2000 03 14 PC Minutes MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampi¢o, La Quinta, CA
March 14, 2000 7'00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:03
P.M. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Butler to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present' Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Steve Robbins,
Robert Tyler, and Chairman Tom Kirk.
C. · Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City
Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior
Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner
__ Leslie Mouriquand, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA'
A. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to reorganize
the agenda to take Business Item A first. Unanimously approved.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS'
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections .to the Minutes of
February 22, 2000. There being no further changes, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to approve the minutes as
presented. Unanimously approved.
B. Department Report: None.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Temporary Use Permit 2000-244 and Minor Use Permit 7000-195; a
request of Chris Clarke for the Auto Centre at La Quinta for approval to
hold a Grand Opening Celebration on March 24-26, 2000 within the Auto
Centre at La Quinta, on and south of Auto Centre Drive, between Auto
Centre Way South and La Quinta Drive.
G :\WPDOCSLPC3-14-20.wpd 1
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
1. Chairman Kirk asked f°r the staff report. Principal Planner Stan
Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a
copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff noted corrections in the staff report and
conditions: Condition #18 modified to read "Commercial food and
beverage vendors that are not selling prepacked food items, shall
obtain a permit from the Riverside County Health Department and
all commercial vendors will be required to obtain a City business
license." Condition #19 modified to delete the last part of the
sentence, "Prior to the opening, the applicant would be required to
pay a license fee of $780."
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if this is the same event the Chamber
of Commerce has been working on. Staff stated it was.
Commissioner Tyler stated he objected to the search lights, but
they are allowed per the City's Zoning Ordinance and in light of
the Tennis Stadium lights, these are minimal. He further noted the
nonstandard signs in the back of pickup trucks parking along the
curb for one of the auto dealers.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Ms. Christine Clarke, Stamko Development, stated
this was the grand opening for the Auto Mall and she has been
working with staff and the Chamber to hold this event. She went
on to explain the event.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the anyone would like to speak regarding
this project. There being no public comment, Chairman Kirk closed
the public participation and opened the issue for Commission
discussion.
5. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2000-005,
approving Temporary Use Permit 2000-244, subject to the
attached Findings and Conditions of Approval, with the
modifications to Conditions #18 and #19.
a. Condition #18: Add, "Commercial food and beverage
vendors that are not selling prepacked food items, shall
obtain a permit from the Riverside County Health
Department and all commercial vendors will be required to
obtain a City business license."
G:\WPDOCS\PC3-14-20.wpd 2
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
b. Condition #19: Delete the last part of the sentence: "Prior
to the opening, the applicant would be required to pay a
license fee of $780."
Unanimously approved.
6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to
adopt Minute Motion 2000-006, approving Minor Use Permit
2000-195, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as
amended.
a. Condition #18: Add, "Commercial food and beverage
vendors that are not selling prepacked food items, shall
obtain a permit from the Riverside County Health
Department and all commercial vendors will be required to
obtain a City business license."
b. Condition #19: Delete the last part of the sentence: "Prior
to the opening, the applicant would be required to pay a
license fee of $780."
Unanimously approved.
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2000-667; a request of M & H Realty Partners
for approval of development plans for a 6,600 square foot commercial
pad building located at the southwest corner of Washington Street and
Highway 111, within Plaza La Quinta.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained
in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Abels stated the site plan on display was not the
same as what had been submitted to the Commission. The
parking stalls on the east side are not indicated on their site. Staff
stated parking stalls will be added to the east elevation.
Commissioner Abels asked if the total number of stalls noted in
the staff report was correct. Staff pointed out the additional stalls
on the site plan.
G :\WPDOC SXPC3-14-20. wpd 3
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
3. Commissioner Tyler noted his site plan denotes parking spaces
next to Highway '111 and asked how many parking stalls were
being added. Staff stated three parking spaces were being added.
4. Commissioner Butler asked if the 50-foot landscape setback could
be used for additional parking. Staff stated it could not.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. David Geiser, M & H Realty Partners, asked if he
could speak after the public comment period.
6. Mr. James Elmer, 78-477 Highway 111, representing the
Beachside Cafe, stated he is allowed 15 parking spaces according
to the parking study. He seats 60 patrons outside and 115 inside
and-has 22 employees per shift. There are not enough parking
spaces even for his restaurant. Then, the Beer Hunter utilizes
parking spaces all the way to Downey Savings and his customers
are complaining about how far away they have to park. To add
this building with additional parking demands to an already bad
situation, is something he does not want to see happen.
