►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Study Session | February 24th, 2021
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
Thank
you
before
we
go
to
public
comment.
The
director
has
an
announcement
which
may
be
of
interest
to
the
people
who
have
just
joined
us.
B
B
So
with
that
we
will
not
be
hearing
an
item
this
afternoon.
The
applicant
has
indicated
that
they
would
like
to
do
additional
outreach
before
the
item
is
heard.
So
again,
the
application
for
the
fulfillment
center
has
been
withdrawn
by
the
applicant.
We
will
not
be
discussing
that
item
on
the
agenda
today.
A
D
Yes,
this
is
steve
gracia.
I
I,
although
I
am
elected
director
of
the
mission-
springs
water
district,
where
this
applicant
that
pulled
his
item
would
have
been
under
consideration.
I
wanted
to
just
since
we're
all
here.
I
wanted
to
mention
that
I
thought
it
would
be
appropriate
as
a
condition
of
approval.
Should
the
application
come
back
before
this
planning
commission
and
I
not
be
able
to
be
president
at
that
time.
D
I
would
just
like
to
suggest-
and
this
is
not
a
an
official
request
on
behalf
of
the
district,
but
myself
just
happened
to
be
available
today
and
as
a
private
citizen
would
ask
that
this
planning,
commission,
the
city
of
palm
springs,
add
as
a
condition
of
approval
that
the
applicant
be
required
to
attach
his
a
new
project
to
any
future
sewage
treatment
facility
that
we
have
currently
on
the
books
and
likely
under
construction
prior
to
the
time
that
this
facility
would
be
built.
D
I
understand
that
this
project
will
be,
if
completed
the
largest
fulfillment
center
in
the
world,
1
million
four
hundred
thousand
square
feet,
and
I
I
I
I
stand
to
be
corrected
on
that,
but
I
believe
my
research
shows
that
that
is
the
case.
That's
a
lot
of
truck
traffic,
as
you
may
know,
in
up
the
street
at
I-10
in
indian,
we
have
the
I
understand,
the
largest
taxpayer
in
the
region,
all
on
septic
with
their
pilot
truck
center.
D
It's
a
concern
to
those
of
us
that
are
concerned
with
clean
drinking
water
that
we
re,
protect
that
asset
at
all
costs,
and
that
means
that
any
facility
like
this
be
forced
to
connect
to
the
sewer
treatment
facilities
that
are
either
available
or
coming
available
on
down
the
road.
So
with
that,
I
thank
you
very
much
for
your
time
and
look
forward
to
participating
as
this
project
moves
forward.
Thank
you.
C
Hi,
this
is
a
peter
peter
davies,
I'm
here
on
my
you
know,
capacity
as
a
resident,
not
as
a
professional,
and
I
have
submitted
a
notice
of
objection
in
a
letter
form
email
to
the
planning
commission
as
well,
and
I'd
like
that
to
stand
as
record
in
objection
to
this
for
a
number
of
reasons,
as
I've
outlaid
in
the
letter
to
you,
one
that
we
should
really
be
first
and
foremost
leading
this
effort
to
sustain
our
community
and
be
environmentally
forward
leaning.
C
This
is
also
a
very
beautiful
scenic
gateway
into
the
coachella
valley
and
to
los
angeles,
vice
versa,
either
going
in
east,
west
or
west
east
direction,
and
we've
seen
what's
happening
from
mourinho
valley,
where
such
a
terrible
president
has
been
set
to
build
these
this
kind
of
infrastructure
along
a
freeway.
That
would
really
be
a
visual
blight
and,
I
believe,
an
environmental
blight
on
our
community.
So
I
stand
firmly
in
objection
to
this
being
approved.
C
It
is
also
not
in
land
use
that
is
approved
in
this
general
plan
and
there
are
better
places
that
we
could
have
a
transit
accessible
facility
like
this
further
east
in
the
coachella
valley
or
elsewhere.
But
this
is
certainly
not
something
that
a
resident
resident
of
as
a
resident
of
palm
springs.
I
would
be
supporting
and
I'll
be
rallying
with
other
organizations
in
the
valley
and
palm
springs
to
object
in
a
much
more
forceful
manner
in
future
meetings.
C
B
D
B
D
Was
against
first
agenda
on
your
item
which
for
first
time
on
your
agenda,
which
has
been
withdrawn.
B
A
B
That's
it
and
then
I
haven't
received
any
other
messages
at
this
time.
Madam
chair,
if
there's
anyone
else
who
wishes
to
speak,
that
would
be
the
appropriate
time
to
unmute
your
microphone.
A
Okay,
there's
also
nobody
who's
identified
that
in
the
chat.
The
public
hearing
is
now
closed.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
testimony
and
your
attendance
I'm
going
to
go
to
since
the
first
item
has
been
withdrawn.
Our
second
item
is
discussion
on
changes
to
the
architectural
review
process,
and
can
we
have
a
staff
report?
Please.
B
B
B
At
the
city
council
level,
back
in
january
of
2020,
where
staff
was
directed
to
proceed
with
a
discussion
of
revisions
to
our
architectural
review
process
with
that
they
gave
us
some
key
goals
that
they
wanted
us
to.
Look
at
number
one
was
relative
to
consider
reversing
the
architectural
advisory
committee
and
planning
commission
review
process.
B
B
B
B
One
of
the
other
concerns
that
has
arisen
is
the
fact
that
there's
an
overlap
in
the
duties
between
the
planning,
commission
and
the
architectural
review
committee
as
it
leads
to
the
as
it
applies
to
the
architectural
review
process.
B
That
council
hears
about
on
occasion
and
then
the
third
issue
that
comes
up
from
time
to
time
is
by
having
the
architectural
advisory
committee.
First,
that's
usually
the
public's
first
option
or
first
available
time
to
review
a
project,
and
so
many
times
when
they
attend
an
aac
meeting
they're,
giving
their
input
on
a
project
that
really
isn't
the
aac's
jurisdiction.
B
It
really
belongs
to
the
planning
commission,
for
example,
on
the
expansion
of
the
parker
hotel
project.
We
had
between
30
and
40
representatives
of
the
neighborhood
come
to
the
aac
meetings.
Talking
about
things
such
as
traffic
impacts
and
other
items
that
really
are
under
the
purview
of
the
planning
commission
and
not
the
aac,
and
so
unfortunately,
you
know
the
body
who
needed
to
hear
those
comments.
Wasn't
the
one
who
was
doing
it.
B
The
subcommittee
began
to
study
the
issue
last
summer
and,
as
part
of
that,
we
looked
at
the
ordinances
of
other
cities
in
the
coachella
valley,
as
well
as
a
number
of
cities
across
california
and
reviewed
their
architectural
review
processes
and
looked
at
what
the
best
practices
were.
We
also
looked
at
the
information
available
from
the
american
planning
association
in
terms
of
architectural
review.
I've
included
some
of
that
information
in
the
backup
materials
for
your
packet.
I
didn't
want
to
go
over
all
of
that
today
in
our
study
session.
B
So
we
really
looked
at
those
two
factors
and
in
doing
so,
there
was
the
city
of
santa
monica,
which
has
a
a
rather
simple
process
to
go
through,
but
one
we
think
is
certainly
one
to
be
modeled.
