►
From YouTube: Planning Commission | Sep 28 22
Description
A meeting of the Palm Springs Planning Commission held September 28th, 2022
A
A
Did
you
say,
commissioner
Irvin?
Yes,
yes,
I'm
here,
commissioner
hirschbein
here,
commissioner
Miller?
Yes
here,
commissioner
maruzzi
here
Vice,
chair
Roberts
is
excused
and
chairwood
Mac
president
six
members
President,
we
have
a
quorum.
Thank
you
can
I
have
a
report
on
the
posting
of
the
agenda.
Please
Madam
chair
and
Planning
Commission.
Our
agenda
was
posted
on
Thursday
September
22nd
and
our
meeting
has
been
posted
in
accordance
with
state
law
and
City
policy
can
I
have
a
motion
to
accept
the
agenda.
I
believe
we're
going
to
be
deleting
one
item
from
the
agenda.
A
A
A
Yes,
commission
Vice,
chair
wermick,
yes,
commissioner
Elaine,
yes,
commissioner
Irvin,
yes
and
commissioner
Miller.
Yes,
commissioner
Rosie.
Yes,
thank
you
at
this
point.
We
are
in
public
comments.
This
time
is
set
aside
for
members
of
the
public
to
address
the
Planning
Commission
on
consent,
calendar
and
other
agenda
items
and
items
of
general
interest
within
the
subject
matter.
Jurisdiction
of
our
commission.
Please
note
that
the
Planning
Commission
is
prohibited
from
taking
action
on
items
that
are
not
on
our
posted
agenda.
Each
speaker
will
have
three
minutes.
A
Testimony
for
hearings
may
be
offered
at
this
time
or
at
the
time
of
the
meeting
members
who
would
like
of
the
public
who
would
like
to
comment
on
item
1A,
which
is
the
consent.
Calendar
must
comment
at
this
time.
Are
there
members
of
the
public
who
would
like
to
speak?
Yes,
ma'am?
Chair
may
I
be
recognized.
A
Yes,
thank
you,
Madam,
chair
and
Commissioners.
My
name
is
Thomas
Boudreau
and
I
live
at
355
North
Avenida
Caballeros
at
the
center
Court
Condominiums
I.
Thank
you
for
listening
to
us
during
the
public
hearing
two
weeks
ago
regarding
the
Dream
Hotel
condominium
development
proposal,
the
development
really
or
the
developer
really
had
been
listening
to
the
neighbors
in
the
past,
the
2019
condo
plans
approved
by
the
city
council
a
test
to
this
and
our
HOA
supported
the
design
and
at
that
ultimate
approval.
A
However,
by
Miss
kibby's
assertion
in
the
last
public
hearing,
the
developer
is
back
in
conversation
with
the
city
and
that
she
is
being
required
to
add
residential
units
resulting
in
both
unit
count
and
height
to
the
north
Villas,
and
an
entirely
new
condo
development
called
South.
Phillips
Mr
priest
confirmed
her
ongoing
discussions
during
the
last.
B
Hearing
but
no
details
could
be
shared
when
the
matter
is
discussed.
In
today's
hearing,
please
flag
to
page
224
in
the
public
hearing
packet
you'll
see
a
David
and
Goliath
scenario
regarding
the
north
Villas
and
you
can
think
of
it
as
a
Volkswagen
Beetle
being
parked
next
to
a
Norwegian
Cruise
lineup.
B
That
illustrate
the
building.
Heights
speak
for
themselves.
Please
study
this
diagram
carefully
and
think
of
the
presidents
on
the
other
side
of
that
wall.
The
contrast
summarizes
the
primary
issue
at
hand.
Page
235
in
the
same
packet
shows
a
similar,
though
slightly
better
proposal
for
the
South
Villas.
One
section
is
stair-stepped
away
from
the
Center
Court
as
he
suggested,
though.
The
other
section
is
not.
B
B
The
approved
2019
plans
for
the
north
Condominiums
have
always
been
very
acceptable
to
our
community.
A
similar
design
for
the
South
Villas
would
also
be
very
desirable,
using
the
same
eye
toward
proportion,
stair,
stepping
height
light,
airflow
view
lines,
you
name
it.
It
all
seems
to
come
down
to
who
the
developer
is
currently
conversing
with
regarding
a
finalized
plan
that
will
impact
our
HOA
and
clearly
the
center
court
has
been
left
out
of
that
discussion.
I.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
opportunity
to
address
you
this
evening.
B
B
B
Are
there
other
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak?
Yes,
yes,
I'll
speak
I'm,
Louis,
farrinello
I'm,
president
of
the
HOA
of
Center
Court
I,
once
again,
I
thank
the
Commissioners
for
listening
to
our
concerns
at
the
last
meeting
and
I
hope
you
receive
the
communication
that
I've
been
the
day
after
the
last
meeting.
Thanking
you
for
your
attentiveness.
We
still
share
tremendous
concerns
about
not
only
what
is
what
is
proposed,
but
the
process
we
did
have
an
opportunity.
Late
last
night
to
review
the
revised
plans.
B
I
am
quite
concerned
that
the
the
condo
development
on
the
south,
the
southeast
section,
which
was
not
in
the
original
planned
and
that's
being
proposed,
as
was
stated
publicly
because
the
dream
developer
development
lost
millions
of
dollars
with
the
previous
con
contract.
If
that's
not
our
issue,
the
the
from
our
south
building
to
the
building
of
on
the
Southwest
condos
and
the
dream
prop
luxury
condos
80
feet.
B
80
feet
is
nothing
the
north
building,
the
north,
complex
I,
couldn't
I
couldn't
determine
how
far
those
condos
that
were
originally
one
story
that
somehow,
over
the
last
few
years,
morphed
into
multi-stories
I,
couldn't
determine
how
far
that
is
from
our
back
wall,
but
certainly
it
appears
to
be
very
close,
probably
80
feet
or
less.
That
is
a
grave
concern
to
us
again
process.
We
had
no
input
into
that
process.
The
other
issue
that
this
that
greatly
disturbs
me
at
the
last
meeting
the
developer
indicated
that
there
would
be
a
view
car.
B
B
Has
lost
all
of
its
views,
except
for
a
couple
of
feet
on
either
side
of
the
hotel
and
in
the
middle
of
the
hotel.
That
is
certainly
I.
Don't
think
anybody
would
label
that
of
you
Corridor
if
you
wanted
to
go
and
enjoy
a
view
where
you
have
to
stretch
your
neck
and
then
to
look
over
multi-story
buildings
with
just
feet
apart,
I
implore,
the
Commissioners
to
really
examine
the
impact
not
only
on
the
community
but
on,
particularly
on
our
small
complex
in
the
middle
of
Palm
Springs.
That
has
been
there
since
1978.
B
That
is
now
going
to
be
have
its
views
completely
obstructed
by
the
hotel
which
we
went
along
with.
As
I
said
at
the
last
meeting,
the
developer
was
sensitive
to
many
of
our
needs,
the
north
of
condos,
which
were
proposed
and
then
modified.
We
had
no
input
into
that
and
they're
now
multi-stories,
don't
know
how
that
happened,
but
now
the
South
also
was
going
to
be
completely
blocked
because
there
was
millions
of
dollars
lost
and
then
again
and
funds
have
to
be
generated.
B
That
clearly
is
not
our
fault
and
we
will
be
punished
permanently
by
having
all
of
our
views:
black,
every
single
one.
So
once
again,
I
thank
the
Planning
Commission
Commissioners
to
listening
to
our
concerns
and
appreciate
any
action
you
could
take.
That
would
be
sensitive
to
our
needs
and
not
the
five-story
hotel
needs.
Thank
you.
C
B
C
C
C
B
C
B
C
Point
to
say
that
Senator
Port
has
an
internal
focus
in
terms
of
its
views.
I
actually
had
the
privilege
of
going
to
one
of
the
other
units.
My
east
west,
facing
facing
unit
is
a
single
story,
but
there's
some
construction
happening,
but
on
the
the
south
side
of
the
complex
in
one
of
the
two-story
units,
looking.
C
B
A
G
G
To
Kathy,
where,
where
I'm
at,
if
I'm
saying
that
correctly
I,
remember
you
mentioning
in
the
last
meeting
the
possibility
of
putting
Flags
in
place,
something
that
would
indicate
precisely
the
setback
and
height
of
what's
being
proposed.
That
would
be
real
helpful
in
terms
of
some
kind
of
a
visual
key,
so
we
can
see
what
we're
up
against.
Thank
you
very
much.
B
G
And
at
the
meeting
she
said
that
that
the
north
west,
building
that
it
would
not
be
higher
than
42
feet
and
since
then
my
understanding
is
that
the
latest
version
it's
going
to
be
much
taller.
She
also
offered
access
to
studies.
They
did
of
sight
lines
and
I
tried
to
contact.
Her
was
unsuccessful,
so
I
don't
know
if
those
studies
exist
or
not.
G
B
Surrounding
our
property,
four-story
Properties
Plus
a
hotel,
it's
five
stories
tall,
so
I
think
we've
got
to
take
a
look
at
this
and
understand.
What's
going
on
and
I'm
really
having
a
hard
time
understanding
how
this
process
has
been
done
so
quickly.
We
were
asking
for
years
to
get
this
done
and
now
within
weeks,
we're
getting
very
short
notice
of
what
has
to
happen
a
lot
of
times
just
a
couple
of
days
for
us
to
react
and
give
information
back
so
I.
E
G
B
And
costly,
in
fact,
I
recall
a
former
mayor,
Pro
tem,
stating
several
years
ago
that
we
were
experiencing
a
very
historic
Renaissance
and
it
wasn't
Happening
by
accident.
It
was
happening
because
we
were
working
really
hard
to
encourage
people
to
invest
in
our
city
as
a
property
owner
I
have
seen
values
climb
significantly
in
my
neighborhood
and
largely
attribute
that
increase
to
newly
constructed
homes
and
mixed-use
development
being
built
in
the
last
10
years.
My
current
home
sat
across
the
street
from
vacant
land
until
2015
when
18
new
homes
were
built
on
it.
A
B
The
vacant
land
that
once
surrounded
them
is
now
home
to
the
residents
at
Seoul,
the
Morrison
Palomino
and
Leo
Vista
I'm,
proud.
Our
city
has
made
great
progress
in
recent
years
in
terms
of
this
growth
and
development
and
I
commend
the
efforts
and
the
vision
of
this
body
and
developers
like
Miss
Kibby
when
I
moved
here
20
years
ago.
My
fear,
my
peers,
laughed
and
accused.
A
The
Dream
Hotel
and
Residences
stall
at
a
point
when
demand
for
such
a
product
has
never
been
higher
I'm.
Confident
this
growth
will
continue
to
increase
the
quality
of
life
for
all
residents
and
visitors
and
respectfully
requests
the
Planning
Commission
approve
the
Dream
Hotel
revised
plans.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you.
E
Planning
director
hadwin
are
there
any
other
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak?
I,
see
none
at
this
time,
Madam
chair
there
being
no
additional
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak.
The
public
hearing
is
closed.
I
want
to
thank
everyone
who
participated
and
I'm
going
to
move
forward
with
the
consent
calendar.
We
have
one
item
in
front
of
us.
The
approval
of
the
minutes
of
July.
A
B
Hershbein,
yes,
commissioner,
Miller,
yes
government!
Yes!
Thank
you.
The
second
item
is
a
public
hearing.
It
is
secondary
source,
Productions
LLC,
doing
business
as
the
form
of
Palm
Springs,
requesting
an
approval
of
an
amendment
to
a
recently
approved
conditional
use
permit
for
a
nightclub
cocktail.
Lounge
at
the
J.W
Robinson's
building
a
class
one
Historic
Site
located
at
333
South
Palm
Canyon
Drive
can
I
have
a
staff
report.
Please
yes,
good
evening,
Madam,
chair
and
Commissioners.
Let
me
share
my
screen
a
moment
for
a
summary
of
this
project.
B
So
reform
of
Palm
Springs
is
going
to
be
a
new
tenant
in
333
South
Paulo
Canyon
Drive,
which
all
of
us
know
as
the
beautiful
Robinson's
department
store
building.
This
is
an
image
of
it.
There'll
be
a
middle
part
of
the
building
as
you're
looking
at
it
here
from
the
Palm
Canyon
Frontage.
An
aerial
view
shows
this
project
and
the
site
in
context.
This
is
within
the
south
end
of
the
central
business
district.
There
are
primarily.
E
E
B
C
A
B
B
B
F
A
H
There
is
a
another
item.
I
want
to
bring
to
your
attention.
Bear
with
me
a
minute
while
I
find
this
one
and
it
has
to
deal
with
control
and
management
of
the
of
people
as
they're
exiting
the
building.
There
is
a
security
plan
I'm
going
to
see
if
I
can
find
it
here
as
I'm
talking
and
looking
at
the
same
time.
But
there
is
a
security
plan
that
was
part
of
the
conditions,
and
it
will.
H
It
will
require
that
the
applicant
have
a
Security
Management
plan
that
will
be
approved
by
the
police
department
and
part
of
what
they
have
already
committed
with
their
original
cup
is
that
they
will
be
monitoring
that
west
side
parking
lot
during
the
time
that
they
are
going
through
closing,
so
that
their
patrons
leave
the
site
and
don't
loiter
and
you
know,
cause
a
a
nuisance
with
you
know,
laughing
and
kidding
around
as
they're
leaving
the
space.
