"open and rural."
Minutes
Planning Cornmission Regular Meeting
01-19-16 -2 -
Vice Chairman Gray cornmented that he feels the lot probably has too much development as it exists but
since the improvements to tk�e garage are being made in tl�e existing footprint, it doesn't make it any
more crowded. He stated that his only concern is the out o�grade situation.
Commissioner Kirkpa�rick commented that he feels the proposed changes improve access to the
property and minimizes the visual impact from the street.
Chairman Chelf commented that he too feels the proposed changes improve access and safety as we11 as
visual impact from the street. He commented that he would like to see the out of grade condition
softened.
Fallowing discussion, Vice Chairman Gray maved that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare
a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. $92 at 3 Eastfield Drive as
amended to address the out of grade condition with the standard fmdings of fact and condi�ions af
approval plus a condition that there be no further development without Planning Commission review.
Commissianer Cardenas second�d the motion, which carried without objection.
ZONING CASE NO. 895. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a new 6,269 squar� foot
single family residence witl� 6,000 square foot basement, 848 square foot garage and ancillary
structures, swi�ming pool, several not ta exceed 5' in height retaining walls, grading of 8,24$
cubic yards of cut and fill, and a new driveway; and Variances for: 1} portion of the house,
service yard and two light wells to encroach into the rear setback; 2) a fixture stable and corral
location in the front yard; 3) to exceed the maxiinum permitted total lot coverage and the
disturbed area of the lot; 4) construction of retaining wa11s that encroach into the front and rear
setbacks and that exceed an average height of 2.5 feet and 5) to exceed the maximum permitted
coverage of the front setback with a driveway in Zoning Case No. 895, at 10 Bowie Road, (Lat
4-CRA), RoIling Hills, CA (Pang Jui Yiu). The �roject is exempt fram the California
Environmental QualYty Ac#(CEQA}pursuant to Section �5303, Class 3 exemption Guidelines.
Planning Director Schwartz stated tt�at the applicant has requested that consideration of this matter be
__ continued. Recognizing that the item is on the published agenda, Chairman Chelf called for public
comment.
Terry McDonald and Cecelia, 10 Bowie Road {tenants) add�ressed the Planning Comrnission to request
that the Planning Commissian delay consideration of this case until their lease is up in May.
In response to Mr. McDonald's request, Chairman Chelf commented that the Planning Commission has
certain t�melines that it must follow based on State law and as such, is not able to delay the proceedings.
He further suggested that Mr. McDonald express their concerns to the property owner.
Jack Ng addressed the Planning Commission on behalf of the property owner to apologize that the
property was not staked for the previously scheduled field trip stating that they will work with the
realtors that are handling the lease to ensure that any issues with the tenants are resolved prior to
rescheduling the field trip.
Consideration of this item was continued to an adjourned reg;ular meeting of the Planning Commission
scheduled to be held on Tuesday, February 16, 20I6 beginning at 7:30 a.m. �or the purpose of
canducting a site visit to Z 0 Bawie Road.
ZONING CASE NO. 896-A. Request for a Lot Line Adjustment to merge two existing parcels,
having an APN: 7569-004-22 and 7569-004-23, into one parcel, which wiil result in a lot having
3.25 acres gross and 2.258 acres net, as calculated by the City for development purposes in the
-- RAS-1 Zoning District, at 11 Saddieback Road, Rolling Hills, CA, (Warren). Project has been
determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to
Sectian �5305(a) {Lot line adjustment).
ZONING CASE NQ. 896. Request for a Conditional Use Permit to construct a 13,860 sqt�are
foat dressage arena, 2,415 square foot stable with a 625 square faot 1aft and 1,685 square foot
corral; Site Plan Review for a 4,745 square foot residence, 659 square foot garage and 324
square foot wine cellar, 9,300 cubic yards of grading, various walls, poot patio and pool deck,
and swimming pool; and Variances to locate the equestrian facilities in the front yard area of the
lot and/or in setbacks and to exceed tl�e maximum permitted lot dfsturbance at 11 Saddleback
Minutes
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
01-19-16 - 3 S
Raad (Lats 48-RH 1 and 48-RH-2}, (Warren). 'The project has been determined to be exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15303 (New
construction of single fami�y residence and accessory structures), and Section 150b1(b}{3)
(Common Sense Exemption) of the CEQA Guidelines.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked far staffls comments. Planning Director Schwartz briefly
r�viewed the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 896 and 896-A at 11 Saddleback Road and stated
that the Planning ComYnission visited the site earlier in the day. She stated that firs� request is for a Lot
Line Adjustment to merge trvo lots and the seconc�is for development of t1�e merged lots.