After
and
one
that
we
can
look
at
and
so
what
you'll
see
as
I
go
through,
the
presentation
today
is
modeled
in
a
certain
part
after
the
city
of
santa
monica's
process.
B
B
They,
thankfully
have
put
together
a
flow
chart
in
terms
of
how
their
process
works,
which
I
included
in
your
packet,
but
again
santa
monica,
seemed
to
have
the
best
model
for
us
in
terms
of
providing
a
a
review.
That's
relatively
simple
in
terms
of
the
number
of
steps,
but
still
has
the
level
of
detail
necessary
for
an
adequate
review
process.
B
In
looking
at
other
cities,
there's
a
couple
of
things
that
we
learned-
and
I
may
have
mentioned
this
before
that
palm
springs-
is
unique
in
that
we
don't
have
a
separate
site
plan
approval
process
which
other
cities
have
most
cities
have
what's
called,
either
a
plot
plan
review
or
a
site
plan
review
that
is
handled
by
the
planning
commission,
where
you
look
at
things
such
as
conformance
to
development
standards
such
as
setbacks,
height
limits,
placement
of
the
building
on
the
site,
use
compliance
with
the
general
plan.
B
Things
like
that
here
in
the
city
of
palm
springs,
we've
merged
that
into
our
architectural
review
process
and,
to
a
certain
degree.
That's
why
some
of
the
issues
that
I
mentioned
earlier
result
is
that
there
is
that
overlap
in
duties
between
what
planning
commissions
typically
do
and
what
an
architectural
review
board
will
do.
B
I'd
like
to
just
compare
what
our
process
is
now
with
what
we
are
proposing
in
terms
of
changes
to
the
process.
So
in
terms
of
our
current
process
for
architectural
review
step,
one
is
the
formal
submittal
where
an
applicant
will
submit
an
application
package
to
planning
staff.
We
will
then
take
that
in
review.
It
prepare
a
report.
B
The
second
step
in
the
process
is
the
architectural
advisory
committee
reviews
it
for
conformance
to
our
architectural
review
criteria.
Step
three
is
the
planning
commission.
They
review
the
application
not
only
for
conformance
to
our
architectural
review
criteria,
but
also
the
zoning
standards,
general
plan,
etc.
B
In
certain
cases,
there's
a
step.
Four,
where
certain
application
types
require
approval
by
city
council,
and
so
that's
whenever
an
architectural
review
item
is
joined
with
either
a
general
plan
amendment
or
a
change
of
zone
application
or
a
plan
development
district.
Those
are
the
types
of
applications
that
city
council
must
approve,
and
so
that's
a
step
four
that
doesn't
apply
in
all
situations,
but
only
in
those
specific
situations.
B
What
we
are
proposing
is,
oh
sorry,
before
I
get
into
that.
As
I
had
mentioned,
one
of
the
issues
that
we
have
is
that
sometimes
this
process
is
lengthened
when
there
are
comments
from
either
aac
or
planning
commission
that
results
in
the
applicant
having
to
redesign
a
project.
So,
even
though
our
process
is
fairly
simple
with
you
know
up
to
four
steps,
sometimes
by
going
through
the
redesign
process
that
adds
other.
B
C
B
So
step
one
is
actually
before
an
applicant
submits
their
application,
we're
proposing
that
they
have
a
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff
and
what
we
would
do
at
that
stage
is
just
like.
Other
cities
do
review
the
initial
submittal
for
conformance
to
development
standards,
address
any
issues
in
terms
of
waivers
or
variances
that
may
be
needed.
B
We
would
do
that
then,
so
that,
upon
step
two
where
the
applicant
is
submitting
their
application,
they
would
have
a
more
complete
application
and
one
that
may
address
our
criteria
more
specifically
and
hopefully
smooth
the
process
going
forward.
Step
three
in
the
process
would
be
the
planning
commission
taking
action
on
a
site
development
permit
I'll
get
into
the
specifics
of
what
planning
commission
will
be
reviewing
as
part
of
that,
but
planning
commission
would
then
approve
the
site
development
permit
if
there
was
an
associated
application
required
that
required
city
council
approval.
B
B
B
Improve
the
quality
of
our
submissions,
and
so
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
we
think
this
would
be
necessary.
One
of
the
things
I
found
is
that
applicants
tend
to
be
fine
with
spending
more
time
up
front
in
the
process
so
prior
to
application
submittal
if
they
can
get
through
the
next
steps
more
quickly.
So
that's
what
that's
intended
to
do
a
moment.
B
The
first
part
would
be
the
site
development
permit,
which
would
be
reviewed
by
the
planning
commission
and
that's
where
planning
commission
would
review
the
use,
the
layout
of
the
site
in
terms
of
the
building
placement
conformance
to
setback
requirements,
where
the
parking
is
how
things
circulate
on
the
site,
where
the
open
space
is
landscape
buffer
areas.
B
B
The
second
part
of
the
process
would
be
the
architectural
review
application
and
that
would
be
the
responsibility
of
the
aac,
and
so
once
the
site
plan
is
set
by
the
planning.
Commission
aac
would
then
review
the
architectural
details,
the
colors
and
materials,
the
landscaping,
the
lighting,
signage
placement,
etc.
B
So
I'll
go
through
first,
the
things
that
the
planning
commission
would
be
reviewing
as
your
criteria
for
a
site
development
permit.
So
number
one
is
conformance
to
the
general
plan
in
terms
of
the
land
use
in
terms
of
the
density,
that's
established
by
the
general
plan
and
any
floor
area
ratio,
that's
established
by
the
general
plan.
B
You
would
also
review
if
the
project
is
in
conformance
to
development
standards,
and
just
so
you're
aware
when
I
say
development
standards,
that's
kind
of
a
catch-all
term,
meaning
you
look
at
the
setbacks.
You
look
at
the
height
limit.
You
look
at
the
lot
coverage.
You
look
at
the
parking
open
space
where
it's
required
the
technical
requirements
of
each
zone
district
and
whether
or
not
the
project
complies
with
those.
B
The
next
criterion
is
relative
to
assessing
the
height
and
massing
of
the
project
for
compatibility
with
its
context
with
the
buildings
on
adjacent
sites.
You
would
also
look
at
building
placement
as
being
compatible
with
adjacent
sites
in
terms
of
its
distance
from
the
street
or
from
adjacent
property
lines.
B
Next,
you'd
be
looking
at
conformance
to
issues
relative
to
traffic,
so
trip
generation.
You
know
based
on
the
use,
how
many
trips
will
it
generate?
Is
the
street
network
sufficient
to
carry
it?
You
would
also
be
looking
at
driveway
locations
or
the
alignment
of
streets
and
how
that
fits
in
with
the
existing
grid
pattern
of
the
city.
B
Another
thing
that
you
would
be
looking
at
under
the
site:
development
permit
is
on-site
circulation,
so
how
vehicles
circulate
on
the
site
if
there's
any
drive-throughs?
What
is
the
stacking
room?
You'd?
Also
look
at
pedestrian
circulation.
