►
From YouTube: General Plan Steering Committee | May 18 2023
Description
Special Meeting of the City of Palm Springs General Plan Steering Committee, held May 18th, 2023
A
C
A
Next
item
on
our
agenda
is
public
comments.
Pursuant
to
the
black
brown
ACT
public
comment
is
limited
to
only
those
other
items
that
appear
on
the
agenda
each
week.
We'll
have
two
minutes
to
speak
at
this
time:
I'll
open
it
up
to
the
comments
we
have,
both
people
participating
remotely
and
the
person
in
our
audience.
A
C
D
One
is
not
in
support
of
Lu
12.2,
adding
language
for
distribution
centers,
but
then
removing
criteria
such
as
screening
buildings
from
the
road.
So
that's
one
quick
one.
Another
one
is
that
one
of
the
areas
of
Prescott
preserve
along
sunrise,
North
of
Mesquite,
is
actually
in
the
general
plan
as
P
slash,
Q
E,
which
is
an
odd
designation
for
that
property.
That's
where
we
plan
to
have
our
parking
lot
and
another
access
to
The,
Preserve,
so
I'm,
not
quite
sure
why
that
is
under
P,
slash
QP.
D
The
third
thing
that
is
utmost
importance
is
the
Chino
cone,
lu,
13.1
removed,
requiring
of
a
specific
plan
for
the
special
Zone
area
there
and
I
believe
that
the
Chino
cone
is
something
that
would
warrant
further
discussion
and
what
we
can
do
to
protect
the
entrance
to
our
city
and
whether
that's
putting
together
a
task
force
or
just
looking
at
anything
that
relates
to
that
area
with
further
detail
would
be
great.
Which
brings
me
to
the
last
point,
which
is
hillsides
there.
D
In
2004,
there
was
a
Citizens
task
force
to
discuss.
Hillside
development
and
I
would
like
to
see
the
city
bring
back
that
task
force
or
our
hillsides
are
really
important
and
action.
Lu
9.1
was
removed,
and
that
was
regarding
the
sloping
of
10
percent
sent
to
30
percent.
I
would
like
to
see
a
reduction
of
the
slope
for
allowed
development
in
the
hillsides.
There
was
also
other
criteria
that
was
removed
from
that
section
regarding
lighting
and
other
factors.
D
A
The
none
will
close
public
comment
so
before
we
begin
our
only
business
items
tonight
or
the
review
of
our
draft
land
use
element.
I
do
want
to
just
make
a
quick
introduction
to
our
new
planning
director
who
hasn't
been
part
of
the
process
just
yet
because
you
can
start
last
fall
and
although
we've
been
working
feverishly
on
this
document,
we
are
now
finally
able
to
bring
forward
to
the
committee.
A
F
F
G
Good
evening
my
name
is
Wendy
Novak
and
I'm,
a
principal
at
placeworks
I,
also
when
I
first
started
at
the
Planning
Center
many
many
years
ago.
This
is
one
of
the
first
projects
that
I
worked
on
was
the
last
update
to
the
general
plan,
so
I
roped
Jonathan
into
this
version
so
I'll
hand
it
over
to
him.
A
Good
evening
everybody,
my
name
is
Jonathan
netler
I'm
an
associate
principal
with
placeworks
and,
as
Wendy
mentioned,
project
manager
working
on
the
general
Plan
update
and
excited
to
be
back
here
with
all
of
you
seeing
everyone
in
person.
For
the
first
time,
three
years
more
than
three
years,
I've
had
a
joyful
and
thankful
to
have
the
occasion.
H
B
J
K
A
A
Okay,
hopefully
that's
working
for
everyone,
who's
watching
online
and
everyone
in
the
room.
We've
got
the
the
PowerPoint
up
on
the
screen
and
and
the
zoom
window
as
well.
So
we
can
see
those
that
are
joining
us
remotely.
So
thank
you
all
again
for
joining
us
for
your
dedication,
commitment
to
the
work
Grant.
We
do
continue.
C
A
The
materials
that
were
circulating
made
public
a
couple
of
or
last
week,
thanks
to
those
who
who
were
able
to
provide
comments
in
advance
were
were
really
excited
to
dig
into
those
and
go
through
a
number
of
them
with
you
tonight.
We'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
process
of
comment
review
in
a
few
minutes
and
and
and
then
after
we
wrap
that
conversation.
A
We
will
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
where
we
go
from
here
and
in
the
next
steps
in
the
process,
so
with
that
I'm
gonna
launch
in
and
with
a
backwards
look
about
what
we
covered
when
we
last
met
together
almost
two
years
ago.
At
that
meeting,
we
looked
at
a
series
of,
or
actually
a
compilation
of,
the
changes
to
the
land
use
plan
or
land
use
map
that
we
had
been
discussing
together.
A
We
also
talked
about
the
projections
of
a
realistic,
build
out
of
the
general
plan
or
looking
out
to
the
Horizon
year
of
2040,
and
what
that
land
use
plan
man
made
could
conceivably
translate
to
in
terms
of
development
of
housing
units
and
future
development
of
non-residential
uses
and
and
the
purpose
for
doing
it.
That
is
to
to
do
some
technical
analysis
associated
with
the
potential
impacts
of
the
the
potential
development
of
the
general
plan
over
its
lifetime.
A
A
In
parallel
with
with
the
land
use
plan,
I
mean
land
use,
element,
circulation
element
which
are
more
of
the
focus
of
our
conversations
during
our
meetings
and
in
the
focus
of
our
work.
So,
following
the
meeting
that
we
held
last
together,
there
was
a
city-wide
Workshop
that
looked
at
those
same
topics,
land
use
plan
and
build
out,
and
we
we
gathered
feedback.
At
that
meeting.
A
There
was,
as
I
mentioned,
additional
Outreach
to
stakeholder
groups
on
the
the
recommendations
related
to
vision
and
priorities,
which
did
go
through
a
subsequent
process
of
review
and
Confirmation
with
the
city
council
that
happened
in
March
of
last
year,
and
so
those
vision
and
priorities.
If
you
call
a
really
the
foundation
and
the
basis
for
the
policy,
writing
and
policy
updates,
many
of
them
that
that
you
have
before
you
this
evening.
A
The
land
use
plan
and
and
those
build
out,
projections
were
also
reviewed
by
the
city
council.
That
happened
a
little
more
than
a
year
ago
in
May
of
2022,
and
the
council
approved
moving
those
forward
as
part
of
that
technical
analysis.
So
there
was
subsequent
study
that
did
happen
associated
with
the
the
recommendations
that
were
approved
at
that
time.
E
A
I
think
that
staff
kept
the
committee
informed
along
the
way
when
those
drafts
were
released
when
they
were
reviewed,
they
go
through
a
process
of
review
at
the
state
level
that
takes
a
minimum,
largely
or
minimum
typically
of
90
days,
so
it
needs
to
move
forward,
usually
in
advance
or
in
parallel
with
other
updates,
so
that
that
technical
review
can
be
completed
and
I
think
we're
gonna.
We're
gonna
have
some
time
at
a
later
meeting
to
provide
an
overview
of
that
safety
element.
A
What
the
the
Board
of
Forestry
and
and
Cal
Fire
signed
off
on
in
terms
of
the
pieces
of
that
it
was
also
reviewed
by
the
sustainability
commission
as
part
of
the
development
of
that
draft
that
was
reviewed
at
the
state
level.
The
the
other
item
here
that
has
been
developed
in
parallel
is
the
housing
element.
Ej
have
occurred
about
a
little
bit
about
housing
element
production
as
it's
been
going
through
the
process,
both
in
Palm
Springs
and
throughout
Southern
California.
A
A
Is
really
Guided
by
state
law,
state
regulation
in
terms
of
the
topics
and
and
nation
that
it
needs
to
include
it
is
the
the
only
element
of
the
general
plan
that
gets
certified
by
a
state
agency.
