2000 09 12 PC Minutes MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
September 12, 2000 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Robbins who asked Commissioner Kirk to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Steve Robbins.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior
Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
--
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
joint meeting of August 22, 2000. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page
4, Item 3 be amended to read, "or across the street?"; Page 6, Item 14
to read, "north one-half of the alley only along his frontage."; Page 9,
Item 9 change the word "He" to "His"; and Item 8 remove the word
"how". There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded
by Commissioners Tyler/Abels to approve the minutes as amended.
B. Department Report: None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2000-68; a request of Tomra Pacific
Inc./Recycling Centers for approval of architectural, landscaping, sign and
site plans for a 496.5 square foot prefabricated recycling collection
facility to be located at 78-630 Highway 111 in front of Stater Brothers
Supermarket within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-O0.wpd
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the
information contained in the staff report,, a copy of which is on file
the Community Development Department.
2. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to identify the location of the State
mandated signs.
3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Abels asked what would happen if a customer came
after hours; do they go to the store to redeem their receipt the
next day. Staff stated the applicant would answer that question.
4. Commissioner Butler asked for clarification as to whether or not
money would be dispensed at the site. Staff stated the patrons
would receive a receipt that would be taken into Stater Bros. for
redemption.
5. Commissioner Abels asked about Attachment //4, a letter from
Washington Plaza Associates stating that all parties in the Center
are agreeable with the project; are all parties to the Center
agreeable to the proposal? Staff stated that all tenants were
notified and the only ones who responded were AAA Auto Club
who wanted to have it moved further east, and Carl's Jr. had
questions in regard to the application.
6. Commissioner Kirk asked why the Center's sign program would
not apply in this instance. Staff noted because they were murals
and educational tools for recycling centers in accordance with the
State mandate. Also the trailers were temporary in nature.
Commissioner Kirk asked if it was a photo kiosk, would it be
considered differently? Staff stated murals had not been
addressed previously.
7. Commissioner Butler asked why it could not remain in its original
location at the rear of the Stater Bros. building. Staff noted the
new location was a request of the applicant.
8. Commissioner Tyler asked what the State mandated requirements
were. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated there were numerous
State mandated requirements and went on to state some of them.
Commissioner Tyler asked if the City had to abdicate to those
requirements. City Attorney Jenson stated that not if the City had
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
adopted its own standards applicable to recycling facilities.
Section 9.100.190 of the City's Zoning Code was adopted for this
purpose and staff reviewed them as to how this project applies to
the City standards. Commissioner Tyler stated there were a
number of areas where the proposal did not apply with the City's
Zoning Code and asked why we were allowing it on an Image
Corridor. City Attorney Jenson stated the City's Zoning Code sets
a maximum of 1 6 square feet of sign and cannot be illuminated.
9. Chairman Robbins stated that the photographs show overhead
power lines. Staff stated they do not expect any and would not
approve any. Chairman Robbins asked about Condition//33 as it
states the building would be open 24 hours and one of the signs
in the pictures state 7-11; what are the hours of operation? Staff
stated it would need to be clarified by the applicant and could be
corrected. Chairman Robbins stated his concern as to why we
require all the landscaping to hide the building which will hide the
signs. It should be one or the other.
10. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to clarify the maximum sign
requirements; what is the total allowable amount of signage on all
four sides. Staff stated the small signs .such as hours of
operation, are not counted. The signs giving the name of the
business are allowed. Commissioner Kirk asked if all the signs
exceeded the allowable 16 square feet.
'11. Chairman Robbins also questioned signage on three sides of the
building which has been consistently denied to applicants.
12. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. John Griffin, representing Tomra Pacific Rancho
Cucamonga, stated that in regard to the hours of operation for the
vending machine, they are generally the same as the grocery store
or 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.; the required signage is to have the
days and hours, a price sign, an open sign,, and signs in the
grocery store windows explaining where to recycle and the days
and hours of operation. Therefore, all the signs are on the front of
the facility. As to the landscaping requirements, they are willing
to revise the landscaping to staff's recommendations. One of the
conditions they have a problem with is the color of the recycling
Center. All of their bins for roll-off containers are a warm grey to
be compatible with the Centers. In looking at the shopping center,
Stater Bros. uses these colors in part of their signage. The roof
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-O0.wpd 3
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
trim and material will be an exact match to the Center to blend in.