In response to Chai�rrian Chelf, Planning Director Schwartz stated that although they are two separate
requests, they should be considered together. Ms. Schwartz further reviewed the proposed Lot Line
Adjustment and the develapment, which includes a new house, garage and pool as well as a stable and
corral. She stated that the applicant is also requesting a variance to retain the existing access to the
proposed stable. Sh� stated that tYze proposed stable meets the Zoning Code requirements for stables.
She further reviewed the pmposed dressage arena stating that variances are requested far it to be
partially located in the front setback as well as to exceed the maxirnum disturbance. She then reviewed
the praposed grading and ather miscellaneons annenities proposed.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering addressed the Planning Commission on behalf of the applicant
to further explain the applicant's request. She expressed the appticant's willingness to work with the
Planning Commission to address the cancern raised in the field regarding stable access. Brief discussion
ensued concerning the access to the arena and stable,
Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that he is fine with the lot line adjustment and the proposed
development; and his only concern would be the visual impact of the dressage arena fronn the road but
he feels it is justifiable.
Vice Chairman Gray commented that he is concerried about the topography that will result from
merging the two lots and he does not feel that it meets the intent of the General Plan given that there are
2:1 stopes around almast two-thirds of the property. He expressed further concern regarding the water
flow from the property and suggeste� that the access path between the stable and the dressage arena be
constructed wi#h DG ta eliminate the additianal slopes.
Commissioner Smith commented that she is delighted to see a property designed for equestrian use, but
she is also concerned about the slopes and the grading. She tao expressed concern regarding the access
path between the stable and the dressage arena.
Commissioner Cardenas commented that his biggest concern is the driveway to the stable and stated that
he would prefer to see the entire surface be porous. He commented that he feels the grading will look
very natural once it is complete.
Cha.irman Chelf commented that he likes the praject noting that the applicant loses an acre of the usable
area because the street goes entirely around the pro�erty. He commented also that much o�tt�e grading
is due to dressage arena and if not far the lot merger, �hat area could be developed with a house if it were
left as two lots.
Following discussion,two motions were made:
Comrnissioner Smith moved that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare a Resolution granting
approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 896 at 11 5addleback Road as amended to saften
the access to the stable and provided that the applicant addresses the issues related to SCE easement and
the Los Angeles County restriction with the standard findings of fact and conditions of approval.
Commissioner Kirkpatrick secanded the motion, which carried with Vice Chairman Gray opposed.
Commissioner Smith moved that the Ptanning Commission d'u�ect staff to prepare a Resolution
recommending tha#the City Council appro�e the applicant's request for a Lot Line Adjustment to merge
two existing parcels in Zoning Case No. 896-A at 11 Saddleback Road with the standard findings of fact
Minutes
Planni�g Commission Reguiar Meeting
ol-I9-16 -4-
and conditions of approval. Cammissioner Cardenas seconded the motion, which carried without
obj ection.
ZONING CASE NO. �88. Request for a Site Plan Review for 1,055 square foot addition,
grading, and reta�ng walls and request for Variances to encroach with 585 sq.ft. o£the addition,
with a light well and retaining walls into the required front and side yard setbacks; for higher
than allowed average height re#aining walls and to exceed the maximum permitted disturbance of
the lot, on a properly with a restr.icted develapment condition, in Zoning Case No. 888, at 17
1ltiddleridge Lane North, (Lot 5-MR), Roliing Hills, CA, (Post). The project is located in the
— RAS-1 Overlay Zone. The project is exempt from the Califomia Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA)pursuant to Section 15301, Class 1 exemption.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and disclosed far the record that he had a conve:rsatian with the
applicant encouraging him ta not encroach into the easements. He then asked for stafPs comments.
