►
From YouTube: Planning Commission | September 25, 2019
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
D
A
D
Yes,
I
do
Thank
You
mr.
chair
those
who
may
have
come
to
the
meeting
today
to
speak
on
items
2a
and
2b.
Those
hearings
are
continued
until
October
the
10th.
However,
if
you
would
like
to
speak
on
those
items,
you
may
do
so
under
the
public
comment
portion
of
the
agenda
for
those
of
you
who
are
here
on
item
4a,
which
is
the
Cannabis
item.
Even
though
this
is
not
a
public
hearing
item,
we
will
take
comments
from
the
public
during
the
discussion
of
that
item
on
the
agenda.
D
A
Welcome
this
is
a
time
that's
been
set
aside
for
members
of
the
public
to
address
the
Planning
Commission
on
the
consent
calendar.
You
can
also
address
us
on
public
hearing
items
tonight
in
items
of
general
interest
within
the
subject
matter
of
the
jurisdiction
of
the
Commission.
If
you
wish
to
speak,
you
can
come
up
to
the
mic
and
please
state
your
name
and
you'll
have
three
minutes
to
speak.
E
E
It
was
a
great
way
to
get
voices
heard
in
a
more
informal
setting,
and
there
were
several
of
us
there
speaking
about
this
issue
and
I
think
we
all
felt
heard
second
kudos
to
Flynn
and
the
staff
for
the
staff
report.
It's
60
pages
and
for
those
of
us
kind
of
on
the
outside
over
here,
going
through
the
labyrinth
of
codes,
is
a
very
daunting
task.
E
We've
held
two
additional
meetings
since
the
September
11th
study
session
to
review
the
staff
report,
both
of
those
occurred.
This
last
Monday
one
was
with
the
1ps
cannabis
workgroup
to
review.
As
best
we
could,
the
staff
report
we
concentrated
on
the
first
six
pages.
The
second
meeting
immediately
following
that
was
a
1ps
special
meeting
to
talk
about
the
cannabis
issue
in
the
staff
report.
There
was
no
official
action
taken
at
that
meeting.
The
staff
report
recommendations.
E
Several
people
want
a
one-mile
distance
from
manufacturing
and
growing
and
that's
been
our
focus,
we're
not
anti
cannabis
and
we're
not
looking
at
lounges
or
distribution.
We've
only
been
looking
at
the
manufacturing,
which
is
an
m6
or
m7
zoning,
but
there
was
strong
feeling
that
there
should
still
be
one
mile
between
for
those
facilities
in
residential
neighborhoods,
because
we
know
from
research
that
the
odors
can
waft
as
far
as
15
football
fields.
E
E
That's
a
winner,
I
know
their
infrastructure
issues,
but
let's
be
realistic.
That
property
out
there
is
going
to
be
developed
and
the
infrastructure
is
going
to
have
to
be
run
at
some
point
in
time.
Let's
bite
the
bullet
and
do
the
infrastructures
that
are
needed
now.
It
will
allow
not
only
the
cannabis
development
business
development
out
there.
It
will
open
up
other
kinds
of
development.
E
E
A
You
there
anyone
else
in
the
audience,
particularly
on
items
2a
or
2b,
that
want
to
speak.
Can
you
move
forward?
Can
you
come
to
the
mic
and
a
state?
Your
name
for
the
record
and
you'll
have
three
minutes
hello.
My
name
is
Rodney
Garcia
I
am
an
owner
resident
full
time
resident
of
the
Riviera
Gardens,
which
is
next.
A
G
A
A
H
H
A
A
D
A
A
This
is
Farwest
industry
for
the
final
development
plan
and
a
revised
tentative
tract
map
to
construct
a
lawn,
a
residential
project
consisting
of
56
Fingal,
single-family
residences,
25,
multi-family,
residential
condominiums
and
related
on
and
off
site
improvements.
On
twelve
point:
three:
eight
acres
located
at
777,
South
Palm
Canyon
Drive.
Can
we
have
a
staff
report?
Please.
I
Chair
woods
and
planning
commissioners,
this
is
the
found
development
plan
for
the
Elan
project
previously
called
the
Palm
Canyon
project
located
at
777
Sal
foam,
Canyon
Drive.
The
project
consists
of
56
single-family,
detached
residences
and
25
attached
condominiums.
As
you
see
her
on
the
screen,
the
project
was
approved
back
in
September
of
2016
by
the
City
Council,
and
the
project
concluded
the
planned
development
district,
a
major
architectural
application
and
a
tentative
tract
map.
I
I
So
as
a
part
of
the
final
development
plan
review
staff
is
calling
out
a
few
things
that
have
changed
since
the
preliminary
development
plan.
You
see
here
on
the
screen,
there's
two
areas
that
are
circled
where
there
were
pedestrian
for
sales
that
traverse
the
site
from
east
to
west,
between
the
rear
yards
of
the
individual
single-family
homes,
and
so,
as
a
result
of
the
settlement
agreement.
The
applicants
requesting
that
these
be
eliminated
to
because
of
a
couple
of
reasons.
First,
this
project
was
requested
to
be
gated.
I
The
City
Council
chose
not
to
have
this,
so
an
entry
and
flow
can
occur
into
the
site
and
through
the
site.
So
this
would
eliminating.
This
would
reduce
the
amount
of
areas
that
potentially
homeless
areas
that
people
may
hang
out,
and
so
this
is
one
of
the
items
that
was
removed.
As
for
the
applicants
request,
so
here's
the
revised
final
development
plan,
you
can
see
those
areas
where
the
paseo
has
been
removed.
I
I
Another
change
that
was
being
requested
is
to
relocate
one
of
the
residences
and
the
pool
area
from
the
preliminary
development
plan
shown
here
to
the
area,
they're
switching
a
lot
for
one
of
the
common
area
Lots.
So
you
see
those
areas
have
changed.
They
have
changed
the
pool
area
so
we're
a
lot.
15
was
previously
shown
on
the
the
preliminary
development
plan.
I
Project
site
has
about
25
feet
of
landscape
frontage
along
Palm,
Canyon
Drive.
So
on
the
plan
here
in
the
preliminary
development
plan,
you
know
it
was
heavily
landscape,
which
is
still
going
to
be
the
case,
but
because
the
site
is
has
quite
a
bit
of
boulders,
they
do
intend
to
utilize
those
boulders
as
a
part
of
that
the
landscape
along
the
edges.
I
So,
on
the
left
side
of
the
screen
here
on
the
developer
development
plan,
you
can
see
a
number
of
those
boulders
are
being
scattered
along
the
poem
cane
frontage,
as
well
as
the
landscape
and
trees
that
are
being
proposed.
They
are
also
proposing
to
landscape
the
Topix
Creek
frontage,
and
you
see
here
in
the
middle.
This
is
the
proposed
plan
with
the
tree
and
planting
palette.
That
would
continue
along
the
pathway
that
is
located
along
the
creek,
the
south
side
of
the
creek.
I
They
also
proposed
to
have
some
breeze
block
walls
that
would
recur
along
the
frontage
of
the
project
to
break
up
some
of
the
project's
lineal
frontage
and
then
on
the
right
side
of
the
screen.
They
have
the
Bilardo
Road
typical
for
the
landscaping.
They
do
propose
a
landscape
landscape
tree
or
trees
and
landscape
within
that
planter
area
in
the
multifamily
architecture,
that
is
the
preliminary
hearing.
The
screen.
The
buildings
for
the
project
are
generally
the
same
architectural
style
and
design.
I
I
There
are
three
floor
plans
with
two
variations
between
within
each
so
floor
plan.
One
two-and
three-and,
there's
an
elevation,
a
and
B
for
each
of
those
floor
plans.
What
you
see
here
on
the
screen
is
the
elevation
of
the
firm,
the
preliminary
development
plans
for
the
street
facades
of
those
buildings,
and
the
final
development
plan
is
shown
here
again
pretty
much
the
same
elevation
that
you
saw
for
the
preliminary
development
plan
for
each
floor
plan
preliminary
develop
land
in
the
front
and
the
final
developing
plan.
I
So
there
really
hasn't
been
any
change,
any
significant
changes
to
the
elevations,
and
this
shows
the
side
and
rear
elevations
of
those
single-family
homes
for
the
plan
1a.
The
preliminary
development
plan
that
was
approved
and
the
final
development
plan
on
the
right
plan
2a.
This
is
the
plumeria
developing
plan
on
the
left
and
the
final
development
plan
on
the
right
again
pretty
much
the
same
elevations
and
plan
3a
side
and
rear
elevations
preliminary
development
plan
on
the
left
here
on
the
screen
and
the
final
development
plan
on
the
right.
I
I
So,
instead
of
doing
that,
they
are
proposing
to
elevate
the
grades
to
be
more
closely
aligned
to
the
sidewalk
and
street
grade
along
Bilardo
and
step
the
property
down
towards
Palm
Canyon.
So
that
is
a
change
that
is
also
proposed
as
a
part
of
the
project,
and
so
you
have
the
preliminary
and
the
final
grading
plans
as
a
part
of
your
packet
and
then
lastly,
I'll
just
touch
on
the
proposed
changes
to
the
tentative
map,
the
opportunity
of
map.
I
What
that
was
originally
approved
for
the
project
is
shown
here
on
the
screen,
and
you
can
see
that
it
did
have
the
rear
paseo
the
Paseo
lots
in
the
center
of
the
project,
and
so
with
the
change
to
the
to
eliminate
those
Paseos.
The
tentative
map
had
to
be
revised,
and
so,
and
also
with
the
change
in
the
location
of
the
community,
pool
a
lot
with
the
relocating
it.
Where
the
single-family
home
lot
was,
they
had
to
revise
the
map
to
accommodate
those
those
revisions.
I
So
you
see
here
on
the
screen,
I
kind
of
drew
in
some
areas
that
we're
highlighting
those
changes,
and
then
so.
This
is
the
final
map
that
is
being
proposed.
The
changes
in
terms
of
the
the
density
or
all
there
are
no
changes
in
terms
of
density.
The
street
grid.
It's
all
the
same:
56
single
family,
lots
and
a
1
lot
subdivision
are
one
like
condominium
map
for
the
25
residential
units.
I
A
F
A
Just
let
me
see
they
are
coming
back
to
us
for
final
compliance.
That
has
some
changes
from
what
was
originally
approved,
but
this
would
be
if
we
approve
those
changes.
This
is
what
they
would
go
forward
with.
If
they
don't.
If
we
don't
approve
those
changes,
we
would
redirect
them
to
do
something
else.
Yes,.
F
C
Of
all
I
want
to
compliment
mr.
Newell
on
the
visual
presentation,
particularly
when
you're
dealing
with
a
track
magda
track
map
change.
It
gets
a
little
bit
confusing
for
us,
but
this
is
very
understandable.
My
preliminary
question
is
this:
with
respect
to
deviations
between
the
preliminary
and
final
planned
development,
what
is
our
level
of
discretion
with
respect
to
approving
the
changes?
Is
there
a
threshold?
Is
it
substantial
in
substantial?
I
So
I
have
indicated
on
the
in
within
the
staff
report,
some
of
the
changes
that
have
occurred
and
with
the
new
adoption
of
the
planned
development
district
ordinance
there,
there
is
specific
authority
granted
to
the
Planning
Commission
to
approve
minor
changes,
and
those
do
include
minor
changes
to
set
facts
as
well
as
I
think
they're,
proposing
the
change
to
the
distance
between
buildings.