So
the
housing
element
is
now
on
its
third
round
of
revision,
which,
for
for
this
cycle
throughout
the
state,
is,
is
pretty
typical
there.
The
housing
elements
are
being
scrutinized
in
much
more
detail,
there's
much
more.
A
That's
being
asked
about
housing
elements
in
terms
of
carrying
forth
policies
and
procedures
and
programs
to
encourage
housing
production
and
meet
the
goals
that
the
state
has
set
forth
and
that
have
been
that
have
been
distributed
through
the
the
regional
governance
level.
So
because
that
is
a
very
technical
document.
It
has
gone
forward
on
its
own
path.
A
So
our
fingers
are
crossed
that
we
have
that
we
have
addressed
the
state's
last
comment
letter
sufficiently
and
that
we
will
be
able
to
move
the
housing
element
forward
for
review
by
the
Planning
Commission
in
city
council
subsequent
to
this.
Next,
the
closing
of
this
this
review
period,
which
is
coming
shortly.
A
B
A
Question
because
we
did
slow
down
part
of
the
reason
that,
for
the
slowdown
in
the
development
of
the
landing
settlement
was
to
make
sure
that
if
there
were
impacts,
as
the
housing
element
went
through,
that
its
review
process,
that
those
were
informing,
the
updates
to
the
land
use,
element
and
land
use
plan.
We
did
I
think
with
this
group.
A
Among
at
that
last
meeting
together,
we
did
look
at
a
potential
change
of
land
use,
designation
to
some
select
Parcels
to
facilitate
housing
production
because
of
of
the
housing
element
site
identification.
There
have
not
been
any
additional
sites
that
have
needed
to
be
identified
or
changed
designations
by
during
the
process
of
hcd's
reviews,
so
there
have
not
been
any
further
changes.
The
land
use
plan
that
have
been
instigated
or
necessitated
by
hcd's
review.
A
J
A
A
Our
our
sequa
experts,
our
environmental
team,
has
recommended
that
an
addendum
to
the
eir
that
was
produced
for
the
current
General
plan
would
be
appropriate
for
this
update
and
and
then
hopefully,
if
all
goes
according
to
plan,
we
will
be
wrapping
up
our
work
and
presenting
the
results
of
of
of
your
contributions
and
additional
Outreach
to
the
public.
Later
this
year,.
A
Okay,
so
on
to
our
task
ahead
of
us
this
evening,
we've
asked
all
of
you
and
we'll
be
asking
this
evening
for
your
thoughts
on
whether
we're
on
the
right
track
in
terms
of
development,
of
the
goals,
policies
and
actions
for
the
landing
settlement
and
and
also,
if
there's
anything
missing
from
the
document.
We'd
like
you
to
or
or
topics
that
you
believe
weren't
additional
policies
or
action
or
goals
that
those
are
are
brought
to.
Our
attention
were
not
intending
to
confirm
final
edits
this
evening
to
the
document.
A
We
want
to
understand
your
comments.
We
want
to
discuss
comments
that
have
been
provided
in
advance
and
questions
that
come
up
this
evening
and
then
we'll
be
we'll
be
taking
that
back
to
our
desk,
working
on
the
related
updates
to
the
document
that
reflect
comments
received
both
in
advance
of
this
meeting
and
this
evening
and
then
recirculating
an
updated
draft
of
the
document
prior
to
a
public
Workshop
that
will
be
held
most
likely
in
the
early
fall.
A
I
should
say
that
are
addressed
in
both
the
policies
and
the
related
related
implementation
programs,
so
want
to
hear
your
feedback
on
on
all
three
of
those
vote,
goals,
policies
and
actions,
keeping
in
mind
the
intention
of
each
of
those
here,
goals
are
typically
written
to
reflect
an
ideal
future.
State
policies
are
going
to
be
the
statements
that
guide
decision
making
around
those
goals
and
the
implementation
programs
are
the
actions
that
indicate
how
the
city
is
going
to
implement
those
goals
and
policies
and
for
each
action.
In
the
implementation
program.
A
Matrix
that
you
received
there
are
associated
timelines
for
the
completion
of
those
actions
and
responsible
parties.
So,
as
we
go
through
the
discussion
tonight,
we
are
going
to
look
at
the
substantive
comments
that
we
received
in
advance.
We'll
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
those
comments
in
a
couple
minutes
and
then
we'll
be
asking
for
your
further
questions
or
comments
associated
with
the
topics
that
are
identified
within
each
goal.
We
also
received
comments
on
items
that
are
addressed
outside
of
the
goals
and
policies.
B
Yeah
question
in
a
lot
of
General
plans
that
I've
seen
there's
a
section
in
the
landing
section.
Sometimes
it's
a
separate
section.
It
talks
about
consistency
with
other
policies
and
Regional
Regional
plans
for
I.
Guess
in
our
case
would
be
like
the
CBM
sacp
and
the
County
transportation
ordinances,
and
things
like
that.
Are
we
going
to
have
a
section
like
that
in
land
use
element
or
somewhere
else
in
the
document.
A
B
Crossover
there's
one
I'm
really
sensitive
to.
It
probably
gives
us
Transportation
in
that
we.
When
we
talked
about
this
two
or
three
years
ago,
we
were
gonna,
still
carry
forward
a
discussion
of
levels
of
service,
the
old
levels
of
service,
yeah
and
but
I.
Guess
that
cannot
go
in
the
at
least
in
the
eir
kind
of
go
into
the
Transportation
section.
So
I'm
curious
as
to
that's
because
of
the
state
rules
yeah
and
where
that
discussion
might
be,
because
I'm
still
very
interested
in
making
sure
that
it's
in.
A
B
A
B
A
That's
correct
and
we
still
have
so
we
did
adopt
traffic
impact
analysis
guidelines
okay,
a
couple
years
ago
with
the
implementation
of
SPD
sympathy.
Yes,
743
is
the
the
Senate
bill.
That
was
the
reason.
Cities
and
jurisdictions
no
longer
use
level
of
service
As
the
metric
for
SQL
reviewing
right
as
a
part
of
our
Tia
guidelines.
We
said
if
you
still
want
to
look
at
level
of
service
as
well.
This.
B
Will
be
the
first
time
I've
seen
one
of
these
sort
of
well
I,
don't
put
it
maybe
I
shouldn't
mention
why
we're
doing
it,
but
it's
my
first
time
we'll
see
one
of
these
that
that
we
have
the
I
assume
we'll
see.
What
does
it
look
up?
Everybody
call
that
the
vehicle
miles
travel
analysis
as
well
as
the
level
of
service
travel
analysis
I'm,
not
sure
how
appropriate
vehicle
miles.
Traveled
is
actually
to
the
to
our
city
situation.
Here
in
Palm,
Springs.
A
K
All
I'm
saying
is
there
well,
let
me
let
me
then
ask
I
didn't
see
anything
on
essentially
parks.
Golf
courses
preserves
and
Valley
land
uses
that
are
open
space
for
the
General,
Public
and
I
was
wanting
to
wear
comments
about
those
go
because
we've
had
significant.
We've
had
significance,
ordinance
changes
in
that
regard,
since
the
last
General
plan
and
some
actual
developments
in
terms
of
New
Uses
of
golf
courses,
so
I'm
wondering
where,
where
it
would
be
appropriate
to
discuss
that.
A
Those
are
typically
addressed
in
a
different
element
of
the
general
plan:
the
open
space,
Recreation
and
conservation
element
of
the
general
plan
and
they're
we're
happy
to
take
comments
related
to
items
that
you
know
that
the
members
of
the
public
think
should
be
that
are
not
addressed
today.