Planning Director Schwartz stated �hat since the agenda packet was delivered, an e-mail in support of
the project was received and has been placed on the dais. She stated also that an amended site plan was
received just befare the meeting. She reviewed #he original request as well as the Planning
Commission's prior action in this case. She stated that the plan originally submitted for consideration
tonight did nat address all of the concerns that the Planning Commission ra.ised the last time the mai#er
was discussed; but after further consideration, the applicant submitted a revised plan just today that
addresses the Planning Commission's concems and shows that the wall originally proposed in the
easement is no longer in the easement. She furthe�r reviewed the revised plan.
Chairman Chel�called£ar public comrnent.
Tavisha Nicho�son, Bolton Engineering addressed the Planning Commission to further explain the
revisions. She stated the three walls previously proposed at the rear of the property were reduced to two
wa11s and the walkway between was eliminated to address the Planning Commission's concern
regarding massing and crawding. Regarding tl�e addition, she expiained that it was revised to be in lin�
with the rest of the addition and the wall was moved aut of the easement while still maintainir�g the 4 ft.
walkway around the structure.
Cha.irman Chelf expressed the Commission's appreciation to the applicant for addressing the Planning
Commission's cor�cerns and for moving the wall out of the easement.
Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that his primazy concern was the wall in the easement and since
that issue was addressed, he is okay with the rest of the project.
Commissioner Cardenas cornmented that this was a difficult project where there was a lot o£healthy
debate but he respects the applicant for doing what was necessary to address #he Commission's
concerns. He stated that he is satisfied with the result.
Cornmissioner Smith commented that she is still concerned about the steepness of the rear s�ape and the
walls that are necessary to increase the pad to accommodate the pooi. She stated that she s�i11 feels that
the project does not maintain the natural topography.
Vice Chairman Gray commented that he feels it was wise to move the wall out of the easement, but
since he was not at the last meeting where this matter was discussed ta hear the discussion and concems,
he wiil abstain from voting on this item.
Commissioner K�rkpatrick moved that the Planning Commission direct staff to prepare a Resolution
granting approval of the applicant's request as amended per the plan submitted at the meeting in Zoning
Case Na. $88 at 17 Middleridge Lane North with the standard findings of fact and conditi�ns o£
approval. Commissioner Cardenas seconded the motion, which carried with Cozz�missianer Smith
opposed and Vice Chaizman Gray abstaining. City Clerk Luce stated that she would provide the audio
recording of the previous meeting so that Vice Chairman Gray can listen to the previous discussion.
Z4NING CASE NO. 893. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED CONTINUANCE OF THI5
CASE TO THE FEBRiTARY 16, 2016 PLANIVING COMMISSION MEETING. (Request
for a Conditianal Use Permit (CUP), Site Plan Review and Variances at 66 Eastfield Drive,
Thomas.)
Minutes
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
01-19-1b - 5 -
At the request of the applicant, consideration of this item was continued to the next regular meeting of
the Planning Commission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, February 16, 2016 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in
the Council Chamber at City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rotling Hills, California.
NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
Z4NING CASE NO. 898. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct an 1,835 square foot
addition and a raised deck, and a Variance to encroach with 150 square feet of the addition l0
feet into the front yard setback, to retain a shed i� side setback and to exceed the maximum
permitted disturbed azea of the lot at 46 Eastfield Drive, {Lot 97-EF), Rolling Hills, CA
{Miller}. The project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) pursuant
to Sect�on 15301, Class 1 exemption Guidelines.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item arid asked for staff s comments. Planning Director Schwartz
re�iewed the applicant's request to construct at 1,$35 sq. ft. addition, 15D sq. ft. of which encroaches
into the fror�t yard setback and raised deck in Zoning Case No. 898 at 46 Eastfield Dri�e. She reviewed
the existing site plan and structures on the lot stating that there is currentiy a code enforcement matter on
the properly that will have to be addressed as well. She reviewed the development standards stating that
the structural lot covera.ge is proposed at 11.9% and the total Iot co�erage is proposed at 21%. She
reviewed building pad and stated that there is no grading required for the addition and slight grading
only far the deck. She stated that building pad coverage is pxoposed at 54.8%. She reviewed the
disturbance stating that is currently non-conforming at 40.3% and will increase to 42.2% with the
grading required for the deck, which requires a Variance. She reviewed the set aside area and access for
a future stable and corral.