How
do
pedestrians
get
from
the
public
sidewalk
to
the
front
door
of
the
building?
B
B
B
They
would
also
look
at
the
landscape
materials.
Make
sure
that
they're
consistent
with
the
water,
efficient
landscape,
ordinance,
look
at
shade
on
the
site
in
terms
of
shading
of
sidewalks
pedestrian
facilities,
parking
lot
shading
looking
at
lighting
and
whether
or
not
it
conforms
to
the
code
sign.
B
Either
on
the
building
or
any
freestanding
signage
screening
of
mechanical
equipment
and
service
areas,
and
then,
finally,
is
it
consistent
with
any
adopted
design
standards?
So,
for
example,
desert
palisades
has
its
own
adopted
design
standards.
The
miralon
development
has
its
own
adopted
design
standards.
Asena
has
design
standards.
B
One
of
the
things
I'm
going
to
talk
about
is
the
possibility
of
adopting
objective
design
standards
as
part
of
our
code,
and
so
that
last
criterion
is
relative
to
conformance
to
any
adopted
design
standards
we
might
have.
So
those
are
the
things
that
the
aac
would
be
reviewing
as
their
part
of
the
process.
B
So
I
had
the
question
at
our
last
discussion.
How
would
the
process
work
and
maybe
go
through
a
couple
of
examples
of
different
types
of
applications,
just
showing
how
they
would
go
through
the
steps
in
the
process?
So
for
this
example?
Let's
assume
that
we're
working
with
a
commercial
building
in
a
commercial
zone
and
it's
one
that
has
a
drive-through,
so
it
could
be
like
the
starbucks
raising
canes
chicken
place
that
we
saw.
That
would
be
an
example
of
how
this
might
go
through
the
process
so
again
step.
One
is
the
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff.
B
B
The
next
step
was
would
be
that
they
would
then
make
their
formal
submittal
so
they'd
submit
an
architectural
review
application,
the
site
development
permit
application
and
because
they
have
a
drive-through,
they
would
also
submit
a
conditional
use
permit
application.
So
we
would
review
that
for
completeness
make
sure
they
have
all
the
items
on
the
checklist.
B
You
would
circulate
it
to
the
other
departments
for
their
comments
and
conditions
and
then
prepare
the
staff
report.
The
third
step
in
the
process
is
planning.
Commission
would
then
review
the
site
development
permit
application
and
go
through
all
the
criteria
that
I
had
just
mentioned
previously
in
terms
of
the
use
conformance
to
development
standards,
general
plan,
etc.
B
As
part
of
that,
one
of
the
things
that
the
subcommittee
thought
was
important
is
that
the
planning
commission
have
the
ability
to
offer
comments
to
the
aac
on
architectural
elements.
So,
for
example,
you
might
say
that
you
know
the
materials
on
the
two
buildings
don't
quite
match.
The
aac
should
review
that
for
consistency,
and
so,
as
part
of
that
process,
you
would
also
be
able
to
forward
comments
to
the
aac
as
part
of
your
review
of
the
project
step.
Four
of
the
process
would
then
be
aac.
B
Reviewing
the
architectural
review
application
and
again
they
would
be
working
with
the
site
plan
that
the
planning
commission
had
approved
and
be
focusing
on
the
architectural
details,
the
landscape
materials,
signage
lighting,
etc,
and
so
that's
how
it
would
work
for
a
standard
commercial
project
in
looking
at
another
type
of
project.
Let's
look
at
a
single
family
residence
in
a
hillside
area
as
part
of
our
process.
In
looking
at
how
we
might
streamline
reviews.
B
What
we're
proposing
to
you
is
that
for
a
hillside
review
of
a
single-family
residence
that
the
aac
would
be
really
the
only
body
that
needs
to
review
those
applications,
and
so
what
we're
proposing
is
just
as
with
the
other
applications,
there
would
be
a
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff.
So
we
have
an
opportunity
to
review
the
site
plan.
B
B
Look
at
conformance
to
design
standards,
for
example
in
desert
palisades
and
from
there
we
would
give
the
applicant
a
checklist
they
would
make
their
formal
submittal
and
then
the
architectural
advisory
committee
would
review
and
approve
the
architectural
review
application.
So,
in
this
case
no
site
development
plan
application
would
be
required.
It
would
just
be
an
architectural
review
application
that
the
aac
would
review
and
approve,
and
so
what
we're
proposing
is
to
eliminate
one
of
the
current
steps
out
of
the
process.
B
B
However,
with
the
desert
palisades
specific
plan,
the
downtown
specific
plan
and
section
14
specific
plan,
they
each
have
a
discussion
about
the
order
of
the
process,
so
desert
palisades
in
section
14.
Both
say
that
project
shall
go
to
aac
first
and
then
to
planning
commission
downtown
specific
plan
says
they
should
go
to
aac
first
15
days
later
they
go
to
planning
commission
and
then,
after
that
they
go
to
city
council.
B
B
Aac
then
reviews
the
application
followed
by
the
planning,
commission
and
then
city
council
is
required
to
review
and
approve
the
project
if
we
were
to
make
changes
based
on
what
is
being
proposed
here
today.
What
that
would
look
like
is,
as
with
the
other
projects
we
discussed,
pre-submittal
conference
would
occur
first
with
staff.
B
B
First
is
relative
to
signage:
there
are
two
application
types
that
typically
require
review
by
aac
and
planning
commission.
The
first
is
sign
programs,
which
is
a
multi-tenant
building.
They'll
have
multiple
signs
on
the
building.
So
currently
we
have
aac
and
planning
commission
review
those
types
of
applications.
B
What
we're
proposing
is
to
shorten
that
process
so
that
aac
would
be
able
to
have
final
action
on
a
sign
program,
and
so
that
way
that
would
cut
one
step
out
of
the
process
with
signed
districts.
What
we're
proposing
is
rather
than
city
council
being
the
one
who
approves
signed
districts
is
having
the
planning
commission,
be
the
body
that
approves
sign
districts,
sign
districts,
apply
to
multiple
properties,
so,
for
example,
that
would
be
the
maryland
development.
It
has
a
signed
district
because
it
has
signs
in
multiple
locations
across
the
300
acre
site.
B
We
also
have
talked
about
sign
districts
for
the
downtown
area,
but
haven't
gone
through
the
process
and
actually
approving
those.
Yet
but
again,
what
we're
proposing
is,
rather
than
having
the
city
council
approve
those
it
would
be
more
appropriate
to
have.
The
planning
commission
approve
those.
So
those
are
two
of
the
changes
relative
to
signage.
That
would
help
to
streamline
the
process.
B
B
It
has
a
list
of
approximately
20
conditional
use
types
that
require
review
by
the
planning,
commission
and
approval
from
the
city
council
and
again,
that
list
is
pretty
much
outdated
because
those
specific
uses
are
typically
addressed
elsewhere
in
the
code
or
they're
no
longer
they're
out
of
date.
Basically,
for
example,
if
you
wanted
to
have
a
beehive
in
your
backyard,
you
would
have
to
file
a
conditional
use.
Permit,
have
the
planning
commission
review
it,
and
then
it
would
have
to
be
approved
by
the
city
council.
