►
From YouTube: Planning Commission Meeting | Oct 13th 2021
Description
City of Palm Springs Planning Commission Meeting, held October 13th, 2021
C
C
D
C
F
A
B
A
Thank
you
so
much
so
we're
now
at
the
time.
In
our
meeting
for
public
comments,
the
general
public
has
three
minutes
to
speak
to
us
on
pretty
much
anything
they
like
and
that
time
is
now.
So,
if
is
there
somebody
who
wants
to
speak,
please
let
me
know
show
your
face
and
let
us
know
that
you
want
to
speak
to
us.
A
F
A
A
A
E
Oh,
thank
you
very
much.
First
one
up,
so
thank
you
for
having
me
on.
I
have
just
moved
to
palm
springs
from
london
england
about
four
months
ago.
It's
my
intention
to
open
up
a
cat
cafe
in
palm
springs.
You
currently
have
4
000,
homeless
cats
in
palm
springs
and
there's
200
in
the
palm
springs
animal
shelter
alone.
E
I
believe
that
this
zoning
restriction
came
into
place
before
anybody
had
ever
heard
of
cat
cafes,
and
so
I
wanted
to
speak
to
you
to
find
out
how
is
it
possible
to
grant
an
exception
to
this?
I'm
not
proposing
to
try
and
change
the
entire
law,
or
anything
like
that,
but
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
open
up
this
cat
cafe
to
help
the
entire
community.
I
want
to
do
lots
of
charity
events
there
and
so
forth,
but,
like
I
said
I
run
into
this
kindling
issue.
A
E
A
A
A
C
A
F
D
F
A
B
Yes,
vice
chair
roberts
and
commissioners,
this
item
is
a
request
to
vacate
an
existing
easement
that
was
approved
as
a
part
of
the
track
map
track
map.
36446
we've
described
the
location.
It
is
a
segment
of
road
that
is
improved
within
the
downtown
development.
The
downtown
palm
springs
pacific
plan.
It's
a
20-foot
wide
easement
that
exists.
B
However,
this
within
this
easement
area,
when
the
development
was,
was
improved.
The
planters
that
were
installed
in
the
roadway
there
were
actually
installed
within
the
easement
and
it
abstracts
public
access
or
emergency
access,
ingress
and
egress
through
that
roadway.
So,
as
a
result,
staff
is
recommending
that
we
vacate
the
easement.
There
is
no
need
to
retain
that
easement
for
emergency
services.
It
was
reviewed
by
our
fire
department
and
they
have
agreed
that
there
is
no
purpose
for
retaining
that
easement.
H
B
Correct
yeah,
it
is
currently
private
property,
but
there
was
the
the
easement
that
he's
been
in
question
that
was
supposed
to
remain
open
for
emergency
access.
Only
but
yes
correct.
If,
if
the
easement
is
vacated,
they
could
do
outdoor
activity
within
that
space
and
not
be
in
violation
of
the
easement.
C
A
A
G
G
G
G
A
A
G
A
G
The
application
was
found
not
to
be
in
conformance
to
the
requirements
for
a
variance
or
the
findings
for
a
variance.
So
consequently,
direction
was
given
to
staff
to
look
at
the
existing
code
and
perhaps
propose
something
that
would
facilitate
developments
such
as
the
walmart
gas
station
and
any
other
development
similar
to
that.
So
with
that,
we
did
a
very
quick
run-through
of
the
standards
that
contained
to
gas
stations
and
have
proposed
a
number
of
changes
which
we
have
before
you
this
evening.
G
G
However,
there
is
no
magic
number
associated
with
that,
so,
if
the
planning
commission
chooses,
we
could
either
come
up
with
a
different
square
footage
or
we
could
eliminate
it
as
it
stands.
If
you
feel
it's
unimportant
in
terms
of
the
background
on
that,
I
can
just
assume
that,
for
some
reason
in
the
city's
history
they
wanted
to
avoid
having
gas
stations
that
had
just
like
an
eight
by
eight
foot
kiosk
that
they
wanted
something
more
substantial.