Another issue raised by the Commission was moving the recycling
facility from the back of the building to the front. The grocery
store was concerned about the safety of their patrons using the
facility where it is currently located. There is some high speed
traffic traveling through there and it is not very well lighted. Part
of the push for the Replanet Center's is to create a clean and well
lit, convenient and safe area to recycle. Under SB332 all ready to
drink beverage containers were added to the Act. Prior to this
being adopted, the only containers that were acceptable were
beer, malt liquor and carbonated beverages. Since then they have
added all ready to drink beverages which include water, juice, and
even children's beverages creating up to three billion more
beverage containers in the State that are recyclable under the
Beverage Container Act. What they are finding with their grocery
store partners is that they want to make recycling much more
convenient because virtually every customer has some type of
beverage container and they are being charged California
redemption value and they believe that the Tomra Recycling Center
is very well timed in that it does meet their customers needs.
13. Commissioner Tyler questioned the need for all night lighting. Mr.
Griffin stated the lighting is incorporated in the construction of the
building and they are down shining lights. Commissioner Tyler
stated his concern is that the proposed location is on the One
Eleven Corridor and to have it there with lighting is not attractive.
14. Chairman Robbins asked if the signs on the sides could be
illuminated. Staff stated the illuminated sign would be where the
pop-up roof element is on the front and the sides will light up the
murals. The overhang at the front would make it an externally
illuminated sign that is not allowed by the Code.
15. Commissioner ,Tyler asked how the roll-up dumPsters would be
replaced. Mr. Griffin stated they will set the new one down out
of the way of traffic and pick up the full container and put it down
and place the empty container in the Center. Commissioner Tyler
stated he did not think the parking lot was constructed to handle
this load over time and he does not believe there is a problem with
traffic at the rear. Mr. Griffin stated install plates where the four
wheels of the roll-off will be stationed and they have not had any
damage with this procedure since July of 1999 and they have 115
in place.
C :\Mv F)oc~ ~ments\WP~)Q_C~PC 9-12-00. wDd 4
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
1 6. Commissioner Butler stated he has not been convinced of the need
to move the Center to the front of the store. He too does not
believe there is any speeding traffic and in the rear of the building
it is out of the way and provides the customers adequate access.
With the number of business existing and coming in the need for
parking will be needed, he is not convinced .this facility cannot go
in the back where it is now. Mr. Griffin stated that what they
have found out is that with the facility in the rear of the grocery
stores, the volume is Iow because people do not feel safe and
others do not even know the facility is there. They have done a
lot of studies and with their presentation to the grocery stores,
they understand that consumers want easy, convenient, safe, well
lit, and clean recycling centers. Commissioner Butler stated he
agrees with these comments and believe they exist with the
current facility at the rear of the store and he does not feel unsafe
with its present location.
1 7. Commissioner Abels asked what prevents someone from using the
Center after it is closed. Mr. Griffin stated a video comes on and
states the machine is closed and will not work.
1 8. Chairman Robbins asked if anyone else would like to address the
Commission. Ms. Susan Moors, representing Stater Bros.
Corporate management, stated the reason they asked Tomra to
relocate was at the request of the property owners, Desert Cities
Development, who asked that the facility be moved to the front as
it is in direct line of their trucks. Parking is impacted due to double
parking and there have been several very serious near misses.
They have had numerous complaints from citizens of the City
complaining about being in the back of the building and with the
new Replanet system they have eliminated many of these
problems and increased the amount of recycling. Stater Bros is
working with Tomra to maintain a clean and safe environment.
Stater Bros. and the owners of the Center have made it clear that
the rear is not an option. They will do whatever it will take to
have an attractive site. They too are concerned about the
condition of the asphalt and working on a system of signage to
make it safe and accessible to the public.
19. There being no further public comment, the public participation
portion of the public hearing is closed and open for Commission
discussion.
C :\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-O0.wpd :~
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
20. Commissioner Kirk stated he believes the owner and Stater Bros
have made a compelling reason for moving the facility to the front
of the building. As this is a recycling center he thinks the City
should be more willing to work with the applicant, but it should
comply with the Center's Specific Plan and City Zoning.
21. Commissioner Abels stated he concurs with Commissioner Kirk
and thinks this design is too gaudy as presented. He also agrees
with the argument to move the facility to the front, but the signs
are too much. They are trying to stop sign pollution and this adds
to the problem.
22. Commissioner Butler stated he still believes it can be behind the
building and work. The idea is fine, but the location is wrong.
