Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0220 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING TUESDAY - FEBRUARY 20, 2001 7:00 P.M. - ADMINISTRATION CONFERENCE ROOM � 73-510 FRED WARING DRIVE * ,� * � � �. ,� .� � � .� �. � * � � � .� �. .� * � � �. .� � * � .� � .� .� * * * �. .� � � � * .� � I. CALL TO ORDER Chairperson Lopez called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Commissioner Tschopp led in the pledge of allegiance. III. ROLL CALL Members Present: Jim Lopez, Chairperson Cindy Finerty, Vice Chairperson Sonia Campbell Sabby Jonathan Dave Tschopp ,,,�, Members Absent: None Staff Present: Phil Drell, Director of Community Development Bob Hargreaves, City Attorney Steve Smith, Planning Manager Martin Alvarez, Associate Planner Mark Greenwood, Engineering Manager Tonya Monroe, Administrative Secretary IV. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Consideration of the February 6, 2001 meeting minutes. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the February 6, 2001 minutes as submitted. Motion carried 5-0. V. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL ACTION M�. Drell indicated that there were no pertinent items at the February 8, 2001 City Council meeting. He noted that the ABD regional park site plan would be �"' back before City Council Thursday with a revised 10,000 square foot minimum MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 .�r� lot plan. Right now it was only a conceptual design and a development agreement. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it would come back befo�e Planning Commission. Mr. Drell said no, because it was of a lesser intensity then what the Planning Commission already approved. It was noted that the park lost about three acres. VI. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Case No. PMW 00-30 - CLK, INC., Applicant Request for approval of a parcel map waiver to merge lots located on the San Pablo Avenue between San Gorgonio Way and Catalina Way, APN's 627-141-002-9, 627-141-016-2, 627- 141-017-3. .�.r� Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the Consent Calendar by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS Anyone who challenges any hearing matter in court may be limited to raising only those issues he, she or someone else raised at the public hearing described herein, or in written correspondence delivered to the Planning Commission at, or prior to, the public hearing. A. Case No. CUP 00-01 - JOHN CRAIG, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to allow the operation of a seasonal strawberry stand located within the Desert Dunes Plaza at 40-205 Washington Street. ..r 2 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 �.. Mr. Alvarez explained that in March of 1998 Planning Commission approved an outdoor strawberry stand at the Desert Dunes Shopping Center within a vacant pad at that center. The vacant pad was recently sold and the applicant was not able to secure a new lease. At this time the applicant was requesting a new conditional use permit to relocate the strawberry stand within that same center but at the south end of the Desert Dunes Shopping Center. Mr. Alvarez indicated there was a site plan showing the location which was included in commission packets. The proposed location would be within a row of 10 parking spaces that front on Harris Lane. The stand would occupy two parking spaces. Staff was recommending that the applicant use three to provide a little more room for pedestrians and stand operation. The strawberry stand operation would be similar to the previous one which basically operated from 10:00 a.m. to dusk and the strawberry season was typically March through May. The stand would be eight feet deep, 18 feet wide and 1 1 feet high. Mr. Alvarez said he visited the site and determined that the center could accommodate the loss of three spaces at this end of the shopping center. Staff recommended that the Planning Commission give credit to the applicant to use six spaces available along Harris Lane. This would be sufficient to provide parking spaces for the stand and would eliminate any additional traffic �"" within the parking lot of the center. Based on the site visits, staff concluded the stand would be compatible and would not compromise the ability of the adjacent businesses to operate. Staff recommended that the commission grant approval for a one-year period to allow evaluation of long-term compatibility. For purposes of CEQA, Mr. Alvarez indicated that the proposal was a Class 3 categorical exemption and no further documentation was necessary. Mr. Alvarez recommended adoption of the draft resolution, subject to the attached conditions. Commissioner Jonathan asked if staff received any complaints or if staff was aware of any problems from the past use. Mr. Alvarez said no. Commissioner Jonathan asked if the stand would be oriented toward the interior of the parking lot. Mr. Alvarez said it would be oriented toward Harris Lane. Customers could access the stand from Harris Lane by parking along the street. The front of the stand woutd face Harris Lane and the back of the stand would face the parking lot. Mr. Drell commented that they were the best strawberries in the Coachella Valley. Commissioner Campbell asked if customers would be standing in the landscape area. Mr. Alvarez concurred, but said that the stand would sit in the �.. 