So
there
is
some
authority
within
the
new
adopted,
planned
development
district
ordinance
that
does
allow
the
Planning
Commission
to
grant
minor
deviations.
I
A
I
C
D
D
What
it
does
we
think
aesthetically
is,
makes
it
more
compatible
with
what
you
will
see
across
the
street
with
the
residential
development
there
that
you
don't
have
such
an
extreme
difference
in
the
grade
as
you're
going
from
Bilardo
down
to
Palm
Canyon,
the
number
of
units
hasn't
changed,
the
architectural
style
is
the
same.
The
amount
of
open
space
is
the
same,
and
so,
for
those
reasons
we
find
it
to
be
in
substantial
compliance
with
the
preliminary
approval.
C
I'll
reserve
my
opinions
until
later.
These
questions
right
one
more
question
with
respect
to
the
the
the
the
talk:
what's:
rêveur
walk
the
creek
trail,
the
homes
that
are
backed
up
to
that.
What
is
the
nature
of
the
wall?
Are
there?
Are
there
access
opportunities
from
those
various
Lots
like
a
door
or
something
I
didn't
the
way
you
described
the
fence?
It
looks
like
the
fences
are
not
aligned
together,
they're
sort
of
like
staggered,
and
it
looks
like
there's
space
among
the
various
fencing's
to
go
into
the
properties.
Is
that
correct
I
recall
us
approving.
I
Yet
correct
so
there
was
actually
more
of
a
courtyard
style,
rear
yard
that
was
a
but
the
the
creek
there.
So
instead
they
are
proposing
to
install
a
wall
along
the
rear
of
the
project
or
along
the
creek
of
the
project
and
also
proposed
a
breeze
block
wall
feature
that
would
recur
along
the
edge
of
the
property.
So.
J
F
D
There
was
a
private
group
of
citizens
who
sued
the
city
and
the
applicant
over
the
approval
of
this
project
as
part
of
the
settlement
agreement,
the
city
had
to
agree
to
changes
to
the
project,
as
did
the
applicant.
That
was
approximately
90
days
in
the
process,
which,
added
on
to
the
time
of
the
and.
D
J
I
I
F
I
The
proposed
the
plan
that's
proposed
is
is
consistent
with
that
in
terms
of
they
do
have
roughly
half
of
the
units
along
both
project
sites
or
along
with
edges
of
the
project
as
being
one
and
two-story
where
the
2-story
is
proposed.
It
is
planned
to,
and
the
plan
to
has
the
second
floor
closer
towards
the
interior
of
the
project
towards
this.
F
I
Well,
the
condition
was
that
I
can
condition
was
written
sit
and
it
said,
unless
approved
otherwise
by
the
Planning
Commission.
A
50-50
mix
of
one
in
2-story
homes
shall
be
provided
on
northerly
and
westerly
edges
of
the
site.
Where
two-story
homes
are
constructed
in
these
locations
they
shall
be
limited
to
the
product
type.
That
has
the
second
story
near
the
internal
streets,
so
it
would
be
contrary
to
that
condition.
Okay,.
I
F
But
I
mean
historian:
that's
where
we're
at
right
now:
yeah,
okay,
so
the
other
question
I
had
was:
oh
I
have
two
more
I'm.
Sorry,
and
this
is
something
I've
asked
every
time
this
project
has
come
before
us
and
you
guys
that
are
new
here.
It's
we've
seen
this
probably
six
or
eight
or
ten
or
twelve
times,
we've
seen
it
a
lot.
I
And
it
looks
like
it's
about
four
feet
from
the
four
feet
of
common
area:
a
depth
of
the
common
area,
a
lot.
So
in
addition
to
that,
so
that
would
be
where
the
perimeter
wall
is
and
then
they
would
have
another
setback
for
to
the
rear
of
the
house.
No.
F
K
F
I
F
F
F
I
So
you
have
your
landscape
plans
in
the
front
of
those
larger
11
by
17
behind
the
landscape
lenses,
the
revised
tentative
map.
The
unit
makes
the
preliminary
plot
plan
and
then
it's
a
preliminary
grading
plan
and
after
that
and
within
that
exhibit
they
have
site
sections
showing
what
the
the
westerly
edge
would
be
with
the
new
grades
can.
F
L
D
D
F
F
A
M
We've
had
a
few
conversations
with
the
applicant
and
they
are
currently
trying
to
secure
dirt
soil,
so
have
it
to
bring
that
site
up,
and
we
talked
with
the
city
engineer
about
this,
and
we
don't
have
a
problem
with
it.
They
do
have
a
few
items
that
they
need
to
clear
up
before
that
can
happen.
They
need
to
make
sure
that
the
tribe
is
ok
with
you
know,
tribal
monitoring
and
that
sort
of
thing
on
the
site,
but
yeah.
We
feel
that
it's
not
an
issue
great.
I
So
they
initially
had
a
12
foot
setback
and
then,
as
a
project
evolved,
the
buildings
started
to
get
further
away
and
there
was
kind
of
more
of
a
common,
a
common
space
between
the
north
property
line
and
the
multifamily
units.
So
they
are
proposing
it's
about
a
25
foot
from
the
north
property
line,
and
so
it
would
comply
with
the
planned
development
requirements.
These
show.
F
I
N
For
the
name
of
that
project,
the
pads
are
very,
very
high
and
I
recall
some
of
the
commissioners,
mentioning
after
the
fact
that
they
were
not
aware
or
wasn't
clear
to
them,
that
those
pads
would
be
so
high
before
the
houses
were
constructed
on
top
of
them.
So
in
this
case,
you're
talking
about
raising
the
height
of
the
pad
on
the
west
side
along
Bilardo,
and
apparently
it's
from
it
used
to
be
five
to
six
feet
below
the
road
of
the
sidewalk.
And
now
it's
1
to
2
feet
from.
N
J
I
N
I
N
I
N
I
So
the
site,
what
is
happening
around
the
property,
is
to
the
west
of
the
property
on
less
Abelardo,
there's
two
large
culverts
that
are
capturing
water
as
it
comes
down
the
hill
and
we'd
funnel
onto
the
site
which,
if
you've
been
out
there.
This
is
quite
a
significant
drop
from
Bilardo
to
the
edge
of
Bilardo
into
the
property,
so
those
culverts
collect
and
convey
water
through
the
site,
and
our
engineering
folks
can
probably
explain
it
better
than
I
can,
but
they
have
to
collect
and
convey
that
through
the
site
for
the
previous
conditions.
I
So,
in
order
to
do
that,
there
has
been
a
couple
of
different
iterations
on
how
that
might
occur.
One
is
that
they
catch
it
and
it
could
and
they
extend
a
drainage
line
down
Bilardo
to
mesquite
to
the
south
and
then
continue
that
down
mesquite
all
the
way
to
random
road
across
Palm
Canyon,
and
then
that
drops
back
into
a
talk
which
Creek
that's
been
one
one
option
that
they've
considered
another
option
is
to
catch
those
catch
the
drainage
through
the
site
and
take
it
to
the
creek
at
the
northeast
corner.
I
There's
been
some
questions
about
whether
or
not
that's
possible,
so
that's
kind
of
also
part
of
the
reason.
I
think
that
they're
trying
to
increase
the
the
pads
here
to
allow
those
drainage
facilities
to
go
through
the
site
and
and
I
don't
know
if
our
engineering
office
has
any
more
comments
or
the
applicant
wants
to
explain
some
of
the
reasoning
further.
But
that's
my
understanding
of
how
it's
worked.
I'm.
M
M
What
they're,
planning
on
doing
is
capturing
that
pipe
in
the
street,
bringing
it
down
Bilardo
and
then
it's
going
to
come
into
the
tract
come
around
this
way
and
then
it's
actually
going
to
dump
into
the
wash,
rather
than
going
all
the
way
down
to
the
skete
across
Palm
Canyon,
connecting
to
the
Cameron
project
and
then
entering
the
wash
that
way
by
raising
these
pads
and
collecting
this
here,
it's
a
much
better
way
of
conveying
that
water.
We
don't
have
as
many
underground
facilities
that
have
to
be
maintained,
there's
less
impact
to
the
surrounding
streets.
M
F
M
Because
they
have
a
couple
items
so,
when
you're
dealing
with
drainage
on
a
lot,
you
have
two
elements
that
you
have
to
continue
or
you
have
to
contend
with.
One
is
you
have
to
convey,
accept
and
convey
all
off-site
water
that
historic
and
through
your
site,
and
then
you
have
to
deal
with
the
water
that
you're
generating
on-site
and
you
typically
are
not
allowed
to
co-mingle
those
two
waters.
M
So
you
have
to
try
to
separate
them
by
raising
these
pads,
it
gives
them
a
little
bit
better
management
of
that
water,
they're
able
to
conduct
and
convey
the
water
that
they're
actually
generating
on-site,
take
it
to
some
underground
facilities.
There
scrub
it
clean
it
do
what
is
required
of
a
water
quality
management
plan,
and
then
those
two
waters
can
converge
and
go
into
the
creeks.
By
raising
these
pads
and
most
of
the
raising
of
the
pads
is
at
Bilardo,
and
it
eventually
steps
down
to
almost
a
natural
grade
or
a
little
bit
lower.
F
F
You
outlined
a
drainage
plan
that
goes
south
on
Bilardo
enters
the
site
at
the
west,
south
west
corner
and
then
goes
east
along
that
kind
of
edge
of
the
property
and
then
goes
back
north
towards
the
creek,
and
this
is
all
underground.
That's
all
underground.
How
would
the
I
don't
understand?
None
of
that
seems
to
me
to
be
affected
by
the
height
specifically
of
those
paths
facing
Bilardo.
M
So
the
pads
were
left
the
way
that
they
were
originally
approved.
Excuse
me,
you'd,
end
up.
You
know
with
these
really
large
retaining
walls
from
the
backside
of
the
properties.
They
would
have
a
I,
don't
want
to
say
a
really
difficult
time.
It
would
be
difficult
to
get
that
water
out
of
those
backyards.
So.
M
Correct
you
would
have
a
hard
time
conveying
that
water
to
the
interior
streets,
just
so
that
it
could
be
conveyed
properly.
You
would
end
up
with
a
tremendous
amount
of
drain
pipes.
In
some
cases
you
may
end
up
with
a
couple
of
sump
pumps
in
there
just
to
get
some
of
the
water
out.
So
this
is.
This
is
a
much
better,
so.
M
N
I
N
N
I
N
I
A
Before
we
referred
move
on
I
just
I
wanted,
we
have
a
lot
of
people
in
the
audience
that
are
here
to
speak
on
an
item.
That's
later
on
that
to
cut
this
one
short
we're
getting
into
some
engineering
details
about
the
thing,
but
what
I'd
like
to
know
is
it's
not
a
public
hearing?
Do
people
want
to
hear
from
the
applicant
well.
F
N
Because
I,
just
you
know,
I
we
make
decisions
here
and
then
afterwards
is
a
gosh,
Jenna,
I
didn't
know
that
was
going
to
be
so
tall
and
you
can't
see
the
valley
anymore.
Then
we
feel
like
idiots,
because
we
didn't
actually
ask
the
right
questions
and
you
know
at
the
time.
So
that's
why
I'm
trying
to
figure
this
out.
So
I
driving
blood
all
the
time
and
I
like
looking
out
seeing
the
valley
now
you
know
it
sounds
like
we
may,
or
we
won't
see
it.
We
wouldn't
have
seen
it
anyway.
