►
From YouTube: General Plan Steering Committee | June 29th, 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
B
A
C
B
A
C
Member
powell,
here
in
place
of
margaret
park,
we
have
dan
malcolm
the
planning
director
who
will
be
joining
us
for
the
remainder
of
the
duration
of
this
committee.
So
welcome
dan
and
I
see
you're
here,
dixie
miller
has
not
joined
us.
Yet
kathy
cohn
has
not
joined
us,
yet
lynn,
kellerdine,
yeah,
remember,
baker
is
going
to
be
absent
and
chair
warmup.
B
C
C
B
Thank
you.
This
is
the
time
for
public
comment.
Pursuant
to
the
brown
act,
public
comment
is
limited
to
only
those
items
that
appear
on
the
agenda.
Two
minutes
will
be
allowed
for
each
speaker.
The
agenda
includes
limited
update
of
the
general
plan,
including
the
proposed
land
use
plan
and
projected
build
out
of
the
plan:
future
housing
units,
population,
jobs,
non-residential
square
footage,
etc
and
other
related
members
matters.
Are
there
members
of
the
public
who
wish
to
testify.
C
Man,
madam
chair
we've,
received
a
few
public
comment:
letters
that
we've
forwarded
to
the
committee.
That
was
from
mr
gamble,
mr
crawford
and
mr
donaldson,
so
those
three
comments
have
been
received
and
forwarded
to
the
committee.
However,
if
there's
anyone
else
who
would
like
to
speak?
Who
is
on
the
call
tonight,
please
either
unmute
yourself
and
you
can
start
by
providing
public
comment
or
you
can
raise
your
hand
and
you
can
provide
comment.
I
see
d
crawford
has
raised
the
hand.
A
Yes,
this
is
dieter
crawford,
desert,
highland
gateway
estates,
neighborhood
community
action
association.
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
staff
and
the
steering
committee
for
all
the
work
that
they've
put
into
this
project.
Thus
far.
I
did
have
a
chance
to
look
at
the
meeting
notes
and
I
have
been
able
to
attend
a
few
of
the
neighborhood
meetings,
so
I
just
want
to
say
I
would
like
to
see
up
in
desert
highland
neighborhood.
A
I
would
like
to
see
a
along
indian
canyon
between
corazon
and
tram
view
near
the
el
mundo
church.
I.
A
There
I
know
the
neighborhood
is
in
need
of
neighborhood
commercial,
we're
looking
for
grocery
stores,
possibly
banks
pharmacies,
things
of
that
nature.
So
that's
one
of
the
only
things.
I
would
like
to
add
to
my
comments
that
I
emailed
over
to
you
guys
and
that
I
also
made
it
the
meeting
yesterday.
B
Thank
you.
Is
there
anyone
else?
A
maribel
nunes
has
her
hand
up
if
you'd,
unmute
yourself
and
speak
yes,.
A
Hi
everyone
maribel
nunez
with
inland
equity
partnership,
and
I
just
wanted
to
add
to
what
dieter
suggested
for
the
desert
highland
in
the
indian
canyon
and
that
that
could
be
looked
into
for
mixed
use
at
zoning.
So
just
wanted
to
reiterate
what
peter
had
mentioned.
Thank
you,
everybody
and
we
look
forward
to
upcoming
meetings
because
we
we
do
have
the
committee
that's
very
involved
and
engaged
in
the
next
phases
of
the
housing
element.
So
thank
you
so
much.
B
D
D
B
And
start
with
the
staff
report,
the
business
tonight
is
a
limited
update
of
the
general
plan,
including
the
proposed
land
use
plan
and
projected
build
out
of
the
planned
future
housing
units,
population,
jobs,
non-residential
square
footage
and
other
related
matters.
I
believe
that
wendy
and
jonathan
nittler
are
going
to
make
a
presentation.
E
E
I
can't
believe
it
and
it
feels
like
a
year
just
kind
of
disappeared
there,
but
hopefully
you'll
see
with
what
we
share
with
you
this
evening
that
we
indeed
have
been
working
on
quite
a
few
things
and
updating
some
things
so
jonathan,
can
you
pull
up
the
powerpoint
great,
thank
you
and
then
just
maybe
get
to
the
agenda
slide
so
tonight
what
we
would
like
to
do
is
on
the
agenda
is
just
kind
of
an
overview
of
where.
B
E
What's
happened
since
we
last
met
and
then
what's
happening
in
the
process?
What's
coming
next
we'd
like
to
go
over
some
of
the
recommended,
landis
changes,
the
map
changes
that
you
guys
had
suggested
so
that
we
can
memorialize
the
discussions
that
we
have
show
you
how
the
map
looks
and
then
also
look
at
how
the
build
out
projections
have
turned
out.
So
what
that
means
for
the
bottom
line,
numbers
for
square
footage
for
units
and
that
sort
of
thing,
because,
ultimately,
from
tonight's
meeting,
what
we
will
do
is
take
this
recommended.
B
E
E
E
Looking
at
some
potential
new
land
use
changes,
especially
those
related
to
the
housing
element
and
some
refinements
to
the
mixed
use
areas
and
looking
at
those
percentage
mixes
that
are
allowed
in
each
one
of
those
defined
areas
and
actually
kind
of
breaking
it
off
a
couple
of
them
and
creating
some
new
ones.
So
we'll
confirm
those
today
next
slide,
please
so
what
has
happened
in
the
last
six
months?
E
Quite
a
few
things
that
happened
and
I'll
ask
david
to
chime
in
here
in
a
minute,
but
a
lot
of
outreach
has
been
happening
related
to
the
vision
statement.
As
you
recall,
council
had
asked
for
some
additional
outreach
to
the
public
regarding
what
additional
things
should
go
into
the
vision
statement.
E
Is
there
anything
missing
so
to
get
a
read
on
that
staff
has
also
been
going
out
in
the
last
two
weeks
to
do
neighborhood
listening
sessions
on
the
vision
on
housing
issues
and
environmental
justice
issues
in
the
neighborhoods,
and
what
we
will
be
doing
is
taking
that
input
and
folding
some
of
that
into
the
process
of
either
the
housing
element,
because
that
will
help
when
we
submit
to
the
the
state,
housing
department
of
housing
and
community
development,
showing
that
the
city
has
done
a
lot
of
outreach
to
the
neighborhoods.
E
C
Certainly
yeah,
so
during
the
past
two
weeks,
we've
had
four
meetings
in
total,
a
range
of
attendance
from
as
little
as
six
at
one
meeting
to
as
much
as
45
at
the
most
recent
meeting.
So
we've
had
some
good
participation.
Some
good
discussions
with
the
community
we've
heard
a
lot
about
housing,
which
is
important.
C
It's
important
to
understand
what
residents
experience
are,
so
it
was
really
great
to
hear
a
lot
of
what
people
are
seen
as
obstacles
or
challenges,
and
I
know
we've
had
some
of
our
committee
members
at
these
meetings,
so
you've
heard
firsthand
some
of
the
the
comments
that
we've
been
receiving
relative
to
not
only
housing
but
other
topics
that
relate
to
environmental
justice
such
as
you
know,
parks,
public
facilities,
access
to
healthy
foods
and
transit.
C
So
if
so,
we
had
a
you
know,
a
discussion
range
on
all
of
these
topics,
and
you
know
a
lot
of
the
feedback
that
we
got
is
just
that
and
affordable
housing.
You
know
we're
lacking,
affordable
housing
and
a
variety
of
housing
types
to
meet
the
housing
needs
of
residents.
We've
heard
a
lot
of
the
challenges
related
to
you
know.
C
Just
keeping
young
people
here
that
you
know
can
afford
housing
or
keeping
people
who
are
in
the
workforce,
who
you
know,
they're
not
able
to
rent
or
purchase
a
home
in
the
community
because
of
the
high
cost
of
living
and
the
high
cost
of
purchase
or
rent
homes
in
palm
springs.
C
So
you
know
again,
we've
heard
other
things
relative
to
parks,
and
you
know
some
of
the
things
that
people
would
like
to
see
in
parks
specifically
more
shade
trees,
some
more
lighting,
some
different
amenities
for
the
parks,
such
as
maybe
pocket
parks
for
skate
parks
or
hockey
or
any
other
active
sport.
C
We've
heard
you
know,
requests
about
public
facilities
related
to
you
know,
lack
of
libraries
or
a
lack
of
library
up
at
the
north
end
requests
to
improve
programming
at
our
public
facilities
and,
of
course,
we've
heard
that
you
know
there
isn't
access
to
healthy
foods
at
the
north
end.
So
you
know
a
grocery
store
is
would
be
an
important
addition
for
that
area
up
in
the
north
area,
northerly
area
of
the
city,
and
then
we've
heard
some
comments
about
transit,
some
issues.
You
know
generally,
that
transit.
C
We
heard
that
the
other
options,
besides
just
the
standard
bus,
you
know,
transit,
that
we
have
that
the
dial-a-ride
service
that
we
have
sometimes
doesn't
work
for
residents
because
of
the
limitations
with
that
program.
C
So,
like
I
said,
we've
had
we've
heard
a
variety
of
different
comments
about
these
various
topics.
So
all
of
this,
as
when
you
said
we'll
be,
we
will
be
evaluating
as
a
part
of
our
housing
element
and
then
looking
at
ways
to
address
these.
Some
of
these
comments
that
we've
heard.
E
We
want
to
make
sure
that
you
guys
have
that
information
as
well
and
one
other
thing
just
for
transparency
in
trying
to
get
out
to
the
community
as
much
as
possible.