G
As
you
can
see
in
some
of
the
iconic
gas
stations
we
have
in
town
the
tramway
gas
station,
the
one
just
immediately
to
the
south
of
it
and
others
in
town
which
are
rather
iconic
designs.
However,
things
have
changed
substantially
relative
to
the
development
of
gas
stations,
and
I
don't
know
that
that
requirement
is
necessary.
G
While
we
did
look
at
changing
that
requirement,
there
are
others
that
we
have
also
proposed
to
be
updated,
and
I
list
those
in
the
bullet
points
on
the
front
of
your
memo.
Some
of
them
are
just
rather
minor,
for
example,
updating
references
to
the
code
or
having
frontage
on
a
major
highway.
We
don't
use
that
term
in
the
general
plan
any
longer
just
changing
that
to
thoroughfare
other
standards
again,
just
don't
seem
to
be
applicable
any
longer.
G
G
There
are
other
things
in
terms
of
outside
operations
that
we
just
don't
see.
Typically,
changing
of
tires
is
not
something
that
we
would
want
to
happen
outdoors
at
the
gas
station
and
that
function
has
changed
over
the
years
that
we
now
have
specific
tire
stores,
instead
of
typically
having
that
use
at
a
gas
station.
G
Other
things
such
as
vending
machines
and
things
like
that
that
we
typically
don't
find
any
longer
at
gas
stations.
So
those
are
the
significant
changes
that
we
are
proposing.
Vice
chair
roberts.
I
believe
that
you
had
asked
a
question
in
terms
of
other
standards
that
we
haven't
proposed
to
change,
one
of
those
being
the
minimum
site
area
for
a
gas
station.
G
Our
zoning
code
specifies
that
it
must
have
a
minimum
of
20
000
square
feet.
I
don't
know
that
that
particular
number
is
related
to
anything
specific
other
than
just
making
sure
that
the
site
has
adequate
area
for
circulation,
getting
the
delivery
trucks,
the
semi
trucks
that
deliver
the
fuel
adequate
room
to
maneuver
on
the
site.
G
Things
like
that,
and
so
that's
the
only
reason
that
I
can
surmise
why
that
requirement
is
there,
but
it
doesn't
necessarily
need
to
be
there
there's
another
requirement
relative
to
a
minimum
of
10
percent
landscape
area,
not
a
magic
number,
but
I
would
recommend
that
we
retain
at
least
some
minimum
percentage
of
landscaping.
Typically
for
gas
stations.
G
You
want
to
see
the
first
10
feet
of
area
adjacent
to
the
street
landscaped
with
either
some
type
of
landscape
material
that
helps
to
screen
the
use
somewhat,
but
I
think
it's
important
to
have
some
type
of
minimum
landscaping
requirement
and
that
number
may
be
up
for
debate
from
the
planning
commission.
So
that
concludes
my
report
to
you,
I'm
happy
to
take
any
questions
or
comments
you
might
have
on
these
proposed
changes.
A
H
Yes,
I
the
question
I
had
was
about
the
electric
vehicle
charging
spaces
in
the
situation
where
it's
a
gas
station
should
it
be
based
on
the
number
of
pumps
and
the
where
I'm
coming
from
this
is.
Is
that
the
actual?
If,
if
we
base
the
parking
spaces
required
based
on
the
retail
or
area,
and
now
it's
based
on
400,
then
it
will
never
surpass
the
10
square
10
spaces
that
are
that
require
an
eb
charging
station
and
in
some
ways
we're
balancing
gas
with
electric?
G
That's
a
very
good
question
and
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up.
Staff
will
look
at
that
and
if
we
come
back
with
a
revised
version
of
these
this
proposal,
what
we'll
do
is
we'll
tailor
that
more
for
the
gas
station
use.
One
of
the
things
we
do
want
to
encourage
is
thinking
of
gas
stations,
not
just
as
selling
gas,
but
also
as
refueling
stations
as
we
look
at
alternative
fuels
and
so
charging
stations,
and
maybe
you
know,
hydrogen
compressed
natural
gas.
Whatever
comes
down
the
pipe.
