Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission approves Feb. 27 minutes and revised 2025 schedule; continues Ivy Project
Summary
The Placer County Planning Commission approved minutes for the Feb. 27 meeting, adopted a revised 2025 meeting schedule and voted to continue the Ivy Project hearing to a future date; roll calls and abstentions are recorded below.
The Placer County Planning Commission took three formal actions during its meeting: it approved the minutes of the Feb. 27, 2025 meeting, adopted a revised 2025 Planning Commission meeting schedule and continued the Ivy Project hearing to a future date (staff indicated it would be re‑noticed, targeting April 10).
Minutes (Item 3.A.1) A motion was made and seconded to approve the Planning Commission minutes for Feb. 27, 2025. Roll call votes recorded: Beckler — yes; Alves — yes; Johnson — yes; Watts — absent; Renting — absent; Jewell — absent; Dahlgren (Chair) — yes. Tally: Yes 4, Absent 3. Outcome: approved.
Revised 2025 meeting schedule (Consent item) A motion was made and seconded to approve the revised 2025 Planning Commission meeting schedule. Roll call votes recorded: Beckler — yes; Alves — yes; Johnson — yes; Watts — yes; (Brenteen/Renting) — yes; Jewell — yes; Dahlgren — yes. Tally: Yes 7, No 0. Outcome: approved.
Ivy Project continuation (Hearing item) Staff requested a continuance of the Ivy Project hearing due to noticing issues; staff said the project will be re‑noticed and mailed to affected residents, with staff targeting April 10 as a hearing date. The commission opened public comment limited to the continuance; no on‑topic speakers were present. A motion to continue the item was made and seconded. Roll call votes recorded: Renting — yes; Watts — yes; Johnson — yes; Jewell — yes; Alves — yes; Dahlgren — yes. Commissioner Beckler recused and was not present for the vote. Tally: Yes 6, Recused 1. Outcome: continued (no date certain published at meeting).
Notes on procedure and public access The chair and staff noted that the continuance was limited to the noticing issue and that the project will be re‑noticed to affected residents; staff said they would target April 10 but would mail new notices and publicly post the new hearing date. The commission also handled the consent agenda by separate roll call votes after confirming which commissioners had been absent from the Feb. 27 meeting.
All recorded vote tallies above are taken from the meeting roll calls documented during the hearing; names are the display names used in the transcript roll calls.