3 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 � a � , � middle of the three spaces which would leave room for customers to stand in front on the pavement. Mr. Drell said there would be room to get around with the third open parking space. Commissioner Campbell asked if this was the same stand as last year. Mr. Alvarez concurred. Chairperson Lopez o�ened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. JOHN CRAIG, 29706 Avenida Del Real in Sun City, California, said that Mr. Alvarez did a good job explaining his request. He used to have a temporary brick sidewalk by his stand and he was planning to put that in front of this one so that people could stand on it and have access to the stand through the grass area. He could put some stepping stones in the grass so that it would be safer and nicer looking. When the season was over, he would fix it back up to its original condition. He also thanked Mr. Drell for his compliment on the strawberries. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. ' Chairperson Lopez asked for commission comments or action. � Commissioner Finerty stated that she thoroughly enjoyed the strawberries last year and was in favor of the project at this location. She moved for approval. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissioner Campbell, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Finerty, seconded by Commissione� Campbell, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2042, approving CUP 00-01 , subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. B. Case Nos. GPA 00-07, C/Z 00-10, and PP 00-23 - LAKESIDE PROPERTIES, Applicant Request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone from Service Industrial (SI) to General Commercial (C-1) and ; � � 4 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 �... a Precise Plan of Design for a 27,1 16 square foot mixed use commercial complex located on 2.35 acres at the southwest corner of Cook Street and Green Lane (northl. Mr. Smith pointed out that plans were on display. He said that the landscape/ site plan was a little confusing in that Green Way runs along the north/south along the east side of the property and Green Lane runs along the north side of the property that intersects with 42nd Avenue on the west side of Cook Street. He said that the site is about 2.35 acres, is currently zo�ed Service Industrial and the applicant was seeking an amendment to Commercial zoning. Staff felt the general plan amendment and change of zone were warranted given the location on an arterial street in the middle of an industrial area. He also felt that the commercial aspect would provide a service to both the employees to the area as well as the passersby on Cook Street, a designated arterial street. The precise plan would provide access from the street to the north and access at the southerly limit onto Green Way on the east side. There were also a couple of driveway connections immediately on the east side which would provide access to loading docks on the rear of the buildings. The front retail portion would face west to Cook Street and the proposed �"` deli/market would be at the north end. Architecture and landscaping were recommended for approval by the Architectural Review Commission on � January 23, 2001 . There would not be any access from Cook Street. Landscaping would continue the theme set by the city with the reconstruction of Cook Street. He said that the Transportation Engineer advised that the project would not impact levels on Cook Street. Staff recommended approval of the application and a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was prepared. Commissioner Jonathan said that the street names were confusing and asked if staff considered changing Green Way to 42nd. Mr. Greenwood said there was a lot of discussion when the street was named. He believed it was Green Way, not Green Lane. Commissioner Jonathan noted that some names change when they curve around like Sheryl turns into Melanie which turns into Merle. Mr. Greenwood said there was some consideration about naming it 42nd, but it wasn't because Green Way is a private street. Naming it 42nd would imply that it was a public street. Commissioner Jonathan noted that in the staff report Mr. Smith indicated that any future request for a restaurant use would have to go through the CUP process. He asked if Mr. Smith knew if the applicant was contemplating a restaurant use because if the project is Y�r.. 5 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 successful, fitting in the additional parking required for a restaurant might be difficult. Mr. Smith said he was unaware of any proposal for a restaurant. Commissioner Jonathan asked if ARC was satisfied with the single, long structure. He asked if there was any discussion about breaking that up into a couple of buildings. Mr. Smith said yes. He pointed to two sets of plans which showed that the