7. Ms. Freddie Hall, Broker Associate of Fred Sands Realty, stated
she has been at this Center since 1 974, and the best use of this
site would be a parking lot. She requested this item be continued
to allow time to notify all the tenants of the Center. One Of the
problems is that the restaurant parking starts before the
businesses are closed. She asked if the parking requirements were
the same requirements used when approving similar projects.
There are parking spaces behind the buildings for the employees,
but they do not feel safe and do not use them. She went on to
note the number of parking spaces allotted to each of the tenants.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if this project met the current parking
standards. Staff stated that based on the current requirements,
it does. With regards to shopping center requirements, if the
shopping center contains 50,000 square feet or more, the
requirement would be one space per 250 square feet. As this is
a mixed use site shared parking standards apply. Staff went on to
explain how the parking requirements are determined.
9. Ms. Holly Escobedo, the Book Rack, 78329 Highway 111, stated
her concerns about the parking. She is allowed five parking
spaces and has four employees. She does park in the rear of the
G :\WPDOCS~PC3-14-20.wpd 4
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
building and even there she has a hard time finding a parking
space. She is a retail business and if she has to look in the back,
where are her customers parking. Customers have stated they will
not come in because they will not carry their books from across
the parking lot.- She asked if anyone had checked to see how
many of the parking spaces are currently being used and why
wasn't underground parking considered.
10. Ms. Kathy Smith, TL Millers and Associates, 78-451 Highway
111, stated she works two doors down from the Beachside Cafe
and would like to request the Commission come to the site and
review the parking. There is no parking. When her job required
her to go to court she is concerned there will not be a parking
space available when she gets back. In the back, the parking is
limited. There has been vandalism and cars stolen, so it is not
safe.
11. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission at this time. Mr. David Geiser, Director of Design for
M & H Realty Partners, stated he knew there was a parking issue
at this Center, but that is due to it being a successful Center.
Pads 5 and 7 are both available for development. They have no
plans to develop Pad 7 as the Beer Hunter desires to install a patio
on a portion of this location. As pointed out in their parking study
the Code does allow the development as proposed. He went on
to review the parking requirements. Because of the parking
problem they have brought a manager on site to handle the parking
issues and the new development. They are considering developing
Pad 7 for parking. The issue is the tenant mix; they have two
popular restaurants at the same end of the Center. The idea they
hope to implement is enforceable employee parking in the rear of
the buildings. If safety is an issue, the property manager needs to
be informed to address the issue. The site is allowed to be
developed based on the requirements of the Center, per the Code
and law. Tlie Vons Supermarket remodel is to expand the back
and east side of the store and will impact the parking minimally.
Their concern is that this store will leave the Center if they cannot
generate more business. They need an additional 9,500 square
feet for them. He noted the site plan in the Commission packet is
correct and there is no additional parking propoSed for the east
side of the building. In regard to staff's statement that any tenant
could modify their sign is incorrect; this is a multi-tenant in-line
building. The design of the-building does not allow for a hanging
G :\WPDOC S~PC3-14-20.wpd 5
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
sign as there is in some portions of the Center. This sign program
is consistent with what is there because there are a variety of
signs currently being allowed in the Center. They did not want to
apply for any variances, but only to build what. is allowed by the
City Code. The design of the building was a function of what is
there at the Center. He went on to note the similarities between
this building and the other buildings and show the changes made
to their plans based on the Architecture and Landscaping Review
Committee's (ALRC) recommendation. Lastly, staff is requesting
Von's Shopping apply for their remodel under their own site
development permit. It helps them in their negotiations with Vons
to have a site approval by the Planning Commission.
1 2. Commissioner Abels stated he had no objection to including the
Von's expansion, but what happens to the existing tenants. Mr.
Geiser stated they will move them possibly into this new building.
Commissioner Abels stated he was glad to hear they are willing to
take the parking into consideration. Perhaps this should be
continued to a future date to consider the parking. He had spoken
to people at the Vons Shopping market and they stated they did
not have any idea about an expansion. He asked how many
parking spaces would be supplied by converting Pad 7. Mr.. Geiser
stated about 1 § more stalls.