B
That's
something
that
seems
way
out
of
date
in
this
day
and
age,
and
not
worth
the
8
500
cost
of
a
conditional
use.
Permit
another
thing
it
requires
airports
to
have
conditional
use,
permit
approval,
I'm
assuming
that
was
developed
prior
to
the
zoning
of
the
airport.
I
don't
anticipate
that
we'll
have
any
other
airports
in
town,
and
so
that's
another
part
of
the
conditional
use
permit
section
of
the
code
that
is
no
longer
applicable.
B
B
Process
quicker,
how
is
it
going
to
streamline
processes?
So
what
we're
proposing
would
help
with
the
following
in
terms
of
eliminating
duplicate
reviews
where
it
may
not
be
necessary.
So,
for
example,
on
the
sign
programs
having
the
aac
approve
those
helps
to
eliminate
a
step
and
shortens
the
time
period
same
thing,
with
architectural
reviews
of
single-family
houses
in
hillside
areas
or
on
major
thoroughfares.
B
The
process
is
by
eliminating
the
overlap
of
responsibilities,
so
those
are
really
the
three
things
that
I
think
will
assist
in
shortening
the
process
and
how
we
might
achieve
the
goals
of
the
city
council
through
those
changes.
B
There
are
some
other
considerations
that
I
want
to
put
out
there
for
you
just
so
that
you're
aware
of
them,
the
palm
springs.
Architectural
alliance,
which
is
a
private
group
here
in
town,
has
approached
me
about
adopting
objective
design
standards.
Looking
at
our
design
review
criteria,
I
think
that's
something
that
could
also
help
us
in
shortening
the
process,
as
I've
mentioned
before
right
now.
B
What
are
we
looking
for
in
terms
of
massing
or
proportions,
or
things
like
that,
and
so
I
think
we
really
need
to
think
about
as
part
two
of
this
process,
the
development
of
objective
design
standards
and
as
I've
mentioned,
psaa
would
like
to
be
involved
in
that
I'd
recommend
that
we
have
representatives
of
the
architecture,
advisory
committee
and
planning
commission
as
part
of
a
subcommittee
that
reviews
and
develops
architectural
criteria
at
some
point
in
the
future.
Here
the
second
consideration
that
I
think
we
need
to
address
is
relative
to
staffing.
B
B
So
that
would
be
someone
who
would
be
able
to
sit
down
with
applicants,
review
the
architectural
details
and
offer
suggestions
in
terms
of
how
they
might
comply
with
our
criteria,
and
so
that's
another
component
that
I
think
we
need
to
discuss
with
the
city
council.
Since
the
budgeting
and
staffing
lies
with
the
city
council,
that's
something
they'll
need
to
look
at,
but
if
we
use
this
pre-submittal
conference,
I
think
that's
something
that
needs
to
be
addressed
there.
A
There
hi,
can
you
hear
me,
can
you
hear
me
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
first
go
over
the
proposed
review
process
and
have
comments
and
discussions
and
any
issues
that
stand
out
to
people.
A
Welcome
to
those
of
you
who
are
sitting
in
with
us,
so
I
wanted
to
go
through
the
general
thrust
of
the
of
the
specific
plan
with
putting
the
plan.
The
planning
commission
first
I'd
also
like
flynn
to
talk
about
the
points
in
time
when
we
will
do
something
slightly
different,
but
can
I
start
with?
Is
there
anyone
who
would
like
to
comment?
D
D
The
only
question
I
had
was
where
city
council
would
make
an
approval
and
then
the
aac
would
weigh
in,
and
I
wonder
if
city
council
is
comfortable
with
approving
something
without
having
seen
the
architecture
that
they're
approving,
but
everything
else
that
you've
done
here
makes
a
ton
of
sense
to
me
and
I'm
very
impressed.
Thank
you
I'll.
B
The
subcommittee
felt
it
was
important
that
all
of
the
architectural
materials
be
provided
as
part
of
the
site
plan
review,
so
that
planning,
commission
and
city
council
are
able
to
see
the
architectural
treatment
colors
and
materials
as
well,
even
though
they
aren't
taking
action
on
those
items.
At
least
they
need
to
see
the
overall
entire
project
as
it's
proposed,
and
so
that's
how
we
would
intend
to
do
that
is
they
would
get
the
same
materials
that
aac
will
eventually
see.
A
C
C
So
yeah,
I
was
thinking
about
that
same
thing,
fun.
So
what
is
gets
submitted
to
us
p
planning
commission
is
the
same
documentation
that
gets
submitted.
This
is
a
question
gets
submitted
to
aac.
A
And
if
I
can
answer
commissioner
lewin's
question,
I
think
it
would
solve
a
problem
that
gets
that
gets
created
if,
for
example,
the
planning
commission
turns
down
a
project,
but
it
then
the
city
council
then
approves
it.
There's
still,
it
still
allows
for
an
architectural
review
of
what
actually
gets
approved
and
there
would
be
two
examples
of
that.
One
would
have
been
the
market.
A
The
tower
market
in
north
palm
springs
where,
because
we
had
turned
it
down,
we
hadn't
dealt
with
architectural
issues.
The
council
actually
took
that
on.
In
that
instance,
the
second
of
those
was
the
virgin
virgin
site
condo
project,
where
they
actually
didn't
take
that
on,
and
there
was
no
review
of
materials.
So
in
this
instance
they
would
see
what
we're
seeing
if
it
was
appealed
to
them,
they
could
or
they
pulled
it
up.
A
E
It
was
actually
yes,
I
really
like
the
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff.
I
think
that's
a
really
excellent
step
that
we
lack
right
now.
I
don't
know
how
long
it's
going
to
take
before
you
know.
There's
a
budget
to
hire.
You
know
a
planner
that
has
the
required
architectural
background.
E
So
what
I
was
thinking,
perhaps
in
the
interim,
the
chair
of
the
aac
could
fulfill
that
function
in
the
pre-submittal
conference
and
then
at
some
point,
when
there's
a
staff
person
that
has
those
you
know,
qualifications,
the
aac
chair,
wouldn't
be
required
anymore.
At
least
there
would
be
somebody
in
there
at
the
beginning
who
understands,
and
then
we
have
to
talk
about
the
design
standards
and
what
the
schedule
is
for
the
second
phase,
but
I
think
that
would
help.
So
that's
number
one.
Should
I
just
keep
going
or
should
we
just
stop
there.
E
E
A
We
asked
that
question
at
our
last
meeting
and
apparently
it
would
require
mr
jakeway's
full-time
presence
and
it
that
seemed
like
it
was
unworkable.
We
do
have
two
architects
on
our
staff.
Don't
we
flynn.
B
Well,
one
and
a
half
mr
lyon
has
worked
as
an
architect
and
is
certified.
I
have
architectural
degrees,
but
I
don't
have
the
time
to
actually
sit
down
with
applicants
and
do
that
in
terms
of
the
chair
of
the
aac.
That
would
be
an
incredible
commitment.
He
would
need
to
be
available
during
the
work
day.
B
You
know
it
could
be
multiple
hours
each
day
in
terms
of
meeting
with
applicants
and
going
through
that.