N
N
I
I
N
A
C
Sir,
as
supportive
as
they
want
to
be
of
these
projects
and
I,
think
that
corridor
just
begs
for
development
and
it's
beginning
to
come
alive
again.
I've
reviewed
a
lot
of
preliminary
plans.
Visa
vie
final
plans
for
PT,
DS
and
I.
Don't
think
I've
ever
seen
as
many
changes
to
the
plan
as
I'm,
seeing
here
it
not
only
changes
staff
identified,
but
mr.
Hertzberg
Hirsch
behind
mr.
Hirsch
Brian
identified
several
others
significant
others.
C
I
didn't
realize
in
the
explanation
of
the
staff
report
that
the
reason
for
the
change
on
the
west
side
of
the
of
the
subdivision
was
not
just
because
of
the
very
high
retaining
wall,
but
there's
really
a
significant
drainage
issue.
That's
being
made
a
bit
more
simple
by
this
change.
I
don't
feel
comfortable,
approving
the
revised
development
plan
in
as
much
as
there
are
so
many
changes.
C
The
paseo,
for
example,
I
think
without
the
Paseos
you're
looking
at
I,
don't
know
if
any
of
you
remember
I'm
I'm
one
of
the
older
people
on
the
Commission,
something
called
Levittown
in
Levittown.
It
was
just
the
initial
subdivision
of
modern
homes,
but
there
was
no
attention
to
detail.
No
attention
to
livability
quality
of
life,
it
was
just
home
after
home
after
home
and
unless
we
we
vary
this
this
landscaping
and
adds
some
changes
to
the
streets.
Just
I,
don't
think
sidewalks.
Do
it
I
think
it
becomes
a
very
ordinary
to
unified
development.
F
Can't
support
it
for
a
couple
of
reasons.
I've
been
looking
at
this
project
for
several
years
and,
like
I,
said
I
think
this
might
be
about
the
10th
or
12th
iteration
of
it,
and
my
initial
concerns
remain
my
concerns.
Today.
Only
they've
been
exacerbated
since
the
final
submittals,
since
the
last
approval
and
and
and
that
that
includes
the
setback
of
the
second
floor
unit.
I
mean,
as
of
today,
we're
getting
changes
on
the
unit
design
and
the
unit
mix.
F
That
has
a
significant
impact
on
the
view
from
the
TOC
was
quick,
tahquitz,
Creek,
Trail
and
I.
Don't
think
that's
fair
to
us.
I
haven't
even
seen
the
drawing
of
the
unit
change
yet
and
we're
supposed
to
make
that
on
the
fly
up
here.
I
think
the
the
the
developer
has
to
comply
with
that
requirement
to
have
that
second
floor
chunk
on
those
units
away
from
the
creek.
That
was
a
very
important
part
of
the
approvals
that
we
went
through.
F
F
There
was
another
one:
Wallach
Creek
fest,
oh
yeah,
again
I've,
going
back
to
the
I
to
live
on
the
south
end
and
I
Drive
Gallardo
a
lot
and
I
love
driving
down
that
Street
and
seeing
that
view
out
to
the
east,
to
the
valley
and
to
South
Ridge,
it's
a
gorgeous
view.
I
would
hate
for
the
city
to
lose
that
view
forever,
because
these
guys
can't
figure
out
how
to
drain
a
half
a
dozen
backyards.
This
has
nothing
to
do
with
that
complicated
drainage
pattern
that
the
City
Engineer
was
describing.
F
He
said
he
stated
that
it's
independent
of
that
it
just
has
to
do
with
draining
a
few
backyards,
and
if
you
have
to
look
at
a
roof,
let's
see
what
that
roof
looks
like
there's
things
we
can
do
to
make
a
parapet
or
some
mitigating
on
that
roof.
Look
but
I
don't
want
to
lose
as
part
of
a
PDD
I
do
not
want
to
lose
that
view
out
to
that
valley,
I,
don't
I
it!
It's
it!
It's
an
amenity.
F
N
To
completely
agree
with
that,
because
again,
this
is
the
kind
of
detail
that
sounds
minor,
but
then,
when
it's
built
and
you're
driving
down
bellari
is
like
what
the
heck
how
come
these
houses
are
so
tall
for
the
wall
too
tall,
and
you
can't
see
anymore,
that
little
detail
is
huge
if
it
turns
out
not
to
work
right,
so
I
don't
know.
If
we're
can
we
ask
for
some
you
relations
of
what
this
thing
would
look.
F
N
F
A
So
I
disagree
with
my
fellow
commissioners
when
you
look
at
the
rendering
that's
here,
that
the
wall
that
was
approved
as
part
of
the
PDD
and
I'm
happy
to
place
the
pass
this
around
again
versus
the
wall,
that's
being
proposed
with
the
change
is
minimal
to
none
to
change
any
visibility
that
was
originally
approved.
I
think
this
site
has
an
enormous
amount
of
challenges
to
it.
A
Unmet
on
many
levels,
I
think
it's
gone
through
many
companies
looking
at
their
due
diligence,
Farwest
has
proven
themselves
in
Palm
Springs
to
not
start
a
stop
the
project
and
stop
it,
but
actually
build
out
projects.
They've
actually
bought
projects
that
were
in
distress
and
built
them
out.
I
think
part
of
the
reason
the
Paseos
are
gone.
Is
the
settlement
agreement
I?
Think
the
Paseos
offered
a
safety
issue
for
this
particular
part
of
the
neighborhood,
so
I
would
be
in
support
of
the
project.
A
D
O
The
Farwest
industries,
as
you
mentioned,
and
thank
you-
we
have
built
many
projects
out
here
and
just
to
name
the
last
three
off
the
top
of
my
head:
we're
building,
icon,
we'd,
built
tuscany
heights
in
murano,
plus
many
many
more,
and
we
don't
stop
a
project.
We
will
get
this
thing
built.
That's
our
point
just
a
couple,
quick
things.
First,
let's
talk
about
the
elevation
so
I
see
this
is
a
troubling
and
struggling
issue
for
you,
but
let
me
make
it.
O
Let
me
explain
it
this
way
when
you're
driving
on
Gallardo
and
you
look
down
at
the
property
right
now,
it's
about
a
15-foot
drop.
So
it's
just
it's
just
a
pit,
so
that
is
gonna
come
up
a
few
feet
with
the
grading,
but
when
you
walk
outside
your
back
door,
if
you're
one
of
the
houses
that
that
back
up
to
Bilardo
you're
gonna
see
a
seven-foot
retaining
wall
on
top
of
that
another
six-foot
garden
wall,
so
about
a
12-foot
wall,
we've
found
that
people
just
don't
like
that.
It's
it's
aesthetically
unpleasing!
O
So
we
wanted
to
modify
that
and
mitigate
that,
but
that
happened
in
conjunction
with
the
grading,
for,
as
Rick
mentioned,
the
engineering
required
us
to
raise
the
pads
up.
So
we
could
get
all
of
the
water.
That's
created
on-site
all
the
way
to
the
end
of
the
property
filter,
it
clean
it
scrub
it,
and
then
it
goes
into
the
wash
and
mixes
with
the
other
water.
O
Why
can't
we
do
that
as
it
is
right
now
if
the
pads
are
still
as
low
as
what
was
on
your
previously
approved
elevations,
we
don't
have
the
fall
to
get
from
Bilardo
all
the
way
around
and
get
inside
to
the
to
the
flood.
I,
don't
know
if
you
can
put
that
slide
up
with
the
sight,
but
as
as
that's
coming
up
so
we
take
it
from
the
bottom
left
corner
top
left
corner.
O
O
O
O
O
The
issue
from
my
understanding
and
remember:
we,
we
just
purchased
this
project
a
few
I
think
six
months
ago,
all
the
other
stuff
of
the
lawsuit
and
everything
else
prior
to
us.
The
settlement
with
the
Paseos
that
was
a
settlement,
the
city
attorney
agreed
and
signed
off
on
so
that
I
I,
don't
think
that
should
be
an
issue
that
really
needs
too
much
direction
because
it's
approved
in
the
settlement
with
the
city.
O
O
So
that's
what
I'm
suggesting
we
put
three
of
those
just
to
mix
it
up
and
as
far
as
you
know,
if
you
drive
along
sandy
dunes
by
the
KFC,
there's
actually
a
mound
a
little
hill,
that's
along
sandy
dunes.
So
if
you're
driving
you're
looking
at
our
project,
you're,
actually
seeing
a
little
berm,
maybe
a
eight-foot
hyper!
So
you're
not
actually
gonna
see
this
mass.
That
I
can.
O
Used
to
be
a
well,
there
was
a
restaurant
on
our
site,
yeah
be
next
to
the
KFC
between
the
KFC
and
Bilardo.
Two
little
berm
stretches
it's
there.
Next
time
you
drive
you'll,
see
it
because
I'm
sure
you'll
be
looking
for
it
now,
but
with
that
that
kind
of
hides
what
I
think
was
the
concern
of
the
City
Council
and
Planning
Commission
when
this
was
heard
in
the
past,
and
that
is
that
we
don't
want
to
see
this
mass
of
just
structures.
O
That's
why
you
wanted
a
houses
pushed
away
toward
the
inside
well
because
of
that
berm,
because
the
taça
Woods
Creek
that
separates
that
gap,
you
you
are
talking
about
a
setback
of
maybe
a
hundred
plus
feet
between
sandy
dunes
and
our
properties,
so
I,
don't
really
think
you're
gonna
notice
that
big
mass.
That
was
the
concern.
So
if
we
were
allowed
to
add
three
plan
threes
up
there
again
same
plan
is
what's
down
below
it,
just
mixes
it
up
and
makes
it
into
a
better
community.
That
was
that's.
That's
the
aspect
can.
A
So
one
thing
we
heard
is
along
Bilardo
right,
you're,
proposing
a
solid
wahlberg
before
it
was
solid,
along
with
a
picket.
I
think
was
the
term
that
we
used
you
that
picket
would
now
be
looking
into
the
backyards.
Would
you
be,
and
people
could
plant
after
they
moved
in
there?
Is
that
something
you
would
be
amenable
to
or
them
to
plant
no
no
did
to
break
up
the
wall
instead
of
being
a
solid
perimeter
wall
to
do
part
of
the
wall
as
transparent
and
part
of
the
wall,
as
so.
O
A
Just
asking
if
that
and
the
other
question,
I
think
they
came
up
that
I'd
like
to
address
is
we
talked
about
on
the
north
side
of
the
site
where
tack
wood
says
there
was
a
loss
of
some
landscape
area
on
the
very
north
side
of
the
site
and
the
talk
what's
wash
and
maybe
an
explanation
as
to
why
that
had
to
happen.
I
wish.
O
H
N
N
Know
if
you're,
if
you're
in
this
dwelling
and
you're
looking
west
you're,
still
gonna,
see
the
wall
based
on
what
this
shows.
The
wall
won't
be
as
high
as
it
was,
but
you'll
still
see
it.
Unless
you're
happen
to
be
on
the
roof,
then
you
can
see
over
the
wall.
According
to
this,
unless
the
windows
are
at
the
very
top
there
clerestory
windows
are
somehow,
then
you
could
somehow
see
over
the
wall,
but
otherwise
you're
still
not
going
to
see
over
the
wall.
No.
O
It's
not
about
seeing
over
the
wall.
To
be
honest,
it's
about
seeing
the
wall.
We
just
still
see
the
wall
well,
I
agree
with
you,
you're
still
going
to
see
the
wall,
but
the
difference
between
seeing
a
12-foot
wall.