C
C
Would
it
be
possible
or
advisable
in
your
opinion,
to
open
it
up
so
that,
rather
than
in
the
ornaments,
shutting
down
everything
saying
or
other
activities
as
may
be
approving
a
conditional
use
permit,
because
I
can
see
in
the
future
that
there
might
be
different
things
that
we
want
to
be
able
to
do
or
to
allow
without
having
to
go
back
and
change
the
ordinance?
Okay.
C
C
G
D
As
strange
as
that
is,
that
was
actually
going
to
be
my
question,
but
I
guess
I
could
just
ask
flynn:
do
you
feel
as
if,
knowing
that
this
was
just
on
our
last
planning
commission,
do
you
feel
that
you've
had
enough
time
to
do
enough
research
so
that
we
don't
have
to
continue
to
go
back
in
and
keep
redoing
it
and
doing
it
over?
Do
you
feel,
like
you've
had
enough
time
to
put
this
ordinance
together?
Is.
G
Your
comments
here
this
evening
are
especially
helpful
to
staff,
and
so
we
do
appreciate
the
review
that
the
planning
commissioners
are
providing
this
evening,
there's
a
couple
of
things
that
I'd
like
to
further
update
in
terms
of
utility
trailers,
they're
now
called
u-hauls,
and
so
that
language
is
something
that
I
would
want
to
update
without
using
the
brand
name
u-haul.
But
you
understand
the
gist
of
it.
G
So
there's
minor
things
that
I
would
still
like
to
tweak
as
we
do
these
revisions
based
on
your
comments,
but
overall,
yes,
I
think
that
it
is
comprehensive
enough
and,
as
we've
had
commission
comments
from
commissioner
lay
and
in
terms
of
making
some
things
more
generalized,
that
helps
us
in
terms
of
giving
the
flexibility
we
need.
So
as
things
change
in
the
future,
we
don't
need
to
come
back
and
keep
on
redoing.
This.
C
G
G
A
Other
questions
comments,
so
I
have
a
few,
so
I'm
I'm
really
glad
we're
bringing
this
I'm
sure
there's
a
lot
of
zoning.
That
is
a
can
of
worms
like
this,
that
if
we
opened
it,
we
just
see
years
of
of
numbers
and
changes
that
we
don't
understand.
That
may
have
made
sense
100
years
ago
or
they
may
have
been
arbitrary,
and
so
you
know
I.
I
question
a
lot
of
the
numbers
in
this
ordinance
like
the
20
000
square
feet,
as
as
commissioner
land
pointed
out,
this
type
of
project
would
require
a
cup
anyway.
A
So
I
would
first
question
the
the
minimum
site
of
20
000
square
feet.
Let's
say
this
is
just
a
service
station
for
electric
charging.
Would
it
need
to
be
20
000
square
feet,
so
my
suggestion
there
would
be
to
eliminate
that
number
altogether
and
simply
base
it
on
the
application.
That's
coming
before
us
using
staff
review
for
their
use,
jumping
ahead
to
the
ground
area
that
you
mentioned
director.
A
A
I
think
if
we
can
do
anything
to
help
the
aesthetics
of
service
stations
be
more
appealing.
This
is
the
place
to
do
it
right
and
coming.
You
know
back
to
us
dictating
the
size
of
their
buildings
in
the
future.
We
may
not
need
any
buildings.
People
may
simply
pull
up
and
plug
their
cars
in
or
we
may
just
need
a
person
to
sit
in
a
kiosk
to
to
take
cash
if,
if
the
machines
aren't
able
to
do
that,
I'd
almost
like
to
take
that
out
all
together.
A
A
What
I'd
like
to
suggest
to
staff
is
to
really
open
this
up
and
make
it
more
appealing
for
service
stations
to
want
to
come
and
take
them
on
a
case-by-case
basis
and
really
reduce
this
ordinance
down
to
the
to
the
bare
minimums
and
are
there
other
areas
that
other
commissioners
have
in
this?
That
they'd
like
to
see
specifically
looked
at
or
questioned
by
staff.
C
Turns
out
with
my
blur
background,
you
can't
see
when
I'm
raising
my
head.
I
I
just
want
to
reinforce
a
couple
of
things
that
you
said
just
so.
Staff
has
a.
I
mean
we're
not
voting
on
this.
