Loading...
2003 01 28 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 28, 2003 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 Vice Chairman Tyler who asked Commissioner Robbins to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, and Vice Chairman Robert Tyler. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to excuse Chairman Butler. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Planning Manager Oscar OrCi, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Environmental Consultant Nicole Criste, Associate Planner Martin Magar~a, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Staff asked that Item "B" under Business Items be corrected to read: "Request: Request for a finding of General Plan conformity for the City of La Quinta's proposed acquisitiOn for the extension of La Quinta Drive." IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of January 14, 2003. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to approve the minutes as presented. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None. V. PRESENTATIONS: None VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-03.wpd ] Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 A. Environmental Assessment 2002-460 and Site Development Permit 2002-753; a request of Evergreen Devco, Inc./Eisenhower Medical Center for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and review of development plans for a 14,560 square foot drug and retail store on a 4.03 acre site located at the northeast corner of Avenue 48 and Washington Street. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Maga~a presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk assumed traffic would be an issue and asked staff to comment on whether or not the traffic would be a significant impact. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated it would not. At the time the General Plan was updated the traffic analysis anticipated what the traffic load would be for all the streets in La Quinta at a buildout scenario. They load the anticipated traffic onto the streets to know what size the streets should be. Then when proposals suCh as this come before the City there is only a need to ask for additional right of way. This project is within what the General Plan anticipated for these streets. Commissioner Kirk asked about the previous design submitted by Walgreens at Avenue 50 and Washington Street and why it was denied for that location. Staff noted the additional applications and requirements that were required for approval at the prior site. Commissioner Kirk asked if this project was consistent with the zoning designations of Community Commercial. Staff stated it is. 3. Commissioner Abels stated he thought the architectural design was different. Staff noted it was. 4. Vice Chairman Tyler asked staff to indicate the location of the 150 foot Image Corridor setback from Washington Street would be and reaffirmed the height limit at this location was 22 feet and asked what the height limit would be beyond that. Staff indicated the location on the map and confirmed the height limit was 22 feet within the setback and beyond that they could go up to 40 feet. The proposed building and tower were within the height limits. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Tim O'Neil, Evergreen Devco, Inc., the applicant, gave a G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 1-28-03.w. pd 2 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 presentation on the project and noted the upgrades they had made to the project site and the building itself. He further noted this site will not make application for a liquor license and the store hours Will be 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. and the lighting plan would be consistent with the store hours. They have eliminated their typical neon sign on the tower and designed a four-sided architectural building. 6. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any conditions they wanted to address. Mr. O'Neil stated Condition #40, and #50. On Condition #40 needs clarification as the sentence is unfinished. The second Condition is #50 requiring the proposed drive through for the pharmacy shall be a minimum of 12 feet wide with proper striping. They agree with the proper striping, but typically work with a nine and ten foot drive through lane with an island that separates the two lanes that is three foot wide. They would request to keep the nine and ten foot lanes. Vice Chairman Tyler asked how this compares with the store at Washington Street and Avenue 42 in Bermuda Dunes. Mr. O'Neil stated it should be a prototype or Criteria store, which would have the nine foot on the internal lane, a three foot island, and then a ten foot lane. 7. Ms. Emily Hemphill, attorney for the applicant, stated there were two other conditions of concern that she would address. First Condition #10 which relates to the dedication along Washington and Condition #11 which is for the dedication of the landscape strip along Washington. They have found that their property is not contiguous to Washington Street. There is a landscape strip along Washington that is owned by the La Quinta Commercial Owners Association. The property owners association that maintains the common area for all the commercial development. So a dedication on their property in the absence of this, will not give the City what they are wanting. They would like to suggest they condition their dedication for the ultimate width of Washington Street such that it does not have to occur until that strip is acquired. The second issue is Condition #38, the joint access. Under this condition her client is being required to provide half of the driveway access onto Washington Street with the remainder being provided by the property owner to the north. Their concern is financing and timing. They have not been given an indication that this property owner is ready to proceed with his development and because it is unknown when they will begin their process, they would like to suggest an alternate condition: "In the event the adjacent property owner to the north refuses to grant the required easements for the G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 1-28-03.