We've
worked
closely
with
council
offices
and
we're
hand
distributing
flyers
and
have
had
a
presentation
done
in
spanish
and
flyers
handed
out
in
spanish
and
so
we're
trying
to
get
as
much
attendance
as
possible.
E
B
E
Affordable
housing
subcommittee
and
getting
their
preliminary
input
on
the
things
that
should
be
included,
and
that
was
actually
one
of
the
reasons
some
of
the
additional
listening
sessions
were
prompted
to
relate
to
the
housing
discussions,
and
then
we
have
started
preparing
some
of
the
technical
studies
like
the
vulnerability
assessment.
E
Some
additional
baseline
analyses
for
the
circulation
plan
and
capturing
traffic
count
data,
which
is
a
whole
other
process.
When
you're
trying
to
do
that
in
a
time
of
code,
you
have
to
find
different
resources.
E
The
city
needs
to
get
approval
of
the
document
in
the
beginning
of
next
year.
So
there's
a
flurry
of
activity,
that's
happening
between
now
and
august,
which
you'll
see
right
below.
E
There's
a
couple
meetings:
follow-up
meetings
to
look
at
the
draft
housing
element
with
the
affordable
housing
subcommittee
to
follow
up
on
the
feedbacks
all
the
outreach
that
we
just
did
getting
folded
in
the
previous
conversations
we've
had
with
you
guys
and
with
them
are
getting
folded
in,
and
although
it
is
not
under
the
purview
of
this
group's
scope
to
review
the
housing
element
and
review
all
the
goals
and
policies,
we
will
be
providing
next
week
to
you.
E
A
draft
of
the
housing
element
as
well,
so
that
you
can
take
a
look
at
it
and
see
the
specific
programs
that
are
in
there.
So
you
can
see
how
some
of
the
things
that
you
guys
have
already
started
to
provide
input
that
you've
provided
to
us
for
the
land
use
plan
has
shaped
that
once
the
the
housing
element
has
been
out
available
for
your
review
and
for
the
public's
review
for
a
little
bit,
it
will
go
in
front
of
planning
commission
for
their
review
and
comment
and
then
also
city
council
review.
E
So
our
tentative
schedule
is
to
have
all
that
done
by
the
end
of
the
month,
so
that
we
can
make
any
changes
that
we
need
to
buy
the
the
30th
and
get
that
submitted
in
august
now
hcd
has
a
requirement
to
review
the
housing
element
that
we
submit
within
60
days
and
then
provide
us
comments
back.
So
our
goal
is
to
get
those
comments
hopefully
respond
to
them.
E
There
we'll
see,
we
don't
know
what
we're
gonna
get
it's
different
for
every
city,
so
we'll
see
how
we
do
and
then
we
will
respond
to
those
comments
and
submit
the
second
revision
to
hcd
in
october
and
then
get
word
back
from
them
again
and
then
hopefully
get
a
final
approval
of
the
plan
in
january.
E
So,
depending
on
what
we
get,
what
comments
we
get
back
from
hcd,
you
know
there
may
be
another
time
that
we
need
to
come
before
you
to
talk
about
any
land
use
changes,
but
we're
confident
with
the
suggestions
that
you
all
have
made
so
far
that
they
would
satisfy
the
requirements
that
that
they
need
to
identify
the
land
inventory
for
the
housing
element.
So
we
won't
know
it's
kind
of
like
getting
a
grade.
We
do
the
best
we
can
and
then
we
get
a
grade
and
see
what
they
say.
E
So
that's
that's.
What's
going
on
parallel
next
slide,
please.
E
So
with
all
of
that
you
can
see
this
is
our
overall
process.
We
are
at
the
pink
in
the
middle
of
the
pink
stage,
so
kind
of
believe
it
or
not
in
between.
We
still
have
quite
a
bit
of
time
to
go
through
all
of
this.
By
the
time
we
do
the
environmental,
but
we
will
be
next
working
through.
E
I
think
we
have
four
more
meetings
with
you,
guys,
five
more
meetings
and
we'll
be
going
through
goals
and
policies,
preparing
the
draft
eir
and
then
going
to
public
hearings
and
adoption,
and
so
that
will
be
in
april
of
2022,
so
you'll
it's
gonna
be
a
long
journey
with
us.
So
I
hope
I
appreciate
your
commitment
to
these
meetings
and
your
patients
as
we
prepare
all
of
these
documents
and
navigate
everything.
E
You
know
the
interesting
part
as
we
move
forward
tonight.
The
big
goal
for
this
evening
is
to
really
go
over.
As
I
mentioned,
the
land
plan
and
the
build-out
numbers
that
we
have
the
interesting
part
about
this
process
is
that
when
we
started
the
update
really
was
and
is
an
administrative
update.
So
we
were
looking
at
correcting
some
things.
Related
to
the
pvd
and
then
housing
element
came
up,
so
we
were
asking
for
changes
to
the
land
plan
that
would
help
us
satisfy
the
housing
element.
E
So
that
was
really
the
breadth
of
the
scope
of
this
update.
We
are,
as
we
start,
promoting
and
putting
the
word
out
about
the
land
plan
receiving
additional
comments
about
bigger
picture
changes
that
people
are
asking
for
or
thinking
about
to,
the
land
plan
and
so
we'll
be
reviewing
those
with
staff
flynn
and
david.
We'll
take
a
look
at
those
and
to
the
degree
that
we
can.
E
Them
we
will,
if
they,
you
know,
are
responsive
to
what
we're
trying
to
do
for
housing
and
administrative
updates,
but
if
they're,
bigger
and
they're
a
much
bigger
discussion
about
changes
of
land
use.
That
may
be
something
that
will
have
to
be
taken
up
with
planning
commissioner
council
to
see
if
they
want
to
think
bigger
picture
about
different
changes,
because
that's
also
the
direction
that
we've
been.
I'm
sharing
with
you
guys
about
how
far
we
can
go
on
land.
E
These
changes
so
tonight
we're
hoping
to
get
a
blessing
on
those
changes
that
we've
talked
about
previously
and
then
answer
any
questions
about
how
we've
approached
the
build
out
methodology
or
anything
that's
in
there.
So
we
can
make
sure
we
have
that
buttoned
up
to
move
forward
to
the
community
workshops
and
planning
commission
council.
E
So
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
jonathan
who
will
walk
through
the
changes
that
we
have,
that
you
can
give
you
a
summary
of
all
of
that
and
then
we'll
talk
about
a
few
other
little
corrections
that
we'll
we
want
to
make
to
the
plan
and
make
sure
you
guys
are
okay
with
that
as
well.
F
B
Yeah,
I
would
like
to
take
quick
questions
on
what
you've
presented
so
far.
Okay
and
possibly
we'll
do
it
slide
by
slide,
as
you
present
us,
with
information
you're
looking
for
blessing
on
okay.
E
B
Maybe
I
can
do
something
very
quick
on
that.
Len
consul
still
wants
more
visioning
sessions
somewhat
broader.
I,
the
council
subcommittee,
wants
to
review
with
some
broader
groups.
B
B
C
C
As
madam
chair
said
from
some
of
the
the
business
organizations
in
the
city
as
a
part
of
the
neighborhood
outreach,
we
have
asked
residents
at
each
of
our
meetings
what
their
thoughts
are
on
the
vision
statement,
I've
gotten
some
suggestions
about
the
existing
language
or
the
language
that
has
been
recommended.
I
should
say
not
the
existing,
because
it's
changed
based
on
your
recommendations.
C
So
you
know
there
were
some
comments
about
existing
language.
There
were
some
there's
also
some
comments
about.
You
know,
being
a
healthy
community
being
an
active
and
healthy
community,
ensuring
that
you
know
that's,
that's
what
residents
see
for
the
for
the
future
of
palm
springs
so
so
yeah.
We
will
continue
to
gather
outreach
over
the
next
several
months
here
to
wrap
that
part
of
it
up.
B
And
what
we
found
was
that
people
we
got
better
dialogue
when
we
didn't
use
the
answers
that
had
already
been
prepared,
but
let
people
go
further
afield
in
their
thinking
and
there
will
be
some
work
to
pull
that
back.
B
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
to
city
staff
and
all
of
you
for
for
welcoming
us
tonight.
It's
nice
to
see
all
of
you
again
hope
to
see
you
in
person
very
soon,
and
I
wanted
to
start
this
section
of
the
of
our
meeting
with
an
overview
of
the
proposed
general
plan,
areas
of
change
and
we've
discussed
each
of
these
types
of
changes
in
our
previous
meetings.
F
F
It
has
illustrations
of
each
parcel
that
has
a
change
associated
with
it,
along
with
a
brief
note
explaining
that
change,
and
there
are
two
general
buckets
of
changes
I
think
we've
talked
about
these
before,
but
there
are
those
that
kind
of
fall
in
an
administrative
category
and
those
include
things
like
changes
to
the
alignment
of
parcels
or
boundaries
for
thing,
based
on
better
information
that
we
have
today,
more
higher
quality,
more
accurate
gis
information
and
using
other
resources
also
includes
changes
to
land
uses.
F
That
more
accurately
reflect
what
is
on
the
ground
today
and
is
not
expected
to
change
over
the
horizon
year
of
the
general
plan,
and
that
includes
revision
to
the
smoke
tree
mixed
use
area
that
we
discussed
at
our
last
meeting
and
we'll
talk
about
shortly
when
we
review
the
changes
to
the
mixed-use
area
descriptions.
F
This
also
includes
changes
to
for
consistency
with
implementation
of
the
section
14
specific
plan
and
we've
gotten
some
additional
comments
on
those
that
we'll
share
with
you
as
well.
