02-21-17 MINUTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING
QF THE PLANNING CQMMISSION
OF THE
CITY OF ROLLING HILLS
FEBRUARY 21, 2Q17
� CALL MEETING TO ORDER
_ A regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Rolling Hilis was called to order by
Chairman Chelf at 6:32 p.m. on Tuesday, February 21, 2017 in the City Council Chamber, at City Hall,
2 Portuguese Bend Road,Roliing Hills, California.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Cardenas, Cooley,Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Cheif.
Commissioners Absent: None.
Others Present: Yolanta Schwartz,Planning Director.
Raymond R. Cruz, City Manager.
Natalie Karpeles,Assistant City Attorney.
Ju1ia Stewart,Assistant Planner.
Heidi Luce, City Clerk.
Tony Fan, 1 Sagebrush Lane.
Martin Waters, 4 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road.
Jeff Manquen, 2b Middleridge Lane South.
Alan McGregor,Landscape Architect.
Louie Tomaro, Tomara Design Group.
Dave Breiholz, 6 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road.
Dan Bolton, Bolton Engineering.
Subir Chowdhury, 11 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road.
Shane Lamb, Lamb Construction.
David McKinnie, 3 E1 Concho Lane.
Lauren Sharng, 5 Pine Tree Lane.
Keith Murphy, 3 Pine Tree Lane.
Tavisha Nicholson,Bolton Engineering.
Bob Gaudenti, Gaudenti & Sons.
Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road.
Spencer Karpf, 8 Maverick Lane.
Debi Fournier, 30 Crest Road East.
Marcia Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive.
Tina Greenberg, 32 Porluguese Bend Road.
Arvel Witte, 5 Quail Ridge Road South.
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS �N MINUTES AND ANY ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA
None.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
January 17 2017, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commissian
Commissioner Seaburn moved that the Planning Commissian approve the minut�s of the regular
meeting of the Planning Commission held on January 17, 2017 as presented. Commissioner Kirkpatrick
seconded the motion, which carried without objection.
November 1, 201b Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-17 - 1 -
Commissioner Kirkpatrick mo�ed that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the Joint
Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission held an November 1, 2016 as presented.
Chairtnan Chelf seconded the monon, which carried wi#h Cammissioners Cardenas and Cooley
abstaining because they were not at the meeting of November 1,2016. �
RES�LUTIONS
None.
PUBLIC HEARiNGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
ZONING CASE NO. 914. Request £or a Site Plan Review to construct 11,052 square foot new
residence with a 1,446 square foot garage and 6,620 square foot basement, 1,336 square foot '�
swimming pool and grading of 24,900 cubic yards of cut and fill, (including excavation and s
compaction); and Conditional Use Perrnit for a 744 square �oot two-story stable with a 504 sc}uare
foot ground floor and 240 square foot laft, a 1,491 squaxe foot corral, a 6,985 square foot tennis
court, and a 804 squaxe foot guesthouse with 195 square feet of attached covered porches. Also
proposed axe variaus outdoor amenities and a new driveway. The subject property is located at 11 :
Upper Blackwater Canyon Road (Lot 99�B-RH) Rolling Hills, CA, (Author Homes, LLC). The �
project has been determined to be ca#egorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act(CEQA), Section 15303.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for stat�s comments. Assistant Planner Stewart
reviewed the applicant's request to construct a new residence, basement, garage and other amenities in
Zoning Case No. 9�4 at 11 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road. She stated tha� disturbance is proposed a�
34.7% with 25,000 cu. yds. of cut and 25,000 cu. yds. oF fill with export of approximately 15,000 cu.
yds. from the basement excavation. She further sta.ted that there was a previously appro�ed project at
this location and reviewed the differences between this proposal and�he previous project stating that the
height is approximately the same and the applicant proposes to lawer the building pad by 2 ft. as in the
previausly approved project. Ms. Stewart fitrther reviewed the proposed stable and guesthouse. She
stated that at the field#rip earlier in the day, a neighbor requested that the stable and corra� be relocated
and the applicant has since submitted a revised plan maving the stable and corral approximately b3 ft.
further into the interior of the subject property in order to address the neighbor's concerns.