How
we
might
solve
the
problem
in
the
interim
is
is
using
a
consultant
to
do
that
review
for
us.
Also.
The
other
thing
that
we
can
look
at
is
because
we
are
in
the
what
I'll
call
budgeting
season
right
now.
The
new
fiscal
year
takes
place
on
july.
The
1st
there
is
the
possibility
if
city
council
were
to
consider
the
addition
of
a
position
that
that
could
go
forward
as
soon
as
july
1st.
E
So,
okay,
so
I
understand
the
the
the
problems
with
having
the
ac
chair
step
in
at
this
point
or
any
point,
it
seems
the
beginning
and
it'd
be
great
if
the
city
would
hire
someone
that
has
additional
experience.
The
second
thing
I'd
like
to
do
is
I'd
like
to
go
through
the
example
that
you
gave.
B
E
Okay,
so
let's
use
that
example
that
we
you
were
talking
about
earlier,
which
is
the
I
think
you
lost
it,
you
had
it
there
for
a
minute.
Let.
B
B
B
E
B
It
depends
on
the
project.
I
see
this
going
a
couple
of
different
ways.
If
you
all,
as
the
planning
commission,
are
proposing
revisions
to
the
site
plan,
you
still
have
the
option
of
continuing
the
item
to
your
next
meeting
and
giving
the
applicant
the
opportunity
to
make
revisions
to
the
site
plan.
You
can
also
continue
to
use
the
subcommittee
process
that
we
currently
use
where,
if
it's
just
minor
tweets,
then
you
can
have
up
to
three
planning.
Commission
members
review
those
changes
before
it
goes
forward
to
the
aac,
so
you
still
will
have
the
opportunity.
E
That
makes
sense,
let's
look
at
the
downtown
specific
plan
and
use
the
virgin
site
as
an
example,
because
there
were
a
lot
of
comments
from
us
and
from
aac,
and
I
want
to
see
how
that
would
have
worked
in
this
case.
I
think
you're
blocking.
E
I
have
to
move
our
little
pictures
over
here
we
go
okay,
so
we
have
the
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff.
You
know
in
the
case
of
the
pre-submittal
conference,
right
off
the
bat
we
have
the
the
issue
of
design
standards
in
the
palm
springs,
architectural
alliance
and
their
involvement
in
helping
create
those
design
standards.
E
This
would
be
the
first
time
for
us
to
see
it.
We
had
issues
with
the
light,
the
amount
of
light
that
was
penetrating
into
the
inner
courtyard.
We
had
issues
about
not
enough
commercial.
On
the
ground
floor,
we
had
issues
about
the
overall
architectural
design,
not
being
high
enough
of
great
enough
standards.
I
mean
all
these
things.
All
these
things
would
be
still
be
considered
and
discussed
at
step.
Three,
yes,
correct.
B
A
And
can
I
enter
well,
it
will
do
things.
This
is
one
of
the
areas
where
we
want
to
talk
through
if
we
want
anything
different.
There
are
two
steps
that
the
director
has
under
this
at
his
purview.
One
would
be
a
single
meeting
of
the
architectural
committee
to
look
at
the
project
once
and
give
comments.
A
A
A
So
it
I
think-
and
this
is
just
and
flynn
might
want
to
talk
about
that
too.
But
I,
I
think
those
steps
are
probably
steps
that
we
want
to
allow
in
the
downtown
specific
plan,
but
possibly
at
the
discretion
of
the
director.
E
What
about
just
to
jump
in
with
the
study
session
concept?
What
if
it
was
a
study
session
with
planning,
commission
and
aac
up
front
so
that
we
for
an
important
project
like
this?
So
we
could
get
all
the
ideas
thrown
out
there.
You
know
at
one
time
instead
of
having
to
maybe
do
it
multiple
times.
A
Right,
I
think
doing
something
like
that
when
it's
a
special
building
and
I
but
again,
I
think
at
the
discretion
of
the
director,
but
I
think
that's
something
we
might
want
to
look
at
in
the
downtown
flynn.
Do
you
want
to
comment
on
that?
Yeah.
B
B
Let
me
just
talk
briefly
with
jim
priest,
our
attorney
in
terms
of
allowing
a
joint
study
session
planning,
commission
and
aac.
I
don't
know
that
we
necessarily
need
to
draft
that
into
the
ordinance
itself.
I
think
we
have
the
authority
and
the
ability
to
do
that
right
now,
but
that's
a
good
comment
and
something
that
we
may
want
to
look
at
so
that
we
can
resolve
both
site
plan
issues
and
architectural
issues,
perhaps
with
the
same
body
up
front
before
we
go
through
the
formal
process.
E
D
A
Okay,
commissioner
hershbein,
and
I
that
was
the
first
hand
I
saw-
I
don't
know
if
anybody
else
had
made
a
request.
C
C
I
do
have
a
number
of
comments
and
I'll
just
throw
them
out
there
they're,
not
in
any
particular
order,
just
kind
of
how
it
came
to
be,
but,
first
of
all,
if
we
do,
if
staff
does
hire
an
architect
to
to
provide
input
on
the
design
pro
packages,
I
would
urge
that
that
architect
also
have
somewhat
of
an
urban
design
background
as
well.
C
There's
no
certification
for
urban
designer,
but
it's
somebody
that's
it's
is-
is
versed
in
good
urban
design
principles
to
also
help
guide
the
applicant,
because
a
lot
of
our
projects
seem
to
need
a
lot
of
help
in
that
regard
as
well.
That's
one
comment
in
terms
of
objective
design
standards
that
was
kind
of
my
careers,
objective,
design
standards
in
in
the
shopping
center
industry,
and
what
one
thing
I
think,
as
a
city,
you
have
to
be
careful
of
mandating
things
like
a
color
and
material
palette.
C
I
would
strongly
disagree
with
that.
I
I
think
it
sets
up
sort
of
an
ossification
in
a
city
I
mean
sometimes
at
work.
Santa
barbara
certainly
has
a
cohesive
look
to
it
and
it
works,
but
we're
not
santa
barbara,
and
I
I
don't
think
having
things
at
that
granular
of
a
level
allow
the
creativity
allow
for
creativity
and
change
over
time
as
well.
I
mean
beige
might
be
in
one
year
and
then
pink
might
be
in
the
next
year.
So
what
are
you
going
to
do?
Address
colors
every
few
years?
C
I
just
think
getting
down
to
that
level
of
design
standard
would
would
be
a
mistake.
That's
that's
my
opinion.
I've
got
a
question
and
a
concern
by
putting
aac
at
the
end
of
the
process.
B
That's
a
good
question
and
something
that
chair
wermick
also
brought
up
in
our
subcommittee
meetings.
What
we've
built
into
the
process
is
that
if
aac
denies
an
architectural
review
application,
it's
appealed
to
the
planning
commission
so
then
be
forwarded
to
the
planning
commission
to
take
action
on
it,
and
so.
C
Clarifying
that
you
know
when
I
first
heard
some
of
the
terminology
being
used
in
previous
sessions.
