04-18-17 MINLJTES OF A
REGULAR MEETING
OF THE PLANNING CONIMISST4N
OF THE
CITY OF ROLLiNG HILLS
APRIL 1 S, 2017
CALL MEETING TO ORDER
�_ A regula,r meet�ng of the Planning Commission of the City of Rol�ing Hills was called to order by
Chairman Che�f at 6:33 p.m. on Tuesday, Apri1 18, 2017 in the City Counci� Chamber, at City Hall, 2
Partuguese Bend Road,Rolling Hills, California.
ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present: Cardenas, Cooley,Kirkpatrick, Seaburn and Chairman Chelf.
Commissioners Absent: None.
Others Present: Raymond Cruz, City Manager.
Yo�anta Schwartz,Planning Director.
Natalie Karpeles,Assistant City Attarney.
Jvlia Stewart, Assistant Planner.
Heidi Luce, City Clerk.
Tavisha Nicholson,Bolton Engineering.
Gary Wynn, Wynn Engineering.
Chaz Cipolla, 1 Middleridge Lane North.
Lisa Naslund, Grading&Drainage Engineer, Los Angeles County.
Yosh Marisaku, Grading&Drainage Engineer, Los Angeles Caunty.
Rarn Reddy, 11 Poppy Trail.
Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road.
���' Jerry Van Nortwick, 37 Chuckwagon Road.
Kathy Kovshilovsky, Critical Str�ctures.
Shane Lamb, Lamb Construction.
Shawn DeMiranda, 5 El Concho Lane.
Jim Aichele, 14 Crest Road West.
James Wald, 7 Quailridge Road South.
Marcia Schoettle, 24 Eastfield Drive.
Leah Mirsch, 4 Cinchring Road,
APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA
Approved as presented.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MTNUTES AND ANY FTEM NOT QN THE AGENDA
Nane.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
March 21, 2017 Adjaurned Regular Meeting af the Planning Commission
Commissioz�er Seaburn moved that the Planning Commission approve the minutes of the adjourned
reguiar meeting of the Planning Commission held on March 21, 2017 as presented. Commissioner
Cardenas seconded the motion,which carried without objection.
Minutes -
PIanning Commission Regular Meeting
04-18-17 _ 1 _
RESOLUTIONS
RESOLUTION NO. 2Q17-04. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSTON OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A SITE PLAN REVIEW,
CONDITION,AL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR GR.ADING AND CONSTRUC'TYON
OF A NEW RESIDENCE ADDITION WITH A BASEMENT, DETACHED GARAGE,
COVERED PORCHES, SWIlVIMING POOL WITH A SPA, PATTO TRELLIS, TENNiS
COURT, NEW SECOND DRIVEWAY, STABLE AND CORRAL; TO EXCEED THE
PERMITTED GRADING AND GR.ADED AREA FOR THE TENNIS COURT
AND TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED LOT DISTURBANCE TN ZONING
CASE NO. 917 AT 5 PINE TREE LANE, (LOT 94-RH), (SHARNG). THE PROJECT HAS
BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT (CLASS 3) PURSUANT TO
THE CALIFOItNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT {CEQA) GUIDELINES, SECTION
15303.
Chairman Chelf intraduced the item and asked far staffls comments. Assistant Planner Stewart re�iewed
the applicant's reques#in Zoning Case No. 917 at 5 Pine Tree Lane and stated that at its last rneeting,the
Planning Commission directed staff to prepare a resolution granting approval of the applicant's request.
She noted that based on concerns raised previously regarding the stable access driveway, new plans
were submitted depicting a revised proposal. She stated that the Traffic Commission reviewed the
proposed stable dt7veway apron and expressed some concerns but recommended approval pending the
Traffic Engineer's review and approval.
Chairman Che�f called for public comment.
Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering addressed #he Planning Cammission to fut�her explain the
revised stable access driveway.
Following brief discussian, Commissioner Seaburn moved that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution No. 2017-04 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 917 at 5 Pine
Tree Lane. Vice Chairman Kirkpatrick seconded the motion,which carried without objection.