F
The
new
changes
or
what
what
we
might
call
discretionary
changes,
are
largely
related
to
changes
for
the
housing
element,
and
we
talked
about
this
land
use
or
parcels
specific
parcels
in
the
artist
colony
that
were
recommended
for
redesignation,
from
mixed
use
to
to
high
density
residential,
to
facilitate
residential
development,
to
meet
the
city's
requirements
under
the
housing
element
cycle
and
then
also
looking
at
the
site
in
the
northern
portion
of
the
central
area
of
the
city.
F
F
Now,
looking
at
redevelopment
of
that
site,
which
is
currently
vacant
for
a
largely
residential
use
and
the
the
the
density
of
uses
that
we're
showing
there
were
based
on
the
feedback
that
we
received
from
the
steering
committee.
At
the
last
meeting.
F
I
I've
heard
that
the
chairs
comment,
I
think,
if
we,
if
people
wanted
to
ask
detailed
questions,
this
might
be
a
good
place
to
stop
to
talk
about
that
area
of
change
map.
The
the
next
topic
is
to
talk
about
the
mixed
use
areas.
So
maybe,
if
there
are
questions
related
to
those,
I
ask
that
they
hold
those,
but
I'm
happy
to
answer
questions
about
this.
This
map
or
any
changes
associated
with
it.
B
Lynn,
it's
you
it's
I'm!
I.
B
G
Yeah,
I've
kind
of
got
the
luxury
of
having
three
different
monitors,
so
I've
got
I've
got
you
all
over
here
and
I've
got
the
presentation
here
and
I've
got
the
map
over
here
and
so,
as
I
look
at
the
map,
I
also
pulled
up.
So
my
question
is
about
one
very
specific
parcel
and
that
is
item
number
29.
G
G
Okay,
so
do
you
see
my
screen
with
the
map?
A
G
So
I'm
looking
at
the
item
number
29,
which
is
right
at
parkview,
close
to
desert
park
avenue,
and
I
understand
the
interest
in
making
the
the
particular
parcel
consistent
with
what
is
actually
developed
at
the
site.
So
I've
got
the
google
map
view
there
too.
So
it
is
this
residential
parcel,
but
I'm
also
looking
at
the
zoning
map,
and
so
my
concern
here
is
that
we
appear
to
be
changing
something
for
consistency
with
what
is
constructed
on
this
site.
G
G
But
I
suspect
that
it
would
probably
be
the
the
general
plan
update
after
that
before
there's
any
possible
consideration
of
redeveloping
that
site,
but
the
zoning
for
that
site-
and
I
realized
we're
looking
at
general
plan-
land
use
designations
as
opposed
to
zoning,
but
the
zoning
for
that
site
is
professional
and
professional
does
allow
for
residential
use.
G
I
think,
though,
if
we
are
faced
with
continuing
increase
in
air
traffic
at
the
airport
that
the
we
will
be
very
lucky
if
the
noise
overlay
for
65
cnel
remains
limited
to
the
double
cross-hatched
area.
So
just
a
thought.
I
I
was
more
inclined
to
leave
that
number
29
on
this
map
as
it
is,
and
I
believe
that
was
designated
open
space,
but
anyway,
just
thinking
about
that
as
the
air
traffic
is
increasing
toward
the
end
of
code.
Thank
you.
C
Yeah,
mr
wilson
yeah,
that's
correct,
so
the
site
actually
currently
has
a
professional
or
an
office
land
use
designation.
So
I
think
the
reference
of
the
oh.
It's
not
it's,
not
open.
It's
it's
office
in
our
our
general
pun,
so
I
think
the
reason
we
were
trying
to
accommodate
that
location
specifically
is
because
they've
had
because
it's
an
established
use
and
our
code
is
pretty
restrictive
when
it
comes
to
modifying
existing
uses
that
are
non-conforming,
so
in
order
to
really
allow
the
continuation
of
that
use.
C
I
think
that
was
the
reasoning
for
allowing
this
change
at
that
location,
but
you
know
we
can
always
discuss
it
further.
D
If
it's,
if
a
land
use,
is
inconsistent
with
a
65
cnl
zone
or
more,
more
importantly,
the
safety
zone-
I
don't
know
how
far
the
safety
zone
was
there.
Maybe
you
know,
but
that's
a
pretty
pretty
inconsistent
use.
D
E
The
question
I
have
just
on
process
would
be:
we
would
it
be
appropriate
to
stop
right
now
and
go
through,
because
I
know
dan
has
also
submitted
some
other
suggestions
for
edits
to
the
areas
of
change
map.
So
I
just
want
to
take
a
pause
because
we
can
work
through
and
the
question
is,
you
know,
work
with
the
group
decide
if
that
should
be
office
or
if
it
should
be
the
residential
change
that
we're
showing
or
we
could
kind
of
put
a
pause.
Have
this
be
the
first
one?
E
D
E
So
I
guess
the
question
is
so
we
if
the
group
was
able
to
look
at
it
at
all
ahead
of
time
or
if
we
know
kind
of
each
area,
because
our
intent
was
that
we
would
go
through
the
areas
that
you
guys
had
question
on,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
an
ability
that
people
have
had
a
chance
to
understand
and
look
at
it,
because
obviously
we
have
the
limitations
of
being
virtual.
E
B
F
E
Unfortunately,
because
we
have
a
limited
number
of
meetings,
I
think
if
we
can
go
through
when
we
get
to
the
q
a
part
of
the
meeting,
because
there's
not
a
whole
lot
of
slides.
I
think
jonathan
can
get
through
the
remainder
of
the
slides
fairly
quickly.
And
then
we
can
spend
the
chunk
of
our
time
and
going
through
the
map
and
answering
the
questions
for
you
guys
and
zooming
in
on
those
areas
to
see.
If
we
can
resolve
it,
digitally
and
and
if
there's
any
follow-up,
then
we
can.
Let's.
G
Yeah
through
the
chair,
wendy
and
jonathan
and
david,
I
was
curious.
I
wasn't
totally
sure
what
the
schedule
was.
I
didn't
take
a
look
through
the
the
the
presentation
packet
to
see
what
the
schedule
was
for
providing
comments
on
these
items.
I
didn't
know
if
we
were
hoping
to
resolve
them
at
this
meeting,
but
maybe
if
she
could
just
give
us
a
quick
idea
of
what
that
particular
specific
schedule
is,
that
would
be
good.
E
Yeah
I
mean
I'm
wondering
jonathan,
would
you
mind
jumping
to
the
next
steps
slide,
so
we
could
just
show
that
schedule
quick.
Overall,
we
were
trying
to
get
because
the
changes
were
not.
You
know
we're
kind
of
limited
in
nature.
We
were
trying
to
get
direction
from
you
guys.
The
intent
was
this
evening
on
the
map,
so
we
have
because
we
have
to
move
forward
with
the
housing
element
so
quickly.
All
of
those
meetings
you
saw
with
the
housing
element
moving
that
forward.
E
We
need
to
know
at
this
meeting
that
those
changes
were
that
that
are
included
in
the
land.
Use
inventory
are
okay,
because
otherwise
we
can't
submit
tapes
so
that
that's
kind
of
our
most
immediate
need,
because
all
these
things
are
lined
up
so
closely
because
we
had
to
back
work
backwards
from
that
august
middle
date,
so
that
we
can
meet
the
statutory
deadlines.
E
So
we
don't
have
a
lot
of
luxury
of
time
on
on
going
back
and
forth
on
comments,
so
we
in
july
we're
already
scheduled.
I
mean
we're
meeting
with
you
guys
and
then
we
have
the
public
workshop
on
the
the
land
use
of
build
out
as
well.
So
in
a
couple
weeks,
we're
scheduled
to
do
that.
E
B
I
think
that's
the
goal,
but
let's
see
where
we
get
with
this,
and
we
might
have
to
have
some
period,
at
least
for
people
to
submit
their
concerns
to
you
after
the
meeting
and
a
more
thorough
review
and
yes
do.
We
need
to
spend
a
lot
of
time
on
this,
or
can
we
go
through
the
issues.
A
A
Suggest,
let's
find
out
what
staff
recommends,
because
I
mean
we're
45
minutes.
D
C
Yeah,
if
we
can
again,
I
think
the
important
issue
is
a
lot
of
the
things
that
we're
looking
at
tonight
have
previously
been
evaluated.
But
if
there's
something
that's
not
clear
or
doesn't
make
sense,
or
if
it's
an
error
or
something,
then
certainly
we
would
like
to
make
sure
we
have
those
things
cleaned
up.
C
So
I
don't
think
that
the
the
changes
that
you're
looking
at
are
really
going
to
be
too
substantive
to
be
concerned
about,
because
these
are
things
that
either
we've
talked
about
in
the
past
or
you
know,
or
you
know,
they
could
just
be
something
that
we
could
resolve
fairly
easily
and
if
it
requires
us
going
through
each
of
the
sites-
and
you
know
we're
happy
to
do
that.
But
again
I
think
it's
you
know
the
stuff
that
we're
looking
at
is
stuff
that
we've
kind
of
already
gone
over
before.
F
Okay,
so
moving
forward
just
wanted
to
report
back
to
you
on
the
changes
that
we've
made
to
the
mixed
use
areas.
When
we
last
met,
we
discussed
potential
changes
to
both
the
definitions
for
the
mixed
use,
multi-use
areas
and
the
descriptions
of
the
mixed-use
areas,
including
their
target
use
percentages
and
based
on
those
discussions.
We
made
revisions
that
are
captured
in
the
the
document
that
you
received
last
week.