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 shared access, they be permitted to put the full width of the Washington Street access on their property and then if the property to the north is later developed, and requires the access, they can provide an easement with both properties sharing the access maintenance costs." 8. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there was a similar condition for the Marriott project. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated yes, but it is based on timing. Ms. Hemphill stated their only concern is that should they not develop their property, they not be left with half a driveway. 9. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Bob Lowry, 48-265 Paso Tiempo Lane, representing the Master Board of Directors for Rancho La Quinta, stated the majority of their members are against locating a Walgreens drug store at this site. They are proud of Rancho La Quinta and La Quinta. A drug store with bright lights on tall poles with a sign 13 feet above the street does not belong across the street from this development. It belongs in a retail corridor. 10. Mr. Bill Ivey, 78-665 Descanso Lane, stated he has been in the Valley for 50 years and chose their home in Rancho La Quinta because they love this area. Their home is about six houses from the corner of this site. It was their understanding that this site was to be an office building and now it is being proposed as a drug store. They do not want it as they know it will devalue their property over time and their lifestyle. Retail uses always bring excessive lighting, traffic, etc. and many are impossible to mitigate. The demographics will not support the use at this location. They commend the developer for their efforts to upgrade their design, but still respectively request the Planning Commission deny the project. 11. Mr. Rob Dawson, 79-770 Rancho La Quinta Drive, stated he is a member of the safety committee for Rancho La Quinta and they believe this proposal represents some safety concerns such as poor ingress and egress onto the site. Both medians create a circulation problem with right-in, right-out, and u-turns will increase accidents. They ask that this proposal be denied. 12. Mr. Chuck Sullivan, 40-610 Vista Estrella, stated he has a lot of G :\WPDOCS\PC M in utes\ 1-28-03.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 concerns about this site for thisproject. Avenue 48 represents the front door to Rancho La Quinta. A food and drug store at this location is wrong. There needs to be a transition between the heavy commercial at Highway 111 and the residential uses to the south. The problems he sees are lighting, traffic, noise, and the. collateral damage you get with a retail application of any kind. Some of these can be mitigated and some cannot. He believes a more professional office building with tenants that arrive in the morning and leave in the afternoon is a more sensitive use of this site. He believes they will be entering a very angry customer base. 13. Mr. Frank Christopher, 48-485 Vista Calico Drive, stated his background has been in residential development and he agrees with what has been stated so far, which is that the retail use is not consistent with the residential uses in the vicinity. He requests the project be denied. 14. Mr. Bob Friedricks, 48-105 Via Solana, stated that from his residence he will visually be able to view this development and he strongly objects to this project. 15. Ms. Sally Jo Baggs, 78-705 Descanso Lane, stated her residence is right across from this development and this has always been a quiet area. She likes the design and appreciates their efforts, but still believes it does not belong in this area. 16. Ms. Emily Hemphill, attorney for the applicant, stated most of the concerns raised by the neighbors have been regarding the land use compatibility and she would like to point out a few things regarding that. First of all, this property is currently designated as Community Commercial on the General Plan. This General Plan went through considerable study by staff, Planning Commission, and the City Council and it was approved only ten months ago. That Community Commercial designation permits the sale of general merchandise, hardware and building materials, food, drug and sundry, person services and similar goods and services to meet the needs of a multi-neighborhood area. Prior to this zoning it was zoned Regional Commercial. This property has been designated as Commercial since 1990 when the Lake La Quinta tract map was recorded on February 28, 1990. To say it is inappropriate for commercial property runs directly counter to the G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-O3.