RESOLUT�ON NO. 2017-45. A RE50LUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL FOR A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, SITE PLAN REVIEW �.Nll VARIANCES FOR GRADING AND
CONSTRUCTION OF A DRESSAGE ARENA, STABLE, RESIDENCE AND GARAGE
ADDITION, VARIOUS RETAINIl�TG WALLS, SWIlVIlVIING POOL AND RELATED
PATIOS, DECKS; TO LOCATE A PORTION OF TI� EQUESTRIAN FACTLIT'IES IN THE
FRONT YARD AREA OF THE LOT, TO RETAIN, BUT REDUCE IN SIZE AN EXISTING
DETACHED GARAGE, TO LOCATE A NOT TO EXCEED 5' HIGH RETAINING WALL IN
THE SIDE SETBACK AND TO EXCEED THE PERMITTED LOT
DISTURBANCE IN ZONING CASE NO. 896-MODIFICATTON (M) AT ll SADDLEBACK
ROAD,{WARREIv}. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPT (CLASS 3) PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT(CEQA}GUIDELINES, SECTION 153Q3.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for s#affls comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed
the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 896-M at 11 Saddleback Road and stated that at its last
meeting, the Planning Cammission directed staff to prepare a resolutian granting approval of the
applicant's request. She noted that the applicant h.as aiso submitted a landscaping plan showing new
planting araund the dressage arena and pool.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Gary Wynn, Wynn Engineering addressed the Planning Co�n�nission offering to answer any question.
Foilowing brief discussion, Commissianer Cardenas moved that the Planning Commission adopt
Resol�tion No. 2017-05 gran�ing approval of the applicant's req�est for modification of a previously
approved project in Zoning Case No. 896-MODIFICATION at 11 Saddleback Road. Commissioner
Seaburn seconded the motion, which carried without objection.
Minutes-
Planning Commissivn Regular Meeting
04-�8-17 -2 -
RESOLUT�ON NO. 2017-06. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF ROLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW AND
VARIANCE FOR A 1,U00 SQUARE FOOT POOL/SPA, POOL EQUIPMENT ENCLOSURE,
AND TO LOCATE THE STRUCTURES IN TI� FRONT YARD OF THE LOT IN ZONING
CASE NO. 919 AT 7 MIDDLERIDGE LANE SOUTH, (LOT 249-A-UR),
(MCCARTHY/CHENG}. TI� PROJECT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TQ BE
CATEGORTCALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE CALTFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT{CEQA), SECT'ION 15303.
�,� Chairman Chel�introduced the itern and asked for staf�s comments. Assistant Planner Stewart reviewed
the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 919 at 7 Middler�dge Lane South and stated that at it last
meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepaxe a resolution granting approval of the
applicant's request. She commented that as requested by the Planning Commission, the applicant made
changes to the pool equipment area so that it is fully enclosed with the doars opening taward#he interior
of the property.
Chairman Chelf called for pub�ic comment. Hearing none,he asked for comments from the members of
the Planning Commissian.
Following discussion, Commissioner Seaburn moved that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution
No. 2017-06 granting approval of the applicarit's request in Zoning Case No. 919 at 7 Middleridge Lane
South. Commissioner Cardenas seconded the motion,which carried without objection.
PUBLIC HEARINGS ON ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
ZONING CASE NO.,915, RE,VISED. Request for a Site Plan Review, Cond.itional Use Permit
and Variance to construct a 1,750 squaze foot home additian with same size basement, porte
cochere and attached 441 s.f. garage, where portions of the addition, garage and porte cochere
wouId encroach into the front yard setback; to widen the existing residential second driveway;
for various retaining wa21s; to legalize grading for previously graded path at the rear of the
property and to exceed the ma.ximum permitted disturbance of the lat in Zoning Case No. 915 -R
at 1 Middleridge Lane North (Lot 15, 16, 17-MR}, Rolling Hills, CA. (Cipolla). The project
has been determined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant to the California
Enviranmental Qua�ity Act{CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303.