plans had changed considerably between the project's first and second appearance at ARC. Commissioner Jonathan asked if there had been discussion in terms of grouping it into a series of three buildings instead of one on the !eft and a long one on the right and breaking up the long building. Mr. Smith said that ARC felt there was enough break in the building with the movement of the roof elevation as well as the in and out movement of the facade. Chairperson Lopez noted that there was a memorandum from Senior Deputy Conley and asked if his comments were incorporated. Mr. Smith said that Senior Deputy Conley was questioning the location of the access and staff indicated that the Transportation Engineer didn't have a concern with it. Chairperson Lopez asked for clarification regarding the entrance and loading � area. Mr. Smith said that he was requesting that the loading area be signed. � That was no problem and could be accomplished. The street numbering requirements would be handled through the Building Department. Chairperson Lopez o ened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. RICK BLOMGREN, Axcess Architects at 18652 Florida Street in Huntington Beach, stated that he was the agent for the property owner. He explained that their primary use would be the market. The remainder of the project would be interior improvements such as interior furnishings, tile, and things like that which would be an accent to the industrial area. They weren't looking at any additional food uses at this time. The movement in that area was for interior type uses. During the ARC meetings, one of his concerns was that they would have tenants that would be 1,500 to 6,000-7,000 feet. Keeping the building in a rectangular footprint gave them flexibility for their tenants. The arcade on the outside ranged from eight feet to 11 feet deep with different increments of massing. It would look like multiple buildings but the main core would be rectangular in shape. They tried to solve both of those problems at the same time. They had a chance to look at the 6 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 � staff report. Regarding zoning, he asked for clarification regarding PC-2 and C-1 and if the uses were similar and if it was based on the lot size. Mr. Smith said that was correct. It was based on the fact that they didn't meet the minimum for the PC-2 zone. Mr. Blomgren noted that another question that was raised in the staff report was the driveway at the southeast corner of the project. He said it jogged slightfy to the side. The reason they did that was because when the old Green Way was abandoned there was a gigantic catch space in that location. If they could work something out from a traffic standpoint that would allow them to jog there, it would save them a lot in terms of construction costs. When they got into plan check, they would discuss this further with the city. Commissioner Jonathan asked if Jensen's was a firm tenant. Mr. Blomgren said they were very close. It was just a matter of getting their entitlements in place. +... Commissioner Jonathan asked if it wasn't Jensen's, if that was the type of user they envisioned for the end building. Mr. Blomgren said yes. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Lopez asked for commission comments or action. Commissioner Campbell stated that she was on Cook Street often and felt that it would be a very good development in that location. She was in favor and moved for approval. Commissioner Finerty concurred and seconded the motion. She felt that the addition of a market/deli in that location would be a great convenience for the area. � 7 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 Commissioner Tschopp stated that he also concurred. A market/deli of that size would be a good addition to the area and the building would be compatible with the existing structures. Chairperson Lopez concurred and called for the vote. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2043, recommending to City Council approval of GPA 00-07, C/Z 00-10 and PP 00-23, subject to conditions. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Drell requested that the following two public hearing items be considered simultaneously. Commission concurred. C. Case Nos. GPA 00-01, C/Z 00-02 and TT 29713 - IRONWOOD � COUNTRY CLUB, Applicant Request for a recommendation to City Council of approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, general plan amendment and prezoning to facilitate future annexation to the city of Palm Desert for 156.01 acres located in the east half of Section 5, T6S R6E (the area south of Ironwood Country Club►. Said property to be designated very low density residential (1-3 dwelling units per acre) and open space in the General Plan and prezoned PR-2 and O.S. (open space). The application also includes a tentative tract map to create 20 residential lots ranging in size from 22,778 square feet to 35,830 square feet to be located on the future extension of Canyon View Drive. D. Case No. TT 29912 - IRONWOOD COUNTRY CLUB, Applicant Request for recommendation to the City Council of approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and