When
you
open
your
back
door
and
a
six
or
seven
or
eight-foot
wall,
it's
a
huge
difference
to
people
again.
That
was
only
half
the
battle.
The
other
was
how
we
convey
the
water
from
from
the
houses
at
that
back
up
to
Bilardo.
O
N
O
N
D
There
was
a
concern
about
the
livability
of
those
spaces
between
the
houses
that
face
Bilardo
Road
and
the
upper
elevation
of
the
street,
in
particular.
Councilmember
Mills
was
concerned
about
the
backyards
of
those
houses
and
how
the
plan
related
to
being
down
in
a
pit
essentially,
and
so
that
was
one
of
the
things
that
the
City
Council
asked
them
to
look
at
as
they
went
through
the
final
plan
development
stage
with
the
previous
developer.
D
Mr.
chair,
if
I
might,
it
seems
like
there
are
concerns
and
being
able
to
make
the
finding
that
it's
substantially
consistent
with
the
approvals
that
were
granted
previously,
you
have
a
couple
of
options
either
moving
forward,
as
is,
or
you
might
request,
additional
information
and
in
particular
the
concern
appears
to
be
along
the
blarg
o
road
front,
both
in
terms
of
having
sections
that
adequately
describe
what
the
condition
will
be
there,
as
well
as
the
wall,
that's
proposed
along
Bilardo
and
then.
D
Secondly,
looking
at
the
talk,
what's
Creek
frontage
being
able
to
compare
what
was
originally
approved
versus
what
is
proposed
here,
those
appear
to
be
the
two
biggest
areas
of
your
concern
relative
to
the
Paseos.
Again,
as
was
pointed
out
earlier,
those
were
omitted
because
of
the
settlement
agreement
and,
unfortunately,
there's
not
much
that
we
can
do
with
those
now
they
made
sense
when
the
development
was
a
gated
development
and
there
was
a
better
ability
to
control
those.
But
again
those
are
lost
so
going
back.
There
are
really
two
areas
that
are
of
concern
again.
D
D
D
C
F
But
to
your
earlier
point:
Commissioner
Donna
felt
it's
not
yeah
I
get.
We
can't
have
to
say
owes
by
Paseos
part
of
the
litigation
they're
gone,
but
to
say
that
the
open
space
that
the
Paseos
provided
and
and
adding
a
four
or
five
foot
wide
sidewalk
is
is
equivalent
to
me
is
a
week
discussion.
I
think.
F
The
point
is
that
we
would
be
looking
for
some
compensatory
open
space
within
the
development
that
would
that
would
soften
it
up
to
your
point
about
it
being
too
regimented
that
so
in
my
motion,
I
would
ask
them
to
look
at
so
some
open
spaces
compensation
for
the
open
space
of
the
position.
Paseos
provided
would.
C
F
D
C
A
But
this
motion
may
fail,
but
I
will
make
a
motion
just
to
keep
us
moving,
because
it's
quarter
to
three
and
I'll
just
make
a
statement
before
the
very
similar
to
the
statement.
I
made.
This
site
has
a
lot
of
constraints
to
it.
It's
gone
through
an
enormous
amount
of
scrutiny
on
several
bodies
here
at
the
city.
To
try
and
get
this
site
to
work.
I
would
make
the
motion
to
approve
it
and
I
would
make
the
motion
to
approve
it
with
the
addition
that
they
asked
for
the
three
along
attack
quits
to
be
approved.
F
I'll
give
it
a
try
I'll
make
a
motion
to
ask
the
applicant
to
come
back
to
us.
Subject:
I
don'ts
not
subject
to,
but
it's
with
the
following
requests:
I
guess
one
would
be
a
simulation
of
the
View
corridor
preserved
on
Bilardo,
not
with
a
solid
privacy
wall
there,
but
was
something
that
allows
a
view
out
across
the
valley.
F
I
would
like
to
see
staff
show
us
if,
in
fact,
some
of
the
buffer
on
the
north
side
was
lost,
I
guess
there's
some
dispute
as
to
whether
that's
the
case
or
not
and
I'd
like
to
see
that
clarified
by
staff,
because
part
of
the
approvals
I
thought
had
a
minimum
buffer.
There
I'd
like
to
see
and
I'll
leave
this
up
to
Commissioner
Donna
felt
because
I
think
he
has
a
strong
opinion
about
this,
but
I'd
like
to
see
the
gates
in
that
wall.
So
so
those
residents
could
access
the
path.
F
And
I'd,
like
I'd,
like
to
preclude
the
second
stories
facing
the
creek
I'd
like
to
just
take,
take
that
off
the
table.
I
again
we're
talking
about
the
to
me.
The
PDD
process
is,
is
a
significant
part
of
the
process
is
to
ensure
that
the
impact
the
project
has
to
the
surrounding
community
is
appropriate.
F
N
Just
discussion
because
of
the
concern
that
the
council
raised
and
the
applicant
has
I'd
like
us
to
see
a
simulation.
If
you
were
in
the
dwelling
in
your
looking
west
east
west,
what
it
would
look
like
with
the
the
tall
wall
and
what
it
would
look
like
with
the
shorter
wall
just
to
get
a
sense
of
it
in
addition
to
having
the
other
way
around
when
you're
driving,
Abelardo
and
you're
looking
east,
what
you'll
see
from
a
car
height
and
not
a
giant
SUV.
A
low
car
like
mine,.
J
J
F
J
F
A
F
A
F
A
D
Know
that
I
can
what
I
will
ask
is
that
I
will
meet
with
Commissioner
Hurst
fine
after
the
meeting
just
to
clarify
exactly
what
he
wants
to
see,
we'll
look
at
a
site
plan
and
do
that
I
do
have
the
other
conditions
written
down
in
your
motion
and
the
motion
is
to
continue
the
item
pending
these
items.
Coming
back
to
you
that.
C
D
A
A
Next,
we've
on
the
agenda
is
a
discussion
item.
It's
a
request
by
the
city
of
Palm
Springs
to
amend
the
chapters
91
92
93
and
94.
The
Palm
Springs
owning
code
relative
to
the
development
standards
for
cannabis,
uses
we're
going
to
run
this
similar
to
a
public
hearing
that
we're
going
to
allow
the
public
to
speak
for
three
minutes
per
speaker.
But
before
we
do
that,
can
we
have
a
staff
report?
Please
Thank.
D
You
mr.
chair
members
of
the
Commission,
in
terms
of
our
discussion
today,
I'm
just
going
to
do
a
very
brief
background.
I'm
not
going
to
go
into
the
level
of
detail
that
I
did
during
our
previous
study
session.
I'll
talk
about
the
proposed
modifications
to
our
cannabis
ordinance,
then
we'll
take
public
input,
Planning
Commission
discussion
and
we'll
look
for
direction
from
the
Planning
Commission
at
the
end
of
this
discussion
today.
In
terms
of
the
background
on
the
regulations,
I
just
want
to
remind
the
Commission
and
members
of
the
public
that
our
regulations
relative
to
cannabis.
D
Businesses
are
contained
in
two
separate
areas
of
the
city's
code.
First
of
all,
in
Chapter
five
we
have
the
regulations
that
pertain
to
how
cannabis
businesses
are
operated
and
then.
Secondly,
in
the
zoning
code,
we
have
the
where
the
cannabis
businesses
may
be
located
in
terms
of
amending
the
code.
Chapter
five
is
amended
by
the
City
Council,
so
they
are
the
only
ones
who
review
and
amend
that
portion
of
the
code.
It
does
require
two
public
hearings.
D
There
have
been
some
changes
to
this
anticipated
process
since
we
had
the
study
session
and
I
just
wanted
to
go
over
the
process
that
we'll
be
going
through
in
terms
of
amendments
to
our
code.
First
of
all,
there
was
a
stakeholder
meeting
held
back
in
July.
Then
we
held
our
study
session
on
September
the
11th,
we're
having
a
discussion
on
proposed
to
the
zoning
code
today,
and
then
we
will
have
our
formal
public
hearing
at
the
next
Planning
Commission
meeting,
which
will
be
on
October
the
10th.
D
What
we
are
looking
for
on
October
the
10th
is
that
you
will
finalize
your
recommendations
to
the
City
Council
on
that
date.
The
city
council
subcommittee
intends
to
hold
another
meeting
with
the
stakeholders.
We
anticipate
that
that
would
be
in
mid-october
and
then
the
first
discussion
of
both
the
zoning
regulations
and
the
changes
to
the
Municipal
Code
Chapter
five
would
be
the
city
council
meeting
of
10:23
October
23rd
and
the
city
council
may
choose
to
hold
additional
public
hearings
so
again.
D
That
process
has
has
lengthened
and
changed
since
we
last
discussed
this
at
the
study
session
on
the
11th
in
terms
of
the
cannabis
zoning
regulations,
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
point
out
and
make
clear
to
both
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
public
is
that
proposed.
Changes
to
our
zoning
code
are
not
retroactive.
As
a
general
rule.
Changes
to
zoning
regulations
are
not
retroactive
in
terms
of
any
applications
that
are
in
process.
The
City
Council
has
a
policy
decision
to
exempt
those
applicants
from
the
new
regulations.
D
However,
that's
not
a
discussion
for
us
to
have
as
the
Planning
Commission.
That's
something
that
the
City
Council
will
decide
at
a
later
date,
and
so
I
just
want
to
make
it
clear
to
both
the
Planning
Commission
and
the
public
that
any
decision
on
applications
that
are
in
process
would
be
a
decision
of
the
City
Council
and
not
of
the
Planning
Commission.
Here
today,.
D
The
City
Council
subcommittee
has
asked
the
Planning
Commission
to
look
at
four
specific
things.
First
of
all
is
the
issue
of
saturation
and
separation
distance
issues.
Secondly,
they've
asked
you
to
look
at
the
waiver
criteria
that
we
look
at
relative
to
separation.
Distance
third
they've
asked
you
to
look
at
notification
requirements
for
new
cannabis
businesses
and
then
fourth
they've
asked
you
to
make
a
recommendation
on
architectural
review
requirements.
D
Let
me
start
with
the
first
issue
of
saturation
and
separation.
In
particular,
City
Council
identified
that
there
were
saturation
issues
in
both
the
desert,
Highland
gateway
and
DeMuth
park
neighborhoods,
and
there
is
a
moratorium
that
is
currently
in
place
relative
to
new
applications
in
those
areas.
In
addition,
we've
had
a
number
of
separation,
distance
waivers
in
the
Palm
Canyon
corridor,
and
so
they
wanted
us
to
look
at
those
issues
as
well.
D
You
all
discussed
the
matter
at
the
study
session
and
you
made
a
number
of
recommendations
to
staff,
and
so
we've
prepared
a
draft
ordinance
which
reflects
the
recommendations
that
you
had
made
to
us
on
September
the
11th,
based
on
that.
What
we
have
proposed
in
the
ordinance
before
you
today
is
to
modify
the
locations
for
where
cultivation
may
occur
and
for
where
type,
six
and
type
seven
manufacturing
may
occur,
and
let
me
just
remind
you,
in
terms
of
manufacturing
type,
six
and
type
seven
manufacturing
licenses
and
those
are
the
state
license.