AND
RESOLUTION NO. 2017-03. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSI4N OF
THE CITY OF RQLLING HILLS GRANTING APPROVAL OF A SITE PLAN REVIEW,
CONDITIQNAL USE PERMIT AND VARIANCES FOR A RESIDENCE ADDITION,
BASEMENT, VARIOUS WALLS AND GRADING, INCLDUING FOR PREVIOUSLY
GRADED UNPERMITTED PATH; WTDEN ONE OF THE TWO RESIDENTYA.L
DRIVEWAYS AND TO ENCROACI� TNTO TI� FRONT SETBACK WITH PORTIONS OF
THE ADDITIONS, BASEMENT AND GARAGE ANll TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM
PERM�TTED DISTURBED AREA OF THE LOT IN ZONING CASE NO. 915 REVISED AT
1 MIDDLERIDGE LANE NORTH, (LOTS 15, 1b, 17-MR}, (CTPQLLA}.
Commissioner Cardenas recused himself fram consideration af this case due to the proximity of his
property to the subject property and �eft the da.is. Chairman Chelf izitroduced the item and asked for
staffls comments. Pfanning Di�ector Schwartz reviewed the applicant's request and the history behind
the previously graded unpermitted pathways in Zoning Case No. 915-REVISED at Z Middleridge Lane
North and stated that at it Iast meeting, the Planning Commission directed staff to prepa�re a resolution
granting approval of the applicant's request pending a site visit to view the pathways. She commented
that the Planning Cammission visited the site earlier in the day to view the pathways at which time the
Planz�ing Commission asked for conditions to be added to the resolution and the revised reso�ution has
been placed on the dais for the Planning Commission's review. Brief discussion ensued concerning the
location of the three-rail fence along the bottom of the property and its praximity ta the property line and
the natural stream.
Cammissioner Seaburn commented that he received a call form one af�he neighbors expressing concern
that the stream not be abstructed and requesting that that the slope be vegetated. Vice Chairman
Kirkpatrick commented that he received the same phone cail.
Minutes-
Planning Commissian Regular Meeting
04-18-17 _3 �
Chairman Chelf called for public comrnent.
Chaz Cipolla, 1 Middleridge Lane North addressed the Planning Commission to further expla.in the
pathways.
Emily Cipalla, 1 Middleridge Lane North addressed the Planning Commission coFnmenting that they are
willing to cornply with any suggestions form the Planning Commission relative to the pathways.
Tavisha Nicholson, Bolton Engineering addressed the Planning Commission to further explain how the
pathways will be stabilized. She offered to answer any questions the Planning Commission may have.
Discussion ensued concerning the natural stream and the concerns raised regarding the loose dirt on the
slope and the location af the fence.
Lisa Naslund, Los Angeles County Building & Sa�ety, Drainage & Grading Sectian addressed the
Planning Commission to fi�rther explain the issues surrounding the natural drainage course. She
commented that their concern is that no loose dirt enter the drainage co�xrse. She stated that per County
Code any graded slope is required to be campacted and�egetated.
Cammissioner Seaburn commented that he is not comfortable approving the pathways given that �the
Plannirig Commission has not seen a plan to show how the issue� will be addressed. Chairman Chelf
concurred. Commissioner Cooley commented that since the applicant is coming back to the Planning
Commission for cansideration of the stable, it may make sense to consider that pathways at that time
since the stable could impact the pathways. The Planning Cammission generally concurred that it may
be better to remove the pathways from consideration at this time and consider them when the stable is
brought back to the Planning Commission.
In response to Chauman Chelf, Ms. Nicholson commented that the applicant would be amenable to
including the pathways when the stable is brought back before the Planning Commission.
Following furthe�' discussion, Vice Chairman Kirkpatrick moved that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution No. 2017-03 granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 915-REVISED
at 1 Middleridge Lane North as amended to e�iminate the pre�iously graded unpertnitted pathway from
the approval. Commissioner Cooley seconded the motion, which carried without objection.
Comrnissioner Cardenas returned to the dais. The applicant will return to the Planning Corn�nission for
consideration of the patl�way.
ZONING CASE NO. 920. Request for a Site Plan Review to legalize grading for pre�iously
graded path at the rear of the property at 37 Chuckwagon Ra�d, (Lot 19-CF}, Rolling Hills, CA
(Van Nartwick). 1'he project has been detexmined to be categorically exempt (Class 3) pursuant
to the California En�ironmenta.l Quality Act{CEQA) Guidelines, Section 15303.