I
was
a
bit
concerned
about
a
site
plan
development
review
because
to
me
that
connotes,
a
rather
limited
review
scope
when
you
list
what
we're
actually
reviewing
it
expands,
but
by
calling
it
that-
and
I
don't
know
what
to
call
it-
I'm
not
going
to
suggest
anything
but
to
my
ears,
when
you
say
site
development
standards,
that's
what
the
review
is
called
you're,
reviewing
a
much
more
limited
scope
than
what
you're
actually
saying
we
can
review.
C
So
I
I
would
suggest
coming
up
with
a
broader
definition
of
what
that
what
that
review
is
called.
Let's
see,
I
just
wanted
to
ask
committee
or
staff.
You
know,
we've
heard
the
upside
to
these
proposed
changes.
What
downsides
do
you
see
to
any
of
the
proposed
changes.
C
B
B
It's
still
the
idea
that
you're
filing
two
permits
and
that's
something
that
we've
struggled
with
as
the
subcommittee
in
terms
of
this
process.
While
it
helps
to
kind
of
keep
the
responsibility
separate,
it
looks
like
a
burden
on
applicants,
even
though
it's
intended
to
make
it
a
little
bit
easier
for.
C
B
Yeah
and
so
that's
something
that
we'll
look
at
that
with
the
attorney
in
terms
of
how
we
might
simplify
that
so
yeah.
C
C
The
other
thing
I
I
just
like
to
throw
out
there-
and
this
is
more
general-
you
know,
council
has
instructed
you
to
look
at
ways
to
expedite
the
process
and
I
think
you've
struck
a
good
balance,
but
I
think
you
always
have
to
keep
in
mind
that
is
expediting
the
process
going
to
lead
to
approving
designs
that
are
less
satisfactory
and
I
think
we
just
got
to
keep
our
eye
on
the
prize
like
what's
what's
the
goal
here,
the
goal
isn't
to
expedite
the
process.
C
B
In
terms
of
the
pdd
process,
we
would
need
to
look
at
that.
I
think
we
can
apply
it
to
the
pdd
process
as
it
currently
stands,
so
that
again,
planning
commission
is
approving
the
key
elements
of
the
pdd
and
then
aac
is
doing
the
architecture
of
that.
So
I
don't
think
it
really
needs
any
major
changes
to
the
pdb
process.
C
Okay,
so
so
basically
it's
yes,
it
does
include
the
pdd,
okay
and
and
the
same
appeals
process
as
now
applies
to
this
revised
scheme.
It's.
B
Just
a
little
bit
different
for
the
site
development
permit,
that
is
reviewed
by
the
planning
commission.
If
you
deny
a
project,
it
would
be
appealed
to
city
council,
so
that
is
basically
the
same
there
with
the
architectural
review.
As
we
had
talked
about,
if
architectural,
if
aac
denies
a
project,
then
the
planning
commission
is
the
appeal,
here's
the
appeal,
so
that's
the
only
difference
in
the
process.
B
C
Again,
I'm
I'm
jumping
around
a
little
bit
so
so
I'm
sorry,
I'm
kind
of
going
back
a
little
bit,
but
in
terms
of
site
development
standards,
which
is
what
you
showed
as
far
as
how
you
want
planning
commission
to
review
the
site
development
application
it
it
seemed
like
a
checklist
I
mean
I
know
you
were
trying
to
get
objective
about
it,
but
it
seemed
like
okay,
floor
area
ratio,
check,
setback,
check,
height
check.
I
mean
that's
kind
of
staff.
C
B
Those
are
items
that
really
aren't
a
checklist
and
tend
to
be
a
little
bit
more
subjective,
and
so
those
are
key
things
that
we
want
the
planning
commission
to
review
so
the
massing
of
a
project.
Again,
that's
not
necessarily
a
checklist
item,
while
height
and
setbacks
play
into
it.
That's
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
you
to
look
at
the
placement
of
the
building
on
the
site.
You
know
just
more
than
does
it
need
to
set
backs,
but
is
it
consistent
with
the
other
buildings
along
the
street?
B
So
there's
a
couple
of
the
criteria
that
address
more
subjective
things,
but
still
need
to
be
addressed
by
the
planning
commission
before
the
architectural
advisory
committee
can
really
get
into
the
fine
details
of
it.
So
it's
a
balance.
There
are
also
things
such
as
the
use.
Are
there
going
to
be
impacts
from
the
use?
B
We
rely
on
the
planning
commission
to
look
at
that
and
talk
about
that
more
as
we
look
at
restaurants
in
the
p-zone
in
our
agenda
later
today,
you
all
tend
to
address
impacts
of
use,
and
is
that
appropriate
and
then
the
final
criterion
that
we
have
in
terms
of
general
health,
safety
and
welfare?
That's
another
area
that
we
look
to
the
planning
commission
for
guidance
on,
so
I
I
tried
to
be
a
little
bit
more
specific
with
the
criteria.
C
Okay,
well
thanks
for
clarifying
now
I
only
have
one
more
thing
and
it
it
kind
of
dovetails
into
this.
The
thing
we
just
talked
about
and
when
we're
asked
to
review
a
project,
we're
asked
to
make
findings
and
you
know,
is
it
appropriate
and
then
there's
a
whole
bun?
I
don't
know
12
different
findings
and
if
there's
one
or
two
findings
we
don't
can't
make,
then
we're
allowed
to
turn
the
project
down.
Will
we
still
have
that
same
format?
Will
findings
still
play
a
part
of
this.
B
C
D
B
So
this
list
that
I
went
through
in
terms
of
the
criteria-
these
are
your
findings,
so,
for
example,
if
it
doesn't
conform
to
the
general
plan,
you
can't
make
the
finding
you
would
deny
the
project
same
thing,
with
conformance
to
zoning
height
and
massing.
If
it's
not
compatible
with
adjacent
sites,
you
can't
make
the
finding
then
you
would
turn
the
project
down.
So
that's
really
the
list
that
we're
looking
at
in
terms
of
findings.
C
B
B
C
B
But
again,
as
I
had
mentioned,
you
have
a
combined
site
plan
architectural
review
process,
and
these
are
the
only
findings
that
we
have
in
the
code.
Currently
now,
staff
does
do
a
review
of
development
standards
and
conformance
to
the
general
plan,
but
they're
not
specifically
identified
as
findings
here
in
your
zoning
code.
Currently,
so
that's
one
of
the
things
that
we
want
to
improve
as
part
of
this
process.
B
Not
per
se,
we've
incorporated
them
into
the
new
findings
like
site
layout,
we're
talking
about
that
location
structure.
So,
for
the
most
part,
they
are
addressed
in
the
criteria
that
we
have
either
under
the
site
plan
review
or
the
architectural
review
criteria.
A
Is
there
are
there
comments,
commissioner
song
or
commissioner
irvin.
D
Is
it
near?
Is
it
commissioner,
urban.
A
D
I
would
like
to
say
that
this
has
been
something
interesting
for
me
and
being
the
new
guy
on
the
block
I
kind
of
want
to
lean
a
little
bit
on
the
other
commissioners.
D
D
I
don't
know
how
I
can
word
this,
but
what
what
makes
the
aac
so
important?