13. Commissioner Robbins asked if the applicant would have any
objection to making the development of parking on Pad 7 a part of
the conditions. Mr. Geiser stated he would have no objection if
the application is not continued. If the Commission wants a
parking plan as part of the approval, he has no objection.
1 4. Commissioner Butler stated the drawing does show the changes
as recommended by the ALRC, but he believes staff's
recommendation is also valid. The raised parapets do allow signs
to be installed at this location. His concerns about these issues as
well as the parking, and seeing that the tenants are notified are
enough to warrant a continuance of the project. The tenants have
a right to know what is proposed here. Mr. Geiser stated they
know there is a problem with parking and they are working to
resolve those issues. If the Commission is going to continue the
project for issues other than parking, then he is in favor. In regard
t° the notification of the tenants, it is unfortunate but the City
only requires a developer to notice property owners.
Commissioner Butler stated that in addition to this, the
G :\WPDOC S\PC3-14-20.wpd 6
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
architectural detail has not been addressed as recommended by
staff. Mr. Geiser stated they have addressed everything except
the mansard roof, which the ALRC agreed with them. Staff has
now changed their opinion and brought a new issue. Staff's
recommendation is not possible.
1 5. Commissioner Tyler asked if the parking study included the parking
spaces in the rear. Mr. Geiser stated yes. Commissioner Tyler
asked if there were enough parking spaces in the back for the
number of employees. Mr. Geiser stated they have not done an
employee parking study, but have provided the number of parking
spaces required by City Code. Commissioner Tyler asked if the
Von's expansion would eliminate any of the parking spaces. Mr.
Geiser stated yes and it was included in its study. Commissioner
Tyler asked what tenants would be going into this new building.
Mr. Geiser stated Rubio's Baja Grill, a pet business and dry cleaner
are proposed. Discussion followed regarding the parking plan.
Commissioner Tyler stated he, as well as the other
Commissioners, have all looked at the area and agree with the
parking problem. He too, is concerned with the design. From the
south you see a building design throughout the Center that
contains tile roofs and this building has no tile, which does not
blend with the Center. Mr. Geiser stated they do not want a row
of clay tile roofs, but rather a variety to the site by the use of the
details used in the building. He gave examples of those details.
Commissioner Tyler asked if there were any examples of the Von's
expansion. Mr. Geiser stated the architectural portion of that
permit would come back to the Commission.
1 6. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the hearing
for Commission discussion. Staff showed pictures of the
architectural style of the existing building. Chairman Kirk asked if
there were pictures of Downey Savings as well. Staff displayed
additional pictures of the Center.
17. Commissioner Abels stated the biggest problem is parking and
even though it conforms to Code, it is a problem. He is glad to
see the owner is willing to turn Pad 7 into parking.
18. Commissioner Robbins was also concerned with the parking and
that one of the proposed tenants for this new building is a
restaurant which will increase the intensity of the parking problem.
G :\WPDOCS~PC3-14-20. wpd 7
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
The only way he could resolve this is to make the conversion of
Pad 7 into parking. In regard to the architecture, he personally is
not drawn to the red tile. The design of the building allows for
several locations for signs and to him it would detract from the
building to have them hanging. He asked if the Commission could
deny the project even though it conforms with the Code. City
Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Commission can look at the
environmental considerations. Even though the Zoning Code is
met, the issues raised have to be mitigated, which is.how the
problem with parking could be addressed. Commissioner Robbins
stated he had no problem with the addition of the Von's
expansion.
19. Commissioner Butler stated his issues were the parking and
architectural design of the building. He concurs with staff's
recommendations and even though the applicant noted his opinion,
he thinks the covered walkways and tile should be included.
20. Commissioner Tyler stated it was nice to consider Pad 7 for
parking, but even that additional parking will create problems with
access. He asked staff if they could add the Von's expansion if it '
had not been a part of the public hearing notice.
21. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked the
applicant if the front elevation of Von's, or the empty pads that
would be used for the expansion, would have be changed. Mr.
Geiser stated that since the elevations of the shop buildings are
lower the front would change. Staff noted this would have to
have a condition added to the approval requiring these elevations
to be approved by staff, or they would have to be submitted as a
different application.
22. Commissioner Tyler stated he has no problem with the trellis, but
in order to blend in the south elevation, the building needs to add
the roof tile.