Chairman Chelf introduced the item and asked for staff s comments. Planning Director Schwartz
reviewed the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 920 at 37 Chuckwagon Road and stated that the
Planning Commission visited the site earlier in the day. She commented that during the site visit, the
Planning Commission heard concern from neighbors that the grading far the pathways caused damage to
their praperties below during the heavy rains this past winter. She stated that after the rains, City staff
along with County staff visited the properties a 11, 14 and 18 Poppy Trail to inspect the damage and
Yash from the County is present this evening to address the concerns.
Yosh Morisaku, Grading & Drainage Engineer, Los Angeles County addressed the Planning
Commission sta.ting that tlie grading did not generalize the drainage in one direction or another and
maintained the natural lay of the land. He commented that once it is vegetated it will likely mimic the
previous existing condition. In response to Chaixman Chelf, Mr. Morisaku cornmented that there was a
surficial pap out on one of the properties below, but it is not possible to affirm that the grading an
Chuckwagon caused the problem.
Chauman Chelf called for public comment.
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
04-i8-17 -4 -
Ram Reddy, 11 Poppy Trail addressed the Planning Commission to express cancern that since it is nat
�own whether or not the grading at 37 Chuckwagon caused the issues for the praperties below that the
project receive appropriate review.
Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the Planning Commission to provide background on the
drainage issues on Chuckwagon Road and expressing support for the project.
Jer�y VanNortwick, 37 Chuckwagon Road addressed tl�e Planning Commission to explain that given the
tapography and exis�ing driveways and curbs, he does nat see how dirt from his property could have
ended up on the properties below.
Discussion ensued concerning the grading and the existing drainage. In response to Comrnissioner
Caoley, Ms. Schwartz commented that any approval would be conditioned on the applicar�t preparing
drainage and grading plans far review under the County code and also submitting a landscaping plan for
review.
Following discussion, Vice Chairman Kirkpatrick moved that the Planning Commission direct staff ta
prepare a Resolution granting approval of the applican�'s reques� in Zoz�ing Case No. 920 at 37
Chuckwagan Road with the standard fmdzngs of fact and conditions of approvaZ. Commissioner Seaburn
seconded the motion, which carriec�withaut objection.
ZONING CASE NO. 916. Request for a Site Plan Review and Variances to retain a partially
excavated area for a proposed 1,322 square foot basement, a portion of which would be located
in the front setback and to retain unpermitted patio with an outdoor barbeque area supported by a
5' high reta.ining wall; grading for dirt pathways that are butkressed by 3' high railroad tie walls
and a 3'8" high concrete block retaining wall in the side and front setback. The app�icant also
requests a Site Plan Review and Variances for a new 76.3' �ong, 4'6" high retaining wall, a
partion af which would be located in the side setback, for retaining walls that do not average out
to 2.5' in height and to �xceed the maximum permitted disturbance (48.8%) of the net �ot area,
including for the set aside area for a future stable and corral in Zoning Case No. 916 at 5 EI
Concho Lane, (Lot 10-GF}, Rolling Hi�1s, CA, (De Miranda). Project has been determined to be
exempt from the California Environmenta� Quality Act, (CEQA).
Chairman Che�f introduced the item and asked for staff's comments. Planning Director Schwaxtz
reviewed the applicant's request in Zoning Case Na. 91b at 5 El Concho Lane as well as the background
on haw this matter came before the Planning Commission. She stated that the applicant is requesting
that the project be divided so that the basement, paths, rear slope and demotion of the existing bbq/patia
area be appraved now and the failed drain portion of the project wottld be addressed at a later time.
Commissioner Seaburn expressed concern that the failed d�rain portion of the project is actually the more
pressing part of the project and inquired as to the timing of that part of the project.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Kathy Kovshilovsky, Critical Structures addressed the Planning Commission offering ta answer any
questions. In response to Commissioner Cardenas, she sta.ted that the basement is sufficiently far
enough away frorr�the faited drain and hillside that it wouldn't be affected by those conditions.
Shane Lamb, Lamb Construction addressed the Planning Commission ta reiterate the applicant's request
that the basement and other items be approved now and the fai�ed drain be considered at a iater time.
Commissioner Ch�lf caminented that the Planning Coinmission's concern is with the failed drainpipe
and that there is not a plan or timeframe to fix it. Mr. Lamb commented that the property owner is trying
_, to determine who has responsibility for�the drainpipe.