It's
not
an
action
item
but
has
a
clear
sense
of
where
we're
coming
from.
I
agree
100
with
removing
the
minimum
building
size.
It
didn't
make
any
sense
to
any
of
us
when
it
was
750
square
feet,
picking
another
arbitrary
number
and
saying
400.
I
think
somebody's
going
to
just
regret
at
some
point
in
the
future.
C
I
don't
think
that
will
help.
I
also
really,
like
commissioner
hirschfein's
suggestion
that
they've
made
public
breakfast
rooms.
If
there
were
something
in
the
code
that
required
that
the
public
restrooms
be
kept
decent,
safe
and
sanitary
such
that
code,
violations
could
be
written
if
need
be.
If
there
were
habitual
offenders,
that
would
be
very
cool,
and
I
also
think
that
the
minimum
ten
percent
for
landscaping
is
much
stronger
than
the
ninety
percent.
C
D
Yeah,
I
agree,
I
kind
of
agree
with
what
you're
saying,
but
I
would
like
to
mention
that
we
probably
would
have
to
be
careful
careful
with
open
it,
opening
it
wide
open.
Just
for
the
specific
reason
that
we
have
seen
that
some
of
our
communities,
who
are
a
little
bit
of
on
the
lower
income,
have
seen
the
saturation
with
gas
stations,
which
also
leads
to
liquor,
which
also
we
see
in
a
lot
of
our
communities
with
minorities.
D
A
D
Yeah,
just
the
concentration
of
them-
and
you
know
we
are
being
progressive
and-
and
we
are
I've
been
reading
in
2025,
we
were
looking
at
getting
more
electric
vehicles
on
the
road,
so
we
might
have
to
do
a
whole,
complete
new
ordinance
when
we,
when
this,
the
governor
or
or
whoever
the
state
of
california,
decides
that
we're
moving
to
electric
vehicles.
So
I
you
know,
opening
it
wide
open
could
lead,
could
put
us
in
a
situation.
It
could
have
a
flood
of
of
gas
stations
in
one
particular
area.
G
G
A
G
G
F
Yeah
I
mean
if
you
had
a
10
000
square
foot
store
with
a
gas
station
out
in
front.
That's
one
thing,
but
I
don't
think
we
need
to
see
like
a
mini
mart
selling
booze
in
you
know
in
front
of
two
pumps.
That's
that's
not
a
good
thing
yeah.
I
agree
that
there
could
be
sort
of
a
minimum
size
before
you're
allowed
to
start
selling
alcohol,
but
I
think
generally
prohibiting
if
it's
a
gas
station,
they
shouldn't
be
selling
booze.
A
G
A
I
I'm
personally
not
opposed
to
service
stations
selling
alcohol
as
long
as
they're
selling
a
variety
of
other
goods,
so
service
stations
have
become
convenience
stores,
they're
no
different
to
me
than
a
7-11,
except
they
have
pumps,
they
also
provide
fuel.
So
I
don't
know
that
I
would
prohibit
feel
good
about
prohibiting
alcohol
in
new
service
stations,
maybe
prohibiting
alcohol,
if
that's
all
they're
willing
to
sell.
F
F
H
Also,
if
I
may
add,
the
the
minimum
square
footage
of
the
building
where
I'm
concerned
is
the
protection
of
the
employee,
meaning
that
if
we
don't
have
a
minimum,
then
and
the
employee
is
sitting
out
there
with
a
computer
tab
and-
and
it's
exposed
to
you-
know
the
people
who
come
to
use
the
pumps.
I
I'm
wondering
if
a
minimum
squad
footage
is
really
for
the
protection
of
the
of
the
employee
in
this
gas
station.
If
it
it
could
be
in
such
a
way.
H
A
C
G
G
C
I
see
that
the
language
here
is
not
redlined
as
it
now
stands,
which
requires
that
I
think
50
of
the
sales
receipts
be
generated
other
than
with
alcohol,
and
I
also
see
that
the
police
department
has
been
involved
in
preparing
this
language
and
because
we
still
have
gas
stations
that
are
wanting
to
open
for
business
here.