So
again,
the
the
findings
for
the
cup
have
been
affirmatively
made.
H
There
is
a
strong
set
of
conditions
of
approval
to
mitigate
and
control
any
potential
adverse
impacts
of
the
use
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
subject
to
those
conditions.
The
applicant
is
here
and
I
am
available
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
Thank
you.
Are
there
questions
of
staff
from
the
commission
I
see
none
I
had
one
a
question
which
was
regarding
the
conference
room
and
that's
possibly
for
the
applicant.
H
Is
that
intended
also
as
private
dining
Rob?
Do
you
want
to
answer
that
sure
I
can
answer
that?
Thank
you
for
having
me
here
tonight.
No,
the
conference
room
is
purely
for
business
purposes.
The
entirety
of
the
office
space,
as
well
as
the
storage
space
that
surrounds
the
extension
of
the
what
we
call
the
venue.
All
of
that
is
not
accessible
to
customers,
and
my
second
question
is
just
if
patrons
are
going
to
exit
through
exit
on
Palm
Canyon
but
park
in
the
parking
lot
behind.
H
How
will
your
security?
How
will
you
get
them
there
and
how
will
you,
the
the
concern
I
have,
is
quietness
in
the
parking
parking
area
for
the
nearby
hotels
and
Residences
sure
well
as
a
as
originally
planned.
The
idea
was
that
everyone
does
exit
the
space
to
the
east
through
the
doors
on
Palm
Canyon,
and
anyone
who
has
parked
would
be
too
you'll
walk
down,
baristo
to
the
parking
lot
and
then
get
their
car
and
exit.
That
way
we
did
commit
to
having
a
security
guard
in
the
parking
lot.
H
H
That
is
not
the
only
security
guard,
so
we,
you
know
the
event
or
the
the
venue
is
the
staff
by
the
team
of
security
guards.
We
will
have
people
who
will
see
people
to
the
exits
and
can
ensure
that
you
know.
There's
not.
You
know,
I
think
the
way
that
can
describe
it
you're
joking
around
on
the
way
out.
We
just
want
to
get
everybody
out
as
quickly
as
possible
to
their
cars
and
and
then
you
know,
exit
the
venue.
H
Can
the
applicants
made
that
as
a
they've
offered
that
but
I
don't
see
it
in
the
conditions?
Is
there
a
way?
I
I
thought
we
were
going
to
see
it
in
the
security
plan,
but
we
don't
have
a
security
plan
as
of
right.
Now
we
don't
have
the
actual
security
plan,
but
it's
identified
in
the
conditions
of
approval
on
the
bottom
of
page
five
Pol
condition
number
two:
the
applicant
shall
develop
a
security
plan
for
the
operation
of
the
business
that
she'll
be
reviewed
and
approved
by
the
police
department.
H
The
what
I
don't
see
is
a
security
guard
in
the
which
the
applicant
committed
to
us
before
is
having
a
security
guard
in
the
parking
lot
and
they've
they've
said
they
would
I'm
correct
that
you
said
he
would
do
that.
Is
it
possible
to
include
that
in
pln1
or
PL,
yeah
or
Pol,
two
yeah
either
one
we
can
do
so
at
the
bottom
of
Pol
2?
Is
security
provisions
shall
be
included
for
Thursday
nights
as
well,
but
we
will
make
that
a
a
provision
of
one
of
those
Pol
conditions.
H
H
Thank
you
I.
You
know.
Ken
and
I
spoke
a
little
bit
earlier
and
talked
about
the
presentation
and
was
really
just
intended
that
if
there
was
anything
that
I
wanted
to,
you
know
emphasize
or
add
to
what
Ken
had
stated
so
I'll
keep
it
relatively
brief,
because
we
really
did
a
fairly
thorough
job
of
you're.
Presenting
this,
you
know
project
when
we
got
the
original
conditional
use
permit.
H
So
I
think
the
only
thing
that
I'll
really
emphasize
is
that
you,
when
we
saw
that
and
Paula
Grill,
was
only
going
to
take
half
of
the
tenant
space
next
to
us.
We
did
you
recognize
that
we,
you
know
just
from
experience
over
at
chill
bar.
We
recognized
you
know
that
storage
space
is
always
in
short
supply
and
because
we
have
the
two
venues:
yeah
we've,
our
businesses
expanded
to
really
be
a
Hospitality
management
company.
So
we
did
need
the
office
space
as
well.
H
So
the
way
that
the
space
is
designed
is
that
the
storage
and
the
office
space
do
serve
as
a
buffer
for
any
device.
You
know
to
the
surrounding
community,
so
we
really
have
you
know
pretty
much
lit
the
maximum
buffer
that
you
could
find
in
a
space
like
this,
and
in
addition,
you
know,
even
though
the
building
is
you
know,
between
us
and
Paula
and
just
on
degree.
Bevmo
is
a
building
that
is
active
at
night.
H
Seeing
none
you
have
three
minutes:
I'm,
sorry
chair!
Yes,
if
I
may,
David
Powell
I
run
a
small
chamber
of
commerce.
I
think
this
is
a
good
plan.
I
think
based
on
the
history
that
Mr
kaseki
has
done
with
his
other
business.
He
and
his
Partners
I
think
that
I
cannot
imagine.
He
would
not
be
running
it
in
the
same
manner
to
be
aware
of
all
issues
both
in
the
neighborhood
and
in
the
business.
So
I
would
encourage
Planning
Commission
to
move
forward
as
as
they
see
fit,
but
to
endorse
this
project.
H
H
F
Moving
right
along,
we
are
at
Douglas
Jones
item
2B
Douglas
Jones
owner
in
conjunction
with
smartlink
LLC,
representing
a
T
Wireless
for
a
conditional
use
permit
to
construct
a
48
foot
tall,
Wireless
telecommunications
facility,
designed
as
a
palm
tree
with
Associated
equipment,
shelter
at
2101,
Sahara
Road
staff
report.
Please
thank
you,
madam
chair.
Let
me
share
the
screen
here
with
you
all.
F
I
think
we
have
somebody
speaking
that
needs
to
turn
off
their
mute,
their
mic
chair.
Are
you
able
to
see
the
presentation?
Yes,
we
are.
Thank
you
all
right.
So
thank
you
very
much,
Madam
chair
this
as
I'm
ready
for
the
record
is
a
new
ATT
cell
tower
at
Sahara
Road.
Looking
at
the
site.
This
is
an
aerial
showing
the
corner
of
Sahara
and
Cerritos
Road
in
the
north
end
of
town
at
the
end
of
the
runway
of
the
Palm
Springs
Airport.
Currently
there
are
three
other
cell
towers
that
are
on
the
site.
F
All
three
of
these
are
operating
and
are
in
what
we
call
a
mono
Palm
instead
of
a
monopole,
and
what
they're
proposing
is
a
48
foot
tall,
mono
Palm,
which
is
a
cell
tower,
that's
disguised
as
a
palm
tree
with
faux
fronds
that
are
at
the
top
of
the
the
hides
the
array
and
the
equipment
with
the
trunk.
That
looks
like
texture
to
look
like
a
palm
tree
trunk.
F
F
I
I
I
J
J
J
J
This
seems
to
be
a
common
problem.
With
these
monopoles
once
they're
constructed,
there
seems
to
be
very
little
maintenance
and
I've
seen
a
lot
of
these
so-called
pumps
that
look
trashed,
thrashed
and
I.
Don't
understand
why
there
is
no
enforcement
mechanism,
or
is
there
an
enforcement
mechanism
associated
with
these
monopoles
once
they're
constructed.
E
K
These
carriers-
it
is
an
issue
that
the
city
monitors
and
we
make
them
aware
of
when
the
towers
are
not
looking
completely
full.
So
yes,
the
this
is
an
issue
that
is
ongoing
and
the
city
does
have
a
property
property
maintenance
and
code
enforcement
has,
if
need
be,
gets
involved.
So
you'll
notice
that,
in
the
conditions
of
approval
condition,
number
10
Planning
number
10
describes
that
failure
to
keep
the
crown
of
the
mono
Palm
full
may
result
in
Code,
Enforcement
action
or
revocation
of
the
cup.
K
So
you
have
that
ability
in
case
this
Palm,
this
monopolam
becomes
a
problem.
Does
it
have
to
be
reported
by
the
public
for
actions
occur
now,
which
can
be
staff
can
in
in
this
application?
I
notified
the
property
owner
that
the
existing
cell
towers
would
need
to
be
upgraded
or
added
branches
to
them,
the
palms
and
in
visiting
the
site.
The
these
towers
are
not
looking
as
bad
as
others
in
the
in
the
city.
K
My
understanding
of
enforcement
generally
is
that
you,
the
public,
has
to
complain
before
their
staff
time
to
go
and
and
look
at
these
things,
not
always
staff
can
do
its
own
investigation
and
and
set
the
owner.
The
carriers
keep
them
as
listed
in
this
condition
of
approval
that
the
crown
be
full
all
right.
Well,
when
we
get
to
public
Com
or
the
comment
time,
I'll
express
my
opinion
about
all
that.
Thank
you.
K
Are
there
other
questions,
commissioner
Olean
you're
muted?
Thank
you.
I
have
a
couple
more
questions
of
similar
nature
kind
of
about
the
maintenance.
One
is
that
I
want
to
visit
inside
I
noticed
that
the
palm
trees,
the
real
palm
trees,
don't
appear
to
be
maintained.
They
don't
appear
to
have
been
primed,
certainly
not
this
year,
maybe
maybe
not
for
a
year
or
two.
K
The
conditions
that
are
included
in
here
are
are
common
conditions
that
we
have
used
through
other
for
other
sites
in
the
city,
so
they
do
have
to
maintain
the
existing
palm
trees
in
a
orderly
fashion
and
if,
if
they
need
to
be
trimmed
and
maintained,
we
will
staff
will
investigate
that.
Okay.
Thank
you.
My
other
question
is
about
the
particular
species
of
palm
tree.
That's
used
the
conditions
in
the
step
report.
K
Talk
about
Mexican
sand
falls,
I
believe
that
those
grow
rapidly
to
much
higher
and
Much
Greater
Heights
such
things
would
no
longer
effectively
screen
the
the
monopolam
and
I'm
wondering
if
staff
has
any
reason
where
the
city
has
any
experience.
That
would
want
them
to
not
change
this
to
the
California
Camp
homes,
washingtonield
bullet
for
us
right.
So
whenever
we
have
these
faux
I
know
Palms
the
carrier
expresses
that
they
are
able
to
get
the
ones
that
look
like
a
Mexican
fan
palm
so
that
or
palm
tree.
K
L
The
existing
site
and
I
noticed
when
it
was
out
there
one
of
them.
The
model
Palms
has
either
a
pale
shade
of
green
or
it
has
faded
over
time.
The
ones
that
are
deeper,
colored
green
went
much
better.
Are
these?
Is
the
equipment
painted?
Is
it
a
matter
of
picking
a
different
colors?
It
matches
a
little
bit
better,
or
are
they
to
become
one
green
and
nothing
can
be
done
about
it?
Do
you
know
being
out
there
on
site
there?
They
they're
a
plastic
is
basically
what
they
are.
L
So
it's
not
painted
it's
it's
a
material.
That
is
that's
fabricated.
That
way
and
the
applicant
may
be
able
to
describe
it
better
than
I.
Could?
Okay,
all
right!
Thank
you.
Are
there
other
questions?
I
I
have
a
couple
and
I'm
just
looking
at
some
of
the
photographs
I
took,
which
match
the
comments
from
from
other
Commissioners,
we
had
a
situation.
M
M
The
Planning
Commission
can
add
a
condition
that
says
that
they
need
to
be
maintained
or
or
so
forth,
depending
on
how
you
wish
to
go
and
which
direction
and
then
the
other
thing
that
I
looked
at
and
I
shared
with
the
planning
director.
He
may
not
have
it
the
view
from
the
view
looking
West,
but
on
the
east
side
of
the
property
and
where
they
had
put
trees
on
two
two
or
three
of
the
sides.
A
A
H
So
so,
but
there
is
no
set
standard.
I
mean
there's
no
set
limit
that
the
city
has
put
into
place
to
say:
five
can
go
in
one
location
or
anything
like
that.
In
most
cases,
we
could
ask
for
co-location
if
a
tower
is
taller
and
it's
not
a
palm
tree,
but
right
now
adding
one
more
would
be
consistent
with
our
our
other
sites
around
the
city,
where
we've
had
more
than
one
two
or
even
three
on
a
property,
and
commissioner
Urban,
you
are
correct,
there's
no
explicit
policy.
H
That
would
probably
that
provides
an
upward
limit
in
terms
of
how
many
of
these
can
be
on
one
side,
okay,
and
so,
if
there's
any
way
possible
that
we
can
look
into
that
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
just
flooding
in
an
area
with
a
lot
of
these
towers
and
and
also
is
there
any
way
that
we
also
can
look
and
see
how
many
of
these
towers
are
are
being
in
certain
locations.
So
we
can
kind
of
get
an
idea
when
we're
making
these
decisions.
H
If
there
has
been
50,
you
know
20
on
the
the
north
side
of
the
town
or
on
the
South
Side
there's
been
20.