F
Titled
recommended
revisions
to
land,
use,
definitions
and
descriptions
in
the
general
plan.
It's
the
one
that
has
strike
out
an
underlying
annotations,
highlighting
which
changes
are
recommended
to
the
current
general
plan,
land
use
text
and
so
just
wanted
to
report
out
to
the
steering
committee
on
the
changes
that
we
made
and
and
summarizing
those
at
a
high
level.
Here
in
response
to
what
we
heard.
The
first
was
regarding
the
indian
canyon.
Drive
in
san
rafael
drive
mixed
use
area.
F
We
heard
about
a
desire
for
more
neighborhood
serving
commercial
uses
in
this
area
and
heard
that
in
a
comment
earlier
this
evening,
so
we
reduced
the
industrial
percentage
target
industrial
target
percentage
and
raised
the
commercial,
the
percentage
as
an
indication
of
what
the
intention
was
for
this
area
changed
tweaked
the
descript,
the
the
description
of
this
area
as
well,
which
you
can
see
in
that
document
in
vistacino
and
sunrise.
F
The
the
changes
to
this
area
reflects
the
addition
of
the
desert
aids
project
campus
as
a
a
supplement
to
the
parcels
that
were
already
identified
for
a
mix
of
uses
at
this
at
this
intersection,
and
so
those
changes
were
made
to
reflect
the
uses
that
are
envisioned
under
that
campus
plan,
which
was
adopted
last
year.
I
believe
in
december,
at
palm
canyon,
drive
and
sunny
dunes.
F
We,
if
you
recall
this
area,
was
characterized
in
the
2007
general
plan
as
showing
three
different,
distinct
areas
along
palm
canyon,
east
and,
with
you
know,
based
on
discussions
with
the
steering
committee,
who
has
decided
that
we
would
break
those
out
into
two
areas,
reflecting
the
the
western
portion
of
the
area
would
remain
with
the
smoke
tree
title
and
in
that
area
we
increased
the
commercial
percentages
to
reflect
what
those
uses
for
that
more
more
specific
area
is
today,
in
the
middle,
we
made
an
adjustment
to
remove
the
mixed
use
and
to
reflect
the
uses
on
the
ground
there
that
are
unlikely
to
change
during
the
lifetime
of
the
plant,
so
that
middle
portion
was
actually
removed
from
the
smoke
tree.
F
Mixed
use
as
a
mixed
use
area.
Sorry,
and
then
we
defined
a
new
mixed
use
area
called
palm
canyon,
east
gateway,
which
was
formerly
that
that
eastern
portion
of
parcels
at
the
city
boundary
and
define
that
the
vision
for
that
area
as
an
iconic
gateway
to
the
city
and
then
the
higher
education
campus
is
the
change
in
title
for
what
had
been
referred
to
as
the
palm
springs.
Mall
area
and
that
the
change
in
the
description
and
title
is
reflective
of
the
real
or
the
intent
to
locate
the
college
of
the
desert
campus
there.
F
That
is
a
summary
of
the
changes
to
the
the
land
use
plan
and
area
descriptions.
F
B
A
B
Discussed
but
it
wasn't,
there
was
no
recommendation
made
as
I
believe
so
that
might
be
good
to
elaborate
on
that,
and
I
think
people
are
aware
of
the
higher
education
campus.
I
don't
know
if
people
know
what
the
eland
project
is.
F
F
A
F
The
area
that
was
formally
mixed
use
that
has
been
changed
to
its
its
current
use
on
the
ground
use
is
located
here
along
matthew
and
around
matthew
and
cherokee.
So
the
proposed
plan
now
reflects
the
current
uses
there,
which
are
not,
which
are
neighborhood
commercial
and
high
design
density
residential,
and
then
this
parcel
here
on
the
eastern
edge
of
the
city,
south
of
palm
canyon,
was
previously
identified
as
mixed
use
and
it
was
associated
with
this
larger
smoke.
B
And
what
do
you
plan
for
that?
Because
I
don't
there's
only
been
one
plan.
That's
come
through
that
hasn't
been
actualized,
never
went
anyplace.
F
Yeah,
I
can
just
I
mean
the
description
is
in
the
document
that
that
was
had
went
to
the
committee.
It's
described
as
an
opportunity
for
an
iconic
mix-use
development
that
serves
as
a
gateway
to
the
city.
F
There's
a
mix
of
commercial
and
residential
uses,
described
as
being
of
moderate
scale
that
respects
the
natural
features
of
the
site
in
the
surrounding
area.
I
you
know
recall
from
our
last
meeting
there
was
some
discussion
of
of
the
that.
The
natural
features
there
are
will,
you
know,
have
are
a
large
determinant
of
what
you
can
actually
build.
The
preferred
mix
of
uses
is
40
to
60
percent
residential
uses
and
40
to
60
commercial
uses.
B
The
one
year
matthew
drive
had
both
habitat
and
drainage
line.
41
is
coming
in
so
in
two
to
four
years.
It
should
be
there
which
may
deal.
But
the
question
is
we
don't
know
how
that'll
deal
with
either
habitat
or
drainage,
yeah.
C
C
And
going
back
to
the
question
about
the
lawn
project?
That's
further!
It's
the
project!
That's
the
mixed
use
in
this
mixed-use
area,
shown
here
at
the
south
side
of
the
topwoods
creek
on
the
west
side
of
oh.
B
C
No,
so
we're
keeping
it
still
part
of
that
whole
mixed
use
area,
but
because
that
is
we
know
that
is
being
developed,
is
all
residential
and
in
its
entirety
at
least
for
the
that
project.
We
upped
the
residential.
D
Smoker's
rights,
translation,
the
dictation,
I'd
like
to
look
at
the
the
big
commercial
mixed
use
block
between
toledo
and
well,
it's
kind
of
between
laverne
and
verona.
We've
got
the
two
different
shopping
centers.
D
How
did
would
that
work
is
mixed.
Use
is
that
whole
area
really
mixed
use,
since
it's
all
commercial
today.
C
There's
a
residential
development
within
the
middle
of
it.
There
are
some
undeveloped
parcels
that
potentially
could
provide
residential.
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we,
you
know,
accounted
for
those
potentially.
D
Yeah
I
I
had
envisioned
that
we
would
take
those
partial
undeveloped
parcels
there
in
the
center
and
adjacent
to
the
existing
housing
and
including
the
cocoa
site,
potentially,
and
maybe
even
the
bank
america
site
and
identify
them
as
either
mixed
use
or
residential
there's
a
mixed
use,
residential
node
in
between
between
the
two
large
centers.
D
D
Well,
I
would
limit
the
mixed
use
or
limit
the
mixed
use
to
be
that
the
undeveloped
sections
around
smoke
tree
road.
I
think
it's
now
called
it's
in
the
center.
It's
the
entrance
to
smoke
tree
where
you've
got
the
old,
cocos
restaurant
and
the
undeveloped
areas
between
the
smoke,
creek
plaza
where
the
hardware
store
is
and
the
a
smoke
tree
smoke
tree
road,
whatever
the
the
public
street
that
goes
in
there.
D
B
Does
that
fit
with
what
david
yeah.
C
Mix
of
uses
for
the
this
designation
or
this
area
of
mixed
use
is
30
to
40
percent,
residential
and
60
to
70
percent
commercial.
D
Is
that
consistent
with
the
residential
just
being
on
that
one
area
or
with
that
look
at
you're,
looking
at
the
whole
site.
E
E
So
when
we
talked
about
it
last
time
we
had
talked
about
some
of
the
existing
residential
being
there
and
not.
You
know
adding
so
that's
why
the
percentage
of
the
30
to
40
percent
was
lower,
because
the
intent
was
really
to
focus
on
what
was
left
to
make
it
commercial.
So
that's
where
the
60
to
70
came
in,
so
we
adjusted
that
up
to
allow
for
more
commercial
and
less
residential.
D
C
We
have
that
we've
revised
the
description
to
specifically
identify
what
you're
saying
so
that's
shown
in
the
material.
That
is
exactly
what
we're
changing
the
text
to
say,
vacant
and
underutilized
parcels.
Okay,
they
can,
under
utilize
parcels
such
as
the
former
cocos,
provide
opportunities
for
multi-family
residential
infill
development.
D
B
And
people,
if
on
the
commission,
if
you
have
questions,
please
just
speak
up,
because
I
can't
see
your
hands
unless
david
ken.
A
E
E
Previously,
it
was
55
to
65
industrial
and
it
was
reduced
down
to
40
to
50,
and
then
the
commercial
was
changed
to
25
to
35
residential
is
allowed
in
that
area
15
to
25.
But
there
was
no
change
to
the
percentage
on
that
one.
So
essentially,
the
industrial
is
ratcheted
down
a
little
bit
and
the
commercials
bumped
up.
C
C
So
if
there's
other
ways
that
we
can
look
at
attracting
market
up
in
this
area,
you
know.
Certainly
we
would
evaluate
that.
One
of
the
suggestions
that
you've
received
tonight
was
to
change
some
areas
along
that,
what's
called
frontage
road
on
indian
to
a
mixed
use
as
opposed
to
the
neighborhood
commercial.
C
But
you
know
that
potentially
could
mean,
there's
still
a
challenge
with
attracting
a
grocery
market,
where
you
have
a
fragmented
parcels
on
that
southwest
corner
of
tranview
road
in
indian.
There
is
a
larger
parcel
in
the
northwest
corner
of
rosa
parks
and
indian.
That
potentially
could
accommodate
a
market.
D
B
F
This
is
consistent
with
what
what
the
committee
recommended
at
the
last.