Brief discussion ensued concerning the size of the garage.
Chairmar�Chelf called far public comment.
Anthony �nferrera, Architect addressed the Planning Commission to fiu�ther explain the applicant's
request.
Following staf�s presentation and pubiic testimony, the rnernbers of the Planning Comrnission
de�ermined that a site visit should be scheduled to provide the members of the Planning Commission
with further understanding of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 898 at 46 Eastfield Drive. Tlie
public hearing was continued.
ZONING CASE NO. 894. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a new 6,631 square foot
single family residence, 1,3Q8 square foot garage, 1,781 square feet covered porches, 950 square
foot swimming poollspa, covered koi pond, various heights, but not to exceed 5' high retaining
walls and other �niscellaneaus accessory structures; grading for the new development and
modification to a previously approved cortal area; and request for a Variance to encroach with
325 square feet of the new residence and covered patio into the side yard setback at 77 Crest
Road East, (Lot 69-A1-MS), Rolling Hills, CA, (�ankovich). The project is exempt froin the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA} pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3 exemption
Guidelines.
Chairman Chelf intraduced the item and asked for stafPs comments. Planning Director Schwa:rtz
reviewed the applicant's request to construct a new 6,631 sq. ft. resider�ce in Zaning Case No. 894 at 77
Crest Raad East. She re�iewed the canfiguration of the lot stating the Planning Commission previously
approved a lot line adjustment merging two lots, which resulted in the existing lot; and also approved a
s�able to �e canstructed in the front yard area. She further reviewed the applicant's request, which also
includes two garages, covered porches as well as a swimming pool, spa and koi pond. She stated that the
applicant proposes ta retain an island of Iandscaping that currently exists in front of the house. �he
reviewed the proposed driveway as we11 a proposed modification of the walls in the area around the
stable. She further s#ated that this project will be subject to the City's Low Impact Development
Ordinance {LID} which requires retention of�he water on site and reviewed the proposed plan. She
stated that the totallot coverage is proposed at 8.8% and the structural lot co�erage is proposed at 3.8%
on the nearly 10-acre lot. She stated that the building pad area is proposed at 39,800 sq. ft. and with the
stable, coverage is proposed at 38.2%. She further reviewed the proposed covered porches one of which
is proposed to be located in the setback. She stated that to date,there have been no objections expaessed
by neighbors.
Minutes
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
01-19-16 -b -
Brief discussion ensued concerning the portio� of the covered porch that encroaches into the setback and
the proposed driveway.
Cha.irman Chelf called for public comment.
Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering addressed the Planning Commission to explain the applicant's
request.
— Geoff Sumich, Designer addressed the Planning Commission ta further explain the applicant's request
and presented a model of the proposed house.
Fol�owing stafPs presentation and p�xblic testimony, ihe members of the Planning Commission
determined that a site visit should be scheduled to provide the members of the Planning Commission
with furtl�er understanding of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 894 at 77 Crest Road East. The
public hearing was continued.
SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS
The Planning Commission schedu�ed a fie�d trip to the following properkies to be conducted an Tuesday,
February 16, 2016 bea nning at 7:30 a.m.
10 Bowie Road
46 Eastfield Drive
77 Crest Road East
NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS (C�NTINUED�
ZONING CASE NO. 899 AND Z�NING CODE AMENDMENT NO. 2016-01.
Consideration of a Zoning Code amendment relating to prohibiting medical mazijuana
cultivation, deiivery, distributing and dispensaries within the City by amending Sections
�- 17.OS.050 and 17.16.020, and adding Chapter 17.29 to Title 17 of the Rolling Hi11s Municipal
Code (R�-�VIC}. It has been determin�d that the project would not have a sigriifican�effect on the
environment pursuan�to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). AND
Consideration to adopt Resolution No. 2016-U1. A Resolution of the Planning Commxssion of the
City of Rolling Hills recommending that the City Council amend Title 17 af the Rollsng Hills
Municipal Code by amending Sections 17.08.OSU and �7.16.020 and adding Chapter 17.29 in
order to impose an express ban on medical marijuana cultivation, delivery and dispensaries within.
the City.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated
that b�fore the Planning Cornmissian for consideration is a proposed Zoning Code amez�dment �hat
wauld ban cultivatian, delivery, dispensing and other activities related to medical marijuana within the
City boundaries. She stated that this proposed amendment is before the Planning Commission in
response to recent legislation, collectively referred to as the Medical Marijuana Regulation and Safety
Act (1VIl1�SA), adopted by the State legislature that requires cities wishing to regulate �nedica.l
marijuana activities within their jurisdiction to adopt specific regu�$dons doing so by March lSt
otlaerwise,the State regulations which are much more permissive would apply.