I
noticed
that
in
the
and
the
rotation
of
the
new
proposal.
D
So
it's
a
lot
of
aac
examination
going
on
in
the
steps.
So
maybe
I
can
have
someone
maybe
help
me
a
little
bit
flan.
Maybe
you
or
kathy
the
significance
and
the
importance
of
aac,
because
for
me
it
seems
like
the
planning
commission
tends
to
be
a
little
bit
of
a
an
afterthought
like
it.
D
It
really
kind
of
could
not
be
here,
so
maybe
I'm
missing
out
on
something.
Can
you
help
me
a
little
along
along
those
lines.
B
I
really
see
planning
commission
as
being
the
critical
step
in
the
process
in
that
you
all
are
approving
the
use
you're
approving
the
parameters
of
the
project.
If
you
will
aac
is
really
focused
on
the
details
of
what
plant
materials,
the
colors
and
materials
the
architectural
details
planning
commission
is
looking
at
the
overall
scope
of
the
project
and
its
impact
on
adjacent
properties.
B
So,
even
though
aac
is
last,
I
wouldn't
say
that
their
most
the
most
important
step
of
the
process.
It
really
is
planning
commission's
approval
of
the
site
development
permit.
That
is
a
critical
element
in
the
process,
and
I
don't
want
to
downplay
that
at
all
but
you're
first,
because
those
are
really
the
issues
we
need
to
address.
First
before
we
can
get
into
the
the
finer
details
of
the
architecture
chair,
you
look
like
you
have
some
thoughts
on
that.
A
Yet,
in
some
sense
it's
a
more
limited
role
for
the
aac,
although
a
more
definite
role
because
they're
not
coming
in
the
beginning,
opining
on
the
whole
project.
Yes,
it's
a
go.
Yes,
we
love
it.
No,
it's
a
disaster,
we're
turning
it.
You
know
it.
We
don't
end
up
with
those
kinds
of
comments.
In
the
beginning,
we
have
to
look
at
the
use,
the
placement.
A
Does
it
look
appropriate
to
us
and
send
the
other
items
along
which
some
of
us
on
this
committee
are
probably
skilled
enough
to
deal
with
like
what's
the
materials
palette,
but
others
of
us
myself
included.
You
would
never
want
to
comment
on
the
materials
palette,
although
I
probably
would
be
willing
to
so,
but
it's
I.
I
actually
think
it.
A
I
think
it
enhances
the
role
of
the
planning
commission
because
it
comes
first.
We
actually
deal
with
whether
it's
going
to
go,
go
or
not
go,
and
I
and
for
me,
that's
that's
important.
I've
worked
in
this
process
and
I,
when
I,
when
I've,
seen
the
biggest
confusion
here,
it
sometimes
is
when
we
both
want
to
turn
something
down.
We
both
hate
it.
We
just
hate
it
for
different
reasons
and
there's
been
a
you
know,
a
number
of
projects
like
that
and
then
it's
harder
to
resolve
those
issues.
D
Yes,
and
so
and
another
question,
so
are
we
gonna
have
any
sort
of
a
trial
period
with
this,
or
is
this
I
mean?
I
know
we
we
tried
it
before,
but
is
this
going
if
this
is
approved?
Is
this
going
to
be
it
going
forward.
B
B
D
Okay
and
then
there's
one
more
other
thing,
since
we
are
making
an
adjustment
to
the
criteria
and
things
like
that,
is
there
any
way
possible?
I
like
to
put
all
my
energy
and
all
my
effort
into
reading
and
making
sure
that
I'm
making
a
sound
decision.
D
Is
there
any
way
that
we
can
discuss
or
talk
about
the
time
from
receiving
the
packet
to
making
the
decision
and
rendering
a
decision?
D
Is
there
any
way
that
we
can
maybe
get
those
packets
sooner
to
give
us
more
time,
especially
with
items
such
as
the
two
that
we
had
prior
that
are
very
important
and
critical?
D
Is
there
any
way
with
the
zoning
with
the
with
the
different
changes
and
the
study
sessions
and
all
the
things
that
we're
doing?
Is
there
any
way
that
we
can
get
those
packets
sooner
to
be
able
to?
You
know
some
of
us
also
have
day
jobs,
so
it
it.
You
know
as
well
as
volunteering
our
time
to
this,
but
I
want
to
be
able
to
make
a
sound
decision
and
be
able
to
to
to
give
that
energy
to
to
reading
everything
and
making
sure
that
everything
is
correct.
D
And
three
or
four
days
is
a
really
short
period
of
time
to
to
go
through
all
of
these
documents
and
be
thorough.
With
the
decision.
A
D
B
I
was
just
going
to
say:
yeah,
that's
an
administrative
item
that
we
can
address
separately,
that
wouldn't
go
into
this
ordinance
per
se,
but
the
concerns
that
you
raise,
commissioner,
irvin,
really
show
your
dedication
to
what
you
do
with
the
planning
commission
and
all
of
you
as
planning
commissioners
in
terms
of
having
to
digest
our
staff
reports
and
the
supporting
materials
and
wanting
to
do
an
effective
job
in
reviewing
and
discussing
these
projects.
So
we
appreciate
that
and
and
understand
your
concerns.
B
Just
so
you're
aware
the
difficulty
that
we
have
is
with
a
limited
staff.
It's
it's
always
a
challenge
for
us
to
get
the
staff
reports
finished.
The
agenda
published
we're
up
against
a
time
clock
as
well,
but
what
I'm
hoping
is
that
the
combination
of
the
changes
to
the
process,
combined
with
the
fact
that
we're
working
on
a
new
electronic
submittal
system
that
will
give
us
greater
abilities
than
we
currently
have
that
might
give
us
the
opportunities
to
get
packets
to
you
sooner.
B
A
Commissioner
song
did
you
have
questions.
I
have
one
or
two
comments,
but
I
wanted
to
incorporate
yours
first.
A
Oh
I'm
sorry,
commissioner
lillin
and
then
if
commissioner
song
would
like
to
speak
and
then
myself.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
wanted
to
say
that
I
I
agreed
with
commissioner
hershbein's
comment
that
an
objective
design
standard
is,
I
don't
think,
is
a
great
idea
for
our
city,
and
I
I
do
remember
the
days
when
all
signs
had
to
be
brown
and
beige
in
palm
springs,
and
you
know
what
sounds
good
today.
I
I
think
he
used
the
word
ossification
and
I
I
think
it's
not
necessary
for
us
to
have
that
in
the
new
ordinance.
So
I
like
that
comment
wanted
to
know
from
flynn.
D
B
So
the
city
council,
as
an
action
at
their
january
2020,
meeting
limited
the
reviews
of
planning,
commission
and
aac
to
two
times
that
if
by
the
second
set
of
revisions,
the
applicant
still
doesn't
have
it
right,
then
you,
as
the
planning
commission
or
the
aac,
has
every
right
to
turn
the
project
down,
because
if
they
still
aren't
getting
it
right,
then
they
need
to
rethink
the
project.
That's
really
the
idea
that
sometimes
we're
just
prolonging
the
pain
by
continuing
them.