That
should
be
addressed
in
that
element,
but
that
is
is
those
are
not
the
focus
of
our
conversation
this
evening.
Okay,.
C
A
I
think
I'll
just
add
to
it
Jonathan
mentioned-
is
that
there
certainly
can
be
overlapped
between
our
open
space
element
yeah,
as
well
as
our
land.
We
settlement
they're.
Primarily
you
know,
preservation
of
Open
Spaces,
both
active
and
non-active,
those
Open
Spaces.
You
know
they
certainly
are
identified
in
our
own
new
settlement
in
different
in
different
ways
through
the
different
descriptions
and
different
languages.
K
H
K
G
And
Sheriff
I
could
also
maybe
suggest
Jonathan's
got
an
outline
of
the
updates
that
have
been
made
and
some
of
the
comments
we've
received
and
we'll
go
through
each
one
of
the
goals
and
there's
actually
one
of
the
goals
that
might
be
appropriate
there,
because
there
are
also
implementation
actions.
So
there
might
be
follow-up
things
that
we
could
put
there.
The
Challenge
on
this
update
was
that
when
we
started
it,
it
was
a
focused
update
to
just
create
some.
G
You
know
remove
the
pdb
and
Jonathan's
going
to
get
into
this,
but
it
was
supposed
to
be
really
focused
on
settlement
agreement,
changes
and
some
other
things
and
because
of
state
regulations
and
the
housing
element
kicked
in.
It
went
to
the
safety
element
as
well,
so
I
think
that's
the
balance.
It's
not
a
whole
comprehensive
land
use
own
update
like
we
would
normally
do.
We
started
these
little
nitpicky
things
and
then
we're
going
to
find
a
bunch
of
things
later.
G
K
G
No
I'm,
sorry,
if
that
came
off
that
that
way,
I
guess
what
I
was
suggesting
was
that
perhaps
what
we
could
do
is
go
through
the
presentation
put
those
things
on
the
side
and
then
put
that
in
a
holding
bin
to
the
appropriate
goal
that
it
falls
under,
and
then
we
can
take
a
note
on
it
and
then
figure
out
what
the
appropriate
next
steps
are.
Basically,
and
then
we
can
compare
it
with
David
in
the
direction
that
we
were
given
from
Council
on
the
things
that
we,
you
know
are
scope
to
address.
A
J
Got
one
sorry
so
that
just
sort
of
raised
the
bigger
question
that
was
one
of
my
comments
and
so
I
I
understood
when
we
went
into
this.
It
was
a
focused
effort.
Maybe
you're
going
to
be
getting
into
this
discussion
a
little
bit
more,
and
maybe
this
is
more
a
question
for
David.
But
is
there
a
schedule
for
a
broader,
more
comprehensive
revision
to
the
entire
general
plan,
because
I
would
think
that
maybe
that
situation
has
changed
since
we
started
this
15
years
ago?.
A
Schedule
for
a
wholesale
update
at
this
time,
it's
really
been
more.
We
think
the
general
plan
has
a
lot
of
successes:
The
Way,
It,
Was
Written.
We
still
need
a
lot
of
applies
today.
There's
certainly
things
that
we
wanted
to
clean
up
address
as
a
part
of
things
that
have
happened
over
the
recent
decade
relative
to
my
development
districts,
specifically,
which
is
one
of
the
things
that
would
be
called
out
in
our
request
for
updates
to
this
to
this
land
use
element.
So
there.
C
The
document
is
that
relevant,
I
don't
think
that's
the
reason.
We
started
this
process
with
a
limited
update
because
we
felt
the
laundry
Solomon
does
have
a
lot
of
broadens
today,
and
so
you
know
again
there's
certain
things
that
we
can't
capture.
We
can't
capture
everything
and
I.
Think
that's
what
when
he
was
mentioning,
is
that
there's
there's
certainly
a
place
that
we
can
there's
certain
things
that
we
can
do
to
add
policies
to
facilitate
in
that
direction
and
then,
ultimately,
you
know
addresses
where
you.
A
J
A
A
Names
of
things
have
changed,
numbers
have
changed
since
2007.,
hopefully,
we've
captured
all
of
those
I
think
there
may
be
a
few
more
that
have
been
caught
in
the
review
process,
so
we'll
we'll
be
updating
the
document
again
to
reflect
our
present
context
and
time
period
and
consistency
with
any
changes
to
state
law
that
have
happened
since
2007
and
then.
Finally,
this
is
more
of
a
a
format,
change
and
and
really
change
in
approach.
A
The
purpose
for
doing
that
is
that
it
allows
for
more
frequent,
update
and
review
to
make
sure
that
those
actions
are
reflective
of
the
council
and
elected
leadership's
priorities
that
they're
reflective
of
capacities
and
and
and
priorities
of
of
the
city
staff
and
don't
require
a
general
Plan
update,
which
of
which
the
city
has
a
limited
purview
for
doing
that
and
and
can
be
revised
more
frequently.
So
it
should
allow
for
better,
tracking
and
and
actual
implementation
of
those
programs.
A
I
will
note
that
there
may
be
some
confusion
and
about
places
in
the
documents
where
you
saw,
actions
that
were
crossed
out.
I.
Think
an
example
that
touches
on
something
that
was
raised
earlier
was
the
requirement
of
the
preparation
of
a
specific
plan
for
the
Chino
cone
area,
so
that
was
an
implementation
action
that
was
in
the
document.
It
was
with
every
other
action
crossed
out
the
ones
that
were
believed
to
still
be
relevant
or
were
pulled
in
to
the
implementation
Matrix.
A
Okay,
again,
just
a
refresher
here
of
the
land
use
plan
that
that
you
had
reviewed
and
have
had
an
opportunity
to
comment
on
and-
and
this
is
the
plan
that
was
approved
by
the
city
council
I-
don't
think
we
received
any
specific
questions.
Aside
from
any
that,
we
heard
tonight,
nothing
in
advance
about
changes
to
land
use,
designation,
I
mean
changes
to
yeah
to
land
use
designations
associated
with
specific
Parcels.
A
C
K
A
Some
of
the
things
that
we
heard
are
noted
on
this
slide.
We
heard
other
comments
as
well,
which
are
captured
in
the
summaries
and
and
details
of
that
that
I
believe
are
available
on
the
the
the
project
website
and
and
some
of
those
comments
you'll
see
in
in
future
meetings,
particularly
you
know
ones
related
specifically
to
circulation.
We'll
look
at
those
at
our
next
meeting.
These
are
the
ones
that
were
most
relevant
to
the
land.
You
settlement.
A
That
I
I
is
something
that
active
may
have
been
addressed
in
in
or
maybe
possible
to
address
more
directly
in
the
implementation
actions
in
terms
of
updates
to
design
standards
but
yeah.
It
we'll
look
back
again
and
see
if
it
warrants
specific
mention
using
that
terminology
in
the
policies
themselves.
K
B
B
K
B
K
A
I
think
the
point
is
that
it's
still
part
of
the
document
it's
just
not
reflected
in
the
same
way
it
was
before.
So
it's
still
a
policy.
It's
still
100
implementation
action
as
part
of
the
landing
settlement.
It's
just
we've
reworked
the
document
to
show
and
track
better
all
of
our
policies
and
implementation
actions.
A
A
So
keep
going
okay,
so
I
I
did
want
to
spend
a
little
bit
of
time.
Looking
at
an
outline
of
some
of
the
the
most
substantive
comments
that
we
received
in
advance
that
we
want
to
bring
to
your
attention
this
evening,
I
I
will
start,
though,
by
noting
that
we
did
receive
as
I'm
sure.
Hopefully
you
had
some
time
to
to
see
as
well
comments
and
requests
regarding
factual
Corrections
and
clarifications.