Is
there
any
way
that
we
can
get
like
an
idea
of
how
many
towers
are
being
put
up
around
the
city
that
way
we're
not
saturating
any
area?
With
these
towers,
the
the
cell
towers,
as
we
showed
in
the
propagation
Maps
we
know
where
they
ate
for
this
application,
the
18t
towers
are
shown
the
other
towers
for
T-Mobile
and
spectrum
and
so
forth,
they're
also
on
other
Maps.
H
So
to
answer
your
question,
there's
not
been
one
map.
That's
that's
shown
it.
We
would
have
to
produce
that
ourselves.
The
cell
tower
companies
are
very
protective
of
that
information.
We've
we've
had
it
and
and
I
understand
everything
that
you're,
saying
and
I
just
want
to.
Let
you
know
that
we
don't
know
what
these
Health
complications
are
in
the
future
or
what
the
cell
towers
have
any
effect.
H
So
if
that's
something
that
we
can
possibly
look
at,
I
would
like
to
get
that
information,
so
I
can
be
able
to
make
a
sound
decision
on
where
these
towers
are
being
placed.
Commissioner
Irvin
I
may
have.
The
City
attorney
provide
a
little
bit
of
information
on
how
Federal
Regulations
speak
to
health
effects
and
locations
of
these
towers,
because
it
is
a
little
bit
complicated
in
terms
of
how
some
of
their
regulations
supersede
our
ability
to
look
at
these.
So
if
the
City
attorney
might
want
to
speak
to
that
issue,.
H
The
ish
of
electromagnetic
radiation,
radio
frequency
and
any
of
those
other
elements,
as
you
know,
causing
potential
health
hazards.
That
is
a
federally
regulated
issue
by
the
FCC
as
a
result
by
federal
law.
That
issue
is
preempted,
which
means
that
the
city
cannot
deny
a
wireless
communication
facility
project
like
this
on
the
basis
of
potential
health
hazards
due
to
em
radiation,
radio,
spectrums
type
of
things
the
most
decision
require.
H
Is
that-
and
we
do
condition
our
cell
towers
this
way
that
they
have
to
be
in
compliance
with
all
FCC
regulations
for
purposes
of
emissions,
radio,
frequency
spectrum,
the
whole
thing,
but
if
they
are
in
compliance
with
FCC
standards
or
FCC
certificate,
then
it
is
a
lawful
cell
tower.
We
cannot
deny
it
on
that
basis.
The
city
can
deny
cell
towers
on
aesthetic
basis
or
other
local
conditions,
but
on
the
health
hazards
or
potential
health
hazards
of
the
emissions
coming
from
cell
towers.
That
is
not
a
basis.
City
can
use
that's
federally
preempted.
C
E
Just
curious
about
that,
because
I
think
the
city,
if
we
wanted
to
as
a
city,
not
on
a
per
application
basis.
But
if
there
was
a
regulation
in
place
which
the
city
I
believe
has
the
ability
to
add,
we
could
require
that
they
submit
a
radio
frequency
study
analyzing
the
anticipated
effects
in
in
conformance
with
Federal
law,
because
we
did
that
in
in
the
city
where
I
previously
worked
in
California
and
it
was
not
challenged.
C
This
alludes
to
a
little
bit
of
what
commissioner
Elaine
mentioned
regarding
the
species.
It
shows
that
all
seven
Palms
are
going
to
be
at
least
30
feet
in
height
at
time
of
planting,
which
is
substantial.
Those
are
substantial
trees,
but
I
I
do
share
a
little
bit
of
commissioner
layan's
concern
about
the
fact
that
at
some
point,
they're
going
to
be
exceeding
the
the
height
of
the
monopole,
which
of
course
is.
B
A
N
N
N
N
N
You
guys
hear
me
yes,
perfect.
All
right,
just
I
want
to
apologize
in
advance
I'm
outside
outdoor,
taking
this
Zoom
meeting
public
hearing.
So
you'll
hear
our
little
background
noises
so
just
bear
with
me.
I'll
try
to
get
my
airpods
to
fix,
but
apparently
it's
not
connecting.
My
name
is
Will
kazimi
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
ATT
I.
N
Just
first
want
to
thank
you
guys
for
hearing
this
project
out
and
then
the
next
project
as
well
I
have
a
presentation
that
I
want
to
share,
but
I
believe
Glenn
will
be
pointing
it
out.
So
if
that
could
show
a
screen
and
then
we'll
move
forward
from
there
I
just
wanna.
This
could
be
very
brief
and
I
just
want
to
talk
about
how
we
got
here
and
why
we
select
kind
of
like
give
a
background
of
why
we
select
the
site.
G
G
I'm
glad.
If
you
want
to
go
next
slide
here,
you
can
see
a
more
overview
of
the
search
ring.
That
I
was
just
talking
about
in
the
previous
slide,
in
conjunction
with
the
other
cell
towers
in
the
era.
In
the
area,
so,
as
you
can
see,
if
you
can
see
a
pattern
you,
the
whole
goal
here
is
to
have
all
have
like
a
honeycomb
like
I,
want
to
say
infrastructure,
so
where
all
the
towers
will
be
communicating
with
each
other.
G
So
this
one
right
here
for
a
csl04905
Sahara
is
going
to
be
located
right
in
the
middle,
where
all
the
towers
could
talk
to
each
other
at
the
end
and
then
also
to
provide
coverage
in
the
houses
around
it
and
right
below
it
to
the
south
of
the
ring.
There's
another
Red
Dot,
that's
the
next
project
that
we're
going
to
be
talking
about
and
Glenn
will
be
presenting
in
the
next
cup
agenda
item.
G
So
next
slide
please
so
my
job
is
for
ATT
is
when
they
come
to
me
and
I
need
to
vet
a
candidate
out
or
I
should
say
location
for
to
propose
a
Wireless
sales
facility.
I
have
to
make
sure
they're,
zonable,
releasable,
RF,
engineerable
and
also
constructible
and,
like
Glenn,
said,
meet
all
the
regulatory
permits
and
FCC
guidelines
as
well.
G
Next
slide,
please
what
I
focus
on
is
when
the
Gap
in
coverage
that's
presented
in
the
propagation
map
and
then
finding
or
coming
up
with
design
ideas
that
will
be
the
least
visual
obtrusive
means
we
live
in
2022
everybody's
using
their
service.
Now
a
lot
more
their
cell
service,
their
cards
are
Wireless
refrigerators,
thermostats,
Smart,
Homes,
it's
very
it.
These
are
the
items
that
causes
a
significant
tick
in
demand
for
these
coverages.
G
G
So
next
slide
please.
So
we
did
also,
although
this
parcel
has
a
lot
of,
has
a
cluster
of
existing
monopods
on
site
and,
like
Glenn
said,
it
is
ideal
to
locate
these
monopomes
in
a
cluster-like
in
one
area
versus
scattered
all
over,
which
makes
things
easier
and
actually
most
jurisdictions
prefer
that.
G
G
So
I
do
want
to
talk
about
some
a
little
bit
of
misconception
conceptions
about
RF
exposure,
because
I
know
during
this
call
a
lot
of
the
members
they
voiced
their
concerns
about
the
health
aspects
of
it
and
I
just
want
to
go
briefly
through
it
and
and
to
point
to
commissioner
Miller's
comment
about
the
jurisdictional.
The
eme
report,
although
city
code
does
not
require
us
to
provide
one
ATT
is
very
gradually
will
provide
an
eme
report.
G
G
I
I
I'm,
not
a
expert
at
RF
radiation
and
micro,
microwave
radiation,
but
I
do
know
a
little
bit
from
my
background
in
undergrad
that
RF
and
micrograve
radiation
is
non-ionized,
so
there
it
means
that
the
process
does
not
break
down
DNA
strands.
Aka
does
not
lead
to
adverse
health
effects,
your
cell
phone,
your
microwave,
etc.
Those
are
non-ionized
radiation,
however,
things
like
the
opposite.
Quite
opposite:
the
ionized
radiation
such
as
X-rays
and
gamma
rays.
Those
are
the
ones
that
actually
would
cause
announcing.
I
I
I
C
C
Ideally,
a
cell
tower
could
provide
coverage
up
to
two
miles
on
perfect
terrain:
perfect,
Democrat,
topography,
like
area
like
right
here,
you
can
see
that's
pretty
spread
apart
and
it'll
probably
cover
much
majority
of
the
objective
and
to
the
South
you're,
probably
wondering
how
we
gotta
cover
that
one.
It's
that
that's
the
next
cop
agenda
is
where
we're
gonna
have
a
cell
tower
down
there
to
help
close
that
one,
and
once
everything
is
up
and
running,
you'll
see
this
flood
of
green
with
reliable
coverage.
C
Here,
as
you
can
see
the
exact
distance,
it
will
go
the
the
coverage
as
if
everything
else
around
it
is
turned
off,
and
only
this
site
is
on
air
and
you
can
see
how
it'll
cover
the
cover.
Basically,
my
scale
is
off
a
little
bit,
but
about
a
mile
a
mile
half
around
next
slide.
Please,
oh
that's
about
it.
So
that's
pretty
much
concludes
that
presentation.
I
know.
I
said
it
would
be
brief.
I'm
here
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
C
C
I'm
asking
if
members
of
the
pub
we're
in
a
public
hearing
are
there
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak,
seeing
none
planning
director
hadwin.
Do
you
have
anybody
who
signed
up
to
speak?
There
are
Madam
chair,
no
one
signed
up
to
speak
in
advance
on
this
item
and
I
see
no
one
else
raising
their
hand.
Thank
you
at
this
point.
It
would
normally
be
rebuttal,
but
if
you
can
stay
available,
members
of
the
commission
may
have
questions
of
you.
Commissioner.
Maruti
had
his
hand
up.
Yes,
ma'am.
A
Yes,
I
have
at
least
from
my
projects,
and
the
ones
I've
been
involved
with
I've
always
escalated.
Any
issues
that
make
came
up
onto
18t
management
to
get
a
resolved.
I
like
I
strive
to
have
a
working
relationship
with
the
jurisdiction
I'm
working
with.
But
how
would
you
know
I
mean
once
you
get
approval?
Doesn't
that
the
end
of
your
job,
correct
I,
have
to
that
would
have
to
rely
on
coder
enforcement
or
any
comments
and
I
could
give
an
example.
Neighboring
City,
Rancho
Mirage
recently.
N
N
In
Palm
Springs,
but
I
do
rely
on
the
city
to
provide
that
feedback.
If
something
happened
or
if
something's
going
on,
then
they
would
have
to
contact
us
and
then
to
add
to
that
at
least
I
know
for
ATT
their
sales
sites.
They
have
a
24-hour
number
for
the
Operations
Command
Center.
And
so
if
anybody
needs
to
get
a
hold
of
somebody,
real
quick,
we're
going
to
increase
emergency
God
forbid,
then
they
could
call
that
number
and
check
out
or.
G
G
N
Out
space
to
the
wireless
carriers,
so
right
now,
ATT
has
a
will
get
into
a
long-term
lease
agreement
with
the
property
owner
and
I
would
imagine
the
other
carriers
that
are
on
the
parcel
currently
they're.
They
did
the
same
thing
as
well.
So
if
we
are
requiring
say
we
required
slightly
different
palm
trees
and
we
require
some
Palo
Verde
trees
on
the
east
side
of
the
property.
Is
that
something.
G
You
provide
when
you
put
it
in
correct,
because
it's
part
of
the
Landscaping,
it's
part
of
the
scope
of
work
for
ATT
here
and
it's
conditioned
by
it
was
a.
It
was
a
request
from
staff
and
we
obliged
to
it
and
we're
they
think
it's
pretty
open,
we're
we're
not
in
a
landscape
business
we're
not
harborous
or
we.
A
C
Continuously
maintain:
how
do
you
deal
with
that?
You
put
that
in
your
release
with
the
with
the
owner.
What
do
you
do
essentially,
the
landscape
portion
of
the
work
once
ATT
installs
and
all
that
will
be
the
responsibility
of
the
property
owner
that
said
the
property
owner
in
18t
when
they
get
into
a
lease
agreement,
they
have
language
I'm,
not
privy
to
this
one.
My
colleagues
are
but
they're
they're
standard
language
where
the
site
that
ATT
needs
to
maintain
the
site
as
it
was,
if
that
makes
sense.
C
A
A
We
have
a
relationship
with,
and
can
you
know
he
ultimately,
if
there's
a
maintenance
issue
would
would
be
get
the
notices
from
code
enforcement?
If,
if
any
of
the
towers
are
lacking
the
fronds
it
wouldn't
go
to
the
ATT,
it
would
go
to
the
property
owner.
He
would
have
to
alert
the
individual
carrier
that
the
hours
are
insufficient
right.
A
What
I'm,
what
I'm
looking
at
is
the
regular
trees,
the
maintenance
of
the
regular
trees,
the
normal
landscape,
if
we
condition
it
with
that
who's
responsible,
it's
the
property
owner,
but
remember
it's
a
it's
a
cup
and
it
could
be
revoked.
I
mean
the
property
owner.
It
runs
in
his
name.
It's
not
18t!
That
is
a
grant
to
the
cup.
A
N
A
A
O
So
I
don't
think
it
addresses
my
concerns.
Your
concern
was
that
funds
coming
off
of
the
existence,
the
monopoles,
so
it's
the
other
palm
trees,
not
the
living
palm
trees.