E
So
it's
a
mix
of
medium
density,
residential,
the
orange
and
then
there's
high
density,
residential
on
the
east
side
of
the
property
and
leaving
the
corner
for
neighborhood
commercial.
Okay.
So
it's
a
it's
a
little
bit,
so
it's
it
actually
works,
creating
a
kind
of
a
corridor
residential
and
a
transition
to
the
medium
density.
D
On
that
parcel,
I
have
a
question:
do
we
envision
the
formerly
planned
sunrise,
parkway
extension
over
to
east
palm
canyon?
Is
that
coming
back?
It
was
taken
out
for
the
college,
but
it
might
be
appropriate
to
bring
it
back
if
that's
residential.
C
Yeah,
I
think
we
still
it's
still
not
planned
to
go
through
because
there's
no
with
the
development
of
of
the
mountain
gate
project,
there
isn't
a
connection
to
provide
to
palm
canyon.
D
F
Okay
artist
colony
here
there
were
no
changes
to
the
description
or
percentage,
although,
as
we
had
discussed
previously,
there
was
the
change
from
a
mixed-use
designation
to
high-density
residential
to
facilitate
residential
development.
Here
at
the
southern
portion,.
F
Uptown,
the
area
here
there's
no
change
to
the
description
or
target
mix
of
uses,
except
to
remove
multi-use
from
the
description
and
just
we've
at
the
last
being
discussed,
removing
that
from
the
definition
and
just
consolidating
under
mixed
use.
C
Yeah,
I
believe,
that's
a
little
bit
further
south,
where
the
brown
is
between
palm
and
indian.
Okay,
that's
currently
high
density
residential.
I
think
the
challenge
is
going
to
be
how
we
address
the
mixed
use.
Zoning
challenges
that
we're
seeing
when
you
have
some
split
zoning
issues
and
you
know
integrating
the
sites
appropriately.
F
Vista
vistacino
and
sunrise
is
the
next
area
going
through
the
definition.
This
is.
These
are
the
parcels
south
of
vistaccino
and
west
of
sunrise
that
were
added
from
the
desert.
Aids
campus.
A
E
F
Okay,
further
south,
this
is
the
we
talked
about
the
palm
canyon
and
sunny
dunes
road
so
again
that
the
percentages
there
just
to
clarify
changed
from
from
30
to
50
commercial
and
30
30
to
50
office,
to
40
to
60
commercial
slash
office.
And
then
the
residential
portion
was
raised
from
fifteen
to
twenty
percent
to
forty
to
sixty
percent.
F
F
So
the
percentages
there
changed
from
25
to
35,
residential
and
25
to
30
office,
to
20,
to
40
commercial,
slash
office
and
60
to
80
percent
school
and
associated
uses.
H
This
is
kurt
watts.
I
had
a
question
on
the
description
for
the
higher
education
campus
area.
I
was
a
little
confused
in
terms
of
how
the
percentages
were
being
represented,
because
it
was
my
understanding
that,
with
the
possibility
of
the
camelot
theater,
all
of
the
remainder
of
the
site
is
all
owned
by
college
of
the
desert.
H
So
correct
me:
if
I'm
wrong
on
that,
and
yet
there's
discussion
here
about
those
percentages
having
commercial
uses
that
the
campus
might
be
operating
and
then
it
says,
restaurant
hotel
or
commercial
operated
by
the
school
used
for
instructional
purposes
shall
count
toward
the
ratio
of
school
and
associated
uses.
H
H
C
I
I
think
our
the
idea
there
was
that,
in
the
event
that
the
school
chose
to
have
a
fully
functional
operation,
you
know
if
it
was
a
restaurant
or
some
other
type
of
commercial
use,
that
we
wouldn't
necessarily
want
to
exclude
the
opportunity
for
that
to
be
considered
as
part
of
the
other
commercial
percentages.
H
E
D
Getting
back
to
the
smoke
tree,
that's
it
not!
Excuse
me
the
palm
canyon
site
at
where
is
there
at
they're
there
by
the
wash
mixed
use
right
there
we
ran
into
some
trouble
legally
or
there
was
a
lawsuit
issue.
E
So
if
another
project
were
to
come
in
to
that
would
put
it
over
one
of
those
percentage
ranges,
then
they
could
put
that
in
as
part
of
their
application,
and
then
you
can
take.
E
D
Like
an
irvine
business,
complex
type
of
thing,
okay,
yeah.
F
And
I
think
that
there
was
some
clarifying
language
that
we
had
added
to
the
description
of
the
mixed
use
zones
that
you
know
added.
You
know
that
there's
flexibility
and
that
they're,
you
know
a
target
to
help
guide
development.
These
ratios
and
the
ultimate
composition
of
each
area
may
vary
in
response
to
market
conditions
as
they
evolve.
E
So
it's
kind
of
a
guide,
it's
kind
of
a
you
know,
it's
kind
of
that.
Stop
signal
where
you're
starting
to
get
to
a
point
where
it's
a
tipping
point.
So
if
somebody
doesn't
just
come
in
and
just
do
all
commercial
if
there's
supposed
to
be
a
residential
mix,
but
we
did
want
to
add
that
flexibility
so
lynn,
I
think
what
you're
wanting
to
make
sure
is
that
you
know
where
legally
do
we
have
enough
play
room
in
it
and
what
does
that
do?
Are
you
at
a
stopping
point,
but
the
intent
is.
E
Are
there
further
questions
on
the
mixed
use
areas,
or
would
it
be
a
good
time
for
jonathan
to
go
through
you
know
kind
of
the
projections
or
do
we
have
want
to
go
through
some
of
those
other
changes
where
I
know
we
talked
about
area
29
and
then
dan
had
a
couple.
Other
suggestions
for
land
use
refinements.
So
do
we
want
to
touch
upon
those
now
or
and
then
do
the
overall
build
out
later.
F
F
So
this
would
be
slide
15
in
your
packet,
and
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
that
we
did
make
one
revision
to
this
slide
because,
just
prior
to
the
meeting
we
got
some
updated
numbers
that
were
run
within
the
parameters
of
build
out
calculations,
but
just
to
go
through
orient
everyone.
F
These
are
changes
to
the
section
14
specific
plan
or
area.
These
were
some
changes
that
dan
had
received
or
had
submitted
in
response
to
the
draft
materials
and
providing
comments
on
on
behalf
of
the
tribe.
F
Essentially
what
we
were
showing
at
this,
this,
the
southwest
corner
of
sunrise
and
alejo,
was
a
change
from
an
existing
multi
or
medium
density
residential
to
neighborhood
serving
commercial
and
which
was
inconsistent
with
the
recommendations
of
the
section
14
plan.
So
we
made
that
change
to
remove,
but
to
change
that
back
to
a
medium
density,
residential
use,
and
then
it
would
then
it
would
be
removed
from
the
areas
of
change
map,
which
is
what
we're
showing
here,
because
it's
no
longer
being
considered
for
change.
F
The
other
change
made
was
these
sites
had
been
shown.
South
of
amato.
Road
west
of
sunrise
had
not
been
shown
as
an
area
of
change
and
a
dan
clarified
that
those
should
be
shown
as
also
changing
to
neighborhood
commercial.
So
this
is
what
the
updated
area
of
change
map
will.
Look
like
we'll.
You
know
be
circulating
that
to
the
committee
after
this
meeting,
but
I
don't
don't
know
if
one
at
first
wanted
to
confirm
with
dan
that
those
reflect
the
comments
that
he
submitted
and
also
to.
E
And
jonathan,
to
clarify
with
the
committee
that
we
that
on
the
landis
map
that
they
receive,
those
are
not
shown,
so
we
are
presenting
these
in
visual
form
and
yeah
dan
would
love
you
to
chime
in
if
we
didn't
get
it
right.
So
we
wanted
to
make
sure
that
these
seemed
like
straightforward
corrections,
but
want
to
make
sure
that
the
group
saw
it
and
was
comfortable
with
it
before
we
made
those,
and
so
those
changes
that
you're
seeing
the
bullet
points.
E
When
we
show
you
the
build
out
for
the
proposed
general
plan,
these
have
not
yet
been
incorporated
in
those
numbers,
so
there'll
be
some
minor
refinements
and
tweaks,
but
at
least
this
would
give
you
the
scale
of
what
that
means
about
adding
two
units
and
six
people
and
then
reducing.
You
know
by
three
thousand
square
feet.
So
they're.
D
A
D
D
A
D
H
D
E
All
right,
so
I'm
hearing
generally
that
the
group
is
okay
with
these
changes,
so
we
have
not
working
on
the
maps
and
we
have
not
yet
updated
the
build
out.
But
you'll
see
those
changes
reflected
in
the
build
out
when
it
goes
to
the.
F
Now
we're
hopping
around
a
bit
but
where
we
left
off
was
with
actually
an
overview
of
the
build-out
projections.
So
if
I
might
I'll,
I
would
we'll.
A
F
Up
there,
so
I
first
wanted
to
just
give
you
a
little
bit
of
overview
on
the
purpose
of
the
build-out
projections,
and
I
think
it's
important
to
note
first,
that
they
are
required
by
the
state.
As
part
of
this
general
plan
update.
F
They
are
also
utilized
as
a
foundation
for
modeling
and
for
technical
studies
undertaken
during
the
environmental
review
process.
So
they
help
our
team
to
determine.
You
know,
does
the
infrastructure
that
is
existing
today
plan
for
the
future?
Is
it
adequate
to
serve
the
the
build-out
that
is
shown
determined
by
the
the
general
plan?
Land
use
designations?
F
The
information
that
we
utilize
to
to
put
these
calculations
together
come
from
a
number
of
different
sources.