A
A
The
staff
and
project
team
acknowledge
that
those
clarification
you
know
the
need
for
clarification
and
correction
and
there's
I
think
in
most
cases,
David
has
has
had
an
opportunity
to
follow
up
with
those
who
submitted
comments
to
confirm
those
that
do
not
require
any
further
discussion
and
and
will
be
addressed
in
an
update
to
the
planned
document.
So
those
items
that
were
raised
as
more
items
for
clarification
and,
in
fact,
correction.
A
We
will
not
be
discussing
them
this
evening
unless
there's
a
specific
question
that
other
committee
members
have
about
them.
What
we
did
want
to
focus
on
is
a
again
more
substantive
changes
that
would
require
more
significant
changes
to
the
document
and
have
more
significant
implementation.
I
mean
have
more
significant
orientation
in
terms
of
updates
to
land,
use,
designations
goals,
policies
or
actions,
and
then
want
to
spend
a
little
bit
of
time.
A
Clarifying
some
comments
related
to
to
some
other
items
so
and-
and
those
are
noted
here-
comments
and
we'll
go
through
these
as
I
had
mentioned,
the
ones
that
are
associated
with
specific
goals
and
policies
we'll
discuss
related
to
those
topics,
the
ones
that
are
related
to
the
introductory
sections
of
the
document.
We
will
tackle
those
first
and
those
will
be
the
comments
around
the
population
projections
and
the
industrial.
A
There
was
some
effort
made
here.
Clearly
it
was
not
adequate
to
kind
of
distinguish
between
the
two
I
think
you
know
with
wins
recommendations
we
can.
We
would
like
to
to
revisit
this
and
add
some
additional
clarification
just
to
make
sure
that
that
that
is
Crystal
Clear
for
anybody
reading
the
document
I
think
it's
in
a
you
know
an
important
distinction
to
be
made
and
Lynn
I,
don't
know
if
you
had.
B
I
think
we
just
can
say
if
we
extrapolate
that
that's
what
it
would
be
realizing,
it's
not
an
official
one,
but
it
really
is
I
could
say
how
many
minutes
we're
going
to
add
really
or
people
or
whatever
units
you
want
to
use
and
segregate
out,
and
you
use
the
same
assumption
for
both
both
types
with
the
permanent
population
and
with
the
all
the
units
I'm
guessing.
What
are
we
looking
at
David
about
40
or
60
of
our
population
is
not
non-permanent.
They
look
like
every
year.
K
There
were
some
studies
done
that
went
to
the
city
regarding
vacation,
rentals
that
showed
the
number
of
of
not
not
full-time,
not
resident,
occupied
houses
and
unit
and
apartment
buildings,
and
it's
a
significant
percentage
about
40
percent.
So
I
think
you
might
be
able
to
get
those
numbers.
But
when
you
say
we
have
51
5
dwelling
units,
you
might
want
to
say
the
numbers
that
you
believe
are
occupied
by
residents
that
might
help.
J
K
Did
well,
they
did
some,
they
actually
projected
it.
They
pulled.
They
pulled
all
the
information
to
be
able
to
show
that,
but
I
think
what
you
have
to
say
is
that
we
have
this
many
dwelling
units
but
40,
you
know
roughly
40
percent
of
them
are
seasonally
occupied
and
you
might
be
able
to
pull
that
from
the
console
notes.
From
from
that
discussion
and
I'm
sure
Flynn
yeah.
J
There's
seasonal
occupation
and
then
there's
also
the
the
short-term
rental
component
that
that's
that's
one
of
the
things
that
was
throwing
me
when
I
was
looking
at
some
of
these
estimates,
because
I
think
the
ordinance
has
written
such
that
the
short-term
rentals
still
have
an
expectation
of
a
permanent
resident
occupying
that
property
and
I.
Don't
know
how
you
count
that
if
it's
it's
so
challenging
to
regulate
that
in
the
first
place,
so
Kathy
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from,
but
what
they
did
just
be
estimates.
K
I
think,
but
there's
there's
some
all
I'm
saying.
Is
this
factual
basis
for
the
estimates
coming
out
of
a
recent
city
council?
Hearing
it's
much
more
impactful
than
vacation
rentals
is
are
actually
the
number
of
homes
that
people
use
as
seasonal
vacation
homes
that
they
don't
occupy,
so
they
those
count
as
unoccupied
residences
and
that's
a
really
significant
number
in
terms
of
our
popular
in
terms
of
our
housing
stock.
A
Yeah
there
there
are
some
shortcuts
made
here
in
in
that
are
not
fully
explained.
That
I
think
we
can
do
a
better
job
of
explaining
how
we
get
from
the
number
of
units
to
a
population
projection,
because
there
is
an
occupancy
Factor,
that's
taken
into
account.
I
think
we
did
spend
some
time.
It's
looking
at
that
with
this
group
when
we
presented
to
the
public
at
the
workshop.
It
didn't
make
its
way
in
that
in
as
much
detail
into
the
document
and
I.
A
So
it's
it's
important.
It's
it's
consistent
with
the
2007
projections
and
and
have
that
environmental
analysis.
So
it's
important
to
present
those
numbers,
but
we
can
distinguish
I
think
between.
You
know
what
that
represents
based
on
full
quote:
unquote:
full
occupancy
versus
you
know
a
current
occupancy
rate.
What
that
might
look
like
we
can
do
a
better
job.
B
A
Let's
see
what
we
can
do,
the
the
other
comment
that
we
received
on
this
section
that
I
think
is
worth
spending
a
little
bit
of
time
on
is
was
one
that
Dan
provided
on
the
average
household
size,
numbers
and
and
actually
I
think
it
relates
to
more
directly
to
the
associated
to
build
out
table.
That's
in
the
document
table
2-1,
where
the
kind
of
details
of
of
the
build
out
projections
are
itemized
and
there's
a
footnote
there
related
to
that
identifies
the
basis
for
those
household
size
multipliers.
A
That
is
specific
to
Palm
Springs
and
when
we
produce
the
build
out
that
that
went
to
the
council
in
2021,
we
confirmed
and-
and
these
are
the
factors
that
were
utilized
in
2007
General
plan.
They
were
carried
forward
without
change
because
of
the
time
the
Department
of
Finance
reporting
was
of
a
stable
historic
household
size
in
or
in
this
case,
combined
dof
looks
at
or
the
city,
so
I
think.
A
Having
a
reference
in
the
document
that
is
to
the
prior
General
plan
is
not
helpful
here.
I
think
what
we'd
like
to
do
to
address
this
is
not
to
revisit
the
numbers,
because
I
think
our
team
felt
that
they
were.
You
know
there
was
some
analysis
done
at
that
time
to
confirm
them,
but
to
update
the
reference
here
to
the
2021
Department
of
Finance
house
phone
size
reporting
for
the
city.
A
I
A
So
those
are
the
those
are
some
areas
of
clarification
that
we
just
wanted
to
I
think
they're
they're
significant.
Here
we
wanted
to
just
address
those
comments
with
the
group,
because
I
think
you
may
have
had
questions
either
reading
the
original
text
or
reading
comments
on
the
text.
Okay,
leaping
forward
I,
did
want
to
spend
some
time
here
talking
about
comment
that
Dan
provided-
and
his
comment
is
shown
here-
related
to
specifically
to
the
maximum
floor
area
ratio
for
industrial
land
use,
and
we
did
receive
a
a
comment.
A
From
Martin,
Roose,
yes,
yeah
and
then,
and
so
I
did
want
to
provide
I
think
before
we
dive
into
the
substance
and
I
do
want
to.
You
know,
provide
an
opportunity
for
the
committee
to
to
engage
in
some
discussion
around
the
substance
of
the
comment
and
give
Dan
an
opportunity
to
provide
some
context
here.
I
did
just
want
to
provide
a
little
bit
of
a
background
on
on
where
we
are
in
the
process
and
what
the
potential
implica
implications
of
of
revising
this
figure
bar.