So,
looking
at
this,
do
we
have
a
condition
that
they
maintain
the
funds
on
the
on
this
particular
monopole
I'd
like
to
see
that
yeah?
Yes,
it's
condition
pln
10.
O
O
Monoplum
full
may
result
in
Code
Enforcement
action
or
revocation
of
the
cup,
but
that's
not
unique
to
this
particular
agreement.
They
all
have
that
correct.
They
all.
They
all
have
this
agreement.
This
condition.
Yes,
all
right.
So
that's
all
about
enforcement.
Apparently,
so
we
have
that
condition.
We
had
since
they've
offered
to
provide
a
RF
admissions
report,
I'd
like
to
add
a
condition
that
they
do
provide
that.
O
Just
looking
at
the
other
things
that
came
up
are
the
varying
Heights
of
the
Palms
that
are
provided
and
possibly
a
different
species.
Commissioner
Elaine,
do
you
have
a
suggestion
for
an
alternate
species?
Yes,
my
suggestion
is
a
California
fan
palm
the
it's
Botanical
maintenance
of
washingtonio
pellifera
and
that
these
seven
of
them
be
staggered
in
height
between
20
and
now
I'd,
say
25
and
40
feet.
O
O
O
Or
Beyond,
but
what
you
do
need
to
remove
is
all
the
groups
that
the
seeds,
because
the
filaments,
because
they
drop
and
they
spread
baby
palm
trees
like
wildfire.
They
are
messy
nuisance.
If
you
take
a
look
at
the
photos
of
the
existing
poems
that
are
there
that
have
not
been
proved
you,
you
can
leave
the
skirts
on
them
or
the
Beards
on
them,
which
does
provide
for
nesting,
but
you
do
need
to
take
off
the
filaments
and
the
the
fruit
is.
Is
it
a
fire
Hazard?
O
O
Commissioner
hershbine,
the
other
portion
of
that
is,
if
you
do
trim
trim
only
in
late
August
after
a
nesting
season
is
over.
So
you
can
add
that,
in
terms
of
trim
time,
there's
actually
different
pruning
times
a
year
for
the
flipers
versus
the
robustas
robustus,
because
based
upon
when
they
blew
and
when
they
they
seed,
the
robustness
are
earlier
than
the
Philippines.
O
O
A
O
O
Once
again,
they
they
have
provided
simulations
of
what
the
site
would
look
like.
This
is
pointing
to
monopom
that
they're,
proposing
and
other
live
trees
that
will
be
planted,
so
this
is
at
the
rear
of
the
property
next
to
an
existing
two-car
garage,
which
is
a
maintenance
facility
for
the
church.
This
is
a
a
photo
simulation
looking
from
sunrise.
O
This
is
the
existing
cluster
of
of
trees,
palm
trees
and
the
monopolm,
which
is
currently
here
now,
there's
two
at
this
site
and
then
they're,
adding
a
third
and
there'll
be
a
new
cluster
of
trees.
Around
the
new
monopom
at
the
North
End
of
the
existing
garage
Maintenance
building
So
currently
and
I
I
do
have
some
photographs,
there's
a
playground
that
that
runs
along
here,
that
is,
is
used
by
the
church
and
then
they're,
proposing
to
plant
three
new
trees,
and
we.
A
N
Provide
some
shade
for
the
children
playing
at
this
Tower
will
be
lower
than
the
one
that
you
previously
looked
at.
The
height
of
the
array
will
be
45
feet
to
the
top,
which
is
consistent
with
other
towers
that
are
on
the
property
once
again
will
may
want
to
go
through
these
propagation
Maps,
but
you
saw
from
his
discussion
gaps
in
service
and
they
have
provided
those
maps
for
us.
So
once
again,
staff
is
recommending
approval
and
the
five
findings
can
be
met.
So.
A
A
O
Plans
show
the
Mexican
fan,
Palms
I
know
we're
likely
going
to
change
that
now
to
the
California
fan
palm,
but
just
to
take
note
of
the
the
photo
Sims
are
incorrectly
showing
the
species
that
they
even
proposed
and
that
could
potentially
I
think
alter
the
way.
Someone
who
might
look
at
these
plans
feels
about
the
Palms,
because
they
are
much
grander
and
more
ornamental
as
Glenn.
D
Seeing
none
I
can
open
the
public
on
I
can
open
the
public
hearing.
Is
the
applicant
here
I?
Think
commissioner
layan
had
a
question.
Oh
sorry,
madam
chair
I,
I
did
note
the
correspondence
that
came
in
from
a
number
of
community
members
who
were
concerned
about
a
few
things
associated
with
this
site.
That
did
not
arise
with
the
other
side
and
in
particular,
they
were
concerned
about
the
timing,
and
they
wondered.
D
One
thing
about
these
applications
for
cell
towers
is
that
they
don't
require
grading
permits.
There's
no
grading
that
occurs
the
site
is
a
level
existing.
There
is
obviously
some
trenching
and
some
digging
when
they
pull
lines
in
from
to
provide
Power,
and
there
are
cranes
that
will
come
onto
site.
They
come
off
of
the
the
little
spur
row
that
has
a
cul-de-sac
that
runs
along
the
church
property
and
they
they
go
on
to
the
site.
And
so
there
is
some
construction
activity.
D
D
D
I
was
gonna,
do
the
same
presentation,
but
you
guys
probably
gonna
be
bored
off
of
it,
but
I
can.
If
you
want
I,
could
go
over
the
propagation
map
as
well,
but
you
guys
got
the
gist
of
it.
Is
that
right
I
mean
I,
don't
mind
I,
think
we
do?
Are
there
any
questions
of
the
applicant
I?
So
I
do
want
to
add
to
member
Ireland
about
that.
D
I,
don't
foresee
any
loud,
significant,
loud
issues
arising
from
this
project
and
especially
doing
construction
as
well
again,
this
will
occur
Monday
through
Friday
during
business
hours
or
unless
there's
certain
hours
that
the
city
wants
it
conditioned
on.
Then
that
could
be
a
normal
routine
as
business
hours,
Olivier,
there's
no
significant
traffic
impact,
no
Street
or
lane
closures
associated
with
any
of
the
work.
D
No,
this
specific
on
this
project.
Everything
is
occurring
in
the
back,
I
want
to
say
the
south
of
the
church
all
the
way
in
the
back
in
the
parking
lot,
so
even
including
our
power
or
bringing
power,
it's
all
within
the
property
itself,
so
we
don't
I,
don't
foresee
any
encroachment
issues
into
there
right
away.
Okay,
thank
you.
D
D
And
and
chairwoman
just
a
flag,
as
you
continue,
commissioner
Irvin
has
been
excused
from
the
meeting
he
had
to
leave.
Thank
you.
Excuse
me,
I'm,
I'm,
sorry,
Tom,
Ambry
public.
Would
you
be
able
to
say
something?
Yes,
you
would
okay.
Thank
you.
First
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
Glenn
mcclaker,
because
he
I've
been
communicating
and
he's
he's
been
very,
very
professional.
D
D
D
D
O
O
See
where
your
and
maybe
will
can
address
this,
so
this
is
a
a
Photoshop
or
an
X
that
I
placed
on
this
actual
pic
today
showing
the
location
of
the
Tower.
So
it
was
not
meant
to
Photoshop
any
anything
out
of
the
picture.
So
there's
parking
here
which
you
can
see
in
this
Photograph,
so
maybe
will
the
applicant
can
describe
where
there
would
be
an
appropriate
location
to
add.
A
O
N
O
A
Why
don't
we
leave
it,
adding
adding
three
three
trees
and
leave
the
placement
at
the
discretion
of
the
planning
director
commissioner
Miller
yeah
on
that
note,
I'm
I'm,
not
sure
and
I,
with
all
due
respect
to
the
gentleman
who
spoke
who
lives
north
of
Alejo
I
understand
the
idea
of
having
a
concern.
But,
let's
keep
in
mind
this
particular
location
is
more
than
200
feet.
South.
O
C
A
O
A
Okay,
so
can
you
say,
let
me
see
my
screen.
Yes,
we
can.
Thank
you.
Okay,
all
right,
so
Madam
chair
recall
on
September
14th
2022.
This
item
was
brought
before
you
and
at
that
meeting
you
made
a
recommendation
to
continue
the
hearing
to
September
28th
and
gave
specific
directions
to
the
applicant.
So
my
presentation
is
going
to
be
very
brief.
Tonight.
I
will
want
to
focus
on
those
two
areas
where
your
direction
was
given
to
the
applicant.
So
just
a
quick
recap.
A
A
A
A
So
in
one
of
my
in
my
discussions,
it's
one
of
the
planning,
Commissioners
I
was
asked
to
show
a
presentation
of
the
previously
approved
condominium
units
at
that
same
location
as
I
did
not
dealers
in.
If
you
can
see
that
there
are
two
sets
of
elevations
that
were
proposed
back
then
the
ones
the
plans
that
were
approved
back
in
2017
I
believe
the
maximum
height
of
that
building
them
was
25.8.
As
you
can
see
here.
A
This
is
the
previously
approved
plan
and
then
the
next
slide
shows
the
the
sub
Villas
again
to
the
right
is
the
the
floor
plan
and
then
to
the
right
of
it
is
the
same.
The
existing
Center
called
community
and,
as
I
mentioned,
the
height
have
been
reduced.
The
maximum
height
of
the
the
structure
has
been
reduced
from
the
previously
44
feet
and
again
the
dotted
Red
Line
denotes
the
previous
overall
height
and
the
new
height
has
been
proposed
to
you.
A
A
And
in
the
2017
plan,
these
are
the
the
previously
approved
plans,
which
was
a
farmhouse
so
but
to
realize
that
the
uses
are
different.
What
you
have
before
you
know
is
a
residential
structure.
What
was
approved
back
then
was
a
farmhouse
for
events,
event,
spaces
and
also
a
section
of
that
area
for
farming.
So
there
are
easy
difference
in
use,
hence
the
difference.
In
height,
however,
the
maximum
height
at
that
time
was
24.2
feet,
as
you
can
see,.
A
Madam
chair
that
would
conclude
myself
report
again.
This
is
going
to
be
given
that
you
focused
mainly
on
those
two
areas
on
the
14th
of
September
and
those
have
been
addressed
by
the
applicant.
The
applicant
is
also
here
to
answer
any
additional
questions
that
you
may
have
recommendations
tonight
will
be
one
two
approve:
the
the
proposed
amendment
subject
to
conditions
or
any
additional
conditions
that
the
Planning
Commission
May
deal
necessary
and
recommend
the
approval
of
the
amendment
to
city
council
for
final
action.
So
that
will
conclude
myself
report.
A
A
A
A
A
So,
looking
at
the
you
mean
the
the
are.
Those
exhibits
that
you
saw
on
the
14th
is
that
the
one
you're
referring
to
I'm,
referring
to
this
section
drawing
here
and
yes,
comparing
it
to
what
was
originally
approved
and
I,
had
asked
that
you
show
a
superimposition
on
this.
Drawing
of
what
was
originally
approved,
we
don't
really
have
we
have
the
heart,
but
a
component
of
view.
Blockage
is
not
just
the
height
but
the
adjacency
to
what's
what's
around
it.
A
So
my
question
is:
where
was:
was
the
original
two-story
building
in
relation
to
this
section
yeah?
So
the
three
stories
were
actually
closest
to
to
Santa
Claus
is
that
approval
and
the
two
the
two-story
buildings
were
internal
to
the
bigger
structures
which
were
the
three-story
beginnings
now
I,
don't
have
the
superim
position
here,
but
I
I'm,
not
I,
didn't
follow
you.
What
I'm
asking
is,
where
is
the
Leading
Edge?
How
close
to
Center
core
was
the
last
approval?
A
Yeah
well
yeah,
because
that's
what
I
asked,
because
my
concern
is
what
are,
is
the
proposed
change
in
relation
to
the
to
the
approvals?
Not
not
necessarily
what
the
proposed
change
is
to
the
last
set
of
drawings?
Okay,
my
my
understanding
was
that
you
were
trying
to
determine
the
height
of
the
previous
change
of
the
previous
approval.
A
Or
I
can
get
this
drawing,
but
it
won't
be
on
this
slide.
So
if
there's
any
other
question,
while
I
answer,
those
I
can
go
back
and
retrieve
those
drawings
that
could
answer
that
question.
That
sounds
like
that:
okay,
okay!
Is
there
any
other
question
before
I
start
sharing?
Caroline
has
a
question:
okay,
Edward,
yes,
ma'am!
When
we
had
some
of
the
public
speak
at
the
beginning,
we
learned
public
comments.
A
There
was
some
mention
of
some
of
the
surrounding
developments
and
impact
on
that
and
I'm
wondering.
Can
you
tell
me
the
height
of
palomino
and
Seoul
and
the
other
multi-story
developments
nearby?
Yes,
this
is
one
of
the
Soul
buildings,
as
you
can
see
on
this.
Yes
yeah,
so
the
maximum
height
on
this
one
is
I,
believe
38
feet,
high
I'm,
sorry,
how
many
38,
no
no
38,
38,
30.,
wow,
okay,
all
right
and
palomino
yeah
Palomino
I
could
not
retrieve
the
file.
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Yes,
okay?
So,
commissioner,
how
much
time
so
here
they
are.
This
is
what
I
was
trying
to
explain.
So
these
are
the
choose.