I
would
presume
that
that
is
okay,
what
I
don't
presume-
and
I'm
not
sure
if
we're
qualified
as
a
planning
commission
to
know
without
talking
to
somebody
in
the
business,
is
where
that
line
might
fall.
C
My
understanding
is
in
the
retail
gasoline
sales.
The
margins
are
razor
thin
pennies.
On
per
gallon,
I
believe
that
the
liquor
margins
liquor
is
a
much
more
profitable
undertaking.
If
we
agree
that
gas
stations
are
necessary
in
the
community,
then
I
would
hate
to
use
our
zeal
for
minimizing
alcohol
sales
or
convenience
of
alcohol
sales
to
essentially
prohibit
gas
stations
from
coming,
because
we
codified
what
the
balance
should
be
based
on
our
own
gut
feel.
A
A
F
A
I'm
simply
saying
that
I
worry
about
having
too
many
requirements.
I
don't
know
that
we
need
more
or
less
gas
stations,
but
it
seems
to
me
that
in
the
future
we're
going
to
have
other
fuel
options.
Oh
yeah.
Definitely
definitely
so
I
guess
my
thinking
is
more
fuel
options
would
potentially
come
from
more
fuel
stations,
and
so
I
just
want
to
keep
it
flexible
enough
for
those
potential
uses.
F
G
No,
in
section
9306
of
the
zoning
code,
we
define
electric
charging
stations
and
we
say
where
they
can
be
located
and
based
on
that
language,
we
are
encouraging
them
with
all
other
types
of
retail
development.
If
someone
were
to
come
in
and,
for
example,
do
tesla,
they
wouldn't
need
a
conditional
use
permit
as
a
gas
station,
because
they
are
technically
not
defined
as
a
gas
station
under
another
section
of
the
ordinance.
A
A
B
B
The
state
requires
that
cities
in
their
sixth
cycle
housing
element,
adoption
which
includes
palm
springs,
have
an
adopted
element
by
october
15th
of
2021.
There
is
a
120-day
grace
period
that
this
state
allows.
However,
there's
some
things
that
are
tied
to
that,
so
I'll
go
through
kind
of
where
we're
at
in
that
process.
B
So,
as
you
recall,
related
to
the
housing
element,
we've
had
some
recommendations
from
the
general
plan
steering
committee.
They
gave
recommendations
related
to
land
use,
changes
specifically
a
couple
of
sites
that
we
would
increase
the
density
on
in
the
city
as
well
as
some
changes
to
the
land
use
descriptions
of
the
land
use
element.
B
B
We
had
our
neighborhood
listening
sessions.
This
past
june,
we
had
the
community
workshop
in
july,
as
well
as
a
review
of
the
draft
housing
element
by
the
planning,
commission
and
city
council
after
we
did
went
through
those
steps.
We
submitted
a
draft
document
to
the
state
on
august
2nd,
and
so
they
have
60
days
to
review
the
draft
element
and
provide
comments.
B
So
we
received
their
comments
on
november
or
excuse
me
october
1st.
So,
just
about
two
weeks
ago
we
got
the
comments
from
the
from
the
housing
and
community
the
department
of
housing
and
community
development,
which
is
the
state
agency
that
reviews
housing
elements
they
do.
The
document
or
the
letter
that
we
receive
is
about
an
eight-page
letter
with
comments
that
require
revisions
to
our
housing
element
as
bad
as
that
may
sound.
B
B
As
I
mentioned,
this
allows
us
to
adopt
within
the
120-day
extension
from
october
15th,
which
is
the
statutory
deadline
imposed
by
the
state
for
housing
elements
in
the
sixth
cycle,
so
that's
kind
of
where
we've
been
what's
happening
and
where,
what's
next
for
the
housing
element
in
terms
of
the
other
processes
that
we're
going
through.
With
the
general
plan
update,
we
are
still
doing
outreach
for
the
vision
and
priority
statements.
B
As
we
get
through
that
in
the
next
few
months
we
will
begin
the
environmental
analysis
that
is
required
for
adopting
the
general
plan
and
then
ultimately
that
that
would
take
some
time
for
staff
and
the
consultant
to
prepare
after
we
get
through
that,
the
final
elements
can
be
adopted
by
planning,
commission
and
city
council.