Shawn DeMiranda addressed the Planning Commission and distributed a carrespondence from a title
insurance company indicating that the d�rain is owned by the Rolling Hi�ls Community Association. He
reiterated their request that the basement and other items be approved now and once they resolve the
issue over who is responsible for the dra,in it will be fixed as well.
Lisa Naslund, Los Angeles County Building & Safety, Draznage & Grading Section addressed the
Planning Commission in response to Chairr�man Chelf ta explain the process and tuneline for replacing
the drain. She stated tlzat the applicant needs ta submit a p1an, approved by the Ro�ling Hills Community
Minutes-
Planning Commission ReguYar Meeting
04-18-17 - 5 -
Association for work in the easement, to the County for review and approval. Discussion ensued
concerning ownership of the pipe and the County's specifications and requirements far replacing the
pipe.
Following discussion, Commissioner Cardenas moved that the Planning Commission direct staff to
prepar� a Resalutian granting approval of the applicant's request in Zoning Case No. 916 at 5 El Concho
Lane with the standard findings of fact and conditions of approval plus conditions that the damaged
drain pipe and failed slope be repaired prior to issuance of the building permits for the project; and that
the unpermitted patio and outdoor barbeque area be demolished and the slope associated with that
unpermitted construction be restored. Commissioner Seaburn seconded the motion, which carried
without objection.
NEW PUBLiC HEARINGS
None.
SCHEDULE OF FIELD TRIPS
The Planning Commission scheduleci a field trip to the following property to be held on Tuesday,
Mayl6, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m.
2 Hillside Lane (MODIFICATIOl�
OLD BUSINESS
CONTINUED PUBLIC FORUM REGARDING VIEW PRESERVATION ORDINANCE
Chairman Chelf intxoduced the item and asked for staff s comments. Planning Director Schwartz stated
that this is a continued public forum to discuss possible amendments to the City's View Preservation
Ordinance as directed by the City Council. She reviewed the contents of the staff report including the
new correspondence received since �he last meeting which includes a correspondence from Lynn Gill
regarding why trees should not be topped and suggestions on how to make the ordinance non-binding as
weil as what role other cities play in their view ordinance process and the language for the ballot measure
that recently qualified for the March 2019 ballot (Measure 2017). She sta.ted that Mr. Gill also provided
a table showing the difference between the ordinance drafted by Mr. Karpf and Measure 2017.
Ms. Schwartz further reviewed some of the background on this topic and stated that the ad hoc committee
came to se�eral compramises during their discussions and provided some praposed concepts for the
Pianning Carnmission's cansideration. She stated that at the previous meetings, the Planning
Commissian discussed sorne of those topics and provided direction to staff regarding what should be the
definition of a "�iew" for inclusion in the ordinance when it is drafted which includes the term "viewing
point". She stated that next for the Planning Commission's consideration is how to define "viewing
point" and what should the City's role be in pro#ecting views and trees and what should the process be.
Viewing Point
Ms. Schwartz reviewed the definitian of a "view" as it exists in the City's current ordinance as well as
the defmition proposed in the draft ordinance prepared by Mr. Karpf and the definition in Measure 2017.
Chairman Chelf called for public comment.
Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the Planning Commission to explain the definition of view in
Measure 2Q17 and to suggest that the definition should be less restric�ive to protect people tha# have
existing views from other areas on their property.
James Aichele, 14 Crest Road West addressed the Planning Comrriission to suggest that the definition
s1�ould be more restrictive to eliminate the possibility of peapie claiming views from areas on �the
property where a view didn't previously exist.
Discussion ensued concerning this issue. Commissioner Seaburn commented that he believes the
definition should be broader to include other azeas, including patios. Commissioner Cardenas concurred
cornmenting that the definition should be simple and clear. Fallowing further discussion, the Planning
Minutes-
Planning Cominission Regular Meeting
a4-is-�� - 6 -
Commission concurred to define viewing point as frorn a principal residence, patia, or deck and aniy
attached or detached accessory structures excluding garages and sheds; and not to include views from
basements, laundry raoms or o#her similar minor raoms.