The
three
story-
prehistoric,
condominium
structures
formally
placed
here
and
over
here
to
the
South.
This
is
this
would
be
the
Farmhouse.
The
the
center
card
will
be
somewhere
around
here.
A
A
A
That,
but
from
what
I'm
looking
here,
looks
like
it's
118.
so
about
20,
20
feet
closer
okay,
and
you
keep
saying
it
was
three
stories
but
you're
telling
me
the
maximum
height
was
25
feet.
So
I,
don't
know
how
you
get
three
stories
in
25
feet:
no,
it's
the
maximum
height
of
the
two-story
building
at
25
feet.
The
maximum
height
of
the
three-story
building
is
37.97
approximately
38
feet
and
the
two-story
building
was
the
one
closest
to
Center.
Court
right.
I
tried
easy.
Three
look
it's
right
here!
A
It
says
five
kind
of
buildings,
High
two-story
units
25.8,
feet
28
and
then
the
three-story
condos
are
37.9,
the
the
the
ones
they're
proposing
now
no,
the
one
that
is
proposed
now
is
46.2.
The
pre-story
building
that
was
previously
approved
in
2019
amendment
was
37.9
feet
behind.
Is
that
behind
the
first
one
yeah
right
here
this?
Let
me
see
there's
another.
Let
me
look
for
another.
A
Okay,
so
you
look
at
this,
this
shows
you
where
the
three
stories
are
at
the
very
edge
these
two
and
yeah.
These
three
are
the
two
story:
buildings,
so
yeah,
you're
right,
the
closest
it's
the
center
card
at
that
time
was
a
two-story
building
at
the
very
edge
here:
okay,
okay
and
that's
the
one
that's
22
feet:
it
is
20
20,
5.8,
yeah,
25.8,
correct,
okay,
all
right.
A
A
By
what
I'm,
looking
at
so
I'll
have
the
architect,
I'm
I'm
sure
I'm,
looking
at
the
correct,
but
I
will
have
the
accident.
Well,
if
I
stick
to
that,
okay,
yeah
I'm,
not
sure
that
that's
accurate,
so
I
would
like
us
to
ask
the
architect,
because
I'm
looking
at
the
two
plans
side
by
side
on
my
computer
screen
and
I
I'm,
not
sure
that
there's
that
much
of
a
discrepancy
so
I,
hopefully
the
architect-
can
clarify
that
for
us
in
terms
of
the
setback
you're
saying
in
the
correctness
of
the
separation
right.
A
A
A
Is
actually
I
was
going
to
present?
Are
you
okay
with
that,
rather
than
the
architect?
That's
fine!
If
we
have
questions
to
see
architect
here,
he
is,
he
is
definitely
but
I
do
have
some
of
the
answers
to
some
of
the
questions
that
were
raised
this
evening.
So
I'll
try
to
address
them
in
the
presentation.
There's
a
lot
of
information
that's
been
shared,
including
at
the
public
hearing
public
comments
at
the
beginning.
A
I
live
also
adjacent
to
the
property
and
behind
my
house
is
an
empty
lot
and
I'm
I
think
that
anybody
who
understands
that,
when
you
buy
a
home
next
to
an
empty
lot
or
one
that's
under
development
that
you're
likely
to
get
a
project
that
may
not
be
what
you
expected
and
the
fact
that
views
are
not
protected.
We
have,
as
a
developer,
tried
to
think
about
the
views,
though
we
know
that
we
can't
Salvage
them
completely.
We
have,
in
the
setbacks,
try
to
create
angled
views.
We
did
that
with
a
hotel.
A
Everyone
else
has
their
privacy,
so
we
all
understand
that
development
will
make
a
difference.
The
one
comment
that
I'm
not
available
is
absolutely
not
accurate.
I
have
both
David
Powell
who's
on
this
call
tonight,
Lewis
have
my
direct
number
I've
always
been
available.
If
anybody
calls
me
and
a
happy
to
continue
to
be
available
to
answer
any
questions,
what
I'd
like
to
look
at,
though
overall
is
that
are
the
things
that
we've
done
to
the
project
before
I
get
into
what
we
have
done
now.
A
Everyone
was
concerned,
as
I
mentioned,
about
the
impact
and
the
Shadows,
so
we
ended
up
moving
the
hotel
and
the
tower
back
170
feet
to
ensure
that
the
Center
Court
was
not
in
Shadow
and
that,
in
fact,
they
had
the
angle
views.
We
agreed
to
a
parking
condition
as
a
parking
valet
parking
only
as
a
condition
of
approval
to
ensure
that
the
car
is
entered
from
Alvarado
and
exited
from
Alvarado,
thereby
limiting
the
traffic
along
the
southern
edge
of
Center
Court.
A
We
ensured
that
all
the
high
traffic
amenities
of
the
hotel
were
located
on
the
Westerly
side
of
the
Hotel.
This
includes
two
restaurants,
it
co-working
I'm,
sorry,
I
have
a
dog
two
working,
two
restaurants,
a
co-working
space
and
the
fitness
area
all
are
on
the
West
Side,
limiting
the
amount
of
noise
and
activity
other
than
coming
in
and
out
of
the
hotel
by
car.
A
On
the
on
the
Eastern
side,
we
also
separated
the
Congo
Tower
from
the
hotel
Tower,
creating
a
large
view,
Corner
View
Corridor,
through
what
was
one
long
building
that
sits
just
off
of
the
corner
of
both
the
west
and
south,
facing
of
Central
Court,
where
they
all
of
those
condos
do
have
a
view
out
to
the
mountain.
Through
the
separation
of
these
two
buildings
and
again,
we
tried
to
lessen
the
impact
in
all
of
these
moves
in
regards
to
the
existing
property.
A
Previous
developments
were
approved
at
the
heights
that
you
heard
the
25
and
37
and
the
25
on
the
project,
though
they
are
of
equal
distance
from
the
property
line.
The
northern
condos
at
the
first
floor
and
all
of
the
properties
are
tiered
back.
So
we've
tried
to
minimize
the
impact
such
that
all
the
condo
buildings
are
not
a
solid
wall
of
five
feet
or
four
feet
or
three
feet.
They
step
back
like
a
wedding
cake
on
the
North
Southern
condos
at
the
garage
level,
which
is
now
just
two
feet
above
ground
level.
A
Instead
of
six
feet,
which
it
was
before
is
80
feet
from
Center
Court
and
132
feet
at
37.2
foot
height
at
the
at
the
top
and
on
the
Northern
condos.
The
distance
from
Center
Court
at
the
first
floor
is
86
feet,
6,
inches
and
136
feet
all
the
way
to
the
mechanical,
which
is
the
highest
point
on
the
building,
which
is
on
the
Alvarado
building,
not
on
the
inner
building,
which
is
facing
Center
Court.
A
We
reduced
the
South
condos
by
lowering
the
ceiling
Heights
and
lowering
the
garage
into
the
ground
more
and
we
reduced
it
by
six
foot,
ten
inches,
which
is
I
believe
Edward
mentioned,
which
is
now
a
height
at
37,
feet,
2
inches
and
on
the
Northern
condos.
We
were
able
to
lower
by
doing
the
ceiling
Heights,
reducing
from
50
feet
to
45
feet
and
two
inches
because
of
the
slope
of
the
property
and
a
number
of
other
things.
A
Lowering
the
garage
is
not
optimal
because
we
don't
have
the
space
and
then
we
might
have
to
re-look
at
how
the
traffic
patterns
are,
and
we
decided
that
would
be
actually
more
disruptive.
If
you
look
again
at
the
distances
that
we've
set,
these
at
a
football
field
is
300
feet
so
where
the
highest
points
of
these
are
are
more
than
a
third
of
a
football
field
which
allows
for
an
angled
view,
not
an
obstruction
completely
of
view.
A
I
think
that
was
very
important
to
recognize.
As
mentioned
earlier
Seoul
is
we
thought
at
around
36
feet,
I
hear
it's
38
and
across
the
street
is
the
convention
center,
which
is
I,
think
a
plus
or
minus
40
feet.
So
none
of
our
buildings
are
out
of
sync
with
what
is
surrounding
us
and
I
have
a
home
in
Palomino,
and
my
height
is
just
under
30
feet:
I
have
very
high
ceilings
and
it's
a
two-story
home.
A
One
of
the
concessions
that
was
made
early
on
is
that
we
would
put
in
a
solid
hedge
along
all
the
borders
of
Center
Court,
to
minimize
sound
that
alone,
if
allowed
to
grow
to
the
height
that
they
requested,
would
minimize
the
views
it
wouldn't
matter
what
we
built,
because
they're
only
one
story
on
the
west
side
of
Center
Court,
so
a
10-foot
hedge
is
automatically
which
is
right
on
their
property
line
automatically
going
to
minimize
their
views,
if
not
obstruct
them
completely.
That
was
at
the
request
of
Center
Court
because
of
the
concerns
about
noise.
A
In
addition,
we
have
very,
very
intensive
Landscaping
along
the
perimeter
again
through
our
discussions
with
Center
Court
early
on
in
this
project.
Those
have
an
impact
effect
as
well.
We
think
a
positive
impact
on
sound
and
the
experience,
but
it
also
will
have
a
negative
impact
on
views
that
there
seems
to
be
a
lot
of
concern
about.
A
Finally,
we
do
believe
that
the
two
buildings
now
are
completely
in
keeping
with
what
we're
being
built
next
to
and
in
the
community
as
a
whole.
What
surrounds
us?
We
also
believe
that
it
anchors
the
neighborhood
right
now
there
are
a
lot
of
empty
lots.
We
have
homeless
ideal
with
homelessness
all
the
time
in
my
backyard,
which
is
a
large
empty
lot
too,
actually
empty
lot,
six
acres
of
empty
lots
and
having
this
hotel
built
with
amenities
and
with
residences,
we
think
as
a
dimension
to
the
neighborhood.
That's
very,
very
important.
A
I
think
that
some
of
the
other
concessions
that
we've
tried
to
do
in
the
design
of
this
project
was
again
to
continue
to
minimize
the
traffic
both
of
these
projects
enter
from
Caballeros
or
the
entrance
at
Alvarado
they're.
By
minimizing,
like
we
have
with
the
hotel
any
traffic
traveling
by
the
southern
condos
at
Center
Court,
we
removed
all
the
Overflow
parking
along
the
southern
edge
of
Center,
Court
and
I.
A
Think
those
that
that's
the
key
items
that
we've
done
so
that's
my
presentation
and
I'm
available
and
The
Architects
available
to
answer
any
questions
about
the
project.
I
do
think
and
I
may
be
mistaken,
but
I
think
that
Edward
will
find
out
that
in
fact,
the
two,
the
five
buildings,
the
four
buildings
that
we
had
designed
were
actually
closer
to
the
property
lines
than
what
is
now
proposed
and
they
did
not
step
back.
They
were
more
solid
buildings.
A
A
Go
ahead:
I,
don't
I,
don't
I'm
Adam,
chair
and
Commissioners.
My
name
is
John
Fahey.
My
partner
and
I
live
in
the
Palomino
development,
so
we're
neighbors
I
also
happen
to
be
a
banker
so
over
the
last
25
years,
I've
financed
many
developments
similar
to
The,
Dream,
Hotel
and
I
understand
why
the
additional
residences
are
necessary
in
a
post-pandemic
environment.
A
Hotel
construction
has
always
been
the
hardest
type
of
financing
to
get
accomplished.
Even
more
so
now
in
a
post-pandemic
environment,
construction
costs
have
skyrocketed,
labor
shortages
continue
and
there
is
any
recession
seems
increasingly
likely.
The
dream
can't
become
a
reality
with
the
additional
without
the
additional
residences.
A
From
my
professional
experience,
I
can
say:
there's
no
Bank,
no
Commercial
Bank.
That
I
know
of
that
will
finance
a
major
stand-alone
luxury.
Full-Service
Resort
right
now
is
just
considered
too
risky.
This
may
sound
hard
to
believe
in
some
of
the
hotel
rates
in
Palm
Springs,
but
the
harsh
reality
is
hotels.
Don't
make
a
lot
of
money
or
for
every
dollar
a
hotel
brings
in
on
a
good
average
year,
20
cents
falls
to
the
bottom
line.
A
A
A
You
know
a
conference
center
would
have
probably
worked
well,
but
we
think
seeing
homes
along
Caballeros
is
is
more
appealing
at
least
to
us
and,
as
Laurie
said,
the
developments,
lighting
and
general
activity
will
help
improve
Security
in
the
neighborhood.
We
often
walk
into
town
to
dinner
and
back
and
it's
a
little
sketchy
walking.
You
know
next
to
dark,
empty
lots.
A
A
A
A
To
be
quite
honest,
I
think
that
it's
it's
unfortunate
that
they're
putting
all
their
finances
on
having
to
have
luxury
condos
on
this
spot
to
be
able
to
build
the
hotel.
That's
very
unusual
I
would
say
you
know
again.
I
would
ask
you
to
reject
this
proposal
and
go
back
to
what
they
originally
had
proposed
to
us
several
years
ago,
with
with
the
minimal
Heights
again,
I.
A
Think
it's
you
know
this
is
just
going
to
surround
our
complex
completely
and,
while
I
understand
that
you
don't
always
get
you
know
when
there's
empty
lots.
Next
to
you,
there
could
be
different
developments,
but
I
think
there's
a
way
to
go
about
it.