23. Commissioner Tyler asked if the State mandated facility does
anything for meeting AB939 requirements. City Attorney Kathy
Jenson stated it does. The City is required to meet certain
mandates, but the Commission is still authorized by the City's
Zoning Ordinance and by State law to regulate the design of the
structures. Commissioner Tyler stated he has gone through this
area early in the morning and there has been some competition for
space with the truck drivers for parking, but he does not believe
it creates the necessity to move the facility. He went on to cite
what he believed were violations of the Zoning Code and asked
why this was being allowed to be built in violation of each of the
City's requirements. Staff stated the sections quoted referred to
individual machines and as this is a building/facility, modifications
were made to allow it to be considered. In addition, the loss of
parking.spaces was analyzed and the Center was still over parked.
Commissioner Tyler stated that if it is approved it should comply
with ADA requirements.
24. Chairman Robbins stated he has no concern about moving it to the
front as he agrees it is a safety concern. He does agree with
Commissioner Kirk in that this does look like an old photo kiosk
that was dropped off in the middle of the parking lot. This should
be classified as a building and should therefore meet those
standards for the shopping center. The architecture does not meet
the architectural design of rest of the Center and does not meet
the image the City wants on Highway 111.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-OO.wpd l~
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
25. Commissioner Kirk suggested the applicant work with staff on the
location and architectural design issue.
Chairman Robbins recessed the meeting at 8:00 p.m. to allow the applicant time to
meet with staff regarding the issues raised. The meeting reconvened at 8:05 p.m.
26. Mr. Griffin asked the Commission to continue his application to
October 10, 2000.
27. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Kirk to continue this item to the meeting of
October 10, 2000, as requested by the applicant. Unanimously
approved.
B. Environmental Assessment 83-009 Addendum, General Plan Amendment
2000-070, Zone Change 2000-095, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment
#4, and Tentative Tract Map ?9878; a request of KSL Land Holdings,
Inc. for certification of an Addendum to the PGA West Environmental
Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial
to Medium Density Residential, Zone Change from Community
Commercial to Medium Density Residential, Specific Plan Amendment to
modify development standards, design guidelines and land use
alternatives for PGA West, and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 22.21
acres into 60 residential lots, and other miscellaneous lots, for the area
located at the southeast corner of Avenue 54 and PGA Boulevard.
1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the
information contained in the staff report and noted additional
changes to the Conditions of Approval for the Specific Plan and
Tentative Tract Map, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department.
2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked about the widths of the streets. Senior
Engineer Steve Speer explained that in one instance it refers to the
right of way width and the other is the street width. Street width
is typically measured between the curb face, but when you go to
a wedge curve we call it a flow line as there is no curb face. He
went on to explain why the conditions were written as they are.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-00.wpd
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
3. Chairman Robbins asked why a 31 foot right of way width and 28
foot gutter to gutter width. Staff stated there is a foot and half
between the flow line and back of the wedge on each side which
equals out to one and a half feet.
4. Commissioner Tyler questioned why the staff report refers to
different minimum lot sizes and yet they are asked to approve a
tract map which has the smallest lot size is 6250 square feet.
Why not make all the lots 6,250 and stop the double bookkeeping
as to what is allowed and what is there. Also the staff reports
should reference the change from GTE to Verizon.
5. Commissioner Kirk asked what function, other than aesthetics, is
the lake serving. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it was for the
stormwater drainage.
6. Chairman Robbins stated that historically rolled curbs have not
been allowed in the City. Staff stated that for the last four years,
KSL and Rancho La Quinta have been using this wedge curbs and
the City does give discretion as they are private streets.
7. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing KSL, stated they are
presenting a reduced intensity project. They have reduced the
Specific Plan by 1,000 units and reduced the commercial uses by
100,000 square feet. It is their belief that this is a more
appropriate land use for what PGA West has come to be over the
last 15 years. The Environmental Addendum states how the
environmental impacts have been reduced by this application.