A
You
know,
based
on
the
feedback
we've
received
by
the
public
prior
to
or
during
the
development
of
those
and
and
then
as
you
as
you
know,
that
plan
the
designations
the
build
out
were
approved
or
Advanced
by
the
city
council
at
that
time.
That
was
the
basis
for
for
technical
analysis
that
was
conducted
based
on
on
these
maximum
intensities
and
densities.
A
A
Essentially,
the
densities
and
intensities
have
been
reviewed
at
you
know
during
a
prior
process
and
and
Advanced
by
the
city
council,
so
I
think
changes
to
those
would
have
to
come
would
have
to
go
back
through
that
process
and
could
require
significant
re-study
through
through
technical
analysis,
potential
change
to
environmental
approach.
We
can
I
think
talk
more
about
that.
A
What
what
I'm
saying?
What
I
think
that
that
there
will
be
a
zoning
consistency,
analysis
that
comes
out
of
this
process
that
will
Point
towards
potential
updates
to
the
zoning
code
that
come
out
of
the
general
Plan
update.
So
it
was
a
vocal
in
one
sense.
Yes,
that
that
could
be
addressed
or
could
be
something
for
further
study
in
a
subsequent
zoning
code
update.
Although
the
zoning
code
would
not
address
a
change
from
point
at
0.5
far
to
in
the
general
plan,.
I
If
you
know,
if
I
may
always
clarify
because
some
some
things
doesn't
come
across
in
a
short
text,
I
was
writing
there.
One
of
my
bigger
concerns
with
this
and
I
talked
with
David
about
is
that
in
the
general
plan,
I
think
this
has
caused
this
confusion
with
people
in
the
public
and
whatnot,
and
what
applies
or
zoning
is,
is
the
general
plan
doesn't
actually
explicitly
say:
that's
a
Max,
it's
kind
of
references,
so
that
was
my
bigger
concern
with
this
and.
E
A
I
Making
that
clear
that
these
are
maximum
yeah
so
that
the
same
thing
with
I
believe
the
units
per
densities
yeah
range
because
yes,
I
know
how
that
was
interpreted
and
relates
to
PD
and
the
whole
issue.
With
that,
and
just
clarifying
that
those
are
you
got
to
stay
within
the
range
according
to
the
way
that,
of
course,
we're
on
that.
But
yeah
in
this
statement
right
here,
I
mean
I'm,
not
pressing.
For
this
far
change.
I
I
was
just
noting
it
and
just
to
to
summarize
what
I
I
just
looked
around
and
you
know,
Springs
is
0.5
not
saying
good
or
bad
cat
cities
0.5
on
far
Palm
Desert
0.75
and
then
Desert
Hot
Springs
at
0.6.
Just
for
some
references,
so
y'all
know
and
then
a
large
spread
and
you
have
to
get
into
it.
I
didn't
want
to
get
it's
point
one
to
two,
so
they
must
have.
Some
I
was
trying
to
decipher.
A
K
A
You
know
if
we
were
doing
a
comprehensive
updates
in
the
journal.
Now
we
might
have
done
a
market
setting
find
out
found
out
what
we,
what
you
know
the
market
would
support
for
partner,
greater
intensity
in
our
industrial
areas
and
things
like
that.
But,
given
our
limited
update,
we
really
didn't
look
at
that
that
level
of
detail
on
that
whether
the
market
was
just
working
so
I
think
from
the
standpoint
of
where
we
started
this
process,
we
didn't
quite
get
to
looking
for
higher
intensities.
A
A
A
Yeah
I'm
not
sure
if
we
benchmarked
that
that
particular
use
with
Scag
but
right
now,
I
think
we're
projecting
11
million
square
feet
of
industrial
uses
in
our
build
out
projection
and
that's
associated
with
a
an
assumption
of
a
build
out
level,
not
maximizing
across
the
board.
The
0.5
it's
I
think
somewhere
in
the
middle
point,
two
three,
maybe
yes,
and
if
we
increase
the
far
maximum
we
would
have
to
I
think
also
increase
that
multiplier
assumption.
A
A
G
Well
and
then
it
might
be
further
policy
discussion
about
you
know.
Looking
at
the
role
of
industrial
uses,
when
Palm
Springs
wants
to
position
itself,
because
we
had
a
whole
discussion
on
the
vision,
but
didn't
really
go
into.
What
does
that
look
like
now,
and
what
are
the
new
industries
that
are
coming
out
and
so
yeah,
so
it
might
even
be.
We
had
talked
about
to
Jonathan
over
brainstorming.
This
idea
that
Jonathan
came
up
with
the
like
an
action
item
that
says
maybe
further
study
this.
So
you
know
how.
A
It
but
I
think
yeah
right
rightfully
acknowledging
that
other
cities
do
set
higher
at
ARS
for
non-residential
use.
So
it
may,
you
know,
be
perfectly
reasonable
to
to
study
that
or
version,
but
again
knowing
that
this
was
not
an
impediment
or
perceived
impediment
really
to
development
that
had
been
on
staff's
radar
that
they
were
hearing
from
from
Property
Owners
from
developers.
I
think
you
know
is
the
reason
that
you
know
this
didn't
surface.
A
Okay,
shall
we
keep
going
all
right
did
want
to
raise
for
discussion.
Some
recommendations
here
related
to
clarification
around
the
description
of
the
central
business
district,
Landing,
designation,
I
think
you
know
I
think
I
want
would
like
to
give
Lynn
an
opportunity
to
provide
some
context
for
the
comment.
I
think
it's
important
for
for
this
group
to
consider.
A
You
know
whether
whether
the
general
plan
wants
to
provide
more
distinction
here
in
the
types
of
retail
uses
that
would
be
encouraged
or
discouraged.
I
think
there
are
certainly
implications
for
that,
but
for
implementation
for
potentially
for
the
zoning,
for
example
the
related
zones
and
so
wanted
to
give
Lynn
an
opportunity
kind
of.
B
B
C
There's
one
thing
that
I
want
to
mention
on
this:
too
I
worked
with
Michael
Braun
a
few
years
ago,
the
developer
of
the
Roman.
In
all
that
area,
he
was
having
a
very
difficult
time
getting
smaller,
unique
businesses
like
Berkeley
Parker
bonopos,
to
come
into
the
city
because
of
our
transient
population.
To
them
it
wasn't
a
good
investment,
because
a
good
half
of
the
Year,
our
population
dips,
and
so
they
couldn't
justify
the
expense
of
having
a
brick
and
mortar
store
without
having
consistent
foot
traffic.
B
A
B
A
B
B
K
A
A
H
A
Time
I
think
we
we
typically
want
to
be
respectful
of
your
time
this
evening
at
all
these
meetings,
I,
don't
think
we
identified
specific
stopping
time
that
we
want
to
check
in
and
7
30
and
see
if
we
think
we
can
conclude
our
discussions
this
evening
or
if
we
need
to
continue
them.
Does
that
make
sense?
A
A
Okay,
well,
let's,
let's
move
forward
and
I
did
want
to
highlight
a
couple
of
revisions
that
were
made
subsequent
to
our
last
meetings
together
to
incentives
related
to
affordable
housing
and
I.
Think
David's
going
to
provide
some
context
for
these
yeah
I
think
once
we
were
looking
at
this
further
the
way
we
we
modified
this
sentence
on
football,
essential
business
district
and
our
excuse
areas.
A
A
So,
instead
of
doing
a
minimum
of
50
or
50
units,
we
just
made
the
base
to
get
the
higher
density
allows
by
lowering
threshold
of
just
20
and
not
requiring
a
minimum
unit
count.