Next,the Planning Commission discussed the City's ro�e in the process
City Role i�Process
P�anning Director Schwartz reviewed the current pracess as outlined in the City's View Preservation
,._.. Ordinance as well as the alternate options proposed in the draft ordinance prepared by Mr. Kapf and
Measure 2017. She commented that there are several options for consideration: (1)No ordinance at all;
{2) Take an advisory position like the City of Tiburan; (3) Use a hybrid approach where the City is
involved in the early stage of the process but parties are given an option later to use arbi�ation instead.
Assistant City Attorney Karpeles reviewed the table she prepared outlining the steps impased by each of
the four dispute resolution processes i�cluding the City's current ordinance, Mr. Kapf's draft ordinance,
Measure 2a17 and the Town of Tiburon's ordinance. She commented that both Mr. Karpfls draft
ordinance and Measure 2017 remove th� City as the final decision maker. Discussion ensued
concerning the City's liabi�ity in being the final decision maker and other 1ega1 ramifications involved in
the other processes.
Chairman Chelf called for public camment an this topic.
James Wa1d, 7 Qua.il Ridge Road South addressed the Planning Commission in support of having the
City take only an advisory role in view disputes to eliminate the City's risk of legal iiability.
Lynn Gill, 31 Chuckwagon Road addressed the Planning Commission alsa in suppart of having the City
take only an advisory role by providin�g only advisory,non-binding decisians.
Marcia Schoettle, 24 EastfieId Drive addressed the Planning Commission to as what benefit �here is to
having the City involved in the pracess and being the fina.l decision maker.
Leah Mirsch, 4 Cinchring Road addressed the Planning Commission to r�view the background on why
this subject is before the Planning Commission and to suggest that the Planning Commission focus on
the parts of the ordinance that deal with the view related issues raised when Measure B was voted in
specifically regarding the "view you bought is the view you get" and don't let the issue regard�ng the
City's role bog the pracess down because that issue wasn't the primary issue wh� this matter was
originally discussed amongst the ad hoc committee.
James Wald addressed the Planming Commission to reiterate his point that the City should not he
involved as a final decision maker and the Planning Commission should discuss and decide on this
matter rather than delaying the discussion.
Discussion ensued concerning the City's role in the process. Commissioner Cardenas commented that
he likes the concepts in the Tib�xron ordinance but his concern is that it creates a situation where people
wi�h less fmancial resources may be taken advantage of by those with more resources, He commented
that he believes the City shoutd have an ordinance tk�at is clear and concise; and enforce it.
Commissioner Seaburn concurred. Vice Chariman Kirkpatrick commented that he believes it is the
City's role to provide guidance not to protect everyone. Further discussion ensued conceming the City's
role and the options for moving forward in this process.
In response to Commissioner Cardenas,Assistant City Attorney Karpeles commented that the only items
Ieft for consideration after this issue are deciding what rernediation actions wilZ be available and a few
--- other miscellaneaus items but some of those matters hirige on this matter.
Following further discussion, the Planning Commissaon asked staff to research if i# is possible to
determine the effect not ha.ving the City involved in #he process {ie: like Tiburon ordinance) had on the
number of lawsuits and what the legal costs (financial exposure} is for comparable Cities that do operate
urider a quasi judiciaZ process — specifically what wou�d be the upper end. Consideratian of this matter
was continued to the next meeting of the Planning Commission.
Minutes-
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
0�4-�8-17 -7 -
ITEMS FROM STAFF
None.
ITEMS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION
None.
ADJOURNMENT
Hearing no further business before the Planning Commission, Chairman Chelf adjourned the meeting at
10:10 p.m. to an adjourned regular meeting of the Planning Commission scheduled to be held on
Tuesday, May 16, 2017 beginning at 7:30 a.m. for the purpose of conducting a site visit to 2 Hillside
Lane. The next regular meeting of the Planning Commission is scheduled to be held on Tuesday, May
16, 2017 beginning at 6:30 p.m. in the City Council Chamber, Rolling Hills City Hall, 2 Portugt.iese Bend
Road, Rolling Hills, California.
Respectfully submitted,
Heidi Luce
City Clerk
Apprav d,
Gregg kPatrick
Vice Chairman
Minutes -
Planning Commission Regular Meeting
04-1&17 - 8 -