tentative tract map to create 32 single family lots ranging in size from 15,081 8 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 �.. square feet to 23,001 square feet and a 96.47 acre recreation lot on the PR-7 D zoned property located in the east half of Section 32 T5S R6E being east of Canyon View Drive and north and south of Irontree Drive extended. Mr. Smith indicated that the tract maps were on display. He explained that Tract Map 29912 was located generally east of the existing clubhouse facility and Tract Map 29713 was at the south of the end of Canyon View. The area east of the clubhouse facility was currently in the city and was currently zoned planned residential and the lotting as proposed complied with the provisions of the ordinance and staff recommended approval of the map subject to conditions. He noted that in the draft resolution that was attached to that report, staff wanted to remove some of the material including, "Whereas, the applicant consulted with Fish and Wildlife Service and Fish and Game; and Whereas, the applicant consulted with the Boyd Deep Canyon Research Center; and Whereas, the applicant has agreed to compensate for loss of bighorn habitat at a 2:1 ratio." As well, the word "mitigated" should be removed. He stated that "mitigated" didn't apply to Map 29912, but only to Map 29713, the area southerly of the existing city limit. Mr. Smith pointed ''�"' out the location of the city boundary on the display map. He said the area was currently in the county of Riverside. The applicant wished to annex the property. Steps involved in annexation included prezoning and general planning the area. He noted that it came before the commission about a year ago and it was sent to City Council without a map. By the time it reached Council, the issue of loss of bighorn sheep habitat had arisen. Over the past year the applicant had been working to resolve that environmental issue and in the meantime prepared the map which would create the 20 residential lots. As well, the map would create another recreation lot and then the area south of the dike would be the last lot which would be an open space lot. He indicated that both maps have a proposed condition included in them relative to the city requesting an easement for trail purposes for a possible future trail that the city was looking at developing which would link from Palm Desert to La Quinta. That condition was imposed on both maps. The lots proposed were in excess of 20,000 square feet. They all backed onto the golf course and would provide use of the golf course. Staff proposed conditions and development standards basically at the minimums created in the city. It was very likely that the homeowner's association would establish CC&Rs in excess of what staff was proposing. He asked for any questions. � 9 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 � Commissioner Jonathan asked about the location of the trail. Mr. Drell indicated that there was a canyon in this location that would drop a person into the south end of La Quinta. The problem right now was that it was a lambing area. If at some time the general sheep population invigorated itself enough that they could allow a little more intrusion into that area, that's when it would be used. Commissioner Campbell noted that in their letter the United States Department of Interior said that with the 41 .9 acres, the remaining 59.7 acres still needed to be identified. She asked if that was still true or if it had been resolved. Mr. Smith said that the letter was dated in December and he knew that the applicant had been working with them on it. Mr. Drell said that they have tentatively identified 91 acres of equivalent land and they had to come up with eight or nine more acres. Chairperson Lopez o ep ned the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. RONALD DAHL, 73099 Ajo Lane in Palm Desert stated that he was ; a member of Ironwood Country Club and a member of the Ironwood ,�.� Country Club Land Development Committee that has been pursuing this for the last year. He said that he wanted to make one quick correction to the agenda. The second plan, TT 29912, referred to the request for a Mitigated Negative Declaration and that wasn't accurate. They spoke to Mr. Smith earlier this afternoon but it was too late to correct the agenda and make the various clerical changes. He said that he had a number of those that he really needed to go through. Most of them related to the fact that they were considering both of these tract maps together and the mitigation factors got tangled up between the two maps. Initially, he wa�ted to bring up the fact that there was a vote held by the members of Ironwood and a letter was sent to the city dated February 16 indicating that 63.2% of all members eligible to vote for Ironwood Country Club voted in favor of them pursuing these tentative maps. Of the actual votes cast, over 95% voted in favor. Under their bylaws, they were only required to have a simple majority. With regard to the first map, TT 29713 which would be the one requiring a Negative Declaration and a Mitigated Negative