D
In
terms
of
cultivation
and
then
the
manufacturing
uses
I
have
a
map
here
showing
the
I-10
corridor
area,
and
this
is
what
we
discussed
as
being
a
possible
cannabis
overlay
zone
where
we
would
like
to
encourage
those
uses
to
locate,
and
so
what
we're
proposing
is
that
cultivation
be
limited
to
this
area
along
the
freeway
and
in
particular
we're
looking
at
the
e
I,
the
m2
and
the
m1
P
zones,
which
would
be
along
the
freeway
and
so
again
just
highlighting
here.
If
I
can
do
that.
D
This
is
the
e
I
in
the
brown,
the
m2
is
the
per
pull
and
then
the
m
1p
is
the
green
that
you
see
here
and
then
further
down
here.
Just
to
orient
you.
This
is
the
I-10
freeway
corridor
as
you
move
through
the
valley.
This
is
the
Indian
Canyon
intersection
with
I-10
here
and
then
this
is
gene
autry
right
down
here,
and
so
those
are
the
areas
where
cultivation
and
manufacturing
would
be
allowed.
D
D
In
the
industrial
zones
we
are
also
proposing
to
have
separation,
distance
requirements.
Based
on
your
discussion
from
September
the
11th.
There
would
be
a
requirement
of
500
feet
of
separation
between
all
cannabis
facilities
in
those
zones
and
then
a
minimum
of
a
thousand
feet.
Separation
for
the
cultivation
and
manufacturing
uses
from
residential
zone,
but
again
no
cultivation
would
be
allowed,
except
in
the
I-10
corridor.
D
In
looking
how
these
separation
distance
requirements
apply
to
the
distinct
areas,
let
me
just
go
through
those
with
the
maps
that
we've
prepared
for
you
the
bubble.
If
you
can
see
here,
let
me
just
go
to
the
pointer,
so
this
dark
line
that
you
see
around
here.
This
is
showing
the
500
foot
separation
between
cannabis
businesses,
so
based
on
a
500
foot
distance
separation
from
the
existing
cannabis
businesses
in
Desert,
Island
Gateway
area,
there
wouldn't
be
any
additional
cannabis
businesses
that
would
be
permitted.
D
Sunny
dunes,
you
see
the
same
thing
because
of
the
residential
separation
and
the
separation
from
the
businesses
that
are
there.
There
wouldn't
be
any
new
additional
cannabis
businesses
allowed
and
then
in
the
airport,
Vista
Chino
area.
There
are
a
limited
number
of
parcels
where
new
cannabis
businesses
would
be
allowed
based
on
the
residential
separation
or
the
separation
from
the
existing
businesses
there.
So
you
can
see
how
those
two
separation
distances
work
in
addressing
the
issues
of
saturation
in
those
areas.
D
So,
as
we
showed
you
last
time
by
having
a
500
foot
separation
distance,
around
lounges
and
dispensaries
in
the
palm
canyon
corridor
and
along
Indian
Canyon,
there's
limited
area
where
you
would
be
able
to
have
additional
dispensaries
and
lounges
and
I've
shown
those
areas
with
the
red
highlight
there.
So
using
a
500
foot
separation
distance
again
that
limits
the
amount
of
new
businesses
that
you
could
have
in
those
corridors.
What's.
D
F
D
So
those
are
the
separation
distance.
Let
me
move
on
next
to
the
waiver
criteria.
Currently
in
terms
of
attaining
a
waiver.
The
City
Council
is
the
body
that
grants
waivers.
They
do
it
through
an
administrative,
minor
modification
process,
but
we
don't
have
any
real
standardized
criteria
for
those
types
of
waivers.
What
we're
proposing
is
the
following
list,
and
we
heard
comments
on
the
proposed
options
we
had
last
time,
so
we
flesh
those
out
a
little
bit
more
in
terms
of
the
proposed
waiver
criteria.
D
Third,
they
need
to
demonstrate
that
there's
no
undue
concentration
of
Canada
uses
on
a
particular
block
or
street
frontage,
and
so
what
we
would
look
at
is
the
immediate
block
where
the
use
is
proposed
to
be
located
forth
in
terms
of
the
operator.
We'd.
Look
at
the
qualifications
of
the
operator.
Do
they
have
experience?
Do
they
have
any
record
of
having
violations
v?
They
would
need
to
have
an
approved
security
program
approved
by
our
police
department,
and
then
the
sixth
would
be
that
the
proposed
use
is
no
closer
than
500
feet
to
any
residential
zone.
D
So
that
is
the
proposed
specific
criteria
that
we
would
forward
to
you.
Based
on
your
comments
at
the
study
session
in
terms
of
notification
requirements.
Currently,
no
notification
is
required
for
uses
cannabis
uses
that
are
approved.
Administrative
Lea
notification
isn't
required
for
distance
waivers,
although
we
have
done
it
at
the
request
of
City
Council
and
then
the
only
time
that
you
do
get
mailed
notices
or
have
a
posting
of
the
property
is
when
a
conditional
use
permit
is
required.
So
that's
the
current
requirements.
D
What
we're
proposing
based
on
your
discussion
is
that
both
the
mailed
notice
and
a
sign
posting
would
be
required
for
both
administrative
approvals
and
for
discretionary
approvals
in
terms
of
the
mailed
notice.
It
would
require
that
the
notice
go
out
to
a
thousand
feet
for
property
owners
and
tenants,
and
it
would
be
ten
days
prior
to
the
action
and
then
a
sign
posting
of
the
property
would
be
required
30
days
prior
to
any
action.
D
What
we
would
do
with
the
sign
posting
it
either
has
to
be
a
free-standing
sign
or
it
could
be
posted
in
the
window
of
an
existing
building.
If
it's
visible
from
the
public
right-of-way
one
of
the
things
I
want
to
say
on
the
mail
notice,
we
did
discuss
a
longer
time
period.
However,
it
becomes
a
little
bit
difficult
in
that
for
all
of
our
other
mailed
notices
for
all
the
other
applications
that
we
do.
We
only
do
a
10-day
notice,
which
is
in
line
with
state
law.
D
While
we
could
do
a
longer
notice
becomes
a
little
bit
confusing
for
staff
and
for
our
applicants
in
doing
a
different
notice
than
what
we
have
for
all
other
standardized
applications,
and
so
that's
the
one
caveat
that
I
will
propose
to
you
there
architectural
review.
Currently
architectural
review
is
only
required
for
new
buildings
or
for
major
alterations.
The
review
is
done
by
the
AAC
and
is
then
forward
to
the
City
Council
Planning
Commission
does
not
participate
in
that
process.
D
What
we're
proposing
based
on
your
input
is
that
architectural
review
of
the
facade
treatment
and
signage
would
be
required
for
all
cannabis
facilities
in
all
zones,
and
then
that
would
be
reviewed
by
the
AAC,
the
architectural
Advisory
Committee
and
the
City
Council.
Now
there
is
one
exception
to
that.
In
our
code
up
in
the
area
north
of
the
freeway
in
the
e
I
and
the
m2
zone,
cannabis
facilities,
agricultural
facilities
are
exempt
from
architectural
review
by
our
existing
code.
D
So
those
are
the
four
things
that
the
City
Council
wanted.
You
to
look
at
as
I
had
mentioned
last
time.
There's
certain
administrative
changes
that
we're
also
proposing
to
make
first
of
all
relative
to
the
references
to
cannabis,
uses
we're
no
longer
distinguishing
between
recreational
and
medical
and
so
we'll
be
making
those
changes.
In
our
code,
all
owner
control
requirements
will
be
moved
to
Chapter
five
of
the
code.
D
Parking
requirements
have
been
added
for
all
cannabis
uses.
We
have
also
proposed
to
clarify
the
development
standards
for
cannabis.
Lounges
is
that
was
somewhat
confusing
in
our
zoning
requirements
and
then,
finally,
the
limitations
on
cultivation
canopy
will
be
aligned
with
state
law
going
back
again
to
the
process.
D
This
is
a
discussion
today
we
will
have
a
formal
public
hearing
on
October
the
10th,
at
which
time
we'll
request
that
you
make
a
recommendation
to
City
Council
City
Council
is
intending
to
hold
a
state
Coulter
meeting
in
mid-october,
with
the
first
city
council
hearing
on
both
the
changes
to
chapter
5
and
the
zoning
code
at
the
end
of
October.
That
concludes
my
presentation
to
you
again.
D
A
The
thoroughness
and,
on
behalf
of
the
Commission,
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
we're
going
to
have
another
per
se
bite
at
this
Apple
today,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
people
in
the
audience
that
are
here
to
speaks.
So
if
there's
questions
of
staff,
I'd
like
to
just
run
from
my
left
to
my
right
and
ask
questions
of
staff
and
then
open
it
up
so
that
people
that
are
here
can
actually
have
an
opportunity
to
speak.
We
do
have
to
be
out
of
here
by
4:30.
A
N
D
D
D
D
N
And
that
may
be
some
beyond
your
purview
to
know
that
or
what
are
they,
the
other
but
I
think
that
needs
to
be
at
least
explored,
because,
if
we're
putting
all
our
eggs
in
the
I-10
basket,
we
should
at
least
know
who
owns
the
land
and
whether
or
not
they
would
even
consider
selling
it
for
cannabis.
Hey.
D
D
D
N
Is
you
know
again,
that's
probably
not
our
purview,
but
it
just
seems
to
me
if
the
council
is
discussing
wanting
to
put
most
of
cultivation
and
manufacturing
in
this
area.
We
need
to
know
if
the
wind
power
companies
would
be
interested
in
selling
land
unless
it's
a
checkerboard
I
mean
I,
understand
how
much
of
it
is
wind
where
it
is
and
what's
open
and
is
it
a
patch.
N
C
D
C
F
I,
forgive
me
I
was
not
at
the
study
session,
but
I
do
have
a
couple
questions
real
quickly,
part
of
what
we've
looked
at
in
the
past
when
a
applicant
wants
to
go
to
an
existing
building.
Is
the
adequacy
of
the
envelope
of
that
building
would
taking
architectural
review
away
from
us
in
those
cases,
prohibit
us
from
looking
at
the
art
the
envelope
aside
from
aesthetic
issues
that.
D
D
F
F
F
D
City
Council
currently
has
it
it
would
be
for
any
cannabis
facility.
One
of
the
things
that
we
haven't
had
in
the
past
is
we
haven't,
had
separation
distance
between
cannabis
facilities
in
our
industrial
zones
and
that's
something
that
would
be
added,
so
the
separation
distance
that's
proposed
and
the
additional
waiver
criteria
would
be
applicable
not
only
to
dispensaries
and
lounges,
but
also
to
manufacturing,
uses
distribution,
uses
testing
facilities
in
industrial
zones.
So.
F
K
In
terms
of
the
notification
process
and
extending
that
to
a
thousand
feet,
it
you
mentioned
in
the
staff
report
that
there
was
an
increase
in
fees
and
it
was
pretty
large
increase
in
fees
just
recently.
Do
you
have
a
sense
of
how
much
more
that
would
go
up
and
then
also
just
the
impact
on
staff
and
their
ability
to
actually
get
these
notices
out?
What.
D
I
would
expect
is
that
by
increasing
the
notification
radius,
what
you
would
see
is
probably
about
a
twenty
five
to
thirty
five
percent
raise
in
those
fees.
By
having
the
expanded
distance,
it
creates
both
additional
staff
time
in
terms
of
the
number
of
envelopes
that
go
out
etc,
but
that
is
incorporated
into
the
fee
itself.
Thank.
K
A
Fill
in
I
just
have
a
one
question.