23. Chairman Kirk stated he agrees there is a parking problem. He
also agrees with Commissioner Butler in that the architecture is an
issue. He is not pleased with the Downey Savings building as it
also does not fit in with the rest of the Center. Signs are a real
issue as well. As this is not a single tenant, but a multi-tenant,
problems are raised. Perhaps the building could be reduced in size
to add the additional parking.
G :\WPDOCS\PC3-14-20. wpd 8
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
24. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Tyler to continue this project to April 11,
2000. Staff noted that with the continuance, staff would notify
the tenants of the hearing. In addition, this will allow the applicant
time to submit the elevations for the Von's expansion.
25. Commissioner Butler stated there are unanswered questions
regarding the Beer Hunter outdoor seating as well. Staff noted
that was not part of this application.
26. Chairman Kirk asked the applicant if he had any questions. Mr.
Geiser stated the Commission has identified the issues, but
provided no direction for him to address. He would therefore,
prefer they act on the project at this time and allow him to appeal
their decision. Chairman Kirk asked staff if they had any
suggestions.
27. Commissioner Abels stated he thought the applicant should obtain
approval by the Planning Commission.
28. Commissioner Robbins stated the applicant should respond to the
same issues he would appeal to the City Council. Mr. Geiser
stated the parking issue cannot be resolved. If the Commission is
going to vote no because of the parking, then let him go forward
on an appeal.
29. Commissioner Tyler stated ALRC is a recommending body to the
Planning Commission. The Planning Commission is a
recommending body to the Council except in some cases such as
Site Development Permits, where the Commission has the final
action.
30. Chairman Kirk stated he did not believe the parking issue was a
fatal flaw, provided the applicant came back and addressed the
issues, they may be resolved.
31. There being no further discussion, the Commission voted on the
motion.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
Chairman Kirk recessed at 8:43 p.m. and reconvened at 8:50 p.m.
G :\WPDOCS~PC3-14-20.wpd 9
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
B. Site Development Permit 2000-669, a request of James R. Paul for
approval of architectural, site, and lighting plans for multi-tenant
industrial/office building within the La Quinta Corporate Center.
1. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Robbins questioned Condition #47 in that planting
the trees 10 inch on center is not possible. Staff noted it should
read 10 feet on center. Commissioner Robbins stated he did not
approve of the use of Yellow Oleanders as it is not a good plant
material for a hedge. Staff stated it was chosen as being the best
for screening from the list of approved plants for the Specific Plan
area. Commissioner Kirk stated his concern was also for the
security in relation to the bike path. Staff noted the planter was
on the inside of the block wall and the bike path was on the
outside. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the hedge
could be removed, but as in Home Depot, the Commission
approved the use of trees to soften the view. Commissioner
Robbins questioned the use of the hedge. Staff would delete the
hedge and leave the trees.
3. Commissioner Robbins asked staff how the City could condition
an applicant to do something on someone else's property. Senior
Engineer Steve Speer stated this was based on the premise that
the land can be approved for bike path use. They cannot install
those improvements unless the permission is acquired. The City
is the applicant for the purpose of the easement.
4. Commissioner Butler stated he agrees with the planting of the
trees on the rear elevation to buffer the view.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked if the street name would continue to.
Adams Street. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Tyler asked how
the project would be built in two phases. Staff suggested the
applicant explain the phasing. Commissioner Tyler asked about
the landscaping along the wall. Staff stated that according to the
Code they are required to provide berming for setbacks along Dune
Palms Road.
G :\WPDOCS\PC3-14-20.wpd 10
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
6. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Bob Flicciardi, Architect for the project, noted
the phasing on the site plan, and explained the landscaping plan
and circulation plan.
7. Mr. Scott Gaynor, representing the owners of the La Quinta
Corporate Center stated the Center had recently been hit with
"taggers" causing them to repair their signs. In light of that, he is
concerned about a wall with no foliage to deter the taggers.
8. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the hearing
for Commission discussion.
9. Commissioner Tyler stated the concern about tagging is a real
problem and he would recommend the hedge, but the trimming
could be a problem. If the wall is removed, they should consider
more than ten trees.
10. Mr. Riccardi suggested the City plant the trees and the applicant
provide the irrigation. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated
the slumpback wall as proposed does not lend itself to being able
to be tagged because it is not easily readable.