Declaration, there were a number of things they had questions aboui in the staff report. They found no conditions of approval they disagreed with and 10 `� MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 � all the comments he had were more of a clerical nature because of the problem of dealing with two maps at the same time. One was a Mitigated Negative Declaration and the other was not. On page four of the conditions of approval, they only had one comment on the in-lieu park dedication requirements and they wanted to see the language in the resolution that stated that it applied to the open space lot or Lot 22 of Tract No. 29713. Mr. Drell explained that the trai! easement had nothing to do with the open space or the bighorn sheep aspect. It was a dedication in lieu of park fees. The park fees would apply to both maps. Mr. Dahl said they didn't question that. What they wanted to do was make sure it was dedicated into what was now called Lot 22 on the second map, 29713. Mr. Drell said that the applicant could designate it any where they wanted and it was ultimately as they determined. The city's goal was to get from one side of the valley to another. Where it would be located was the applicant's '� choice. Mr. Dahl said that was okay and that they assumed they would be able to make the offer when they brought in the final map. Mr. Drell said that was correct. It was their free choice of where it would go. Mr. Dahl said they didn't have anything further on Map 29713. He thought the staff repo�t was acceptable. He indicated that there was one word on the staff report on page 5 that used the word "mitigation" that he hoped would be struck out. Anywhere it said Mitigated Negative Declaration on the 29912 report he felt should be corrected. On the staff report for TT 29912, page one of the staff report had the same problem with regard to the Negative Declaration. He saw that on page five for CEQA the term "Mitigated Negative Declaration" was left out in 29713. He just requested as a blanket item that for tentative map TT 29912, that all references to the negative environmental impact be omitted. Other than that, they didn't have any other problems with the conditions of approval and requested that the commission accept the recommendation of approval from staff on both plans. � 11 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 ,9 � � Chairperson Lopez noted that there were a lot of changes and without going through a long continuance, he asked if this could be done. Mr. Drell said that there was no need to change anything in the staff reports. The staff reports were informational. The only thing that needed to be changed in the resolution was removing the mitigation language from TT 29912 and keeping it in TT 29713. That was the only change. Mr. Dahl concurred and felt that could all be done at the staff level. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. He requested commission comments and/or action. Commissioner Jonathan felt that the applicant had done a great job. Obviously they had done their homework with the residents as well since there was a 95% approval rating. He saw no problem with the requests and was prepared to move for approval. Commissioner Finerty concurred and seconded the motion. � � Commissioner Campbell also concurred. She said that she lived there three years and felt they woutd do a first class job. Chairperson Lopez stated that he would also concur. Having lived in the desert for over 20 years and watching the whole valley grow, he felt the Ironwood area has always been one of the shining places in the desert. Commissioner Tschopp informed commission that he would be abstaining from voting and discussion because the bank he worked at had a financial interest in the property. Chairperson Lopez called for a vote. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Tschopp abstainedl. ; 12 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 �... It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2044, recommending to City Council approval of GPA 00-01 , C/Z 00-02 and adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2045 recommending to City Council approval of TT 29713, subject to conditions. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Tschopp abstained). Action: It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, approving the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Tschopp abstained). It was moved by Commissioner Jonathan, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2046, recommending to City Council approval of TT 29912, subject to conditions and changes noted by staff. Motion carried 4-0-1 (Commissioner Tschopp abstained). IX. MISCELLANEOUS � None. X. ELECTION OF COMMITTEE LIAISONS Appointment of an Art in Public Places Representative, a Civic Center Steering Committee Representative, Appointment of a Desert Willow Committee Representative, Appointment of a Landscape Committee Representative, Appointment of a Project Area 4 Committee Representative, Appointment of a Representative to the Palm Desert/Rancho Mirage Monterey Avenue Corridor Planning Work Group, and Appointment of a Zoning Ordinance