You
know
we
got
several
pieces
of
communication
and
some
of
them
are
about
the
where,
and
some
of
them
are
about
the-
how
and
some
of
them
mix
both
of
them
up
in
the
communication
we
have,
but
one
of
the
letters
was
that
a
lounge
can't
share
a
door
with
the
dispensary.
Can
you
talk
about
that?
A
bit.
D
Yes,
that
is
the
language
that's
currently
in
our
code,
and
it
has
created
a
number
of
issues
in
that
a
lounge
also
has
to
have
a
licensed
dispensary,
and
so
what
we've
done
in
the
zoning
code
is
essentially,
we
put
a
barrier
between
those
two
uses.
What
I'm
proposing
to
do
to
correct
that
is
to
state
that
a
lounge
and
a
dispensary
may
be
connected
internally,
because
again
you
need
to
have
that
relationship,
and
so
we
are
correcting
that
situation
great.
You.
A
Know
with
that
I'd
like
to
actually
open
it
up
to
the
public
to
speak.
What
I
would
ask
is
that
the
first
person
that
comes
up
if
the
next
person,
with
just
a
second
person,
which
is
cue
behind
that
person,
so
it
goes
very
quickly.
I
want
to
thank
everyone.
That's
here
and
anyone
who's
not
here,
we
received
an
enormous
amount
of
communication
on
this
and
I
want
to
thank,
and
the
communication
was
actually
very
good.
So
I
want
to
thank
people
for
that
communication
as
well.
A
B
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Tempe
Essel
and
I'm.
Here
as
a
rookie
member
of
the
cannabis
workgroup
and
a
concerned,
citizen
of
Palm
Springs
I
attended
the
City
Council
meeting
on
July
9th
and
the
Planning
Commission
workshop
on
September,
11th
and
I
listened
to.
My
fellow
citizens
raised
their
concerns
about
the
smells
that
were
emanating
from
the
production
facilities.
Our
wonderful
city
is
comprised
of
many
neighborhoods
and
have
been
here
for
many
generations.
No
one
should
be
forced
to
stay
indoors
because
of
these
orders.
Children
should
not
be
exposed
to
these
smells
in
their
neighborhoods.
B
Cannabis
is
a
new
business
and
it
appears
we
are
going
to
going
through
a
learning
curve
on
how
to
coexist.
There
seems
to
be
a
strong
coordination
between
the
staff
report
and
the
workgroup
findings.
Specifically
the
stop
the
proliferation
creating
the
Green
Zone,
the
I-10
corridor
kept
the
number
of
manufacturing
and
cultivation
facilities
the
distance
requirements.
B
The
neighbors
feel
that
a
one-mile
distance
from
neighborhoods
would
be
a
better
situation,
develop
and
monitor
order
control
standards
using
the
most
up-to-date
technology
available.
It's
great.
The
Palm
Springs
is
one
of
the
two
cities
in
California
to
be
using
the
nasal
ranger's.
It's
great
that
we
will
soon
have
a
20
for
our
hotline
for
order,
complaints
and
the
new
fines
and
the
three-strike
rule
for
those
facilities
that
fail
to
comply
with
these
standards
is
fantastic.
B
Notifying
the
neighborhood
organizations
when
the
permits
are
submitted
and
update
according
to
the
process,
would
be
even
a
better
situation.
I
know
that's
now
available
online
and
if
people
make
themselves
available
to
that
information,
so
it's
my
hope
that
by
considering
these
changes
to
the
zoning
ordinance,
we
will
preserve
and
nurture
all
neighborhoods.
A
H
Commissioners
and
chair
and
vice-chair
I'm
actually
here
in
opposition
of
the
Planning
Commission
staff
report,
in
particular
to
the
area
near
Vista,
Chino
it
backs
into
the
Palm
Springs
Airport
I,
think
that,
in
regards
to
the
issues
related
to
density
setback,
cultivation
and
the
manufacturing
type,
six
and
seven
should
be
continued
to
be
allowed.
In
particular,
we
purchase
a
building
at
1251
Montalvo
way,
which
is
had
some
conversations
here
with
the
city
and
before
we
acquire
the
building,
we
started
our
due
diligence
in
January
of
2018.
H
We
spoke
to
the
fire
department,
the
police
department,
the
Planning
Department
and
the
City
Attorney's
office,
followed
up
with
multiple
emails.
I've
got
some
things
that
like
to
pass
on
to
you
guys.
Hopefully,
if
you
could
take
that,
but
we
did
extreme
due
diligence
on
this,
because
we
did
not
want
to
have
any
issues
with
odor
control
or
ask
for
any
variances
or
any
special
considerations.
I
do
want
to
just
bring
to
everyone's
awareness,
I
think
everyone
knows
it,
but
maybe
not
in
such
detail.
This
property
backs
in
to
the
airport.
H
It's
also
in
an
m1
zone.
Everyone
is
talking
about.
You
know
the
impact
it's
having
on
there's
been
health
issues
that
there's
no
scientific
data
to
back
up.
It's
been
brought
up,
there's
been
issues
about
property
values
being
diminished
from
a
real
estate
standpoint
and
I'm
in
real
estate.
Every
homeowner
that
is
around
community,
had
to
sign
disclosure
that
said
their
next
or
an
industrial
zone.
H
And
since
the
the
hearing
on
July
24th,
where
I
was
able
to
hear
all
the
issues
and
I'm
prepared
to
address
those.
At
my
upcoming
hearing,
the
number
one
thing
that
did
have
merit
to
it
was
odor
control.
We've
done
a
significant
amount
of
research
on
odor
control
and
are
looking
forward
to
presenting
our
case
on
that,
because
we
will
have
the
most
state-of-the-art
odor
control
systems
that
anyone
in
the
Coachella
Valley
is
seen
to
date.
H
Lastly,
I
just
wanted
to
to
close
out
that
when
we
purchased
this
building.
After
doing
all
this
due
diligence,
we've
invested
over
four
million
dollars
in
cash
and
hard
money
loans
to
do
this
transaction
we've
our
three
quarters
the
way
through
upgrading
our
power
to
the
tune
of
seven
hundred
and
fifty
thousand
dollars.
This
will
have
a
significant
financial
hardship
on
us
and
we
would
just
like
our
cases
to
be
heard.
H
A
A
A
P
First
of
all,
the
industrial
area
and
abused
park,
according
to
reports,
I've
seen,
is
already
highly
saturated,
with
both
dispensaries
and
then
growing
facilities
and
I
have
strong
feeling
that
the
distance
requirement
should
be
more
than
a
thousand
feet
because,
of
course,
the
Bella
Road
which
separates
the
residential
from
the
industrial
park.
Is
you
know
wide
open,
as
so
anything
that
emanates
from
the
industrial
park
is
going
to
undoubtedly
drift
over
into
residential
area.
P
The
other
thing
I
feel
that
the
distance
requirement
as
proposed
should
be
moved
to
at
least
a
mile
that
would
exclude
than
any
additional
facilities
in
to
be
booth
park
and
I
think
moving
facilities.
Growth
facilities
out
to
the
I-10
corridor
would
be
a
very
good
idea
for
the
present
and
for
future
growth
of
the
city
and
finally,
on
the
notification.
I
think
it
needs
to
be
more
than
just
a
thousand
feet
again.
I
live
north
2,000
feet
from
that.
P
Park
and
I
would
like
to
be
notified
as
early
as
possible
about
any
proposed
new
facilities
going
in
and
I
think
that's
important
not
happened
to
head
up
the
Guth
Park
neighborhood
organization,
I'd
like
to
be
able
to
get
the
information
out
to
all
of
our
residents
at
an
earlier
time.
So
thank
you
for
your
time.
Thank
you.
J
Hi
guys
just
thank
you
for
your
time.
I'm,
actually
a
real
estate
investor,
not
by
choice,
but
I
was
a
software
engineer
and
I
had
a
stroke.
I
had
to
make
some
health
choices,
not
a
recommended
health
choice
plan.
By
the
way,
I
wanted
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
mainly
the
City
Council
recommendation
that
you
guys,
hopefully
will
do
about
grandfathering
in
businesses
since
I
also
have
already
invested
in
a
building,
that's
in
an
m1
zone
and
wouldn't
meet
one-mile
restrictions.
It
would
create
a
large
financial
hardship.
For
me.
J
Obviously,
we've
invested
in
the
building
I
was
excited
to
invest
in
this
area.
I.
You
know,
I
bought
a
property
in
the
desert,
I
moved
here,
but
you
know
one
thing
that
you
know:
I
I,
truly
believe
that
the
the
issues
can
be
handled
with
technology.
Odor
control
I
mean
I,
want
to
be
a
good
neighbor
as
a
landlord
and
I
wouldn't
I
wouldn't
want
to
be
next
to
something.
J
That's
smelled,
bad
and
I
would
have
that
problem
too,
but
when
you're
making
please
when
you're
making
I
would
just
ask
when
you're
making
your
decisions
to
take
technology
into
effect,
and
if
it
is
a
building
in
an
area
and
odor
control
can
be
proven
that
it
isn't
going
to
impact
anybody.
I
would
think
that
maybe
you
could
make
an
exception,
especially
for
properties
have
already
been
purchased,
and
people
have
invested
money
based
on
the
rules
that
were
existing
at
the
time.
So
just
thank
you
for
your
consideration.
A
H
H
I
think
that
it
makes
sense
for
everyone
getting
involved
in
the
city.
I've
been
I've
done,
work
in
cities
before
where
it
new
ordinances,
have
come
out
and
created
a
lot
of
problems
and
a
lot
of
issues
and
with
these
new
changes,
I
think
they
do
make
sense.
Specifically,
you
know
some
of
the
big
things
is
with
that.
You
know
dispensary
and
lounge
being
able
to
connect
them
internally.
H
The
confusion
that
was
in
some
of
the
old
and
some
of
the
verbage
of
the
old
ordinance
made
things
more
difficult
for
us,
not
just
in
operation
wise,
but
also
you
know
when
enjoyment
for
customers
coming
in,
and
safety
and
security
when
we
have
to
move
outside
of
our
own
building
to
get
around
to
go
to
places,
it
makes
it
more
difficult
for
us
and
the
customer,
and
it
just
doesn't
make
sense
to
any
way,
shape
or
form.
So
we
did
submit
a
letter
from
the
row
house.
H
L
Q
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
Karina
Romero
and
I'm
here
on
behalf
of
highroad
Consulting
Group
were
based
out
in
Desert
Hot
Springs
I
just
wanted
to
bring
light
to
the
following
regarding
the
draft
ordinance
in
regards
to
the
waiver
program
requiring
a
building
to
be
vacant
for
three
years
as
a
bit
too
rigid,
and
it
does
not
allow
city
council
some
discretion
in
determining
the
vacancy
of
the
building.
The
number
of
buildings
and
Palm
Springs
are
compliant
to
the
current,
and
new
ordinance
are
few.
Q
If
any,
since,
adding
a
length
of
time
is
necessary,
then
we
would
encourage
a
minimum
of
one
year.
Businesses
come
and
go
and
if
a
property
becomes
available
and
all
it
needs
is
a
complete
and
it
needs
to
be
compliant
is
a
waiver.
It
should
be
granted,
given
that
the
property
and
the
applicant
meet
all
the
other
requirements.
Q
Establishing
a
time
limit
of
at
least
a
year
will
allow
businesses
to
occupy
buildings
instead
of
the
city
having
empty
buildings.