They
come
from
federal
state,
local,
regional
governments,
and
we
also
use
those
to
benchmark
the
calculations
that
we
build
up
from
the
parcel
level.
So
looking
at
the
characteristics
of
every
single
parcel
within
the
city
and
just
thinking
more
broadly
for
us
and
for
for
your
consideration,
the
build-out
numbers
provide
a
quantification
of
the
cumulative
impact
of
the
decisions
that
we've
made
along
the
way.
F
So
those
decisions
we've
been
talking
about
previously
in
this
meeting
and
in
prior
meetings
lead
to
the
numbers
that
we'll
review
with
you
so
before
we
dive
into
the
numbers
themselves.
We
just
want
to
provide
a
brief
summary
of
what
those
decisions
add
up
to
and
the
changes
that
are
reflected
in
the
build-out
and
again
I'll
review.
Those
numbers
in
a
moment
demonstrate
a
commitment
to
increased
housing,
production
and,
and
those
are
reflected
in
some
of
this-
the
the
changes
that
we've
been
discussing
tonight
around
the
mixed
use
areas.
F
We
also
in
the
build-out
numbers
are
accounting
for
a
increasing
number
of
accessory
dwelling
unit
production.
This
is
reflected
in
the
housing
element
and
it
is
based
on
recent
trends
within
the
city
and
increases
in
edu
production
and
looking
out
to
the
out
for
the
next
20
years.
F
These
changes,
you
know,
as
we've
been
kind
of
discussing
along
the
way,
are
meant
to
meet
the
needs
or
the
requirements
identify
for
the
city
for
its
next
housing
element
in
terms
of
total
number
of
housing
units
that
need
to
be
accommodated,
and
it
meets
the
no
le
no
net
loss
provisions
of
sb
330,
which
essentially
says
that
the
number
of
total
housing
units
that
the
city
accommodates
cannot
fall
below
the.
A
F
Okay
and
then
at
a
high
level,
these
are
the
summary
numbers
that
are
capitals,
sorry
captured
in
the
the
build
out
document
memo
that
was
shared
with
the
committee
members
in
advance.
In
the
meeting,
there
is
a
lot
of
detailed
tables,
a
lot
of
description
of
the
methodology
which
we're
happy
to
answer,
questions
about
or
discuss,
but
I
wanted
to
just
at
a
very
high
level
start
the
conversation
by
identifying
the
the
major
findings.
F
So
those
are
cons.
Any
amendments
made,
but
after
the
2007
plan
was
adopted
up
until
today
are
considered
as
current
as
falling
within
the
purview
of
the
current
general
plan,
and
then
the
proposed
general
plan
is
those
changes
that
we
reviewed
with
you
tonight
and
we've
been
talking
about
previously,
both
administrative
and
discretionary,
so
just
to
describe
a
little
bit
more
about
how
these
numbers
are
calculated.
F
Housing
units
is
under
the
existing
category
is
derived
again
from
looking
at
the
parcel
level
data.
When
we
project
out
to
the
current
general
plan
or
the
proposed
general
plan,
we
use
a
multiplying
factor
that
is
based
on
the
anticipated
density
or
units
per
acre
of
each
site
that
is
designated
for
some
type
of
residential
use,
whether
it
be
all
residential
or
mix
of
uses
that
allows
residential
or
commercial
area
that
allows
residential
for
the
household
category.
F
F
How
that's
calculated
how
it's
applied-
and
you
know
we're
happy
to
entertain
those
and
have
a
discussion
of
that,
but
maybe
I'll
set
that
aside
for
the
moment,
as
I
described
the
table
itself
and
you'll,
see
that
there
is
a
substantial
increase
between
the
occupancy
number
that
is
assigned
for
the
existing
on
the
ground
conditions
versus
the
the
the
build-out
scenario,
and
that
essentially,
is
the
the
vacancy
rate
based
on
or
the
reverse
of,
the
vacancy
rate
based
on
the
number
of
full-time
residents
in
the
city.
F
The
population
is
derived
by
using
the
household
data
as
the
baseline
and
multiplying
that
by
the
person
for
households
projection,
which
is
based
on
the
average
persons
per
household,
which
is
essentially
around
two.
It
fluctuates
just
a
tad
over
time,
but
is
generally
around
two
persons
per
household.
F
That's
how
we
arrive
at
the
numbers
that
around
residential
uses
in
residence
within
the
city
to
calculate
non-residential
uses.
We
look
at
the
parcels
that
are
assigned
a
non-residential
designation,
so
that
would
cover
things
like
commercial
retail
office.
F
Industrial
airport
would
also
apply
to
the
non-residential
portions
of
mixed-use
sites
and
that
square
footage
is
calculated
by
multiplying
that
acreage
of
non-residential
uses
by
the
floor
area
ratio
which
is
or
far,
which
is
the
allowable
square
footage
of
space
determined
by
the
footprint
of
the
site,
to
and
and
then
to
calculate
jobs
that
are
associated
with
those
non-residential
uses.
We
we
apply
employment
generation
rates
that
for
each
non-residential,
use
type.
So
in
the.
A
F
Has
the
the
non-residential
rates
that
we've
applied
in
terms
of
number
of
jobs
and
it's
often
per
square
feet
for
these
different
use
types.
F
Is
that
what
you
see
is
an
increase
in
the
projected
amount
of
residential
units
again,
for
the
reasons
that
I
had
had
described
a
few
moments
ago
and
a
reduction
in
the
overall
projected
amount
of
non-residential
square
footage
and
thus
associated
jobs.
So
that
is
the
decisions
that
we've
been
making
from
a
policy
and
a
land
use
perspective
in
in
numerical
form.
G
I
have
a
question
about
some
of
those
calculations.
So
jonathan
touched
on
the
fact
that
a
typical
household
is
about
two
people.
G
A
F
Sure
so
it
was
if
the
the
persons
per
household
number
is
specific
to
palm
springs,
so
both
for
the
existing
on
the
ground
comes
from
the
department
of
finance
information
and
that's
and
then
for
the
projected
historically
over
time
again,
looking
specifically
at
palm
springs,
that
person's
per
household
factor
has
has
been
relatively
constant
at
a
between
1.98
and
2.0
persons
per
household
over
the
last
five
years.
F
So
that
is,
it
is
specific
to
palm
springs,
and
it
is
projected
out
based
on
the
recent
trends
in
the
city
and
then
what
you'll
also
see
is
we
have
in
the
tables
we
have
a
different
persons
per
household
factor
that
is
applied
for
single
family
residences
versus
multi-family
residences,
so
and
then
on
on
sites,
where
or
in
land
use
designations
that
might
allow
for
both
types
abuses.
E
F
D
D
Okay,
there's,
I
think
I
understand
where
we've
got
the
numbers,
that
we've
got,
that
if
you
look
at
the
table-
and
you
see
the
65.3
occupancy
for
the
existing
condition
that
doesn't
reflect
the
fact
that
we're
a
tourist
town,
we
have
a
high
number
of
vacant
units
now.
For
for
reasons,
I
think
after
the
department
of
finance
were
for
projecting
95
occupancy
in
the
in
the
future.
D
I
suspect
that
is
high.
I
don't
have
any
reason
to
know
why
that
we
would
go
from
65
to
95
percent
of
that
the
number
of
vacant
units
because
of
their
vacation
homes
or
whatever
tourist
homes
or
rentals.
Something
like
that.
I
don't
know
that
that
number
is
going
to
go
up
to
anywhere
near
95.
E
Sure
yeah
a
couple
reasons
for
that
and
I
think
there's
two
things
kind
of
going
on
here:
there's
like
population
growth,
which
is
you
know
time
what
happens
over
time.
So
that's
why
you're
you
know
you're
seeing
occupancy
and
then
there's
also
when
we're
looking
at
for
the
general
plan.
It's
the
overall.
E
You
know
it's
kind
of
like
what
your
capacity
is
you're
carrying
capacity,
and
so
we
talked
to
the
environmental
folks
on
our
team
too,
just
to
firm
this
up,
but
from
an
environmental
perspective,
it's
hard
for
them
to
say,
you're
going
to
have
units
that
aren't
going
to
be
occupied.
They
can't
they
have
to
admit
if
you're
showing
a
unit,
they
have
to
assume
it's
going
to
be
occupied.
E
So
when
we're
looking
at
95,
that's
you
know,
fudging
it
down
a
little
bit
because
we
know
not
all
units
are
100
occupied,
but
when
you're
looking
at,
if
a
unit,
if
you
have
the
ability
to
build
a
unit
at
some
point,
it's
going
to
be
occupied,
so
they
have
to
look
at
these
cracks
going
out
now.
I
know
when
you
suggested
there
was
a
case
to
where
they
had
adjusted
the
baseline.
You
know
so
it's
like.
E
Do
you
bring
up
the
occupancy
of
the
existing
the
baseline,
but
the
case
that
you
had
presented
dealt
with
transit,
yep
and.
E
You
know
you,
you
have
to
know
that
that
first
phase
is
going
to
get
done
to
be
able
to
start
the
second
phase.
So
it's
a
little
bit
different
here
and
the
other
thing
is
that
we
don't
know
over
time
and
we've
seen
with
covet
in
some
cases
you
know
some
people
a
lot
more
people
are
working
remotely
and
now
their
full-time
occupancy
is
maybe
somewhere
else
because
they
have
ability
to
work
remotely.
So
we
have
no
way
to
predict
what
that
occupancy
is
going
to
be.