So,
as
you
can
see
here,
it
just
is
basically
that
if
you
want
to
achieve
a
higher
density
for
a
project,
you'd
have
to
propose
at
least
20
minutes
at
night,
because
it.
C
A
So
it
doesn't
be
done
in
conjunction
with
the
density.
That's
permitted,
so
CBD
has
the
greatest
density
and
intensity
for
the
city
in
70
units
with
affordable
housing.
So
that's
the
highest
density
that
we
have
in
the
city
when
you
go
to
the
mixed
use,
classifications
15
normally,
but
if
you
want
to
achieve
a
higher
density,
you
can
do
so
at
up
to
a
very
long
news.
Breaker.
B
K
A
K
A
E
K
A
A
A
So
at
this
point
we
wanted
to
begin
our
our
look
at
the
the
goals
and
policies
and
Associated
actions
section
of
the
document
and
go
through
one
by
one
through
each
goal
and
just
provide
an
overview
very
quickly
for
the
ones
where
we've
received
substantive
comments.
We're
gonna
we're
gonna
pause
and
address
those
comments
as
they're
associated
with
specific
goals,
but
also,
as
we
review
you're
we're
we're
inviting
the
committee
members
to
to
raise
questions
or
comments
that
they
have
not
submitted
previously
related
to
these.
A
Although
you
know
the
the
encouragement
as
we
had
set
forward
set
forth
in
our
in
in
our
message
to
the
steering
committee
members.
Is
that
comments
that
are
you
know,
more
related
to
wordsmithing
or
or
clarification
are
our
best
transmitted
in
writing.
The
the
most
valuable
use
of
everyone's
time
here
is
to
have
some
discussion
of
the
more
consequential
or
substant
comments
that
could
either
alter
or
add
to
the
policies
and
goals
in
the
document
just
quickly.
A
I
want
to
just
read
the
first
goal
here,
because
I
think
it's
important
to
meet
the
goals
in
their
entirety
and
then
and
then
mention
just
very
quickly
some
context
here
and
then
open
the
floor
to
any
questions
or
comments
goal.
One
is
for
a
balanced
pattern
of
land
uses
that
complements
the
location
and
character
of
existing
uses,
offers
opportunities
for
the
intensification
of
key
targeted
sites,
enhances
environmental
sustainability
and
as
positive
economic
results.
A
So
in
within
that
goal
topic
they
address.
Some
of
the
the
public
comments
that
you
saw
earlier
about.
A
desire
for
intensification
in
key
areas
within
this
goal
there
are
is,
is
a
policy
that
addresses
priority
number
two
identified
in
the
vision
and
priorities
related
to
the
city
being
a
a
leader
in
sustainability,
and
then
you
know
the
rest
of
the
the
balance
of
the
topics
here.
A
Address
kind
of
the
range
of
of
land
uses
that
are
accommodated
in
the
city
today
and
and
that
are
related
to
different
land
use
types
and
how
to
balance
those
to
to
achieve
the
the
overall
vision
and
priorities
set
forth
by
the
city.
So
whether
we're
not
specific
comments,
substantive
comments
submitted
in
advance
related
to
this
goal,
but
if
or
the
policies
or
actions
associated
with
it,
but
I
wanted
to
provide
the
members
with
an
opportunity
to
raise
any
that
they'd
like
to
discuss
with
the
broader
group.
A
The
city
maintains
its
unique
Modern
urban
Village
atmosphere
and
preserves
the
rich
historical,
architectural,
recreational,
Environmental,
Quality
organ
community
and
Business
Development
goals
related
to
comments
that
we
had
received
about
the
city's
village
field.
Those
are
addressed
to
some
extent
here
and
the
desire
to
preserve
and
enhance
the
unique
character
of
neighborhoods.
Another
topic
that
we
heard
about
during
our
Outreach.
K
K
Opening
up
reducing
open
space
without
without
a
firm
requirement
for
the
city
to
and
enact
that
it
you
know
it
doesn't
work.
It
didn't
work
in
a
major
project:
Serena
Park,
Serena,
Park
yeah,
where
the
city,
basically
just
they
got
nothing
out
of
it.
They
they
didn't
enforce
the
fee,
allowed
it
to
be
paid
later
and
then
didn't
get
the
project
either.
K
A
So
there's
there
is
an
implementation
action
associated
with
the
density
transfer
program
that
appears
in
a
couple
of
different
places
or
associated
with
a
couple
of
different
policies.
It's
action,
1.4
I
think
the
intent
was
that
that
would
provide
an
opportunity
to
kind
of
dig
into
and
and
either
refine
or
or
better
clarify
or
establish.
A
A
K
A
A
Okay
goal:
number:
three:
is
a
desert
community
with
high
quality,
industrial
and
Business
Park
development.
I
think
this.
This
goal
and
Associated
policies
relate
to
public
comments
about
making
sure
this
the
city
has
a
diversified
economy.
It
talks
about
Job,
centers
of
high
quality
and
and
the
variety
of
manufacturing
and
Industrial
uses
that
may
be
encouraged
in
appropriate
areas.
It
also
talks
about
collaboration
with
Partners
such
as
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
any
questions
or
comments
related
to
this
goal.
We
did
not
receive
substantive
comments
in
advance.
The.
E
A
A
Oh,
we
could,
or
an
action
associated
with
the
existing
policies
here.
David
was
just
just
asking
if,
if
this
might
be
the
goal
where
we
would
address
the
the
topic
that
we
had
discussed
earlier
related
to
far
and
I
would
I
think
that
makes
sense,
an
item
or
policy
and
action
item
addressing
the
evaluation
of
appropriate
maximum
that
they
are.
E
K
E
E
B
There's
in
reality,
we
have
the
local
serving
needs,
have
really
lined
up
along
Sunrise
Parkway,
and
we
don't
talk
about
that
anywhere,
whereas
the
I
think
we've
tried
to
do
local
local,
serving
resident
commercial
on
the
eastbound
Canyon
in
Southampton
and
North.
Well,
those
excuse
me
South
Palm
Canyon
in
North.
Well,
Northbound
Canyon.
Primarily,
it's
been
kind
of
a
failure
and
we
might
we
had
more
time
or
just
more
analysis.
A
You
okay,
this
goal:
five
addresses
education
and
Innovation.
One
of
the
comments
that
was
raised
and
then
or
that
is
identified
in
in
the
city's
priorities
and
and
the
policies
here
address
things
like
lifelong
learning,
Workforce,
Development,
joint
use
of
facilities.
There
was
a
comment
that
Lynn
submitted,
suggesting
adding
a
policy
regarding
College
of
the
Desert
and
and
and
some
some
suggestions
for
Associated
language.
I.
A
Think
the
the
question
to
the
committee
would
be
whether
there's
agreement,
whether
that
would
if
so,
if
that
would
necessitate
a
entirely
new
policy
or
amending
one
of
the
the
current
policies
that
are
here
to
be
more
specific.
There
is,
for
instance,
policy
5.1,
which
talks
about
educational
opportunities
and
5.3
as
well,
so
I.
K
B
K
B
But
yeah
I
I
certainly
would
think
we'd
want
to
tie
the
goal
of
the
I.
Don't
know
if
it
talks
about
lifelong
yeah,
lifelong
learning
here
and
to
tie
that
into
Cod,
and
it's
because
in
part,
because
the
sensitive
discussions
that
are
going
on
now
kind
of
close
loop
yeah.
We
we
this
space
that
Cod
decided
to
be
a
lifelong
Learning
Center
for
the
residents
of
the
city.
J
G
A
A
Next
one
I
did
also
have
a
comment,
so
this
is
a
goal
that
is
associated
with
one
of
the
one
of
the
priorities
identified
regarding
providing
a
broad
range
of
housing
opportunities
for
all
residents.