Ms. Stewart reviewed the concerns addressed by neighbors and other residents staxing that the concerns
primarily involve screening of the stable and tennis court and placement of the sta.ble. She reviewed the
proposed landscape plan,which addresses the screening of the tennis court and stable.
Brief discussion ensued cancerning the basement, wa11s and location of the stable. Chairrnan Chelf
called for public comment.
Tony Fan, 1 Sagebrush Lane addressed the Planning Commission ta express concern regarding noise
from the tennis court.
In response to Chairman Chel�, Ms. Schwartz stated that normally the City does nat regulate noise from
tennis courts, but there are measures that can be taken witt; regard to the surface of the court and
screening that rnay address noise issues.
Martin Waters, 9 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road addressed the P�anning Cornmission stating that he
does not want his property to be averlooked by this project and he would like to see a landscaping plan
showing how the project will be screened. He further expressed continued concern rega�rding the
lacation of the stable and asked that it be moved further away frarn his property.
Jeff Manquen, 2b Middleridge Lane Soufh addressed the Planning Cornmission to express concem
regarding the visibility of the stable and guest house frorn across the canyon and asked that they be
screened.
Alan McCrregor, Landscape Architect addressed the Planning Commission to review the landscape plan
and the revised location of the stable. In response to Commissioner Kirkpatrick, staff confirmed that the
stable was moved 63 ft. further away frarn Mr. Waters' house. Mr. McGregor stated that it could be
rnoved an additionai 50 ft. further and will be screened to address the concerns raised regarding
visibility. With regard to the noise from the tennxs court, Mr. McGregor commented that there is a
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-17 -2 -
cushioned surface that could be placed over the asphalt or concrete to attenuate the noise and they would
be wiliing to incorporate such a surface.
Loui� Tomaro, Tomaro Design Group addressed the Planning Commission to explain the configuration
of the basement and the proposed exit as amended based on the Rolling Hills Communi�y Association's
requiremer�ts. With regard to the tennis court he stated that it will be surfaced with a rubberized surface,
as well as lowered by 3-4 ft. and screened with landscaping to further address the concerns regarding
sound.
Discussion ensued cancerning the location of the stable.
Dave Breiholz, 6 Upper Blackwater Canyon Road addressed the Planning Commission to inquire about
the drainage plan given that his property is down stream fram this property.
In response to Mr. Breiholz's inquiry, Ms. Stewart reviewed the proposed drainage p�an. Dan Bolton,
Bolton Engineering further explained the proposed drainage plan to address Mr. Breiholz's concern.
Commissioner �irkpatrick expressed general support for the projEct stating that he appreciates that the
applicant is working with the neighbors to address the concerns raised. Commissioner Seabu�n
concurred.
Corntnissioner Cardenas also expressed support for the project and suggested that the project be fiu-�her
modified to move the stable further away from Mr. Waters' property and to address tYie issues raised
regarding screeriing. Commissioner Cooley conc�arred.
Subir Chowdhury, 11 Upper Blackwate�r Canyon Road addressed the Planning CommissiQn to express
concem that moving the stable too far will put it in the �iew of the guesthouse. Mr. McGregor
commented that mov�ing it 50 ft. won't put it the guesthouse view.
Following discussion, Commissioner Cardenas moved that the Planning Cornmissian direct staff to
prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 914 at 11 Upper
Blackwater Canyon Road as amended to mave the stable an addztional 50 ft. to address the neigl�bors'
concerns with the standard fmdings of fact and conditions of approva�plus additional conditians that the
applicant submit a landscaping plan to show screening of the stable from all sides; that the tennis court
be of such a surface to minimize naise; and that the tennis court be screezied appropriately from view
and sound. Cammissianer Kirkpatrick seconded the motian,which canried without objection.