B
B
D
B
D
D
D
D
D
Got
it
we
would
be
denying
the
architectural
permit
exactly
that
makes
total
sense.
Thank
you.
The
final
question
is
with
the
pre-submittal
concept,
which
I
think
is
outstanding,
the
the
conference
with
staff,
and
I
feel
confident
that
the
council
will
find
the
budget
to
hire
an
architect,
because
this
is
a
revamping
of
our
process.
D
B
What
I
would
propose
is
that
for
the
pre-submittal
conference
there
not
be
a
fee
associated
with
that.
If
someone
does
a
study
session
with
the
planning
commission,
for
example,
a
pre-application
like
we
had
today
with
transwestern,
there
is
a
fee
for
the
pre-application,
but
not
the
conference
was
staffed.
Does
that
make
sense?
B
D
And
and
flynn
can
I
just
follow
up
on
that
a
little
bit
just
just
to
understand?
Why?
Because
because
in
my
mind,
they're
already
taking
up
your
staff
time,
you're
pulling
your
staff
architect
and
one
of
your
planning
people,
and
maybe
your
engineer-
why?
Wouldn't
they
be
paying
for
it?
At
that
point,.
B
D
But-
and
I'm
not
trying
to
I'm
just
trying
to
understand
this
fully
from
from
your
frame
of
reference,
I
understand
what
you're
saying
there,
but
if
the
ordinance
requires
that
they
have
a
pre-submittal
conference
with
staff,
the
incentive
is,
you
can't
actually
apply
for
anything
unless
you
do
it.
So
it's.
How
does
the
fee
deter
them
from
doing
it?.
D
Okay,
that
that
makes
a
ton
of
sense
I
understand,
and
obviously,
as
we
address
with
commissioner
irvin,
these
are
just
laws
and
rules
and
if
it
turns
out
somebody's
abusing
the
system
and
you
get
750
cannabis
applications
in
the
pre-submittal
process,
we'll
address
it
at
the
one-year
review.
Okay
thanks
so
much
for
making
this
so
clear.
Madam
chair,
those
those
were
my
questions.
Thank
you.
A
Commissioner
song
did
you
have
questions
or
comments?
No,
I
had
only.
D
One
clarification-
and
I
think
also
to
the
public
that
at
every
meeting
being
planning
commission
being
architectural
review,
there
is
a
public
hearing.
People
are
allowed
to
participate.
People
are
allowed
to
comment.
That's
why
all
meetings
would
be
publicly
posted.
D
B
A
A
A
I
would
say,
although
you
can't
give
a
standard
for
it,
looks
like
a
really
bad
design
doesn't
fit.
Well,
I
mean
there
are
issues,
that's
part
of
why
we
want
this.
Is
we
want
better
design
and
having
having
staff?
A
talented
staff
person
early
on
is
important,
but
it's
a
hybrid,
it's,
not
all
professional
staff,
and
it's
not
just
all
volunteers.
A
The
second
is
that
we
did
include
in
this.
The
planning,
commission-
and
I
don't
know
if
council
will
do
that-
appointing
the
aac,
because
we
work
most
closely
with
them.
We
probably
have
more
of
a
sense
of
who
the
talented
people
are
or
what
kind
of
talents
we
need
on
that
commission
and
we
have
the
ability
to
appoint
or
not
continue.
A
A
A
The
last
is,
I
just
want
to
say
something
about
the
two
meeting
rule
we're
trying
to
streamline
it.
My
experience
with
this
is
that
it
did
streamline
it,
but
when
we
had-
and
I
can
almost
say
we
had
a
corrupt
city
council,
we
certainly
had
an
indicted
member
of
the
city
council.
There
were
times
with
developers
where
we
would
they
would
come
in
and
they'd
say
just
turn
us
down
we're
not
going
to
do
anything
for
you.
We
don't
we're
not
going
to
change
anything.
Just
take
it.
A
A
It
was
an
experience
of
my
early
years
on
the
planning
commission
here
in
this
city
and
and
sort
of
abuses
occurred
by
people
feeling
like
they
could
just
go
over
us
and
never
have
to
deal
with
our
comments.
A
A
E
Yeah,
just
regarding
the
design,
the
term
design
standards,
I
think,
is
inappropriate.
It's
design
guidelines
and
I
I
don't
think
that
the
idea
would
be
to
prescribe
color
and
these
very
specific
things.
I
think
what
we're
talking
about
here
is
the
palm
springs.
Architectural
alliance
is
a
new
organization
that
has
some
very
smart
and
talented
people
involved
in
it.
I
would
like
to
hear
what
they
have
to
say:
they're
working
really
hard
on
coming
up
with
some
design,
ideas
and
guidelines.
E
I
like
the
idea
of
of
the
city
council,
creating
a
subcommittee
which
would
involve
us
and
others,
and
I'd
like
to
be
part
of
that,
if
possible,
but
yeah,
I
don't
want
to
see
standards
that
are
that
are
hard
standards.
That's
that's
not
at
all.
What
I'm
concerned
about
what
I'm
concerned
about
is
we
need
to
I'm
going
to
just
take
the
example
of
the
virgin
project
replacement
project.
E
It
seemed
unfair
to
require,
at
the
very
end
of
the
process
if
the
project
had
been
denied
because
of
architecture
that
we,
the
overall
design,
was
not
appropriate
for
the
city
in
our
what
we
expect
to
have
as
architecture
in
this
town.
That
should
be
right
up
front,
and
if
we
do
in
this
pre-submittal
hearing
have
our
meeting.
E
You
know
somebody
talented
in
those
areas
as
part
of
staff,
and
there
are
some
general
guidelines
that
have
been
put
together,
that
they're
trying
to
explain
why
palm
springs
is
unique
in
terms
of
our
design
and
why
we
want
to
keep
those
standards
high.
Maybe
we
can
nip
something
in
the
bud
early
on
before
they
spend
a
lot
of
money
on
plans
and
and
renderings,
and
all
of
these
things
that
that
then,
ultimately
you
know
either
we
or
the
aac
say.
E
Well,
you
know
I
I'm
sorry,
but
whatever
finding
we
have
to
make
here.
This
is
not
going
to
work
here
in
this
town
and
the
sooner
that
can
happen
the
better.
So
that
is
what
I'm
thinking
about
for
design
guidelines
up
front,
not
saying!
Oh,
you
know
you
got
to
do
beige,
no,
I'm
not
at
all
interested
in
that.
So
this
is
something
that
I'd
like
to
continue
to
talk
about.
E
A
A
So
can
we
finish
up
this
portion
say
we
finished
up
comments
in
the
study
session
and
take
up
the
this.
The
specific
plan
issues
as
the
second
item
of
our
regular
meeting
since
we're
in
both
agendas
or
flynn.
Do
you
need
those
comments.
B
A
Then
I
am
going
to
and
you've
you
have
enough
in
the
way
of
comments
and
guidance.
Yes,
okay,
I'm
going
to
adjourn
our
study
session
and
the
meeting
the
regular
meeting
of
the
planning
commission
will
be
adjourned
until
six
o'clock,
at
which
time
we
will
resume
on
the
same
zoom
channel.
Thank
you.