City Manager Cruz stated that both Mayor Pra Tem Dieringer and Councilmember Mirsch suggested
that this matter be considered by the Planning Commission recognizing that there is a narrow windaw of
time for the City to take action.
Discussion ensued concerning why this matter is before the Planning Comrnission rather than directly
before the City Council. In :response to Chairman Chelf, Assistant City Attorney Karpeles stated that if
the City does not act in regard to this matter, the State rvill be the soie licensing authority with regard to
the cultivation of inedicat marijuana in the City of Rolling Hills. She stated that the amendment as
proposed by the Ci�r Attorney's affice represents the most restrictive regulations, but could be amended
a#a later c�a.te to be more permissive.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Minutes
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
01-14-16 -7 -
Cathy Nichols, 14 Crest Road West addressed the City Council in opposition to the propased regulations
pertaining to restrictions on medical marijuana in the City statir�g that she feels it takes away people's
rights granted under the compassionate use act. She stated that she does not feel there should be any
restrictions on legally prescribed medical rnarijuana for personal use.
Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Raad West addressed the City Council in opposit�on to the proposed ordinance
perta.ining to restrictions on rnedical marijuana in the City. He stated that he alsa does not feel there
should be any restrictions on legally prescribed medical marijuana for personal use.
Discussion ensued concerning the effect this regulation would have on inclividuals in the City who are
c�ualified patients and have a legal right to obtain medical marijuana. Ms. Karpeles clarified that this
regulation would not prevent qualified patients from obtaining medial mari}uana from fixed location
dispensaries or qualified delivery services. She stated that the primary objective of the regulation is to
ban mobile medical marijuana dispensaries from coming into the City to dispense medical marijuana.
Further discussion ensued regarding personal cultivation. Ms. Karpeles clarified that the proposed
regulation prohibits comrnercial cultivatian and personai cultivation to the extent that such cultivation is
not preempted by State law. The Planning Commissioners collectively expressed concern that they were
not given enough time to give this matter due diligence. Further discussion ensued regarding the
deli�ery mechanisms available to qualified patients. Vice Chairman Gray expressed cancem that the
term "cornmercial transfer" is not clearly defined. Ms. Karpeles pro�ided an explanation of the tenm
"commercial transfer."
Follawing fiirther discussion and recagnizing the time constraints, Commissioner K�rkpatrick moved
that the PYanning Commission adopt Resolution No. 2016-01 recommending that the City Council
amend Title 17 of the Rol�ing Hills Municipal Code by ar�ending Sections 17.OSA50 and 17.16.Q20 and
adding Chapter 17.29 in order to impose an express ban on medical marijuana cul�iva�ian, delivery and
dispensaries within the City as amended to (1) provide a definition for the term "commercial transfer"
and (2} pxovide for a delivery mechanism into the City fox patients who need medical marijuana but
cannot procure it for themselves. Commissioner Smith seconded the motion, which carried without
obj ection.
ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
None.
ITEMS FROM STAFF
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further business before the Commission, Chairman Chelf adjourned the meeting at 9:52 p.m.
to an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled to be held on Tuesday,
February 16, 201fi beginning at 7:30 a.m. for the purpose of conducting field trips to 10 Bowie Road, 46
Eastfield Drive and 77 Crest Road East. The next regular n�eeting of the Planning Commission is
scheduled to be held on Tuesday, Febnxary 16, 201b beginning at b:30 p.m. in the City Council
Chamber, Rolling Hiils City Hall, 2 Portuguese Bend Road,Rolling Hills, California.
Respectfully submitted,
,
Heidi Luce
City Clerk
pproved,
B d Chel�
airman
Minutes
Planning Co�nmission Regular Meeting
01-19-1b - � -