Review Committee Representative. Mr. Drell said there had been some conversations regarding this and basically repeating what he said last time was that the City Council went through a process of discussing and arguing on the members of the committee and for whatever reason they chose to make all these decisions themselves and took it upon themselves to not leave it up to the committees to pick their own ir.. 13 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 a 4 � , � representatives. For all the committees, whether it was Parks and Recreation or Public Safety, they took it upon themselves to pick their own person. Chairperson Lopez asked if it was fair to assume that it wasn't just the Planning Commission, but all the committees. Mr. Drell said it was all the committees. He first carried the message to all of them. He said it was probably his mistake. He assumed that the committees would have the ability to pick their own representative. But that wasn't what the Council was thinking and they decided they wanted to make those selections themselves. They then argued about them and specifically argued that there couldn't be three planning commissioners on the committee. Commissioner Jonathan asked if it was just for the General Plan Committee. Mr. Drell said yes, it was just for that committee. Commissioner Jonathan asked if that was the case, why there was an exception. He asked if that was addressed. Mr. Drell said he thought that it was because the Council had a strong interest in this committee. Commissioner Jonathan thanked Mr. Drell for getting that information. Commissioner Jonathan noted that the Planning Commission selected these various committees and they didn't have representation on the Parks and � Recreation Commission. He asked if they needed to. Commissioner Campbell ,.� stated that they met quite often. Mr. Drell thought the Council might have to make that determination. Mr. Drell noted that anyone could go and observe. Commissioner Jonathan said he was talking about in an official capacity, whether it was voting or not. Just as the Planning Commission liaison. He suggested that the Mr. Drell mention it to Council. Commissioner Campbell noted that they didn't have any voting power on these committees. Commissioner Jonathan explained that they were trying to get onto committees that had impacts on planning and development in the city and Parks and Recreation was fairly active. He would find the time to make those and seriously didn't know if the Council wanted think about it and suggested Mr. Drell talk to them and let the Planning Commission know. Mr. Drell noted that the Council had a representative on that committee. Chairperson Lopez asked if there were any other committees they should have representation on. Commissioner Campbell brought up the Architectural Review Commission. Mr. Drell said that issues irnpacting development came to the Planning Commission eventually. He indicated that Architectural Commission agendas were usually ' full. Commissioner Jonathan stated that he felt ihe Planning Commission should remain independent from the Architectural Commission. Commissioner Jonathan said that if staff or Council didn't feel it was necessary for the 14 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 �.. Planning Commission to be represented at Park and Recreation that was fine. Mr. Drell said ultimately those items impacting development came to the Planning Commission eventually. It was up to the Planning Commission. He could make the request. Commissioner Campbell felt the request should be made. Mr. Drell agreed. Action: Moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Jonathan, by minute motion appointing Commissioner Campbell as the Art in Public Places, appointing Commissioner Tschopp as the Civic Center Steering Committee representative, appointing Commissioner Finerty as the Desert Willow Committee representative, appointing Commissioner Finerty as the Landscape Committee representative, appointing Commissioner Finerty as the Project Area 4 Committee representative, appointing Commissioner Jonathan as the Palm Desert/Rancho Mirage Monterey Avenue Corridor Planning Work Group representative, and appointing Commissioner Campbell as the ZORC representative. Motion carried 5-0. ` XI. COMMITTEE MEETING UPDATES A. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES - (No meeting) B. CIVIC CENTER STEERING COMMITTEE - (No meeting) C. DESERT WILLOW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) D. LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE - (No meeting) E. PROJECT AREA 4 COMMITTEE - (No meeting) F. PALM DESERT/RANCHO MIRAGE MONTEREY AVENUE CORRIDOR PLANNING WORK GROUP - 1No meeting) G. ZONING ORDINANCE REVIEW COMMITTEE - (No meeting) X11. COMMENTS None. �.. 15 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION FEBRUARY 20, 2001 � � � XIII. ADJOURNMENT It was moved Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adjourning the meeting by minute motion. Motion carried 5-0. The meeting was adjourned at 7:53 p.m. � ` � u� --- -- PHI IP DRELL,•SecFe ary 1 T: JIM �'EZ, Chai er Pal esert Plannin ommission /tm � � � � 16 