E
So
if
the
unit
is
there,
we
have
to
assume
that
there's
going
to
be
some
occupancy
now,
when
we're
looking
at
say,
infrastructure
needs,
the
infrastructure
in
and
of
itself
would
have
to
look
at
okay,
what's
actually
getting
built
and
that
growth
rate,
so
obviously
you're
not
going
to
build
a
you
know
a
sewer
plant
for
all
95
occupancy
right
now
it
would
follow
what
that
actual
growth
is.
But
when
we're
looking
at
the
environmental,
we
have
to
assume
that
at
some
point
those
units
are
all
going
to
be
occupied.
D
I
understand
why
we
may
be
doing
this.
I
just
when
I
did
the
numbers.
D
If
I
looked
at
the
population
increase
due
to
just
increasing
the
occupancy
rate
from
65
to
95,
that
was
half
the
population
increase
roughly
by
my
math
and
then
my
may
have
not
been
right,
because
I
was
trying
to
understand
all
the
details
of
your
model,
but
it
came
out
roughly
half
of
that,
and
so
we're
really.
I
think,
if
we're
looking
at
the
picture
here,
we're
going
from
twenty
three
thousand
197
existing.
D
I
guess
I'm
looking
at
households
there
at
a
51,
let's
look
at
the
population,
rather
56
46
000
to
over
100
000,
that's
more
than
a
doubling,
but
half
of
that
doubling
is
really
just
increasing
the
occupancy
and
it.
So
I
think
somehow
we
need
to
discuss
that
know
and
I'm
real
familiar
with
the
sql
baseline
case
issue.
D
I
think
the
transit
ones
are
relevant
here
because
it
all
has
to
do
with
how
you
deal
with
the
background
growth
that
may
occur,
and
certainly
we
can
carry
a
discussion
number
of
what
the
existing
population
would
be
if
we're
95
percent
occupied,
and
I
think
actually
that
record,
we
get
that
on
our
peak
weekend
days.
Probably
that
is
the
actual
population
of
the
city.
D
During
the
the
season
on
peak
weekends
and
in
some
cases
we
do
need
to
be
building
our
infrastructure
to
deal
with
that,
but
I
just
wait
just
leaving
it
the
way
it
is.
I
have
two
concerns
that
if
I
was
a
resident,
I
go
we're
going
to
double
the
population
of
the
city,
more
than
double
the
population
of
the
city
and
and
and
we're
making
it
worse.
D
By
going
to
this
new
proposed
journal
plan,
but
going
up
from
95
to
100
to
201
000
roughly
when
the
the
comparable
population
figure
really
for
the
existing
would
be
something
like.
I
think
I
came
up
with
65
000
70
000
somewhere
in
there
and
I've
I
that
number's
only
me
and
even
in
the
old
journal
plan.
Why
are
we
going?
Why
are
we
doubling
the
population
of
the
city
when
we're
almost
built
out.
D
D
H
This
is
kurt
watts,
if
I
might
be
able
to
add
in,
I,
you
know,
share
the
views
in
terms
of
what
the
visual
of
this
is,
and
my
question
was
initially,
if
we
have
these
higher
numbers
without
any
comment
related
to
it
in
there
about
what
our
typical
occupancy
has
been
historically
or
whatever,
can
this
higher
number
be
pulled
out
and
in
some
cases
say
misused
or
services
or
things
that
are
geared
toward
full-time
residents?
Let's
say
parks
for
example,
say
because
we're
projected
to
be
at
95
000.
H
We
need
to
double
our
amount
of
park
space
when,
in
reality,
the
people
who
are
having
second
homes
or
vacation
rentals,
which
only
seem
to
be
maintaining,
if
not
increasing,
we
might
get
a
real
distortion
and
a
misuse
of
some
of
these
numbers
when
it's
based
on
an
occupancy.
That
is
highly
unlikely,
if
not
impossible,
that
we
will
be
reaching
anytime
in
the
near
future.
E
E
So
if
we
don't
have
any
backup
information
to
show
that
you
know
it's
okay,
so
when
you
have
your
peak
times,
you
know
your
peak
seasons
if
it's
spring
and
fall.
How
often
is
that?
What
is
the
occupancy?
Where,
where
can
we
get
information
on
that?
That's
that
was
the
the
concern
our
sequa
practitioner
had
because
it's
like,
if
you're
showing
a
unit,
it
could
be
occupied,
and
we
don't
know
even
if
we
did
it
today
and
we
knew
what
traditional
occupancy
is.
We
don't
know
what
factors
could
change
in
the
future.
E
That
would
shift
that.
So
there
is
a
potential
that
we
underestimate,
because
we
use
what
was
going
on
now
and
something
that
we
didn't
predict
like
covid
could
happen
and
that
could
push
it
to
95.
So
then
we're
underestimating
what
impacts
were
there.
So
that's
why
his
his
message
was:
if
the
units
are
there.
D
We
have
to
assume
that
they,
I
think
at
minimum,
we
can
have
a
discussion
of
the
95
percent
occupancy
number
for
the
current
popul
for
the
current
month.
Existing
existing
conditions,
okay,
recognize
that
and
it
also
it
really
creates
a
practical
problem
for
the
city
too,
and
we're
because
we're
we're
excited
this
way.
For
example,
when
we
talk
about
crime
rates
in
the
city,
we
use
to
calculate
crime
rates,
we
calculate
it
with
the
46
000
number
as
the
basis
or
something
like
that.
E
D
E
E
D
This
thing
is
there
I
still
would
be.
I
think
I
would
disagree
with
that.
I
would
have
a
discussion
of
this
number.
I
don't
know
that
I
would
use
it
formally,
but
just
say
hey
that
in
reality,
the
number
the
comparable
number
is
whatever
it
is:
65
000
or
66
000.
If
we
had
a
95
occupancy
on
under
the
existing
conditions
and
just
leave
it
at
that.
E
A
E
Other
than
dof
and
acs
to
back
it
up.
E
D
Me
continue
this
discussion
online
because
I
don't
know
what
somehow
I'm
not
sure
everyone
else
is
interested
in
it.
But
I
it's
something
that
I'm
I'm
concerned
about.
B
Kurt's
point
was
good,
is
it's
a
perception
point
with
the
growth
of
the
village
having
been
a
political
issue
over
the
last
10
years,
and
what
I
think
might
be
important
is
how
it's
explained
in
presentation,
and
that
would
be
a
challenge
for
flynn
and
for
david
in
terms
of
presenting
it.
I
think
you
have
to
do
what
you
need
to
do
for
ceqla,
that's
my
opinion,
but
the
people
who
present
it
have
to
explain
that
it's
being
looked
at
differently
now
than
it
was
looked
at
in
2004.
E
E
That
that
is
correct.
They
look
at
the
imp.
There's
two
things
going
on
here:
the
sequa
does
the
delta
comparison
of
impacts
between
the
existing
column
and
the
proposed.
It
doesn't
look
at
a
plan
to
plan
comparison
plan
versus
new
plan,
but
I
was
just
making
the
note
that
approach-wise,
the
proposed
general
plan
approach
is,
as
far
as
occupancy
goes,
is
exactly
the
same
as
the
2007..
So
we.
E
A
Let
me
jump
in
here,
wendy
and
lynn.
We
understand
the
concern
wendy
david
and
I
will
chat
with
you
about
how
we
present
that
information
offline
great.
I
don't
want
to
waste
the
time
here
this
evening
because
we
are
running
out
of
time
we're
coming
up
close
to
the
end
of
our
meeting,
and
we
want
to
make
sure
that
jonathan
can
get
through
the
rest
of
the
discussion
points
before
we
end
here.
F
Certainly,
we
and
we've
already
discussed
our
next
slide
here,
so
we
can
move
on
from
that
one
and
and
wanted
to
also
bring
to
your
attention.
I
think
this
was
referenced
earlier
by
city
staff,
that
there
are
comments
that
additional
reques,
including
additional
requests
from
the
public.
The
these
are
a
couple
of
the
areas
represented
in
the
communications
that
staff
has
received
and
staff
is,
I
think
the
recommendation
is
that
these
get
vetted
through
the
planning
commission,
as
we
move
through
that
process.
D
B
F
Well,
the
at
this
point
we
were
going
to
pause
for
questions.
We've
had
those,
so
we
can
keep
going
and
the
wrap
up
here
was
just
a
look
at
next
steps,
and
I
think
I
was
going
to
pass
this
back
to
wendy
just
for
an
overview
of
where
we're
heading.
But
I
don't
know
if-
and
I
think
we
actually
actually
have
looked
at
this
slide
at
the
top
of
our
meeting,
but.
E
So
the
updated
definitions,
the
strikethrough
definitions
that
you
received.
Yes,
we
don't
have
it
in
the
slides.
It
was
provided
in
your
packet,
but
if
you
would
like
to
go
through
that,
we
could
certainly
pull
up
that
document
and
I
do
believe
we
still
have.
I
have
in
my
notes
that
we
had
that
one
parcel
29
and
I
don't
know
if
we
closed
the
on
that
one.
B
We
didn't
close
on
that
and
we
probably
didn't
close
on
the
southern,
the
most
southern
parcel
that
you
were
talking
about
as
well.
E
B
E
A
Let's
have
staff
investigate
that
with
place,
works
and
see
if
we
might
be
able
to
come
back
with
something
a
little
bit
more
appropriate
for
that
site,
because
this
does
not
impact
the
housing
element
per
se.
A
A
B
I
have
a
dog
barking
at
me,
sorry
about
that
the
I
think
it's
appropriate
to
for
staff
to
come
back
with
that
later
and
that
could
even
be
vetted
through
the
the
planning
commission.
It's
the
question.