ZONING CASE NO. 916. Request for a Site Plan Review and Vaxiances to retain a partially
excavated area for a proposed 1,322 square foot basement, a partion of which would be located in
the front setback and to retain unpermitted patio with an outdoor barbeque area supported by a 5'
high retaining wa�l; grading for dirt pathways that are buttressed by 3' high railroad tie wa11s and
a 3'S"high concrete block retaining wall in the side and front setback. The applicant also requests
a Site Plan Review and Variances for a new 76.3' long, 4'6" high retaining wall, a portion of
which would be located in the side setback, far refiaining walls that do not average out to 2.5' in
height and ta exceed the max�imum permitted disturbance (48.8%) of the net lot area, including
for the set aside area for a future stable and corra�. Project is located at 5 El Concho Lane, {Lot
10-GF), Rolling Hills, CA, (de Miranda). Project has been determined to be exempt froxn the
California Environmental Quality Act, (CEQA).
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for stafPs comments. Planning Director Schwartz
reviewed the applicant's request stating that the Planning Commission visited this site earlier in#he day.
She stated that the applicant proposes to retain conditions �1�.at were pxeviously constructed without
permits and to add some other ameruties. She further reviewed the applicant's request ta construct a
1,322 sq. ft. basement under the existing footprint of the residence to be partially located in the frant
yard setback. She stated that the applicant a�so proposes additional walls, grading for pathways and to
retain an unpermitted patio with an outdoor barbeque area supported by a 5' high retaining wall. She
stated that a 3.5 ft. wall was constructed in the side se#back as an emergency measure to retain a pipe
that ruptured and the app�icant proposes to keep that wall. She stated that the applicant also needs to
remediate damage further down on the praperty, a result of runoff from#1�e recent rains, but that it needs
to be designed and submitted to the County.
Chaurnan Chelf called for public comrnent.
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-t7 -3 -
Shane Lamb, Lamb Canstruction addressed the Planning Commission to introduce himself to offer to
answer any questions.
Cammissioner Seaburn expressed concem regarding the amount of work that was done on the property
without permits, specifically the outdoor barbeque area. Commissioner Kirkpatrick expressed concern
regarding the drainage issue that was visible on the property today. Mr. Larnb commented that it was#he
ruptured pipe that caused a11 of the erosion and the reason the wa11 was constructed in the side setback
was to address an emergency situation. Commissioner Kirkpatrick commented that he understand the
need to address the emergency situation, but expresse� concern r�garding the location of the outdoor
barbeque axea.
Commissioner Cardenas expressed concern regarding the walls and suggested that the applicant consult
an engineer ta determine what is minimally necessary to retain the slope, He also expressed concern
regarding the outdoor barbeque area. Commissioner Cooley concurred.
Discussian ensued concerning the ways to address the drainage issue. The Planning Commission
expressed general support fo:r the walls necessary to address the drainage issues but suggested that they
be engineered properly so that future problems do not arise.
David McKinnie, 3 El Concha Road addressed the Planning Commission to express cancern regarding
the drainage and its affect on the stability of the adjacent properties.
Mr. Lamb addressed the Planning Commission stating that the applicant is warking with an engineer to
address the drainage issue; but, all of the water draining from Gerogeff Road and Ei Cancho Lane ends
up an this property and the property owner does nat feel it should be his responsibility solely. Further
discussion ensued concerning the drainage issues, ways to address the issues and who is responsible for
addressing such issues. Mr, McKinnie suggested that Mr. Lamb approach the Rolling Hills Community
Association to place this matter on an agenda before the RHCA Board of Du�ectors.
Fallowing discussion, the Planning Commission asked the applicant to present plans to address the
drainage issue and ha�e an engineer present at the next meefing to present a plan of action for the
drainage and ascertain that the short walls along the paths are adequate to support the slope between the
paths. The Planning Commission expressed general suppart for #he area exca�ated for the proposed
basement, paths, and the as bi.�ilt retaining wa11 in the side setback, if it is determined that this wall is
necessary for the drainage device; and did not expressed support for the unpermitted patio and outdoor
barbecue area. The public hearing was continued.