So
we
don't
expect
that
we
get
through
this
process
until
probably
the
summer
or
potentially
fall
of
next
year
by
the
by
the
time
you
get
through
the
next
steps
of
the
process.
D
B
D
B
There
will
be
additional
community
meetings
as
a
part
of
the
general
plan
update
process.
So
yes,
we'll
have
I
mean
our
steering
committee
meetings
are
open
to
the
public,
so
anyone
can
go
to
those
meetings
at
this
time
we
haven't
got
the
next
movement
scheduled
yet,
but
that,
once
it's
scheduled
it'll
be
on
the
website.
Psjarrowfun.Com
next
and
I
do
believe
we
have
one
more
community-wide
workshop
for
the
general
plan
update.
F
B
But
that's
not
the
strategy
we're
using
to
address
the
lower
or
moderate
income
levels
at
this
time
and
as
far
as
an
update
in
terms
of
local
update
to
our
code
staff
will
be
working
on
an
update
to
design
code.
To
ensure
that
you
know
we
address
that
that
law
as
close
as
possible
to
the
effective
date,
which
is
january
first
of
next
year.
So
that
would
be
something
that
the
commission
will
review
here
in
the
next
couple
of
months.
A
A
G
G
F
H
But
the
project
may
have
been
approved
for
six
years
ago
and
therefore,
during
four
six
years,
many
things
have
might
have
changed
environmentally
or
the
growth
of
the
city.
And
so
it's
not
clear
of.
We
cannot
reopen
and
look
at
the
project
again
and
therefore
we
have
to
stay
within
the
entitlement
that
was
approved
several
years
ago
or
is
there
a
framework
on
which
we
could
review
the
project
to
the
current
conditions.
I
Yes
thanks,
mr
vice
chair
members
of
the
commission,
to
the
extent
that
a
permit
is
granted
that
generally
conveys
a
vested
right
to
the
developer
to
proceed
with
that
project,
and
unless
there
is
a
specific,
you
know,
condition
included
to
perhaps
revisit
a
pers,
a
particular
issue
that
right
is
vested
and
they
can
proceed
with
development
and
so
usually
as
long
as
they
have
a
vested
right.
There
is
not
an
opportunity
to
come
back
and
revisit
the
permit
that
was
granted.
I
However,
in
some
cases
where
pre
they
may
be
asking
for
an
extension
or
an
amendment
to
an
existing
development
agreement,
or
something
like
that,
there
may
be
opportunities
to
revisit
certain
issues,
but,
as
a
general
rule,
usually
there's
a
vested
right
to
proceed
with
development
and
it
you
know
if
they
don't
proceed
within
a
timely
manner.
Then
our
code
has
other
provisions
that
deal
with
that
as
well.
H
I
There
are
limits
to
to
what
the
commission
can
do
on
that
with
an
extension.
It
really
depends
on
the
particular
project.
Again
as
a
general
rule,
there
is
not
you
know,
reassessing
the
project.
You
know
again.
I
think
you
know
in
the
case
of
an
extension
or
asking
for
an
amendment
to
an
agreement.
You
know
we
would
have
to
assess
that
each
case
on
its
facts.
H
H
G
I
think
that
more
than
any
other
action
that
the
planning
commission
has
taken
has
been
very
effective
in
terms
of
dealing
with
projects
that
are
drawn
out
so
that
we
won't
see
projects,
for
example,
the
cody
place
project,
unfortunately,
is
one
of
those
that
got
drawn
out
over.
I
don't
know
10
years,
and
so
I
don't
think
you'll
see
those
going
forward
in
the
future,
just
based
on
the
changes
that
you've
already
made
to
the
code.
G
C
A
And
and
maybe
also
director,
we
could
understand
what
other
cities
are
doing.
According
to
ms
rogers,
there
are
over
a
hundred
successful
versions
of
this,
so
maybe
we
could
know
a
little
bit
about
these
others
and
how
they're
doing
it
and
how
they're
zoning
altered
for
them,
at
least
in
sampling,
not
all
125
of
them,
but
at
least
a
sampling
of
where
it
works,
and
why.