I
think
it
was
a
question
of
whether
the
land
was
developable
and
how
so,
okay,
which
so
I
I
think
those
are
really
the
questions.
B
If
you
don't
need
us
to
comment
on
them,
then
we
could
do
whatever.
Is
your
pleasure.
E
B
B
B
A
A
E
H
And
this
is
kurt
watts.
I
had
a
question
relative
to
the
section
referring
to
affordable
housing,
I'll
use
the
term
incentives
under
both
central
business
district
and
the
mixed
use.
I'm
reading
this
correctly.
It
did
indicate
that
under
the
mixed
use
that
there
could
be
an
increase
in
the
amount
of
units
if
it
was
contributing
to
affordable
housing,
but
it
appeared
that
under
the
central
business
district,
in
both
cases
it
refers
to
70
dwelling
units.
H
So
I
was
wondering
if
it
was,
if
I'm
missing
something
that
there
is
an
incentive
for
doing
affordable
in
the
central
business
district
that
relates
to
something
other
than
the
770
dwelling
units
per
acre
or
is
it
effectively
not?
It
doesn't
really
allow
any
higher
density
or
anything
than
whether
it's
affordable
or
not.
B
Okay
p2,
the
next
page,
includes
some
of
the
same
development
agree.
Oh,
this
is
the
density
transfer
portion
with
the
mountains
and
we
have
traditionally
used
the
development
agreement.
Haven't
we
for
density
transfer.
A
B
C
C
This
is
the
pre
the
preface
before
each
of
the
specific
percentages
that
we
were
discussing
earlier.
A
E
E
B
Or
I
I
don't
have
a
problem
with
the
way
you've
written
it,
but
just
the
rest
of
the
committee.
G
There
is
a
little
typo
on
page
six,
at
least
I
think
it's
a
typo
under
the
mrchino
and
sunrise
way,
paragraph
that
language
where
it
says
the
northern
position
of
this
site.
I
assume
that
should
be
northern
portion.
B
B
B
B
D
On
page
seven
we're
under
smoke
tree,
it
would
be
good
to
maybe
expand
that
discussion
in
the
the
last
sentence
of
the
first
paragraph
under
smoke
tree
to
add
the
vacant
parcel
between
the
smoke
tree
plaza
development
and
the
smoke
tree.
Is
that
road-
or
I
forget
what
the
name
of
that
road
is
when
it's
that
large
face
vacant
parcel
to
the
west
of
the
hardware,
to
the
east
of
the
hardware
store
rather.
C
So
just
indicate
that
the
preference
for
that
parcel
is
residential.
D
B
Future,
so
we
have
lynn's
suggestion
there
and
is
the
current
percentage
of
commercial
42.
I
guess
it's
60.
E
D
F
C
I
think
we
well.
We
certainly
increased
the
residential
from
15
to
20
residential
to
40
to
60
percent
residential,
and
then
the
remaining
commercial
office
would
be
40
to
60
percent
commercial.
C
So
it's
kind
of
a
split
if
you
look
at
the
area
that
it
encompasses
really
north
of
the
of
the
chocolates
creek
area
is
probably
mostly
the
commercial
or
office
spaces,
and
then
south
of
the
creek
is
really
the
residential.
Perhaps
a
small
portion,
there
is
a
small
portion.
That's
part
of
cody
place
that
is
commercial
and
there's
a
probably
a
parcel
at
the
corner
of
mesquite
in
north
palm
or
southbound
camp
northwest
corner.
That
could
be
commercial.
C
Yeah
we
have
direction
from
you
again
about
29.
A
B
C
I
mean
what
we
certainly
can
do
is
explore
if
that
will
be
an
issue,
because
if
there
is
an
issue
I
mean
it's
an
existing
condition,
do
we?
How
do
we?
How
do
we
improve
that?
C
G
G
Well,
presumably,
that
that
house-
I
I
don't
know
exactly
who
owns
it
or
how
old
it
is,
but
presumably
it
was
there
during
or
before
the
aircraft
noise
installation
program
was
implemented,
and
so
it
it
does.
G
I
would
assume,
have
insulated
windows
and
doors,
I'm
just
I'm
just
thinking
for
consistency
with
some
of
the
other
parcels
of
that
area,
because
the
we
do
have
that
as
zone
p,
essentially
for
that
same
strip
along
this
dicino
all
the
way
to
whatever
the
name
of
the
street
is
that
comes
out
where
sandra
and
deborah
meet
at
that
triangle,
and
you
know
here
we
are
two
hours
into
this
meeting.
G
The
last
thing
anyone
anybody
wants
to
hear
is
yet
another
idea,
but
this
is
very
specific
and
it's
something
that
I
had
considered
while
on
the
sustainability
commission.
G
So
I'm
going
off
on
a
tangent
here
a
little
bit,
but
there
are
two
little
triangular
parcels.
At
least
I
assume
they're
parcels
and
I
assume
they're
publicly
owned,
where
let's
see
desert
park,
avenue
meet
magnolia
and
victoria,
which
are
not
labeled
and
also
a
little
bit
to
the
west.
G
Where
desert
park
meets
deborah
and
sandra,
and
I
have
always
thought
that
those
little
triangular
spots,
which
I
assume
are
owned
by
the
city,
as
well
as
a
similar
triangular
spot
farther
south
at
the
corner
of
saturn,
where
kaye,
felicia
and
kai
lolita
go
west,
could
be
used
for
public
use
like
a
garden
exchange
or
something
within
the
neighborhood.
G
C
So
yeah
these
are
obsidion
parcels,
so
I'm
not
sure
they
could
ever
be
developed,
but
I
do
believe
they
have
a
general
plan
designation
of
well
they've,
identified
it
as
o,
which
is
office.
So
I
don't
or
excuse
me
vldr,
but
I
don't
ever
appreciate
that
being
developed
as
very
low
density,
residential
or
low
density,
residential.
A
E
Zoning
in
there,
like
sometimes
like,
for
instance,
churches
right
those
are
allowed
in
residential
areas.
So
our
parks
right.
So
you
could
still
do
a
garden
in
there
with
a
residential
designation,
and
I
agree
with
you
that
the
house
will
never
be
built
there,
but
there
are
other
uses
that
are
still
allowed
in
residential.
So
you
can
still
achieve
that.
But
you
know
I
don't
know
if
if
it
would
be
worth
changing
it
to
something
else
at
this
point,
because
you
couldn't
really
consider
it
a
park
either.
A
On
that
lot,
29
real,
quick,
just
the
concept
here
is,
that
is
the
reason
we're
changing
it
because
there's
a
residence
there
and
the
concern
would
be
probably
is
the
current
zoning
general
plan
like
that,
if
the
homeowner
there
wanted
to
do
a
remodel
to
the
house
or
at
a
casita,
would
that
be
what's
prohibiting
him
from
doing
it
because
he's
not
in
the
right
general
plan,
land
use,
designation
and
zoning?
Is
that
potentially
a
problem
and
why
we're
changing
it
right.
A
G
But
that's
actually
not
quite
the
case,
because
it
is,
as
I
read,
the
zoning
code,
p
professional
zone
and
permitted
use
a
18.
A
is
single
family
dwellings
and
related
accessory
dwelling
units.
C
The
the
the
issue
is
that
the
general
plan
designation
of
this
parcel
is
his
office.
B
G
What's
going
on
with
that
parcel,
if
you
keep
going
west,
but
not
quite
as
far
as
the
yellow,
keep
going
west
couple
of
blocks
and
then
go
back
east
a
little
bit
and
then
down
one.
C
And
so
potentially
yeah,
this
whole
block
is
its
own
p.
So
the
zoning
for
this
block
is,
does
you
know
potentially
allow
for
presidential,
because
the
general
plan
says
you
can
have
residential
in
these
areas.
This
one
parcel
actually
is
office,
so
potentially
yeah
this.
If
this
is
a
residential
structure,
then
yeah
we
would
probably
want
to
apply
the
same.
For
that.
You
know
what
wasn't
here
for
this
property.
D
C
B
A
I'd
also
like
to
look
at
that.
I
don't
think
it's
going
to
impact
the
housing
element.
But
again
I
want
to
take
a
look
at
that
relative
to
changes
to
the
land
use
element
and
see
what
we
can
do
there.
So
if
the
steering
committee
is
okay
with
that
we'd
like
to
investigate
that
further
and
then
come
back
as
we
discuss
the
land
use
element
and
what.
B
E
D
B
E
C
So
july
13th
we
will
plan
to
hold
our
community
wide
workshop,
which
will
be
both
in
person
and
virtual.
So
anyone
who's,
not
here
in
the
middle
of
july,
can
attend
by
virtue
virtual
meeting
so
really
to
roll
out
the
land
plan.
C
Probably
can't
do
it,
so
that's
why
we
want
to
have
the
the
virtual
component
as
well,
so
that
people,
who
don't,
who
can't
be
here
or
are
at
home
or
we
occur
that
even
in
some
of
our
neighborhood
means
some
people
might
not
be
comfortable
ready.
You
know
or
ready
to
come
to
an
in-person
meeting,
so
we
certainly
want
to
make
sure
that
we
have
that
option.
B
I
think
the
city
council
may
be
attempting
to
do
in
person
with
a
zoom
element
for
collins.
So
it's
a
test.
A
Okay,
madam
chair,
if
there's
nothing
else,
I
think
we
have
the
information
that
we
need.
We
can
go
ahead
and
close
out
this
meeting.
C
Uncertain
and
it
will
be
published
on
psgeneralplan.com
once
available.
B
So
we
are
during
adjourning
this
meeting
to
a
data
uncertain.
Thank
you
all.