ZO1vING CASE NQ. 915. Request for a Site Plan Review, Conditional Use Permit, and
Variance at 1 Middleridge Lane North {Lot 15, i6, 17-MR), Rolling Hills, CA, (Cipolla).
APPLICANT REQUESTED CONTINUANCE TO MARCH 21, 2017 FIELD TRIP MEETING.
Plannxng Director Schwartz reported that at the request of the applicant, consideration of this matter was
continued to a field trip scheduled to be held on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m. at 1
Middleridge Lane North. The public hearing was continued.
NEW PUSLIC HEARINGS
ZQNING CASE NO. 917. Request for a Site Plan Review to construct a new residence additian
of 2,065 square feet, a new 2,065 square foot basement, 7Q0 square foot swimming pool, and
grading of 3�,920 cubic yards of dirt, (which includes excavation and compaction) and
construction of various miscellaneous accessory structures; Conditional Use Permits for a new
1,100 square foat detached garage, 7,000 square foot tennis court, 1,200 square faot stable, 9,150
square foot corral and a n.ew second driveway; and Variances to exceed�he maximum permitted
disturbance of the lot and to grade more than 750 cubic yards of dirt and over 10,00D square feet
surface area for the tennis court. The subject properiy is located at 5 Pine Tree Lane (Lot 94-RI�
Rolling Hills, CA, (Sharng). The project has been determined to be categorically exempt(Class 3)
purstxant to the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Assistant Planner Stewark
revievved the applicant's request to construct a new residential addition, basem�nt and other accessory
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-17 -4 -
+
structures an'd amenities including a tennis court and stable in Zoning Case Na. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane.
She stated that the applicant proposes to retain the exisdng driveway and to construct a second driveway
to serve the house as well as a pathway to serve the stable. She stated that this proposal will replace the
previousty approved project, which the applicant has since abandoned. She further reviewed the grading
plan and the proposed stable. She sta.ted that a variance is requested for grading/disturbance associated
with the tennis court. Ms. Stewart further stated that one neighbor at 3 Pine Tree Lane, who shares a
driveway with the subject property inquired about the project.
Lauren Sharng, 5 Pine Tree Lane addressed the Planning Commission to further expiain the project and
why the original proposal was abandoned. She sta.ted that with the revised proposal they attempted to
minimize the impact on the neighboring property as much as possible.
Keith Murphy, 3 Pine Tree Lane addressed the Planning Commission to further explain his concerns
associated with the previous project. He stated tha# he supports the project as currently proposed. He
asked the Planning Commission to consider a conditian that ailows his continued use of the current
shared driveway as was placed in the previous approval. In response to Mr. Murphy's request regarding
the driveway, Ms. Sharng sta.ted that the driveway is entirely on her properiy and it is at her discretion
whether or not to grant an easement.
Tavisha Nich.olson, Bolton Engineez�ing addressed the Planning Commission ta further explain the
pxoject as compared to the previously approved project.
Following staff's presentation and public testimony, ttxe members of the P�anning Commission
detcrmined 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. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane. The
public hearing was continued.
ZONING CASE NO. 896-R. Request for a Major Madification to Zoning Case No. 896
requiring 5ite Plan Review, Conditiona� Use Permit, and Variances to make changes to a
previously approved project, which entails grading totaling 7,484 cubic yards af dirt, for a 13,93Q
square foot dressage arena, a 1,736 square foot residential addition wi#h 1,056 square foot
basement azid 480 square foot attached garage; fo retain but reduce in size to 8G3 square feet an
existing detached garage, constnxct a new 2,430 square foot sta.ble and wash area with 1,350
squar� feet of fenced open turnout paddocks, and a new 480 square �oot infimity pool; to construct
a retaining wall in the side setback(not to exceed five feet in height), and to exceed the maximurn
permitted disturbance of the lot. Tlie subject property is located at 11 Saddleback Road (Laf 48-
1-RH 48-2-RH)Ro�l�ixig Hills, CA, (Warren). The project has been dete�nined�o be ca�egorically
exempt {Class 3} pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines,
Section 15303.