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 planning process that this Commission went through for the General Plan update. To suggest that we do not like Walgreens, or we feel it is a discount issue, and therefore need to change the land use and ignore the planning process does violation to the planning process in the City of La Quinta. They have conformed in every way with the land use requirements for a commercial development in this area. The traffic conditions, as.indicated by staff, have already been fulfilled. With respect to marketing, Walgreens has studied the area and believes it is appropriate from a market standpoint. She submitted a letter from Walgreens regarding their marketing analysis. The Planning Commission's purpose is land use issues and in this case, land use is appropriate and in an agreement with the City's General Plan. 17. Mr. Jerry Sheldon, 48-015 Casita Drive, stated he runs a competing pharmacy chain and does not think this is a good use of the land and urges the Planning Commission to reject the application. There are only 41,559 people in a radius of three mines and there are ten competitors. That averages to only 4,000 people per store, which is a disaster. The population over 60 is only 19%, which alone is not a good indication as they are the largest purchaser of drugs. The other issue is that drug stores are a magnet for crimes and asked if there were any other development options. 18. Mr. Sam Spinello, 75-600 Mary Lane, Indian Wells, stated he is a local real estate broker for commercial developments. He was asked to speak on how a drug store could work with the office buildings proposed on the remainder of the site. His experience in projects like this is extensive and named the other sites he has worked with. The remainder of the site is being marketed and receiving favorable response due to the Walgreens. In regard to property values, there seems to be an increase in property values when there are good schools and good quality neighborhood retail in close proximity. 19. Mr. Tim O'Niel, Evergreen Devco, stated that at this site they have exceeded the City's Code. The lighting is within the Dark Sky Ordinance and have expressed a willingness to work with staff to amend that lighting program if staff deems it appropriate. Second is traffic. There is room for improvement on the circulation of the site and they believe the improvement should be on Caleo Bay. Staff has advised them there is a proposal to add a left turn lane G :~WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-03.wpd (~ Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 departing Caleo Bay. They have agreed to participate in the striping of that program at their cost to meet staff's requirements. The issue of the market place and whether or not there is room for another store, in the last ten years they have opened 3100 store; , two of which have closed due to sales problems. That is better. than 99.9% success which is greater than any other company. Walgreens is 101 years old and has been named the most respected food and drug retailer in the Fortune 100, seven of the last ten years. This is not a case of taking a poor business and dressing it up with aesthetics to meet a higher end neighborhood. They are taking a business that typically locates on higher traffic areas and bringing it up to Code with aesthetics to meet the neighborhood. The quality and the credibility and the credit worthiness is there. Regarding the marketplace, they look to a 1-2 mile radius and focus on a neighborhood orientation. Based on their experience, the cluster Of retail that exists On Washington is in a distinct trade market. The competing businesses at the highway are high traffic businesses they continually hear complaints about; circulation, safety, sanitation, site plan, quality. People who do not like to go to the highway and navigate the highway have a clean, safe option,, that is obviously a higher end design than they can find at the highway. This is the strategy behind this project. He continued to list other examples of the market place. They appreciate the comments from the neighbors, even those in opposition. 20. Mr. Grady Sparks, Rancho La Quinta developer, stated he reviewed some of the projects that have been proposed along Avenue 48. He asked if Caleo Bay was a public street. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated yes. Mr. Sparks stated it appears to him that especially at night the lights along Avenue 48 will shine into the homes. With all the traffic on Washington Street now, this will create additional prOblems for people trying to get out onto Washington Street and Avenue 48. He asked if the entrance to Walgreens on Avenue 48 could be deleted and use the entrance off Caleo Bay. It appears to him that another traffic signal will be needed and maybe some type of a frontage road to get the traffic up to a light to get them out onto Washington Street. His other concerns are lighting and he would like the lighting to .be very restrictive. He does not see where the trash will be picked up nor what is proposed for the other sites on the site plan. 21. Mr. Jack Fleck 48-425 Via Salona, stated all the comments so far G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 1-28-03.wpd Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 are valid issues. Traffic, lighting, general'litter, noise, are all issues that this project will bring. He knows their operation is successful, but they are the residents that have to live with this development in their community. He does not see the need for another.drug store in this location. 