I,
don't
think
this
is
the
right
way
to
go
about.
It.
I
think
that
that
again
it's
just
it's
it's
it's
blocking
our
views
completely,
and
it's
going
to
completely
surround
us
and
obliterate
any
views
that
we
have.
Thank
you.
A
Yes,
you're
recognized,
I'm,
sorry,
I
didn't
see
your
name.
The
woman
with
her
hand
up
hi.
Yes,
my
name
is
Maureen
Burrell
I
live
in
Center
Court
unit.
Six
and
I'm
also
excited
about
having
the
hotel,
but
I
am
concerned
about
the
views
and
I
was
wondering,
could
developer
put
up
polls
so
that
we
could
see
exactly
what
those
Heights
are
going
to
be
in
certain
spots,
especially
the
highest
spots.
A
Hello,
we
don't
answer
questions
in
public,
okay,
we're
taking
your
comments.
I'm!
Sorry,
my
but
I
understand
that
that
is
done
and
I
think
that
maybe
that
would
even
be
a
benefit
to
the
hotel
for
us
to
be
able
to
see
what
those
polls
would
reach
in
height
and
maybe
even
on
those
polls.
A
paint
line
could
be
put
where
the
original
was
and
I
also
noticed
on
some
of
the
drawings
that
there
was
large
palm
trees
very
close
to
Center
Court,
at
least
in
the
drawing
and
is,
is
that
planned.
A
A
Thank
you,
Mr
Powell.
You
had
indicated
earlier.
You
wish
to
speak.
Yes
thank
you,
chair
David,
Powell,
I'm
homeowner
at
Center,
Court,
lots
of
stuff
going
on
here,
and
so
my
feedback
is
I'm,
really
frankly,
disappointed
in
the
presentation
Again
by
staff.
It
seems
to
be
a
consistent
unclear
and
we
don't
seem
to
get
accurate
data
and
that's
basically
been
the
case.
The
entire
time
and
I'm
really
disappointed.
Having
been
a
former
planning,
commissioner
in
the
San
Francisco
Bay,
Area
I
haven't
seen
it
like
this.
A
There
are
some
comments
that
were
made
by
the
developer,
so
miss
Kibby
says
that
you
know
homeowners
were
considered
through
all
these
decisions.
But
yet
there's
been
no
discussions,
you
say
we
have
your
phone
number
Lori
yeah
and
you
have
ours,
but
when
all
of
these
plans
were
made
and
every
time
Lou
or
I
would
talk
to
you,
you
would
always
say
well
we're
moving
forward.
You
never
said
that
there
was
going
to
be
new
development
of
residential
units.
A
You
never
said
that
there
was
going
to
be
any
of
this
height
in
in
any
part
of
this,
and
it
really
is
a
disappointment
that
we
are
hearing
this.
Even
over
the
last
two
weeks
there
could
have
been
and
I
know
know
you
don't
work
development
by
public
input,
but
this
may
be
a
different
situation.
We
never
heard
anything
from
you
in
the
last
two
weeks
saying
maybe
with
this
work,
would
this
not
work
that
we
could
have
given
feedback?
A
It
probably
could
have
solved
a
number
of
these
issues
and
this
feedback
that
we
have
here
the
these,
the
hotel.
We
know,
isn't
the
discussion
at
this
point.
That's
already
been
taken
care
of
frankly,
I,
don't
remember
there
being
20
and
there
very
well
could
have
been,
but
to
the
city.
I,
don't
remember
there
being
2019
public
hearings
that
were
noticed
that
we
participated
in
I
have
2017
that
we
participated
in
I,
don't
recall,
2019
and
maybe
I'm
Incorrect
and
I'd
like
to
you
know.
A
Maybe
I'll
have
to
go
to
the
city
and
see
the
Public
Notices
from
those,
but
I.
Don't
recall
that
because
I
also
don't
remember
any
of
these
changes
on
the
Northern
building
that
it
was
so
close
to
the
wall.
The
property
line.
I
do
remember
it
being
farther
I.
Remember
there
are
going
to
be
Bungalows
that
were
going
going
to
be
little
meeting
spaces
I,
don't
recall
them
being
two
or
even
three
level
residential
units
there,
and
then
we
go
ahead
and
take
the
Farmhouse,
which
I
know
was
pushed
back
for
a
certain
point.
A
A
None
of
these
other
ones
that
were
just
discussed
are
anywhere
as
close
are
going
to
have
the
impact
with
us.
Now
I
can
kind
of
see
the
East
to
Western
View
with
the
Hedge
that
I,
don't
recall,
being
10
feet.
I
thought
it
was
going
to
be
eight
feet
is
what
you
agreed
to,
but
10
feet,
maybe
that's
better,
but
the
Easter,
the
southern
view.
A
That
has
never
been
a
discussion
and
to
those
people
that
have
come
in
the
the
neighbor
that
you
have
Loria
Palomino,
who
supports
you
and
the
real
estate
agent
in
the
beginning,
who's
been
supporting
you
that's
great,
and
none
of
you
are
going
to
be
affected
like
us,
and
we
can
talk
about
the
sale
of
the
pro
of
the
house
and
how
great
the
home
values
are
going
to
be.
That's
fine,
but
we're
concerned
about
the
quiet
enjoyment
of
our
home
and
we're
concerned
about
also
the
last
part.
A
Is
you
said
two
weeks
ago
that
there
was
on-site
parking
now
that
was
approved,
I,
don't
recall
on-site
parking.
There
was
going
to
be
some
staging
parking
back
when
I
last
saw
it
in
2017
and
there
was
going
to
be
some
stage
and
parking.
There
was
not
going
to
be
any
surface
sparking
there,
because
everything
was
going
to
be
subsurface
parking
below
the
building
and
it
was
going
to
be
valet
and
now
from
two
weeks
ago.
I
remember
hearing
something
different,
so
this
is
you
know.
A
I
know
this
is
going
to
be
the
recommendation
from
planning
it's
going
to
go
to
City,
Council
I'm
sure
we'll
have
to
go
and
deal
with
relationships
that
the
developer
has
with
city
council
and
it's
just
I'm
a
little
tired
after
this
many
years
of
kind
of
being
working
working
and
then
being
shunned
Again
by
the
developer.
To
say
we
want
to
do
what
we
want
to
do.
We
have
to
make
it
done
and
yeah
again
whether
she
needs
all
those
units
to
make
the
hotel
I'm.
Sorry
I
can't
deal
with
that.
A
A
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
other
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak
yeah
I,
do
have
something
I'd
like
to
add.
Dave
did
a
great
job
of
many
of
my
concerns,
but
the
big
one
here
is
that
we
did
not
get
notification
of
the
changes
to
the
amendments
in
2019.
I
received
nothing
and
the
way
that
these
are
changes
are
being
made.
That's
what
I
went
back
to
the
process?
We
don't
we're
just
residents.
A
We
are
not
professionals
like
the
people
that
are
doing
the
development
in
yourselves
and
the
council,
so
there
has
to
be
a
better
way
to
inform
us
of
what's
going
to
be
changed
here.
My
concern
would
be
that
we
go
through
and
this
gets
approved
and
now
it's
another
adjustment
where
the
height
goes
up
again.
So
whatever
is
approved
now
will
go
up
again
and
we
won't
have
any
knowledge
of
what's
going
on
here.
So
you
know
that
that
is
a
concern.
A
A
Thank
you.
Are
there
any
other
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
speak
the
gentleman
who's
raising
his
hand?
Madam
chairwoman,
my
name
is
Craig
with
unit
6
Center
Court.
We
also
agreed
with
the
original
plan
because
I
I
stated
earlier.
We
went
to
City
Hall
and
discovered
what
that
plan
was,
and
it
was
acceptable
to
us
and
we
purchased
here
based
upon
that
on
the
height
on
the
hype.
The
original
plan
with
including
the
hype
and
what
I've
seen
appears
to
be
going
on.
The
presentation
that
I
just
witnessed
was
absolutely
used.
A
I
considered
deplorable.
My
my
head
is
spinning
with
the
slides
going
back
and
forth.
It
was
not
helpful
to
me
at
all.
It
seemed
like
what
was
requested
that
there
was
going
to
be
a
presentation
of
the
original
and
the
height
against
Center
Court
to
proposed
against
Center
Court.
That
is
not
what
was
displayed
and
just
sliding
through
screen
up
the
screen
up
the
screen.
It
was
terrible
and
did
did
nothing
to
to
to
educate
me
at
all
and
I'm
just
more
confused.
Now
than
ever.
A
You
know,
I'm
come
back
East,
but
I
call
this
back.
East
as
well
bait
and
switch
where
the
original
gets
accepted,
and
then
the
proposals
go
in
to
change
it
and
we
call
that
back
he's
bait
and
switch
I,
don't
know
what
you
call
it
on
the
West
Coast,
but
it's
certainly
that's
what
I
call
it.
Thank
you.
A
A
I,
don't
see
any
other
members
of
the
public
planning
director
Hayden
had
one
of
you
see
anybody
else
who
wishes
I,
don't
see
anyone
else
and
no
one
else
has
requested
to
speak
chairwoman.
Thank
you.
You
have
three
minutes
for
a
rebuttal
and
then
we'll
ask
questions
of
you
Lori.
Thank
you
it's!
So
it's
it's
difficult
to
respond
to
the
vitriol
and
the
upset
that
people
are
so
willing
to
Express,
because
it's
not
been
my
intention
ever.
A
Nor
has
it
ever
been
the
tension
of
the
development
to
in
any
way
not
consider
the
neighbors.
However,
we
do
have
a
big
project
to
build
and
it
has
certain
requirements
whether
people
like
it
or
not.
The
lack
of
understanding
of
what
it
takes
to
build
a
project
that
is
in
excess
of
150
quickly
approaching.
200
million
dollars
is
hard
to
convince
people.
If
we
want
to
build
a
project,
we
as
a
developer
have
to
keep
responding
to.
What's
going
on.
This
project
has
been
stopped
by
a
number
of
things.
A
First,
the
recession
then
covid
and
now
what
looks
to
be
another
recession,
unfortunately,
or
fortunately,
we
did
call
a
public
meeting
to
discuss
that
we
were
making
these
changes.
I
know
David,
wasn't
there,
but
Lewis
and
several
of
the
other
people
who
live
at
Center
Court
were
there,
and
we
did
hear
some
of
those
issues.
I
tried
to
answer
the
questions
as
best
I
could
we
were
in
early
planning
phase.
A
So
we
have
tried,
through
the
years
to
continue
to
respond
to
what
makes
sense
on
the
project
and
still
make
it
a
viable
project.
I,
don't
I
don't
really
the
parking.
There
was
an
issue
about
overflow
parking.
If
somebody
would
look
at
the
drawings,
they
would
note
that
we
had
tandem
parking
all
along
the
South
edge
of
Center
Court,
that
was
in
relation.
It
was
all
overflow
parking.
It
was
approved
in
the
original
plan,
so
I
see
that
David's
shaking
his
head,
but
in
fact
it
was
in
the
original
plan.
A
So
I
don't
remember
the
number
of
count,
but
there
was
quite
a
bit
of
overflow
parking
there.
Yes,
it's
all
valet,
but
that
was
meant
for
overflow.
We
had
quite
a
bit
of
surface
parking
as
guest
parking
and
other
things,
but
the
hotel
itself
and
what
was
origin
and
the
tower
residences
are
valet
trying
to
think
what
else
we
believe-
and
we
did
do.
Studies
I
looked
up
those
balloon
studies
that
we
did
previously,
which
all
are
around
the
same
height
55
feet
and
and
had
what
they
look
like.
A
We
have
moved
back.
Those
studies
are
now,
unfortunately,
invalid,
because
that
original
building
sat
right
at
the
street
line,
which
was
I,
think
28
feet
back
from
the
property
line
and
stood
55
feet,
and
that
was
an
approved
project.
This
is
now
as
I
said
earlier.
80
feet
I
mean
let's
see,
86
feet
back
from
Center
Court
now,
which
I
don't
know
quite
what
Center
Court
is
distance,
but
I
do
know
the
road
is
26,
so
we're
at
least
probably
40
feet.
A
In
addition,
beyond
the
road
before
our
condos
start
and
though
in
the
drawings,
it's
not
clear,
the
actual
buildings
are
stepped
back
and
then
there
are
Gardens
which
have
enclosed
areas
around
them.
That
was
the
intention
was
to
keep
it
more
Airy
and
to
try
to
make
it
more
appealing
from
Center
Court
looking
out,
the
northern
condos
are
looked
out
on
by
one's
four
one
story
or
five
one-story
units
I
suspect
that
if
even
if
we
built
two-story
units
there
would
be
an
issue
around
View
and
so
I.
A
We
can
address
this
all
day,
long
I'm
happy
to
try
to
keep
going
back
and
forth
about
it,
but
we
do
believe
that
we've
created
angled
views
in
a
way
that
doesn't
just
Tower
above
them
that
the
condo
Tower
in
the
hotel
Tower
are
the
predominant
piece
of
this
project
and
those
aren't
changing.
Those
are
what
they
are,
and
we've
tried
to
reduce
the
North
and
South
condos
from
that
height
level,
such
that
it
tears
down
to
the
neighborhood.
A
A
I
I
this
is
hi.