It's
been
informed,
I,
think
by
by
what
we
heard
other
things
that
we
heard
in
public
comment
on
access
to
housing
that
meets
all
of
the
residents
needs,
IT
addresses,
facilitating
more
housing
and
a
variety
of
housing,
types
of
adult
or
policies
themselves,
including
affordable
housing,
and
there
was
a
comment
here.
A
K
K
K
One
or
two
I
think
there
were
people
who
had
existing
vacant
Lots
who
wanted
to
do
it.
We
have
I,
don't
think,
we've
seen
a
single
and
we
wouldn't
we've,
probably
not
seen
a
single
developed
house
that
wanted
to
do
a
lot
split,
but
we've
gotten
lots
of
adus
and
that's
one
of
the
best
ways
we
can
get
new
housing
in
the
city.
A
new,
affordable
housing.
We've
got
Apartments.
We
we
need
to
service
a
huge
segment
of
our
population
that
needs
either
affordable
units
or
rentals
that
are
created
by
the
market.
B
E
G
And
maybe
that's
like
cross-reference,
we
can
put
to
the
housing
element
in
a
sidebar,
because
there
is
a
whole
discussion
on
adus
and
encouraging
that
so
that
a
lot
of
times
we'll
just
look
at
that.
So
we're
not
duplicating
the
policies
in
both
places
but
pointing
to
where
all
that
stuff
happening.
Yeah,
because
I
mean
it's
a
great
point
about
the
apartments
as
well
and
I'm.
Sure
that's
got
to
be
enough.
Yeah.
K
H
B
A
Think
that's
consisting
of
other
other
jurisdictions,
so
I
don't
know.
If
there's
any
more
comments
on
this
particular
goal,
I
did
want
to
pause
before
we
go
to
the
next
and
just
note
that
it
is
7.
30.
we've
got,
we've
I
will
say:
we've
covered
the
majority
of
the
substantive
comments
that
we've
gotten
in
advance.
We
only
have
I
think
one
more
goal
around
mixed
use
where
there's
some
comments
that
have
that
were
flagged,
that
we
want
to
bring
to
the
group's
attention
at
least
of
what
was
provided
in
again
in
advance.
A
A
A
K
A
J
G
A
J
Yeah
I
yeah,
thanks
for
humoring
me
here,
I
did
have
a
comment
that
is
on
267
about
the
airport
and
I.
Think
that
part
of
that
goes
back
to
to
goal
seven,
but
I
think
the
the
focus
of
my
comment
is
actually
in
that
section
that
will
be
on
page
267..
Okay,
so
maybe
let's
hold
that,
maybe
until
we
as
an
iPhone,
yeah
and
I
can
mention
it
here
at
this
meeting.
But
I
I
might
want
to
follow
up
with
a
written
comment.
So
I
can
crack
something.
K
Basically,
there
is
space
available
on
that
campus.
It
would
be
I'd
I,
think
people
are
going.
I've
talked
to
people
who
are
going
to
encourage
the
college
to
put
closing
in
some
of
that
unused
space
and
to
partner
it's
a
good
location
for
housing.
I
just
didn't
want
to
close
it
out
by
having
full
housing
in
that
preferred
mix.
B
K
I,
don't
know
you
know,
they've
just
gone
back
to
the
original
plan:
minus
minus
the
hotel
and
it's
coming
to
Planning
Commission
for
review
of
Just
for
a
study
session
on
the
7th
so
I'm,
not
as
familiar
with
what
what
they're
required
to
have.
But
I
know
that
they're
going
to
be
presenting
that
to
the
Cod
board
on
the
16th.
B
Yeah
I
was
just
curious,
do
they
have
I
mean
most
colleges,
or
at
least
you
see
when
I've
looked
at
it?
They
have
to
have
a
master
plan
for
each
campus
and
I
I.
What
I've
seen
profanities
College
of
the
Desert
is
kind
of
phase
one
plans
without
a
feeling
of
what
that
relates
to
now.
I,
don't
know
how
much
Authority
we
have
over
them
to.
We.
K
Quick
question-
and
it's
just
you
know
this
could
go
in
there.
I
just
I
just
didn't
want
to
preclude
housing
in
this
location,
okay
and
I,
and
it's
something
that
the
college
would
have
to
be
willing
to
take
up.
It'd
have
to
be
worth
their
while
they'd
have
to
partner
with
somebody.
It
might
never
happen,
but
it
would
be
good
for
us
if
it
did.
B
K
A
I
think
we
can
make
that
reference
here
and
it
would
I
think
fall
under
this.
The
associated
use
category,
which
is
very
important,
can
be
broadly
interpreted,
I
think,
but
we
can
add
residents
some
clarification
around
a
residential
use
being
a
part
of
that
potential
mix
that
would
be
related
to
it.
Yeah.
A
There
was
a
question
about
the
enforcement
of
mixed-use
percentages
and
I.
Think
it's
important
to
to
I
know
that
I
I
recall.
There
was
some
discussion
about
this.
You
know
at
our
earlier
meetings
and
I
think
it's
important
to
to
kind
of
re-emphasize.
The
intention
here
is
that
you
know
that
it
is.
There
is
not
a
mechanism
to
enforce
it's
very
difficult
to
enforce
that
on
a
parcel
by
parcel
basis
that
the
ratio
of
uses
is
really
a
Target
that
is
used
to
help
guide
development.
A
Yeah-
and
you
know
I
think
there's
flexibility
here,
but
there
is
also
some
language
that
that
is
more
Concrete
in
saying
that,
if
the
intended
use
is
are
do
not
coincide
or
or
align
with
the
the
intended,
you
know
character
or
the
ratios
that
we
described
as
the
intent
of
the
misuse
districts
that
a
general
plan
Amendment
may
be
to
a
single-use
designation
may
be
required.
So
there
is
that
kind
of
tool.
That's
in
the
city's
pocket.
E
B
I
had
a
thought:
I,
don't
know
what
we
could
do
with
it,
but
it'd
be
nice
if
we
could
encourage
somehow
that
that
multiple
property
owners
get
together
and
and
when
you
have
a
misuse
designation
that
covers
multiple
property
owners
that
they
somehow
reach
some
agreement
amongst
themselves
as
to
how
that
would
be
allocated
because
I
know
the
places
where
we've
tried
this
currently
on
multiple
property
owners.
It
hasn't
worked
out
right.
A
E
A
B
Yeah
that
that
was
kind
of
my
random
thought,
I
think
it's
a
good
thought.
It
may
not
belong
in
here
and
that
there's
with
the
just
notice
that
we
had
the
Coco
site.
We've
talked
about
a
lot
last
time,
and
now
we
have.
It
looks
as
though
either
the
buildings
on
either
side
of
that
site
are
also
going
to
be
vacant
and
there
may
be
more
opportunity
now.
B
K
One
question
I
had
was
on
number
four
and
it
was
allowing
the
designated
mixed-use
areas
to
contain
buildings
that
are
taller
than
surrounding
neighborhood
who
are
appropriate.
Are
we
going
to
stay
that
loose
on
it?
I
mean
I'm,
delighted
I,
think
it's
appropriate,
but
do
we
give?
Is
there
anything
more
that
people
can
rely
on
in
the
general
plan,
or
would
they
have
to
get?
What
would
they
have
to
do.
A
A
B
G
A
Okay,
moving
forward
two
goal:
nine,
this
addresses
new
priority
or
the
policies
here
are
helpful
in
addressing
a
new
priority
that
was
established
about
open
space
retention
and
expansion,
addresses
existing
priorities
around
Scenic
natural
resources.
Preservation
of
those
we
didn't
have
comments
in
advance
on
the
goals
and
policies
in
this
section,
but
are
wouldn't.
G
K
B
K
We
number
four
on
hillsides,
visible
from
scenic
highways,
and
corridors
on
slopes
of
15
or
greater
should
demonstrate
no
significant
adverse
aesthetic
impacts
or
provide
adequate
mitigation
prior
to
approval.