22. Mr. Tom Gorney, 49-893 Via Catalina, stated he has. no objection to Walgreens, but to put this store, as nice as it is, next to a high end residential, is not appropriate. Make the transition reasonable. He would like to see the City rank itself with Indian Wells and Rancho Mirage, not Cathedral City and Desert Hot Springs. 23. Ms. Grace Ellen Goodman, 78-885 Rio Seco, stated that as a woman she looks at safety when she purchased her home. This development will cause them more traffic and safety issue. They moved into their area to have a lovely, safe environment and this will not give them the safety they bought for. 24. Mr. Sean O'Brien, 78-955 Descanso Lane, stated the reason he moved here was to get away from this type of development. Their studies were based on economics and not what was best for the community. In court, a judge would not rule on a project like this until he would see the entire picture. He would state that it was too early to rule on an issue until they see the entire picture. At this time, we have no idea what will be happening on the remainder of the site. H.e asks that any decision be held off until a complete picture of the site is presented. 25. Mr. John Peruzzi, architect for the project, stated he cannot address all the issues raised, but would address the statement that Walgreens is an eyesore and is not studying the needs of the local community. He would like to disagree. They have worked very hard to make this a very special Walgreens to make it a pride of ownership for the neighborhood. They have deleted signs to be sensitive, created arcades, Iow level lighting, landscape buffers and many other amenities to make this an upscale project. 26. Ms. Betty Shelley, 78-565 Descanso Lane, stated her house is right across the street from the proposed site. She got the idea from Walgreens that they do not want to be where they are not wanted and she hopes they get the message they do not want them to be here. G :\WPDOCS\PC M in utes\ 1-28-03.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 27. There being no other public participation, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion and opened the matter up for Commission discussion. 28. Commissioner Abels commended the applicant on their presentation and design. He wonders if people realize the obligation the Planning Commission is under when'an applicant meets all the City requirements. This is a good project. It is not a purview of the Commission to say whether or not this is a good place for a Walgreens. 29. Commissioner Kirk asked staff if the applicant did any view shed analysis from adjoining properties. Associate Planner Martin Maga~a stated they did. Mr. Garbett reviewed the viewshed plans. Commissioner Kirk asked if the lighting with 22 foot poles, meets City Code. Associate Planner Martin Magar~a stated the Code allows the lighting poles to be the maximum height established by the zone in which the building is located or 18 feet, whichever is greater. Commissioner Kirk asked if bollards could be used instead. Staff stated the Lighting Ordinance is currently under review, so the current Code requirements would be applicable in this instance. The use of bollards would be more of a question for the applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked where staff was on review of the Lighting Ordinance. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated public hearings will be conducted in February and March on those proposed changes to the Lighting Ordinance. Commissioner Kirk asked if bollard lighting can meet the Dark Sky Ordinance and safety issues. Community Development Director stated bollard lighting is permitted, yes. It would be a question of the applicant as to whether or not bollard lighting provides enough light for their safety concerns. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated the issue of lighting in regard to the La Quinta Arts Foundation site is that bollard lighting could not meet the City's standards. Therefore, a specific plan amendment was used to deviate from the regular standards by combining bollard lighting and reducing the height of the lighting to reach a compromise. Community Development Director stated the consultant hired to review the lighting standards has stated the higher the better for the lighting standards. Commissioner Kirk asked if lower lighting in the parking lot on Avenue 48 could be a proposition the applicant would consider. He commented on how sophisticated the comments have been from those speaking and they did address their issues. It is known that Rancho La Quinta is a high quality G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-03.wpd ~) Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 development, but at the same time the residents have to understand that when land use is not an issue, the Commission has to be sensitive to an applicant's request. In regard to this not being a market for Walgreens, this is not a purview for the Commission. The prior application submitted by Walgreens was ' a good project, but in a wrong location. In this location it is a good project, and maybe it should have been considered when the General Plan was being considered. The Commission should make this retail development more acceptable to the community. The Commission does have an opportunity to address lighting, traffic, and circulation. This development could be conditioned in regard to what would be allowed on the remainder of the site. He supports the project if these issues can be addressed. 