This
is
Anil
I'm,
the
Arctic
with
AV
Design
Studio,
the
in
the
drawing
that
you're
asking
about
is
the
two
sections
are
marked.
Maybe
just
named
I'm
gonna
check
the
drawing
that
you're
talking
about
just
one
second
in
the
north,
they're
they're
marked
as
two
and
three
on
the
left
hand
side
of
the
site
plan.
A
A
A
A
A
A
It
allowed
me
to
get
a
much
better
understanding
of
the
articulation
of
the
buildings
and
spending
more
time
in
the
neighborhood
over
the
last
week,
I
was
better
able
to
see
exactly
how
it
would
fit
in
I.
Think
that
we.
What
we
have
here
is
an
example
of
detention
that
always
exists
when
new
development
comes
into
an
existing
neighborhood.
A
Unfortunately,
it's
naive
and
it's
I
I
know
that
it's
painful
nonetheless,
I
think
that
what
I
see
here
is
a
developer,
who
has
ultimately
done
who's
ultimately
proposed
a
responsible
development.
It
is
not
to
the
intensity
or
the
hype
that
it
could
be.
It
is
respectful
of
the
development
around
it
to
a
reasonable
extent,
hearing
and
reading
about
the
changes
that
have
been
made
over
time
in
response
to
Neighborhood
input
is.
A
A
A
If
that
is
what
would
help
to
satisfy
the
neighbor
I'm
a
little
bit
distressed
when
residents
indicate
that
these
that
they
have
and
I
have
a
quote
from
her
later
on
that
they
had
no
in
no
input
into
the
process.
I
believe
that
the
written
record
shows
that
there
have
been
many
opportunities
for
input,
and
this,
in
fact,
is
another
public
hearing,
at
which
time
anybody
is
welcome
to
speak
and
to
give
their
input,
and
so
I
would
ask
you
to
reframe
your
view
of
what
is
an
opportunity
to
have
input.
A
Public
hearings
are
designed
specifically
so
that
neighbors
residents
in
the
interested
party
can
have
input
and
I.
Think
we've
been
able
to
listen
to
a
number
of
you
tonight
who
have
expressed
your
concerns
so
I
at
this
point.
I
certainly
lean
towards
supporting
this
project,
because
I
feel
that,
as
far
as
long-term
planning
goes
for
a
community,
this
meets
the
objectives
of
the
general
plan.
It
means
the
letter
of
the
zoning
ordinance.
It
is
what
is
appropriate
to
be
developed
in
that
location.
A
The
end,
thank
you,
commissioner
maruti.
Would
you
like
to
go
next
or
commissioner
hershbein?
Well
I'll
do.
Thank
you.
I
think.
One
of
the
big
issues
here
is
that
it's
take
it's
still
it's
15
years,
since
this
project
first
seems
to
have
gotten
up
the
ground,
and
economic
conditions
have
changed
over
time
in
the
you
know,
apparently
to
fund
something
like
this
now
requires
a
lot
more
condominiums
that
then
were
required
in
2007
and
2000
17
and
then
2019.
A
It's
really
going
to
be
up
to
the
city
council
if
they
think
this
is
acceptable,
I
mean
I'm,
not
on
the
council.
If
I
were
I
might
say,
you
know
this
is
just
dragged
on
too
long
and
I'm
tired
of
all
the
changes,
and
how
do
we
know
that
this
last
one
is
going
to
be
any
different,
because
if
this
gets,
you
know
the
recession's
coming
and
this
will
be
dragged
out
and
then
you
know
three
years
from
now.
We're
gonna
have
another
request.
So,
let's
we
gotta
just
call
it
the
day.
A
Apparently,
that's
not
what's
going
to
happen
based
on
the
effort
we
got
from
our
City
attorney
these
things
going
on
behind
the
scenes.
So
if
that
is
indeed
the
case,
then
are
moving
this
forward
to
them
based
on
the
latest
presentation.
I
think
would
then
put
it
in
their
Court.
I
mean
if
they're
comfortable
with
that
and
whatever
they're
doing
behind
the
scenes
is
consistent
with
this
particular
proposal.
A
Then
they'll
approve
it
so
I
mean
at
this
stage
I'm
in
line
with
my
colleagues
that
I'd
like
to
prove
this
and
move
it
forward.
But
I
I
have
no
idea
what
the
city
council
is
working
on
behind
the
scenes
and
I
don't
exactly
know
what
they
will
think
about
just
dragging
out
15
years,
commissioner
hirschbine.
A
Yeah
I
am
really
saddened
by
the
process
our
city
is
going
through
and
the
contortions
it's
going
through
to
try
to
get
this
through
the
system.
You
know,
after
all,
these
years
we're
told
that
we
have
to
hurry
up
and
do
this.
You
know
two
weeks
go
by
and
they
drew
a
red
line
on
a
piece
of
paper.
You
know
that
was
the
only
change
to
the
presentation
that
I
could
see.
A
You
know,
as
J.R
said
in
the
last
meeting,
this
has
been
going
on
for
years
and
if
we
have
to
wait
to
get
this
right
or
to
get
to
understand
it,
clearly,
then
then
so
be
it.
The
other
thing
that
gnaws
at
me
is
this
idea
that
there's
this
secret
negotiation
going
on.
You
know
that,
for
those
of
you,
who've
been
around
Palm
Springs
for
a
while.
You
know
you'll
remember
how
the
city
got
in
trouble
for
that
with
other
developers
and
I.
A
A
A
Thank
you,
I
would
have
preferred.
We
got
back
what
we
asked
for,
which
was
the
reduction
of
one
layer
of
condos
adjacent
to
Center
Court.
That
really
is
what
we
asked
for.
We
we
didn't
receive
that
what
we
got
was
six
feet
in
instead
of
probably
11
or
12
feet
reduction.
I
thought
what
we
asked
for
was
reasonable.
A
A
Yes,
I
would
move
to
approve
the
final
development
plans
and
tentative
track
map
35236,
as
outlined
in
the
agenda
and
staff
report
for
Celine
Palm
Springs
LLC
for
the
Dream
hotel
and
Condominiums,
with
the
changes
that
were
made
today
with
the
changes
that
were
made
based
on
the
revised
plans
that
show
these
six
plus
foot,
lowering
of
both
the
North
and
the
South
Villas
or
condos,
as
well
as
the
landscape.
Suggestion
that
commissioner
Layin
made
regarding
whether
or
not
there
would
be
room
for
additional
landscape
in
the
buffer
area
surrounding
Center
Court.
A
A
A
You're
right,
you're,
right
and
I
I
hope
that
the
the
audience
of
people
that
are
still
watching
this
understand
that
we're
not
involved
in
and
don't
know
firsthand
of
anything
else
that
might
be
going
on
beyond
the
records
that
are
public
records
that
you're,
seeing
as
well
as
we
are
for
discussion
purposes.
It's
not
our
purview.
A
So
so
the
reason
I
brought
that
up
was
I.
Think
there's
a
rush
to
judgment
here.
I
think
polls
are
an
excellent
way.
We
require
polls
in
one
story:
houses.
Now
we've
got
a
four-story
house
what
we
all
agree
that
the
presentation
was
subpar
and
and
it
you
know
the
the
reason
being
that
they
were
wanted
to
get
this
through
the
system
in
two
weeks
and
and
I
think
those
are
relevant
points
of
discussion.
A
Could
you
call
the
question,
please
I'm,
going
to
make
a
comment
before
we
call
the
question
I'm
going
to
vote
against
this,
and
it's
it's
basically
that
I
don't
think
a
six
foot
reduction
is
adequate.
Given
the
history
of
the
project,
I
would
have
liked
to
see
I
appreciate
that
they
made
some
reduction.
I
would
have
liked
to
see
them
come
back
with.
What
we
had
asked
them
to
do.
A
Going
going
from
25
feet
to
45
feet
is
fairly
substantial.
Given
the
history
of
the
project,
had
one
floor
been
reduced
and
had
gone,
probably
to
39
feet,
I
could
have
supported
it.
I
just
think
that
the
with
the
history
of
the
project
I
would
have
preferred
to
see
it
peeled
back,
as
we
asked
them
to
by
one
story
at
the
back
buildings,
so
I'm
not
going
to
support
it,
but
we
can
call
the
question
if
no
one
else
has
comments.
A
A
To
the
city
of
we're
going
to
item
2E,
which
is
the
last
item
in
our
agenda:
it's
Palm
Springs
Municipal,
Code,
section
9.62.055
in
Palm,
Springs
zoning
code,
section
nine
through
93.23.21
amendments
relative
to
the
development
standard
for
urban
lot,
splits
and
two
unit
residential
developments,
staff
report-
please
Madam
chair
and
members
of
the
commission.
As
you'll
recall,
we
had
a
study
session
back
in
July
to
discuss
amendments
to
our
regulations
for
urban
lot,
splits
and
two
unit
development.
A
We
presented
the
recommendations
of
our
Planning
Commission
subcommittee
at
that
point
and
also
discussed
with
you
at
that
time.
Three
issues
to
which
the
subcommittee
was
not
able
to
come
to
resolution
I'm
going
to
poorly
attempt
to
share
my
screen.
So
if
you'll
give
me
just
a
few
moments
to
get
this
arranged
and
get
it
correctly,.
A
Okay
and
Madam
chair,
can
you
see
the
appropriate
screen
now?
Yes,
I
can.
Thank
you,
okay,
because
of
the
late
hour
I'm
going
to
skip
through
all
of
the
background,
I
think
you're,
all
aware
of.
Why
we're
here
and
what
we're
considering
and
let
me
just
go
straight
ahead
to
the
issues
as
I
had
mentioned.
There
were
three
issues
that
the
subcommittee
was
not
able
to
come
to
agreement.
A
We
discussed
those
at
your
study
session
on
the
27th
and
I
would
just
want
to
go
over
those
with
you
this
evening
to
finalize
them
before
we
move
this
on
to
the
city
council.
With
your
recommendation,
the
three
issues
were
relative
to
the
maximum
permissible
unit
square
footage,
the
requirements
relative
to
the
expansion
of
any
existing
dwelling
on
a
site
and
then
finally
privacy
standards
for
these
New
Lots.
A
Let
me
discuss
the
first
item.
The
maximum
unit
square
footage,
as
is
currently
in
the
ordinance
the
unit
size,
is
limited
to
no
more
than
one
thousand
square
feet.
You
can
have
two
of
those
units
on
a
lot.
That's
created
under
this
ordinance
as
you'll
recall.
The
city
council
wanted
us
to
look
at
that
limitation
with
the
intent
of
expanding
it
to
allow
for
the
development
of
affordable
housing
or
Workforce
housing
that
could
accommodate
families,
and
so
a
thousand
square
feet
obviously,
is
generally
not
enough
to
do
that.
A
The
subcommittee
was
not
able
to
come
to
concurrence
on
that,
but
at
our
discussion
at
Planning
Commission
it
was
determined
that
we
should
allow
1500
square
feet
is
the
maximum
and
a
thousand
square
feet
for
any
second
unit
on
the
parcel?
And
so
what
that
does
is
increase
the
maximum
developable
square
footage
on
a
site
from
the
current
2000
square
feet
to
2500
square
feet
and
does
accomplish
the
goal
of
allowing
the
development
of
a
three-bedroom
house
which
could
accommodate
families.
So
that
was
the
first
Point
again.
A
The
recommendation
from
the
Planning
Commission
from
July
was
to
allow
1500
feet
and
one
thousand
square
feet.
The
next
point
is
relative
to
expansion
of
any
existing
dwelling
on
a
site.
The
current
ordinance
does
not
allow
the
expansion
of
any
existing
dwelling
that
is
greater
than
a
thousand
square
feet.
So
if
there's
an
existing
volume
on
the
side
as
part
of
an
urban
lot
split,
that's
greater
than
a
thousand
square
feet,
it
could
not
be
expanded
at
all.
A
In
discussing
that,
the
Planning
Commission
at
the
meeting
of
July
the
27th,
it
was
determined
that
the
best
requirement
to
put
in
place
is
to
limit
the
expansion
of
any
existing
dwelling
only
by
setbacks
and
lot
coverage
in
looking
at
the
other
development
standards
that
we
have
in
place.
That
should
be
adequate
to
cap
the
expansion
of
any
existing
dwelling,
while
still
allowing
room
for
a
second
dwelling
on
the
parcel.
A
We
weren't
able
to
come
to
a
finalization
of
what
that
requirement
should
be
to
offer
protection
to
existing
adjacent
residences.
In
discussing
that,
at
the
study
session
on
the
27th
of
July,
what
we
ultimately
came
down
to
is
that
a
six
foot,
high
wall
or
appropriately
dense
six
foot,
High
Landscaping,
would
be
adequate
to
buffer
adjacent
properties,
because
we
essentially
have
a
one-story
community
in
our
single
family.
A
Neighborhoods
we're
not
going
to
have
the
issue
of
two
stories
and
worries
about
lines
of
sight,
and
so
the
direction
from
the
Planning
Commission
was
that
language
that
requires
either
a
wall
or
six
foot
High
Landscaping
would
be
more
than
adequate.
There
was
a
concern
because
there's
language
about
doors
or
Windows
having
a
direct
line
of
sight.
My
response
to
that
is
the
requirement
for
the
wall
or
Landscaping
will
essentially
eliminate
any
direct
line
of
sight
to
adjacent
properties.