In
addition,
it
would
be
an
affair
for
the
city
to
say
that,
in
order
to
qualify
for
the
waiver
program,
an
applicant
must
have
at
least
two
years
of
experience
operating
licensed
cannabis
facility.
Q
This
is
beneficial
to
those
with
the
financial
ability
to
open
a
secondary
or
third
location
versus
appealing
to
those
wanting
to
begin
building
their
business
in
the
industry.
In
the
previous
Planning
Commission
study
session,
there
was
a
public
comment
made
regarding
the
lack
of
people
of
color
being
able
to
go
through
the
application
process
due
to
its
high
requirements,
and
adding
this
detail
to
the
waiver
program
would
further
hinder
small
businesses
and
social
social
economic
equity
applicants
under
the
draft
ordinance,
specifically
pages
14
and
15.
Q
It
states
that
cannabis
facilities
in
any
zone
that
have
submitted
a
complete
and
pending
land
use
entitlement
application
and
is
pending
review
to
the
draft
ordinance
being
adopted,
are
exempt
from
falling
separation
distance
requirements.
We
would
first
like
to
suggest
extending
the
date
from
October
23rd
2019
until
the
end
of
the
year
and
changing
the
language
from
land
use
entitlement,
application
to
regulatory,
permit
application
applicants
who
are
currently
undergoing
this
process
or
are
waiting
for
their
background
report.
Q
Results
to
return,
which
can
take
up
to
four
weeks
to
complete,
have
also
spent
time
and
money
in
creating
a
compliant
regulatory
permit
application.
The
application
requires
things
like
a
site
and
floor
plan,
which
means
applicants
must
hire
an
architect.
A
secured
property,
which
means
an
applicant
is
either
leasing
or
buying
the
property,
as
well
as
an
odor
control
plan,
which
would
require
expertise,
help
in
addition
to
these
expenses.
Those
who
have
submitted
a
regulatory
permit
application
have
paid
fees
to
the
city
in
order
to
begin
the
review
process.
Q
The
application
alone
is
four
thousand
and
ninety
two
dollars,
and
that
does
not
include
the
background
fee
order,
control
reviews,
site
inspections
and
other
services.
Applicants
who
are
following
the
current
regulations
implemented
by
the
cities
should
be
considered
legally
non-conforming
uses,
given
they
are
playing
by
the
rules
and
extending
the
Dillion
of
October
23rd
will
allow
the
applicants
currently
in
the
beginning
stages
of
the
review
to
be
completed.
L
A
N
R
Go
ahead,
I'm!
Sorry!
Yes,
good
afternoon.
Mr.
director
commissioners
staff,
my
name
is
Steven
V,
attic
and
I'm,
the
owner
of
reefer
madness,
I've,
carefully,
reviewed
and
studied
the
draft
zoning
amendments
and
their
impact
to
cannabis.
Business
I
am
extremely
concerned
because,
pending
land
use,
entitlement
applications
in
the
em1
zone
are
not
being
addressed
specifically
on
page
8
of
the
proposed
ordinance
under
M
one's
own
regulations,
the
text
proposes
to
strike
out
cultivation
and
type
six
manufacturing
entirely.
R
If
this
is
not
possible,
I'd
like
to
ask
the
staff
and
the
Commission
please
consider
defining
small-scale
type,
6
manufacturers
and
tiny
cultivators
such
as
myself
and
allowing
small-scale
operations,
especially
if
they
are
already
in
the
application
pipeline
I,
would
I
would
define
cultivation
or
manufacturing
facility
less
than
three
thousand
square
feet
as
something
of
small
scale.
My
order
control
systems
are
designed
with
fail-safes
in
mind,
so
if
one
component
fails,
another
come
on,
the
component
is
already
doing
the
job
adequately
without
help
from
any
other
components.
A
B
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
joy,
Brown,
Meredith
and,
first
of
all,
I
really
want
to
thank
staff.
This
has
been
an
incredibly
complicated
process
and
they've
been
very
kind,
and
in
talking
to
me
about
it,
because
it
does
make
me
a
little
bit
nervous
and
I
know
that
Flynn
has
stated
today
that
everything
that
has
already
been
approved
won't
be
under
these.
These
new
regulations
here
I
just
want
to
tell
you
that
I
have
always
supported
the
notification.
I've
always
supported
the
residential
separation.
B
I
actually
don't
know
when
exactly
the
residential
separation
disappeared
from
the
ordinance,
because
it
was
quite
a
surprise.
For
me,
it
happens
sometime,
maybe
in
2016
or
17,
but
you
know
there
needs
to
be
a
balance
here
between
what
the
needs
are
of
the
residents
and
as
a
cannabis.
Business
owner
I've
always
respected
that
one
of
my
locations
is
so
far
up
north
that
they
actually
had
to
make
the
map
bigger
in
Palm
Springs.
To
make
sure
that
my
that
my
project
would
be
on
there.
B
So
I
do
have
something
that's
off
of
the
freeway
out
of
respect
for
the
residents.
That's
why
I
chose
it
and
then
my
other
project
that
is
also
licensed,
but
I
would
need
to
see
you
pee
for
might
fall
into
this
little
bit
of
wiggle
room
here.
But
I
just
want
to
say
too
that
you
know
it's
possible
to
be
a
good
neighbor.
B
If
you
have
a
smaller
size
cultivation
as
far
as
odor
or
anything
else
goes
so,
I
mean
in
this
case
really
size
does
matter
and
I
think
that
you
need
to
look
at
that.
So
I,
just
you
know,
really
want
to
say.
Thank
you
so
much
for
all
these
meetings
and
taking
this
all
into
consideration.
It's
a
very
complicated
thing,
trying
to
really
make
sure
that
residents
are
and
the
businesses
can
find
some
sort
of
happy
medium
here.
B
A
L
Good
afternoon
hi,
my
name
is
Shane
Camby
I'm,
the
CFO
with
evolved
engineering,
which
I
own
with
my
wife,
it's
located
in
the
Duluth
Park
area,
just
south
of
Mesquite.
Our
main
concern
is
that
scene
is
we're
at
the
cup
approval
portion
of
the
process
that
we
do
get
grandfathered
in
for
consideration.
If
I'm
understanding
what
you
said
at
the
beginning
earlier.
L
We've
specifically
purchased
a
building
in
the
n1
zone
because
there
are
no
distance
requirements
and
every
activity
is
permitted
there
and
we
proceeded
with
our
due
diligence
and
acted
in
good
faith,
getting
our
administrative
permit
and
our
state
license,
and
we
submitted
our
cup
a
month
ago.
So
we
would
just
like
to
make
sure
that
that's
considered.
S
My
name
is
Harold
Ivan,
Smith
I'm,
a
new
resident
I'm
against
the
marijuana
thing
totally.
The
whole
kit
and
caboodle
I
cannot
fathom
why
this
community
needs
this
expansion
of
marijuana,
but
I
won't
go
there,
go
that's
my
own
personal
beliefs,
but
I've
heard
I'm
supposed
to
trust
the
technology
really
does
anyone.
Remember
is
the
tight
antique,
the
greatest
ship
ever
built
and
it's
sank.
You
know
how
many
lawyers
make
wonderful
livings.
You
know
after
somebody
puts
something
in
someone's
body,
trust
the
technology
and
there's
all,
and
so
you
have
all
these
medical
problems.
S
You
have
people
dying
from
it.
So
what
we've
heard
is
trust
the
technology.
Well,
then,
you
got
to
go
back
and
go
trust.
The
people
who
are
selling
the
technology
so
I'm
not
sure
I'm
real
excited
about
that.
What
are
their
credentials?
You
can
find
someone
to
tell
you
anything.
You
want
if
you're
willing
to
pay
enough
money
for
it.
The
third
thing
I
think
that
really
troubles
me
is
that
you
know
I,
don't
give
a
rat's
ass
of
what
you've
spent
to
buy
buildings
to
build
marijuana.
It's
called
risk.
That's
part
of
American
capitalism.
S
You
come
in,
you
could
have
put
your
money
all
these
other
places,
but
you
chose
here.
It
is
like
a
gambling
casino
so
that
you've
put
this
money
in
too
bad.
Tell
me
about
it
and
I'm
sorry
that
young
people
are
putting
their
money
in
and
hello,
we
spent
$70,000
of
$50,000,
it's
called
risk
and
that's
a
big
part
of
business,
and
it's
back
to
that
thing,
though,
of
the
technology,
because
it's
gonna
be
beautiful.
We
trust
the
technology
that
these
people
claim
they're
paying
for
and
then
the
smell
or
the
odor
happens.
S
So
then
you
go.
Where
are
these
experts
who
we
were
to
trust
on
odor
they're
out
of
here
they're
on
to
the
next
community,
trying
to
sell
their
expertise?
This
is
an
important
issue.
It
needs
lots
of
governance,
and
this
is
a
great
city
and
there's
no
point
in
just
rushing
into
this
and
saying
come
on
to
Palm
Springs
bring
your
money
buy
buildings
I
just
don't
buy
that
I'm.
A
new
resident,
I
love,
Palm
Springs,
but
I
don't
have
the
experience
of
waking
up
some
day
going,
my
god.
What
is
that
smell
and
I?
S
E
Are
these
seen
a
neighborhood
organization
and
I
want
to
thank
the
Planning
Commission
stuff?
Thank
you
for
having
this
Planning
Commission
study
session
on
September
11th.
It
gave
our
residents
the
opportunity
to
explain
their
issues
to
you
and
it
appears
you're
listening,
which
was
evident
in
the
recommendations
in
the
staff
report.
You
have
addressed
our
concerns
and
we
agree
with
the
recommended
modifications
to
the
planning
ordinance.
Restricting
the
cannabis
cultivation
and
manufacturing
to
the
I-10
corridor
is
a
pro-business
approach
that
ensures
schools
and
residences
are
not
adversely
affected
impacted.
E
We
are
aware
that
there
are
several
cannabis
business
applications
in
the
pipeline
and
we
would
recommend
that
you
or
the
City
Council
extend
these
modifications
in
your
staff
report
to
include
them.
We
also
request
that
you
include
language
that
would
require
all
cannabis
businesses
now
and
in
the
future,
to
use
the
latest
technologies
for
odor
control.
This
would
ensure
that
old,
outdated
and
ineffective
devices
are
not
used.
Thank
you
for
addressing
the
note
efficient
notification
process.
E
A
A
B
B
One
is
regarding
waivers
that
you
make
the
waiver
requirements
inclusive
someone
would
have
to
meet
all
of
them
for
a
waiver,
but
with
the
two-year
requirement,
I
would
recommend
that
you
do
two
years
or
equity
for
people.
Who've
been
impacted
and
excluded
from
the
cannabis
businesses
and
I.
Think
Commissioner
Gardner
would
probably
have
language
for
that.
I
would
also
recommend
that
for
type
six
type,
seven
and
cannabis
grow
facilities,
no
waivers
be
allowed
in
terms
of
notification.
B
I
believe
that
there's
one
additional
notification
that
wasn't
in
the
proposed
ordinance
and
that
would
be
a
notification
for
the
neighborhood
organizations
within
a
mile
of
any
proposed
business.
At
the
time
an
application
is
filed
and
also
at
the
time
that
a
hearing
would
be
coming
forward
so
that
there
would
be
two
two
different
times
that
organization
would
be
notified
in
terms.
B
A
H
Good
afternoon,
Paul
Henrickson,
Palm
Springs
also
chaired
the
upper
Westside
neighborhood
organization
and,
as
you've
heard
me
speak
before
our
neighborhood
was
strongly
impacted
by
grow
facilities
that
already
had
mitigation
plans
and
odor
control
plans,
and
we
were
at
a
desperate
hour
because
we
couldn't
open
our
windows
and
doors.