Chairman Chel� introduced the item and asked for staffls comments. Assistant Planner Stewart
reviewed the applicant's revised request in Zoning Case No. 896-R at 11 Saddleba.ck Road. She stated
that this request is a rnajor rnodificatian to a previous approval, which will result in a house remodel and
addition,basement,new pool,new stable and less grading than the previous approval. She further stated
that the detached garage is now proposed to remain and not be converted to a stable. She stated that if
the modifications are denied, the applicant will still be able to construct what was previously approved
but the applicant feeis that the modification have a lesser impact on the averall property. She further
reviewed the previously approved project stating that the proposed modifications would keep the
proposed arena at grade which �requires a retaining wall in one area but eliminates all of the exterior
retaining walls associated with the previous project; include a new stable,modifications to the house and
a new infinity paol. She reviewed the p�ans showing the previously proposed project as compared to �he
revised proposal.
In response to Commissioner Cardenas' inquiry, Planning Directar Schwartz stated that the 1ot merge
was approved but sill needs to be recarded, so the applicant would not be able to pu11 any permits for
this project until the dacuments are recorded.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment. Hearing none, the Planning Commission determined that a
site �isit should be scheduled to provide the members of the Planning Commission with further
understanding of the appiicant's request in Zaning Case No. 89b-R at 11 Saddleback Road.
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-17 - 5 -
Bob Gaudenti, Gaudenti & Sons addressed the Planning Commission to ask if the Planning Commission
would consider having a site�isit befoxe the next Planning Commission in oxder to expedite the project.
Following discussion concerning the scope of the project, the noticxng required for the field trip and the
time�ine far reviewing and approving the project, the members of the Planning Cammission determined
tha.t it was not feasible to hold the field trip any sooner than the next meeting. The public hearing was
continued.
SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS
The Planning Commission scheduled a field trip to the �ollowing properties to be held on Tuesday,
March 21, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m.
5 Pine Tree Lane
11 Saddleback
1 Mic�dleridge Lane N.
OLD BUSINESS
CONTINUED PUBLIC FORUM ON VIEW PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
Chairman Chelf introduced the itern and asked for staf�s comments. Planning Director Schwarfz
reviewed the background on this matter and stated that the Planning Commissian's task i� to review the
cancepts discussed in the ad hoc committee and focus on ga.ining consensus as to the concepts rather than
the actual language of the ordinance. She stated that once the concepts are agreed on, staff will prepare
the actual ordinance Ianguage for the Planning Commissian's consideration. Ms. Schwartz further
reviewed the staff report, which includes the ardinance language prepared by Spencer Karpf, the
informa�ion prepared and submitted by Lynn Gill. She stated�hat also,placed on the dais is an additional
correspondence from Mr. Gill regarding the initiative petition�hat was submitted to the City Clerk. City
Clerk Luce stated that the petition was verified and a Certificate of Sufficiency will be presented to the
City Council at its meeting af February 27,2017 for consideration.
Planning Director Schwartz stated that at its last meeting, the Planning Commission asked staff to do
further research regarding the proposed definitions related to the arborist terms. She stated that staff was
unable ta fmd industry standard definitions, but the proposed defmitions appear to be appropriate based
on staff research of other ordinances. She further reviewed what was discussed and decided at the �ast
meeting on this subject and stated that there are otl�er terms relatec� to views that the Planning
Commission will need to decide how to define — including established view and other terfns relafive to
views. The Plar�ning Commission began taking public testimony and discussing the concepts starting
with"Established View."
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the Planning Commissian stating that the measure was
submitted as an insurance policy with the understanding that it could be withdrawn from the ballot if
requested by the pro�onents in sufficient nme before the March 2Q19 election. He urged the Planning
Commission tfl continue its careful deliberation of this matter and take its time ta ensure that a fair
ordinance is ultimate�y adopted.