8. Commissioner Kirk asked how much of the lake is needed for
drainage. Mr. Haag stated the tentative tract is required to deal
with the stormwater runoff. The lake serves two functions. From
a planning, landscape, architectural standpoint it provides a green
space, water space a softening element into the site plan as well
as provide storm water retention. As depicted on the exhibit, less
than 16% is in water surface area and that is only in the event of
a 100 year storm flood. Commissioner Kirk raised some issues
that had been indicated in letters received from the residents of
PGA West and asked if some of the commercial uses would some
day be addressed. Mr. Haag stated that originally a 1,000 room
hotel would have the commercial uses to accommodate that type
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
of use. As it turns out PGA West has been developed
considerably less dense than the first applications and over the
years it continues to be reduced. Commissioner Kirk asked what
the Tourist Commercial uses will be. Mr. Haag stated that
currently they do not have a defined plan for that area. Residents
have raised concerns regarding the 1,000 room hotel. Mr. Chevis
Hosea, KSL, stated that they do intend to develop the Tourist
Commercial site as residential. They do think it is good to have a
mixture of Residential with the Tourist Commercial.
Unfortunately, the market has not developed to accommodate the
Tourist Commercial use. Once homeowners are existing, there are
opposed and they now intend to develop it as residential. They
would like to have some commercial, but most of the
Neighborhood Commercial sites have been reduced in size and
most of the commercial uses have moved further north making
this not a good site in terms of the market to generate the traffic
count to produce the commercial uses.
9. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was any opportunity on the site
for a six acre commercial use that could be marketed in 10-15
years. Mr. Hosea stated they are out of property with the
exception of a couple of two or three acre sites once this site and
the hotel site are developed. They, as a club, do intend to have
some commercial uses within the club area. Commissioner Kirk
asked about the architectural changes being suggested in this
application.
10. Commissioner Butler stated he concurs that the demand creates
the problem and the solution.
1 1. Commissioner Tyler asked if the minimum lot size could be more
standard. Mr. Hosea stated that as the parcels are engineered the
lot sizes and plot the homes, it will be more defined.
Commissioner Tyler aSked about Section 3.2 of the Specific Plan
as to whether there had been any changes. Mr. Hosea stated
none.
12. Chairman Robbins asked about the lake and it conformance with
the City's Landscape Ordinance. Hovv can a project that is half
water including the landscape areas, meet the maximum vvater use
which is 80% of ET when half of the lot is water vvhich runs about
110 of ET which means the other half would have to be about
50% ET which is not a typical KSL landscaping scene. It would
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-1 2-O0.wpd 0
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
have to be very heavily xeroscape in order to meet the ordinance
requirements. Mr. Haag stated that the existing perimeter of the
project from curbline back even into the landscape setback is
already existing and incorporated into the setback on two of the
three sides. The other side is an existing wall. If you take out the
house pads from the equations, you would see how they met the
Code. The intent is to develop a neighborhood that is consistent
with the thematic of the landscape, architecture of other
residential tracts in PGA West. It is not intended to be a desert
landscape project. Chairman Robbins stated the intent of the
Landscape Ordinance is to conserve or minimize the use of water.
He doubts if the landscaping approved over the last ten years
agrees with the City's Ordinance. To have this much water you
have to have a lot of sand everywhere else to meet the
requirements of the Landscape Ordinance. He would suggest
adding a condition to require this project to meet the maximum
water allowance in the Landscape Ordinance if they want this
much water.
13. Commissioner Tyler asked what type of garage doors would be
used. Mr. Haag stated they would be refined during the
architectural review of the units. Commissioner Tyler asked about
some of the uses listed in Planning Area IV, what type of uses are
proposed. Mr. Haag stated it would only be allowed by a
Temporary Use Permit.
14. Commissioner Kirk asked what the major changes are proposed for
the architectural changes. Mr. Haag stated they did not make any
specific changes from the previous approval. It is their intent to
integrate the graphics of the previous approval into this document.
Fundamentally, they are the same standards and guidelines.
Commissioner Kirk stated the staff report references the La Quinta
Hotel Specific Plan and the Greg Norman Golf Course, so they
have incorporated graphics from there as well? Mr. Haag stated
there is a reference to the Greg Norman Golf Course in regard to
a sign issue on this Specific Plan because of the tunnel connecting
the two and giving people an indication of how to get from one
project to the other.
15. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment.