30. Commissioner Robbins stated he agrees with what has been stated. Demographics are not within the Commission's purview. One of the concerns raised was safety with too many right-in and right-outs. These are done by design for safety.. The project is zoned f°r the use and he does not believe they have the right to decide what can be developed on the remainder of the site. 31. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if this goes to the City Council. Staff stated the Commission's action is final unless it is appealed, or called up by the Council. 32. Commissioner Robbins asked if the community can appeal the application. Staff stated yes. 33. Vice Chairman Tyler stated he does have a concern about the 22 foot light poles. It seems the Arnold Palmer restaurant was reduced to 18 feet. He would like to suggest they be reduced to 18 feet on the entire site. They can use Iow level bollards to augment them. Another concern he has is what will be developed on the remainder of the site. The staff report indicates the other buildings could be medical uses; can the Commission limit what can be allowed to ensure they are compatible with what is already built. City Attorney Kathy Jenson, stated if the Commission had a concern that the project would not be compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, if it was consolidated with other retail uses, the Commission could request the developer and/or property owner to consent to as a condition of approval. A finding must be made that the architecture, site design, and use is compatible and therefore they could request the owner and applicant to consent to this limitation. Vice Chairman Tyler stated a condition does need to be added requiring stabilizing of the ground until G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-O3.wpd ] 0 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 something is built on the remainder of the site. Also, a condition should be added requiring all deliveries be made during the hours of operation. The same for the trash pick up. He would like to ask the applicant if any comments were received from Lake La Quinta. . Community Development Director Jerry Herman informed the. Commission that the Environmental Assessment mitigation measures requires the vacant land to be seeded and deliveries are limited to 7 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. Trash is controlled by the construction hours for pick-up. 34. Mr. O'Niel stated that any uses on the remainder of the site will come before the Commission as a matter of planning procedures. They will state there will be no other pharmacy or pharmacy use on the site based on the CC~rR's for the site. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated generally staff does not look at the substance of the CC~rR's unless there are Special conditions that need to 'be included. Staff reviews them only to see that no uses are being allowed that are not allowed by the City. The applicant has stated they will have an anti-competitive clause provision allowing them to not sell any land to a competitor. Mr. O'Neil stated the CC~rR's are very restrictive in regard to the uses that are allowed. Evergreen Devoo has entitlements on the entire site and their CC~R's will not allow any other pharmacies or nuisance use on the site. In regard to lighting, lowering the light standards does not improve the lighting program. To lower the light standards requires either a brighter bulb, or more lights. Their plan is to the City's Code which is one to two foot candles and lower the lighting plan that is evenly distributed that does not have brighter bulbs. The goal is to have lights shielded onto the property, evenly distributed, at very Iow foot candles. All lights are out by 10:00 p.m., except for what is required for public safety. Community Development Director stated the proposed lighting standards being brought to the Commission at a later date will have a curfew requirement for exterior lights. This applicant is complying with what staff will be proposing with the new lighting standards. 35. Commissioner Kirk asked if the hours of operation could be reduced due to this location. 36. Commissioner Abels stated he did not believe this was within the Commission's purview. 37. Vice Chairman stated they have already conceded to not opening G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-03.wpd 1. 1. Planning Commission Minutes january 28, 2003 till 8:00 a.m. 38. Commissioner Kirk stated that if the other Commissioner Members do not consider it an issue he would relinquish the idea. 39. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adopt Resolution. 2003-003, certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2002-460, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler, NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 40. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Resolution 2003-004 approving Site Development Permit 2002-753, subject to the conditions as amended. A. Staff work with applicant to design the lighting with 16-18 foot high light standards; B. Conditions #10: applicant shall dedicate or acquire a six foot strip of land from the landscape lot adjacent to the existing right of way at their expense or request the Council acquire it by condemnation. C. Condition #11: applicant shall provide a 20 foot landscape setback from t'he edge of the new right of way. D. Add Condition: a provision added to the CC~rR that no other pharmacies, or related uses, would be allowed on the site. E. Condition #38: Discretion is given to the City Engineer on how the shared drive is implemented. F. Condition #40: eliminated. G. Condition #50: the drive through lane shall be 9 feet wide with a 3 foot island and ten foot wide lane. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler, NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. ABSTAIN: None. Vice Chairman Tyler recessed the meeting at 8:50 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Sign Application 2003-679, a request of CensourceJon's Supermarket G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-03.wpd ] 2 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 for consideration of a sign program amendment to replace two monument signs and the elimination of one oval sign in the Von's Shopping Center located at the southwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 11 1 (78-483 Highway 111). 1. Vice Chairman Tyler asked for the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Vice Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked why there was a minimum letter size. Staff stated it was limited by the Code. 3. Vice Chairman Tyler asked what part of the sign on Washington street was being removed. Staff stated the entire sign. The Code allows one monument sign per street frontage. Vice Chairman Tyler stated he would prefer to keep the Plaza La Quinta sign. In regard to the letter size, what latitude does the Commission have. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Commission has the latitude to approve what has been submitted and what will remain. Vice Chairman Tyler stated the distance they are proposing to move sign back, should be clarified. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the verbiage could be clarified to state it will be moved to the back of the inside of the curb line. 4. There being no further questions of staff, Vice Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Tim Pitts, representing Von's Company, stated they have worked with staff to resolve these issues. Von's will be starting their remodel and bringing their signs into conformance with the City. They will remove the two palm trees and move the sign back on Washington Street. As far as the oval sign on the Plaza La Quinta sign, they thought removing the oval sign was enough, but will agree to whatever the Commission requires. In regard to the height, they are trying to get a height that is visible to the public driving by. 5. Commissioner Abels asked if any of the other tenants were involved or requested to be participants on the sign. Mr. Pitts stated that is an issue of the property owner. This is the final decision of what the property owners requested. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked if the entire monument sign on Highway G :\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-03.wpd 1_ 3 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 111 was to be removed or just the oval Von's sign. Staff stated the entire sign. 7. There being no further questions of the applicant, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion and opened the matter ' for Commission discussion. ' 8. Commissioner Robbins stated he had no objection to keeping the Plaza La Quinta sign on Highway 111. 9. Commissioner Kirk stated this is an opportunity to clean up the site and bringing it up to City standards by allowing only the two monument signs. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 2003-002, approving Sign Application 2003-679, as recommended. Motion passes with Vice Chairman Tyler voting no and Chairman Butler being absent. B. Finding of General Plan Conformity, a request of the City for a finding of General Plan conformity for the City of La Quinta's potential acquisition and construction of the extension of La Quinta Drive on the north side of Highway 111 between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road. 1. Vice Chairman Tyler asked for the staff report. City Attorney Kathy Jenson gave the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Vice Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-005, confirming findings of conformity with the La Quinta General Plan for a potential acquisition and construction of the extension of La Quinta Drive on the north side of Highway 111 between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, and Vice Chairman Tyler, NOES: None. ABSENT: Chairman Butler. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1-28-O3.wpd ! 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 28, 2003 ABSTAIN: None. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Abels gave a report of the City Council meetirig of January X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held February 11,2003, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:35 p.m. on January 28, 2003. Respectfully submitted, 15et~t:y_~o~ y , e Secretary City e__f~a Quinta, California G :\WPDOCS\PC Mi nutes\ 1-28-03.wpd ]. 5