11. Commissioner Robbins asked if the bike path would have any
landscaping. Staff stated this has not been considered yet. Staff
noted the storage facility has already provided plant material by
recessing the wall so the planting is on their property. Openings
could also be provided in the wall to provide a view of the
landscaping.
12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2000-009 approving Site Development Permit 2000-
669, approving architecture, landscape, site, and lighting plans, for
a multi-tenant industrial/office building within the La Quinta
Corporate Centre, subject to the Findings and Conditions of
Approval as amended/:
a. Condition //5: Construct a Class "A" Bike Path along the
south embankment of the Whitewater Storm Channel within
the Channel right-of-way from Dune Palms Road to the
G :\WPDOCS~PC3-14-20.wpd 1 1
Planning Commission Meeting -
March 14, 2000
west boundary of this property subject to City and CVWD
requirements. The City will acquire the Bike Path easement.
b. Condition//47: The landscaping plan shall indicate ten (10)
Australian Willow trees (24-inch box size) evenly spaced
and each with an enlarged planting curb with consideration
of including a hedge along'the north property line in the
proposed planter. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the
landscape and wall plans along the north property line shall
be redesigned to incorporate through wall design and/or
landscaping for a softer appearance from the adjacent bike
path and vertical elements to break up the view of the rear
building elevation subject to Community Development
approval.
ROLL COLL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
C. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2000-065; a request of the City for a
recommendation of approval regarding an Amendment to Section
9.50.020 of the Zoning Code regarding height limits and setbacks near
Image Corridors.
1. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Robbins asked if Washington Street was the only
street that would be affected. Staff stated they have checked all
the other Image Corridors and this is the only area of concern.
3. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern about adopting a change
to the Zoning Code for one area of concern in that it could set a
precedent. He asked if there was any other means to approve
these houses without amending the Zoning Code. Staff stated
there was not.
4. Commissioner Robbins asked if there would be some style in the
roof line. Staff noted the roof would have a pitch and trees would
be planted along Washington Street to break it up.
G :\WPDOC SXPC3-14-20. wpd 12
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
5. Chairman Kirk asked how this problem was discovered. Staff
noted there was an error in the plan check process and it was not
found until the framing was under way.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone wanted to speak regarding this
issue. Mr. John Kalogeris, 51-215 Calle Quito, builder of the
houses, stated they began plan check for the houses in June,
1999 and pulled building permits in November. They did not begin
framing until January, 2000. In order to resolve the issue, they
have agreed to modify the roof line 30% and plant mesquite trees
to mitigate the noise levels on Washington Street.
7. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the hearing
for Commission discussion.
8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2000-010, recommending approval of Zoning Code
Amendment 2000-065, modifying Section 9.50.020 regarding the
side yard setbacks for existing lots adjacent to Image Corridors, as
recommended.
ROLL COLL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
B. Master Design Guidelines 2000-009; a request of Tribble Construction
for approval of guidelines for construction of single family homes
throughout the Cove.
1. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Director.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. William Tribble stated he was available for any
questions.
3. Commissioner Butler suggested some popouts be added to Plan E3
for detail around windows and garage doors. Mr. Tribble stated he
had no objections and would work with staff. He noted Plan E5
G :\WPDOCS~PC3-14-20.wpd 13
Planning Commission Meeting
March 14, 2000
contained the details noted by Commissioner Butler and the
photo§raphs were of earlier units. The current units have popout
treatments. Discussion followed re§ardin§ the different plans.
4. Commissioner Tyler questioned the 20-foot front yard setback.
Mr. Tribble stated there is a 12 foot easement in addition to the
20-foot front yard setback, but all the garages will have roll-up
sectional doors. Commissioner Tyler asked that the Guidelines
have page numbers added as well as note the case number on the
front.
§. There bein§ no further discussion, Chairman Kirk closed the public
participation portion and opened the case for Commission
discussion.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2000-007,
approving Master Design Guidelines 2000-009, as amended.
Unanimously approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Abels gave a brief report on the League of California Cities
Planners Institute.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner
Robins/Abels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held March 28, 2000, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:43 P.M. on March 14,
2000.
Respectfully submitted,
~E~R, Executive Secretary Cif, y%f La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC3-14-20.wpd 14