A
A
A
That's
my
only
comment
or
question.
Thank
you.
I
had
one
question
and
it
I'm
sure
it's
that
the
committee
agreed
on
it.
I
was
just
looking
at
the
landscape
requirement
of
reducing
the
sizes
of
landscape
to
five
gallons
from
15
and
with
something
that's
going
to
be
it's
going
to
stand
out
in
neighborhoods.
If
it's
installed
at
this,
it
just
seems
good
to
me
that
we
beautify
it
with
landscape
and
I
would
like
to
not
have
that
restriction.
A
A
You
will
I
believe,
naturally
get
a
variety
of
sizes
of
plants.
If
we
would
like
to
make
it
more
specific
to
state
that
you
know
at
least
three
or
four
of
the
required
plants
must
be.
You
know
24
inch,
box,
trees
or
15
gallon
trees,
I
I
think
we
could
make
that
adjustment
to
it
if
everyone
else
is
comfortable
with
that,
but,
generally
speaking,
I
think
having
the
ability
to
do
both
five
gallon
plants.
A
In
addition
to
some
of
the
plants,
the
larger
plants
that
will
be
required
for
screening
is
a
good
thing
in
giving
variety
of
Landscaping
on
the
site.
Does
anybody
I
I'm
perfectly
fine
with
that?
Does
anybody
else
feel
comfortable
with
adding
trees?
I
would
like
to
do
that
just
for
shade
I'm,
seeing
a
yes
from
commissioner
hirschfein
and
I'm.
Seeing
a
yes
from
a
comment
from
commissioner
Miller.
A
A
Initially,
in
that,
the
15
gallon
is
a
pretty
substantial
size,
plant
and
I
thought
it
might
have
been
a
little
bit
of
Overkill
to
do
a
complete
hedge
of
15
gallon
plant
material.
But
I
do
like
the
idea
of
providing
some
variety
through
the
24
inch
box
tree
and
such
so
I
support
that
Flynn.
Do
you
want
to
craft
a
Amendment
or
condition
yeah?
If
you'll
give
me
just
a
little
bit
of
time
as
we
take
public
testimony
that
might
be
helpful?
A
Madam
chair,
I
forgot
one
of
those
things
we
are
in
public
hearing.
I
was
thinking
that
this
was
my
apologies.
I
was
thinking.
It
was
a
discussion
with
staff.
We
are,
if
are
there
any
other
questions
of
staff,
but
Madam
chair
may
I
just
make
one
comment:
I
need
to
make
a
correction
in
the
draft
ordinance
relative
to
the
maximum
square.
Footage
I
need
to
correct
the
language
there
to
say
the
first
primary
residence
and
the
second
primary
residence,
and
so
I
will
just
do
that.
A
As
part
of
your
motion
this
evening,
it's
one
of
the
things
that
the
City
attorney
requested
that
I
do
to
clarify
that
issue,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
and
enter
that
change
into
the
record
and
what
that
Adam
Carroll
turn
it
back
to
you
and
open
in
the
public
hearing
and
as
the
city
is
the
applicant
and
you've
already
given
a
report
I'm
just
oh
I'm,
opening
this
to
members
of
the
public
who
would
wish
to
speak?
Are
there
members
of
the
public
would
wish
to
speak?
Yes,
yes,
Madam
chair.
A
Thank
you,
I'm
Mark,
Taran,
Madam,
chair
members
of
the
commission.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
address
you.
The
working
subcommittee,
I
think
knows
me
well,
I've
had
the
opportunity
to
participate
in
a
number
of
those
sessions
and
Flynn
has
been
incredibly
helpful
by
way
of
background
I
own
a
parcel
in
of
Warm
Sands
that
I
plan
to
develop
as
my
primary
residence
in
Palm
Springs,
so
I'm
pretty
excited
about
the
ordinance
and
that
opportunity.
A
Thinking
I
know
there's
a
lot
of
concern
in
terms
of
thinking
about
how
to
establish
maximum
sizes
and
other
things
to
a
large
degree
when
you're
dealing
with
smaller
lot
sizes.
As
I've
looked
at
this
for
the
development
of
my
own
parcel,
the
parcels
almost
become
self-limiting
in
a
way
because,
as
you
apply,
the
lot
area
coverage
ratios
and
you
apply
the
setback,
requirements
and
other
things,
since
there
is
no
relief
offered
in
this
ordinance
to
any
of
those
setback
requirements
in
many
levels.
A
A
Everything
in
the
last
draft
of
the
ordinance
I
I
saw
I
haven't
really
gone
to
read
it
through
in
detail,
because
in
the
summaries
in
the
staff
report
and
the
summaries
of
the
changes,
everything
that
was
listed,
there
exactly
met
all
of
the
modifications
that
I
had
heard
through
prior
meetings.
But
in
reading
the
ordinance
I.
A
Each
and
I
guess
in
the
work
session
and
I
was
not
able
to
listen
to
that
and
the
recordings
for
the
work
sessions
or
the
study
sessions
aren't
maintained
with
that
being
reduced
to
800
feet
for
Lots
kind
of
in
the
under
5500
square
foot
level,
which
probably
is
what
it's.
What
I'm
facing
in
dividing?
What
is
effectively
an
infill
lot,
you
can
you
can't
get
to
build
a
property
that
meets
the
ability
to
have
a
large
enough
unit
for
a
family,
but
a
2
000
square
feet.
A
You
effectively
could
have
a
1200
square
foot,
three
bedroom
and
an
800
square
foot,
two
bedroom
they'd
both
be
small
but
they'd,
be
comfortable,
and
that
would
work.
But
if
you
get
down
to
only
the
allowance
for
Relief
to
get
to
1600
feet
effectively,
you've
built
a
two-bedroom
house
and
a
one
bedroom
secondary
unit,
and
you
really
lose
the
opportunity
to
take
advantage
of
what
I
think
the
code
that
you've
established
created.
A
The
other
element
of
this
is
as
a
homeowner
that
would
be
utilizing
the
ordinance
the
economics
of
building
under
sb9
without
the
ability
to
build
a
home
for
your
family
without
the
ability
to
build
a
three-bedroom
home
and
a
two-bedroom,
a
secondary
unit
or
Adu
I,
think
makes
the
viability
of
any
projects
very
difficult
and
so
I
think
the
work
that's
been
done
is
absolutely
phenomenal.
I
really
do
and
I'm
really
excited.
A
So
going
back
to
that
combined
2
000
feet
that
the
ordinance
currently
States
would
allow
you
to
accomplish
the
goal
and
the
difference
in
lot
area
coverage
to
accomplish
that
really.
Only
moves
from
45
percent
to
55
percent
and
I
did
a
quick
calculation
of
what
would
happen
on
my
lot
if
I
had
built
using
the
existing
zoning
and
added
an
allowable
Adu
and
that
gets
to
55
as
well.
So
the
lot
area
coverage
ratio
really
isn't
different
than
what
the
current
code
would
allow.
A
It
just
happens
that
it's
on
a
smaller
property,
but
overall
massing
setbacks.
Etc,
don't
really
change
so
I
hope,
that's
not
too
long-winded,
but
I
just
really
wanted
to
point
out
that
I
think
that
this
one
provision
is
extremely
limiting
and
will
really
impact
the
ability
to
complete
a
project
on
an
infill
wat.
So
thank
you
for
the
opportunity
happy
to
answer
any
questions
if
they
come
up.
Thank
you.
A
A
A
A
As
Mr
chairman
has
indicated,
we
had
dropped
that
threshold
in
order
to
reduce
setbacks
or
increase
law
coverage
from
a
thousand
square
feet,
which
is
what
city
council
had
originally
approved
back
in
January
to
800
square
feet.
I
I,
quite
honestly,
don't
know
that
it
makes
a
difference.
In
fact,
if
we
bump
that
back
to
a
thousand
square
feet,
I
think
we're
fine
I,
don't
think
that
we'll
have
any
significant
impacts
to
adjacent
properties
in
that
regard.
A
So
if
the
suggestion
made
by
Mr,
Taran
I
think
is
acceptable
and
more
than
happy
to
accommodate
that,
how
would
you
change
the
language
I
I
would
just
in
the
cross,
the
strikeout
underlined
version
you'll,
see
in
subsection
E
that
he's
mentioning
it
currently
has
a
thousand
square
feet
crossed
out
and
800
square
feet
underlined
it's
just
a
matter
of
going
back
to
the
original
language
about
a
thousand
square
feet.
So
it's
a
very
simple
change
to
make.
A
So
we're
are
there
comments,
commissioner
Miller
just
a
question
for
Flynn:
does
that
only
affect
the
item
that
a
Mr
Terran
specifically
referenced
D,
or
would
it
also
apply
to
C2
where
it
talks
about
800
square
feet?
I
would
modify
both
of
those
to
say
a
thousand
square
feet,
so
it's
basically
just
taking
that
language
throughout
the
ordinance
and
bumping
it
back
to
a
thousand
square
feet
where
it
occurs.
A
So
so,
basically,
what
you're
saying
is,
regardless
of
existing
setback
and
lot
coverage
requirements,
those
are
waived
in
order
to
get
to
a
minimum
of
a
thousand
square
feet
correct.
That's
the
only
instance
where
you
would
be
able
to
waive
that
got
it:
I,
I,
I'm,
okay,
with
that
I.
What
I'm
seeing
are
head
knots
and
that
everyone
here
is
okay
with
that.
A
I
just
I
think
this
is
terrific
I'm
glad
I
really
want
to
thank
the
subcommittee
that
worked
on
it.
I
would
take
a
proposal
that
takes
both
changes
that
we
discussed.
If
someone
would
like
to
make
emotion,
maybe
more
emotion
is
made
Madam
chair
just
going
back
to
your
question
about
the
Landscaping
I've
got
two
alternates
to
consider
as
Mr
Taran
was
making
his
comments
in
looking
at
the
language
under
Landscaping.
A
It
says
at
least
one
five
gallon
size
plant
shall
be
provided
for
every
five
linear
feet
of
exterior
wall,
and
then
it
says,
excuse
me,
alternatively,
alternatively,
at
least
one
24
inch
size
box
plant
shall
be
provided
for
every
10
linear
feet
of
exterior
wall.
We
could
add
another
sentence
on
to
that
paragraph,
stating
that
a
minimum
of
X
number
of
24
inch
box
trees
shall
be
provided
for
each
lot
created
under
this
ordinance.
A
That
was
two
fingers
for
the
second
piece
of
that:
okay,
the
the
tree,
the
Box
tree,
okay,
but
in
terms
of
the
number
of
box
trees
that
we
would
require
for
each
lot,
yeah,
I,
I!
Think
too
I,
don't
you
know
when
we
get
to
like
marijuana
or
one
of
these
Merchant
built
tracks?
We
don't
require
more
than
one
so
we're
doubling
it
foreign.
A
A
If
the
commission
agrees,
we
can
add
that
language
on
to
the
final
part
of
that
paragraph,
and
you
had
the
the
change
that
our
City
attorney
required
regard
first
and
second,
primary
residences.
We
have
the
change
to
item
you'll
have
to
tell
me
the
item
numbers
there
were
two
were
changing
to
a
thousand
square
feet.
A
Apologize
I've
got
this
on
my
screen
here
and
it's
a
little
bit
small,
it's
under
subsection
e
setbacks
and
it's
sub
paragraph
two
and
as
it
appears
elsewhere
throughout
the
document.
So
in
the
motion
we'll
word
it
that
way.
Okay
and
I
think
it
might
be
nice.
If
someone
was
on
the
subcommittee
made
the
motion
and
seconded
it,
because
it's
your
good
work
that
is
coming
before
us.
A
A
Madam
chair
before
we
move
on
to
the
next
item,
it
was
brought
to
my
attention
that
we
didn't
read
into
the
record
the
results
of
the
vote
on
the
prior
item:
2D
Celine
Palm
Springs.
So
if
you
don't
mind,
if
we
could
just
go
back
and
just
record
that
approval
Terry,
are
you
able
to
read
that
vote
into
the
record
for
item
2E.
A
A
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
Terry
moving
right
along
to
planning,
commission
reports,
requests
and
comments.
If
we
get
an
action
on
2f,
we
do
need
to
get
that
continue
to
a
date
certain.
Oh,
yes,
thank
you
move
to
continue
to
the
date.
Certain
thank
you
and
the
date
certain
is
October.
12.
fell
in
the
blanks.
A
Is
there
October
12th,
oh
sen,
commissioner
Miller
just
seconded
that
all
in
favor,
but
under
discussion,
I
thought
I
wrote
down
on
my
agenda
that
we
had
approved
that
six
to
zero
at
the
beginning.
So
you
might
want
to
look
back
at
the
record,
but
we
can
certainly
redo
it,
but
we're
only
going
to
get
five
to
zero,
but
that's
fine.
We
could
approve
it
when
we
did
the
agenda.
A
A
A
A
A
Most
of
the
sustainability
work.
That's
been
done
to
date
has
really
focused
on
reducing
the
causes
of
climate
change,
but
I
do
think
we're
at
a
point
where
we've
experienced
hot
enough
Summers
that
we
might
also
want
to
think
about
ameliorating
the
effects
of
climate
change
and
working
on
that
with
other
commissions,
to
see
what
we
might
be
able
to
recommend
to
the
city
and
really
good
work
is
being
done
on
this
in
Phoenix.