Spencer Karpf, 8 Maverick Lane addressed the Planning Commissian to further explain how the sample
ordinance he wrote was created stating that it involved significant input from the ad hoc committee. He
stated that it is designed to protect both views and vegetation. He urged the Planning Commission to not
write the ordinance,but rather come up with concepts that the Commission agrees with within the context
of what has been draft�d, the opinions of the members of the Planning Commission and with input from
members af the community.
Planning Director Schwartz sta�ed that the concept of"Established View" means that a property owner
shauld be eligible for the view that existed when the property was purchased but the question is should it
be expanded to include "any other specific point in time following purchase."
Chairman Chelf called for public comment on the concept of"Established View."
Minutes -
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-17 - 6 -
Established View
Debi Fournier, 30 Crest Road East addressed the Planning Commission in support of protecting
established views and expanding the scope of the concept. She expressed cancern regarding views that
are diminished overtime.
Marcia Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive addressed the Pla�zting Commission stating that it is important that
established views be documented. She agreed with the cancept of protecting established views.
Tina Greenberg, 32 Portuguese Bend Road addressed the PIanning Commission concwrring with Mrs.
Schoettle.
Commissioner Cardenas commented tha# there is one school of�tb.ought that says a properry owner is
entitled to a view they had at any point in time, presumably tha# can be documented, and asked if there
are any member of the public that would like to speak in opposition to that concept.
Arvel Witte, 5 Quail Ridge Road South addressed the Planning Commission to express concern regarding
the cancept of view corridors and enforcemer�t autho�ity.
Mr. Gill suggested that the Planning Commission consider the proposed definition as provided an circle
page 47 of the staff report and expressed support of that concept.
The Planning Commission concuired with the concept that an established view is the view that existed
when the properry was purchased or some later date.
Planning Director Schwartz stated that the next concept for consideration is should the vegeta.tion owners
also have rights allawing for the protection of�egetation that existed when a property owner purchased
the property. Discussion ensued cancerning documenting the established vegetaxion and areas where this
may pose conflict.
Established Vegetation
Mr. Gill referred to circle page 48 of the staff report where Mr. Karpf's sample ordinance defnes
established view. Ms. Schwartz commented that established means existing regardless of its size. Mr.
Gill noted that the intent is for the vegetation owner to mainta.in their vegetation so that it doesn'# grow
into a view.
N1.�s. Schoettle cornrnented that it is important for both parties to maintain documentation of the view and
the vegetation.
Planning Director Schwartz stated that Commissioner Cairdenas has referenced the Tiburan ordinance
se�eral times and provided a copy for the Commission's reference. Discussion ensued conce�ning the
responsibilities associated rvath the rights of both vegetation owners and view seekers.
With regard to concept of a �ight to established vegeta#ion, the Planning Commission concurred that the
concept is worfhwhile.
Consideration of this matter was continued.
NEW BUSINESS
None.
ITEMS FROM STAFF
Status an Ad Hoc Committee, including members of Caballeros far the purpose of reviewing
construction of stables, (oral).
Planning Director Schwartz reported that Caballeros appointed JiII Smith, Dave Breiholz and 7ack Srnith
to serve on the ad hoc committee with Commissioners Cardenas and Cooley to review and discuss sta.ble
construction; and staff is working with the ad hac committee to schedule a meeting.
Minutes -
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
02-21-17 - 7 -
ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further business before the Commission, Chairman Chelf adjourned the meeting at I0:00 p.m.
to an adjourned regular meering of the Planr�ing Cornmission scheduled to be held on Tuesday, March
21, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m. for the purpose of canducting a site visit to S Pine Tree Lane, 11
Saddleback Road and 1 Middleridge Lane North. The next regulaz meeting of the Planning Commission
is scheduled to be heid on Tuesday, March 21, 2017 beginning at b:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber,
Rolling Hills Ciry Hall,2 Portuguese Bend Road, Rolling Hills, California.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Luce
City Clerk
Approved,
�
Br
C irman
Minutes -
Planning Commission Regvlar Meeting
02-2I-17 - 8 -