Mr. Michael Walker, General Manager of PGA West Residential
Association, Inc., representing the Board of Directors of the 1300
homeowners or two-thirds of the Masters Association
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-O0.wpd ] 0
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
membership. They are conceptionally in favor of the Zone
Change. Originally, the Board of Directors was told this proposed
development would be annexed into the Residential Association 1
and accessed from inside the gated complex off Oak Tree. Later
they were told this would not occur and access would be from
PGA Boulevard by a card gate. Their concern is safety as the only
means of ingress/egress is off PGA Boulevard and the amount of
traffic generated. Although PGA Boulevard is designated as a 35
mph zone, many drivers excelled that limit. Add to that a
consistent flow of resident and guest automobiles, golf carts and
service vehicles and the risk for liability becomes a real concern for
the Master Association. Although they unanimously approve of
the rezoning of the 22 acres, they believe the access should be off
Oak Tree or 54th Avenue. If neither option is utilized, a fair and
impartial and unbiased traffic study should be required prior to
approval of this request.
16. Mr. Robert Foulk, 57-540 Interlachen, President of the Masters
Association, stated they have had a lot of discussions with the
applicant and do support the residential use for this property.
Their problem is that their CC&R's do not function well with this
project as it relates to security gates, etc. They have reached an
agreement to propose an amendment to the CC&R's to overcome
that problem. On that basis and requesting that the Commission
condition the project to that extent, they have no objections.
17. Commissioner Kirk asked if they are concerned about not having
a commercial use in the development. Mr. Foulk stated they do
not and their responsibilities do not address those type of
questions in regard to land uses.
18. Commissioner Butler asked if the Commission could make any
conditions regarding HOA concerns. Staff noted no.
19. Commissioner Tyler asked if the access would be by card gate.
Mr. Haag stated the Tentative Tract envisions some type of a
gated access, but does not mandate a human guard. The cost
may be prohibitive for a 22 acre site with such Iow intensity
- development to make it viable. The other sites that have manned
gates have a larger number of homes to serve. Mr. Foulk stated
they do request that the gatehouse be compatible with the other
gatehouses at PGA West.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PCg-12-O0.wpd ! !
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
20. Chairman Robbins asked if they would be building houses or selling
lots. Mr. Haag stated the site would be sold to a developer to
build out the houses.
21. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed
the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the
project for Commission discussion.
22. Commissioners Abels and Butler stated they has no concerns.
23. Commissioner Kirk stated he agrees with the change in land use
and as the residents are not wanting the commercial uses, then he
has no objection. In regard to the Tentative Tract, his concern is
regarding the lake. There needs to be more sensitivity to the
environment and the lake does not meet the Landscaping
Ordinance, nor the intent of the xeroscape and would be in
support of denial of the Tentative Tract for that reason.
24. Commissioner Tyler stated his only issues was the lot sizes in the
Specific Plan.
25. Chairman Robbins stated there is an existing median and asked if
this will be a full turn access.' Staff stated it would be a full turn.
Chairman Robbins stated he does not see any emergency access.
Staff stated it is next to the well site at Avenue 54. Chairman
Robbins asked if access will be from the interior or exterior of the
well site. Staff noted there is an easement and it will be wherever
the Water District prefers. Chairman Robbins stated he is not sure
he would deny the Tentative Tract because of the lake, but does
have some concerns that it meet the Landscape Ordinance.
26. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2000-061 recommending certification of an Addendum
to Environmental Impact Report Addendum 83-009.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
27. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-062 recommending
approval of General Plan Amendment 2000-070, subject to the
Findings as submitted.
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
28. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-063 recommending
approval of Zone Change 2000-095, subject to the Findings as
submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-064 recommending
approval of Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment//4, subject to the
Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended:
a. Condition //8: Delete any reference in the Specific Plan to
allowing time shares, interval and fractional ownership, in
the Tourist Commercial zone.
b. Condition//9: Delete Section 3.2.29 on page 3.24.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and
Chairman Robbins. NOES: None.' ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-065 recommending
approval of Tentative Tract Map 29878, subject to the Findings
and Conditions of Approval as amended:
a. Condition//25: Delete
b. Add Condition //79: Prior to issuance of a grading permit
the applicant shall provide calculations consistent with
Chapter 8.13 of the Municipal Code-Water Efficient
Landscaping.
11. Commissioner Kirk asked if this would preclude the development
of the lake. Staff stated they would have to review it.
ROLL CALL:' AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman
Robbins. NOES: Commissioner Kirk. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-O0.wpd ] 3
Planning Commission Minutes
September 12, 2000
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Chairman Robbins reminded the Commission of the joint meeting of the
City Council, Planning Commission, and Architecture and Landscape
Review Committee on September 26, 2000, tentatively at 6:00 p.m.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Butler/Abels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held September 26, 2000, at 7:00
p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. on
September 12, 2000.
Respectfully submitted,
er, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California