They
all
get
approved.
I'm
just
wondering
I'm,
just
wondering
if
we've
had
to
deal
with
I
mean
what
we've
been
replacing
is
the
old
windmills
with
taller
ones
where
the
I
guess
the
they
don't
have
the
impacts.
People
have
thought
they
had
on
birds
and
they're,
more
aesthetic.
B
I
think
I
think
there
is
some
there.
There
has
been
some
wind
farm
development,
but
not
in
the
city
of
Palm
Springs,
where
we've
had
very
sensitive
slope
issues
up
near
WhiteWater
reserve
and
then
on
the
edge
of
Desert
Hot
Springs
by
highway.
62.
I,
don't
know
if
that's
our
issue,
but
it
is
a
sensitive
issue
in
in
some
of
the
some
of
those
developments
but
but
Kathy's
right,
I.
Think
most
of
ours
have
been
flat,
really
development,
stuff.
G
K
I
guess
we
have
to
have
that
because
some
will
be
permitted
40
to
the
acre,
but
just
a
conch.
Those
were
Jane's
comments.
It's
more
caution
about
that
and
she
was
more
concerned
about
the
the
only
prohibition
being
the
30
slope
and
thought
that
that
should
be
a
lower
number
and
David
I.
Don't
know
if
we
can
do
that.
H
J
G
K
K
A
K
J
Attempted
to
just
go
off
on
a
rant
but
well
restrain
myself
because
there's
okay,
we
did
a
Master
Plan
update
for
the
airport.
It
was
completed,
2015
right,
there's,
a
new
Master
Plan,
update
underway
or
starting
yes
and
I.
Think
that
so
my
concern
is
that
the
scope
of
this
Master
Plan
update
is
potentially
quite
a
bit
greater
than
the
last
Master
Plan
update
and
I
think
that
there
have
been
some
actions
in
the
past
that
well
I'll
refer
back
to.
J
10.5
that
we
were
just
discussing
strengthen
the
unique
sense
of
place
that
one
was
in
reference
to
downtown,
but
I
think
that
we
need
to
have
something
similar
related
to
the
airport,
and
so
the
airport
has
gotten
a
lot
of
attention.
The
past
several
years
for
being
one
of
the
best
small
airports
in
the
country
for
one
reason
or
another,
and
despite
everything,
I'm,
not
sure
what
you
mean
by
that,
but
well
I
mean
I
could
say
the
same
thing
that
we
may
disagree
away.
J
What's
the
what
the
problems
are
anyway,
I
I
think
that
there
needs
to
be
something
in
that
section
and
in
goal
11
related
to
sense
of
place
associated
with
treatment.
So
just
as
an
example,
I
think
the
Palm
Springs
Airport
is
fairly
unique
in
that
it's
it's
an
out-looking
airport.
It
serves
more
like
a
train
station
than
an
airport.
J
You
get
off
the
plane,
you
step
out
of
the
terminal
and
there's
Palm
Springs,
not
a
gigantic
parking
lot,
not
gigantic
Fields,
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
in
the
past
there
have
been
some
directions:
directives,
maybe
a
better
word
that
are
inconsistent
with
maintaining
or
fostering
the
brand.
If
you
will
of
Palm
Springs
with
some
changes,
also
known
as
improvements
that
may
not
actually
the
improvements
at
the
airport
so
I
feel
pretty
strongly
about
that
one.
Okay,
thank
you!
J
Yeah,
just
to
elaborate
a
little
bit
more,
you
know
with
the
facade
being
class
one
designated,
it
was
the
best
one
that
was
admitted
right
in
that's.
What's
imaginary
or
not,
you
know,
I
think
that
we
need
to
maintain
something
about
that
as
we're
looking
at
potentially
having
the
main
entrance
shift.
There
are
all
kinds
of
Concepts
being
banned
into
pounds,
so
we
just
need
to
be
very
sensitive
to
that.
J
K
I
do
I
think
goal
12.
Doesn't
it's
the
the
energy
issue?
I
I
think
that
you
we
should
it's
that
distribution
centers!
It's
that
commercial,
it's
energy
uses,
because
there
there
are
a
lot
of
different
energy
uses
that
are
going
into
that
space
as
well
as
as
well
as
we
have
Warehouse
and
nobody's
mentioned
how
much
cannabis
we
have
out
there
at
how
much
agriculture
but
I
just
think
that
needs
to
be
a
little
broader.
B
Maybe
things
have
moved
in
a
slightly
different
direction
over
the
past,
but
is
it
12
years
13
quite
a
while,
but
I
still
think,
there's
some
opportunity
out
there
that
the
the
other
cities
are
beginning
to
try
to
utilize
I
mean
North
Desert
Hot
Springs
is
trying
to
inch
their
way
down
to
the
freeway
and
some
of
the
other
cities
inch
their
way
up.
It'd.
E
B
Good,
if
we
could
think
about
it
now,
I
really
recognize
that
Kathy
is
quite
correct,
that
it's
it's
right
now
it's
being
dominated
by
energy,
although
we
do
allow
other
uses
in
the
energy
Zone
in
some
of
the
areas,
there
is
anywhere
time.
You've
got
a
freeway
going.
You
know
the
Transcontinental
freeway
going
through
your
city
There's
an
opportunity
there.
K
B
Yeah
one
of
the
things
Kathy
we
as
I
recall,
we
discussed
a
lot,
is
we
have
a
problem
with
Services
up
there
utilities
and
if
we
could
break
that
string
a
hole
and
make
it
a
policy
that
would
that
would
allow
some
of
these
things
to
go
ahead.
But
some
of
the
developments
we've
talked
about
have
been
stalled
by
lack
of
primarily
sewer.
Isn't
it
and
I.
K
K
A
K
Under
that
a
lot
of
these
areas
that
you
have
right
now
and
I
I
know
I've
mentioned
it
to
David
and
he's
working
on
it
have
been
either
partially
bought
and
have
restrictions,
deed
restrictions
on
them.
A
lot
of
the
cone
I
think
Snow
Creek.
Some
areas
have
been
bought
and
given
to
the
city
with
State
and
in
federal
deed
restrictions
on
them,
so
I
it
would
be
good.
K
H
H
J
J
F
H
A
K
A
H
A
A
Okay
last
piece,
all
right
last
piece
here
is
just
looking
at
where
we
go
from
here.
So
as
we
had
talked
about
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
work
on
revisions
that
address
the
other
kind
of
more
straightforward
comments
address
what
we
discussed
this
evening,
the
that
will
be
in
preparation
for
a
public
Workshop
that'll
likely
happen
in
the
fall
and
will
Encompass
the
outcomes
of
all
of
our
discussions
on
goals
and
policies,
and
we
have
a
couple
of
more
meetings
on
the
the
calendar.
Well,
they're,
not
calendared.
A
A
And
then,
hopefully
you
know
the
intention
is
that,
as
mentioned,
we're
going
to
be
able
to
move
forward
with
the
housing
element
to
hearings,
so
fingers
crossed
on
that.
This
fall
we're
looking
at
in
addition
to
the
public
Workshop,
completing
the
environmental
work,
that
zoning
consistency,
analysis,
approval
hearings
and
then
also
pulling
General
plan
sections
into
an
online
format.
A
E
A
Exciting
I
know,
but
we're
I
will
say
we're.
We
are
really
happy
to
to
start
our
work
Anew
with
all
of
you
and
have
a
really
productive
next
couple
of
months
and
moving
the
rest
of
these
items
forward.
So
I
I,
you
know,
on
behalf
of
our
team
and
the
staff,
really
appreciate
your
your
willingness
to
to
stay
set
for
some
extra
time
tonight
and
your
thoughtfulness
we're.