So
it's
really
important
that
this
is
done
right
and
that
we
move
forward.
H
Fortunately,
the
city
did
act
when
the
neighborhood
spoke
up,
not
just
ours,
but
other
neighborhoods
as
well,
and
we've
had
a
significant
improvement,
but
there
still
is
one
big
gap
and
that's
with
the
technology
that
we
have
today.
This
is
a
rapidly
evolving
science
with
cannabis
and
one
part
of
that
technology
isn't
keeping
up
with
the
rest
and
that's
the
mitigation
of
monitoring.
H
Fortunately,
in
the
city
has
invested
in
the
nasal
rangers,
but
there's
still
substantial
weak
links
in
that
process
and
the
technology
that
goes
with
that
process,
because
we
continue
even
in
our
neighborhood,
to
file
complaints
when
we
have
issues
and
because
of
shifting
wind
and
so
on
and
so
forth
and
time
delays.
The
staff
does
a
really
good
job
here
at
the
city,
trying
its
best
to
make
sure
that
they
monitor
and
are
responsive
to
the
community,
but
there's
still
these
major
gaps.
H
That
has
strong
support
with
the
neighborhoods
very
strong
support,
and
even
when
there
is
newer
technology
with
mitigation
and
the
odor
control
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
challenge
to
AB
completely,
and
if
it's
up
in
that
zone,
it's
not
going
to
impact
the
neighborhoods
or
general
retail
and
that's
a
big
plus,
and
that
allows
us
to
contain
a
problem
in
an
area
where
it's
not
going
to
impact
the
residents
and
that's
really
important
and
that's
why
so
many
people
from
one
PS
are
here
and
talk
to
you.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
A
J
J
Excuse
me
today,
I'm
speaking
to
you,
as
a
private
citizen,
I
want
to
express
my
appreciation
to
you
for
the
efforts
that
you've
put
forward
into
the
staff
for
the
efforts
they've
put
forward
in
bringing
forth
this
ordinance.
But
my
comments
are
going
to
be
a
little
bit
different
from
the
ones
that
you've
heard
from
everybody
else.
J
Following
most
meetings,
there's
always
a
few
parking
lot
meetings
that
take
place
as
you're
well
aware.
Last
night
was
no
exception.
Several
clusters
of
individuals
gathered
in
their
groups
after
the
1ps
sponsored
candidate
forum
for
district
1
at
the
James
O
Jessie
Unity
Center
in
the
north
end
of
the
city
last
night,
several
individuals
in
my
parking
lot
meeting
began
discussing
whether
or
not
to
attend
today's
Planning
Commission
meeting
one
person
inhaled
deeply
sighed
with
exasperation
and
declared
rather
emphatically
that
no
I'm
not
going
to
be
in
attending
in
attendance.
J
J
J
A
You
is
there
anyone
else
in
the
audience
that
would
like
to
speak
so
in
the
interest
of
time,
because
we
have
to
get
through
this
and
the
agenda.
I
think
I'll
go
I'm,
starting
with
Commissioner
Gardner
good
to
go
around
and
actually
at
this
point
it's
about
comets
and
providing
any
direction
to
staff
when
they
come
back
at
the
next
meeting.
K
K
The
one
that's
yeah,
so
this
em--to
location,
just
beyond
that
is
a
mobile
home
park.
So
I
just
want
to
be
really
careful
with
what
we're
doing
here,
because,
as
we've
talked
about,
we
wouldn't
be
having
any
buffer
distances
or
anything
in
that
m2
industrial
zone.
If
we
made
a
particular
Green
Zone
and
basically
we
would
be
pushing
out
the
problem
to
other
residents,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
mindful
of
that
and
if
possible.
K
K
Don't
know
what
that
impact
will
be
on
that
community
and
just
in
general,
with
with
the
odor
I,
do
think
that
there
we
need
to
make
sure
that
we're
developing
the
right
technology,
of
course,
and
so
with
these
they
know
there
would
be
new
buildings
and
all
of
that,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
mindful
that
there
is
a
community,
that's
there
and
it's
there's
actually
quite
a
few
people
with
children
there.
It's
there's
actually
quite
a
lot
of
children
in
that
mobile
home
park.
K
So
just
just
to
be
mindful
of
that
as
we're
moving
forward.
The
other
piece
is
that
I,
the
social
equity
portion
I
did
make
that
comment
at
the
last
meeting
that
I
thought
that
should
be
included
with
the
waiver
process.
I
think
it
just
got
left
out,
but
it's
in
it's
in
the
minutes.
From
the
last
meeting.
Okay.
K
I'll
do
that
the
other
thing
oh
and
I
do
want
to
hear
more
about
the
size
of
the
the
grow
facilities
at
the
oh
gosh,
no
I'm,
forgetting
names.
Steven
mentioned
the
size
of
his
in
comparison
to
the
others
and
I.
Do
think
I'd
like
to
get
more
information
on
that
and
exactly
what
that
impact
is
because
I
think
that
is
a
really
big
difference.
If
you're
talking
about
a
350
square
foot
space
versus
a
10,000
foot
space
for
growing,
you
know
what
what
is
the
impact?
K
F
Yeah
I
again
I
wasn't
at
the
study
session.
So
a
lot
of
this
is
new
to
me,
but
hearing
from
the
public
about
people
that
have
spent
money
on
City
applications
for
projects
and
after
the
applications
been
submitted,
the
rules
have
changed.
I
think
we
need
to
look
at
at
a
minimum
refunding
the
application
fees
I
know.
C
Very
sorry,
mr.
Ashburn
I
didn't
mean
to
I
sort
of
put
the
hammer
down
to
you.
I
didn't
mean
to
do
that
at
all.
I
just
want
to
make
some
comments.
I
think
one
of
the
most
important
things
we've
done
is
mandating
six
and
seven
type
manufacturing
and
cultivation
in
the
Green,
Zone
I.
Think
that's
extremely
important.
C
I
do
like
some
of
the
some
of
the
suggestions
that
were
made
with
respect
to
waivers
ms
Warmack
made
a
couple
very
important
recommendations,
I
think
I
believe
in
waivers,
because
I
think
the
City
Council
should
certainly
have
discretion
in
extraordinary
cases
because
they
are
the
governing
body
of
our
city,
but
I
think
the
waiver
criteria
should
be
relatively
stringent.
What,
by
that
I
mean
I,
think
the
criteria
should
be
cumulative
and
not
separate,
and
individual
and
I
think
with
respect
to
allowing
an
applicant
with
tears,
experience
and
operating
a
license
to
come
in
I.
C
C
With
respect
to
typed,
six
and
seven
I
think
that
there
should
be
no
waivers
on
six
and
seven,
because
once
you
once
you
allow
six
and
seven
is
what
we're
all
talking
about.
Basically,
I
have
continued
to
talk
about,
and
once
you
open
that
up,
then
I
think
you're
back
to
opening
up
Pandora's,
Box
and
I.
Don't
think
that's
a
good
idea
again.
It
goes
against
my
wanting
to
have
waiver
criteria
for
the
City
Council,
but
I.
C
C
I
do
want
to
address
the
final
comment
from
someone
who
I
respect
very
much,
who
spoke
at
the
very
end,
but
I
have
to
disagree
with
him.
We
all
know
people
who
complain
and
complain
and
complain
that
city
government
is
not
being
responsible
is
not
moving
enough
is
not
representing
the
people
and
I
know
what
our
motto
says
in
the
front,
but
with
respect
to
this
issue,
I
think
the
city
has
and
I
think
we
have
taken
this
extremely
seriously.
C
I
believe
that
that
person
who
complained
it
probably
has
never
attended
a
city
function
or
a
city
meeting
when
it
comes
to
any
of
these
issues,
I
think
we
take
this
very
seriously.
This
is
really
a
quality-of-life
issue
that
is
going
to
affect
all
of
us
going
forward
and
unless
we
get
it
right
now,
when
it's
sort
of
the
blossoming
industry
we're
going
to
be
caught
being
nothing
but
known
as
the
place
where
cannabis
has
grown,
cultivated
and
distributed,
and
that's
not
the
Palm
Springs
that
any
of
us
want.
Nor
do
I.
C
N
D
7
is
extraction
using
volatile
processes
and
type.
Six
is
non
volatile
processes
between
the
two
type.
Six
has
less
of
an
impact
less
of
the
possibility
for
odors
as
I
understand
it
than
type
7.
But,
based
on
your
discussion
at
the
last
meeting,
you
wanted
to
keep
both
of
those
together
in
terms
of
how
we
regulated.
A
Thank
you
I
for
my
comments.
I
I
I
agree
with
the
staff
is
doing
at
this
point.
I
think
one
thing
that
we
were
missing
is
that
a
lot
of
the
businesses
in
the
cannabis
and
what
we
heard
from
testimony
are
small
businesses
and
one
small
business
will
keep
any
other
small
business
from
opening.
But
if
it
was
a
large
business,
it
could
have
the
same
impact.
It's
just
something
we
haven't
really
thought
about,
because
it
is
a
lot
of
small
businesses.
I
agree
with
the
distance
I
agree
with
the
notification.
A
I
agree
absolutely
with
making
sure
that
we
use
the
latest
and
greatest
technology,
not
just
carbon.
Only
filters
I
like
the
idea
of
a
waiver
that
includes
the
criteria,
maybe
with
some
social
criteria
as
well.
Maybe
that's
a
shortening
at
the
time
that
the
building
is
vacant,
as
was
suggested,
or
maybe
it's
something
other
than
that
which
commissioner
Gardner
will
fourth
coming
to
it
with
us.
A
So
in
the
whole,
I
applaud
staff
and
I
applaud
the
public
for
participating
in
this
I
also
want
to
say.
Lastly,
what
I
agree
with
in
it
I
put
out
a
challenge:
the
cannabis
industry
is
that
we
do
do
architectural
review
I
think
we
don't
want
head
shops.
What
we
want
is
something
that
looks
really
good,
mixes
and
blends
in
both
in
our
industrial
zones
as
well
as
the
commercial
zones.
So
with
that
I'll
close,
can
we
share
garter
yeah.
K
Just
one
thing
about
the
review
of
the
signs,
so
it
says
AAC
and
then
it
goes
to
City
Council.
That
just
seems
like
a
lot
to
me.
It's
it's
AAC
seems
like
it
should
be
enough.
I'm,
not
sure
how
the
City
Council
will
feel
about
that.
But
when
we're
talking
about
streamlining
and
making
things
a
little
bit
easier,
especially
since
other
businesses
correct,
you
don't
have
to
go
through
that
process,
it
seems
like
AAC
can
handle
it
and.
K
Then
just
I
have
to
have
to
make
a
comment
regarding
Commissioner
donenfeld
comments,
because
I
do
want
to
put
out
there
that
there
there
have
been
communities
that
have
been
advocating
for
changes
in
the
cannabis
ordinance
for
a
really
long
time,
and
it's
you
know
it's.
Finally,
something
is
happening
now,
but
they've
been
doing
this
for
almost
two
years
and
so
I
think
that
there
are
legitimate
reasons
why
they're
frustrated
and
it's
not
that
they
haven't
been
here.
They
have
it's
just
now.
A
A
I
want
to
reiterate.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank
you
for
your
detailed
letters.
Many
of
them
came
in.
We
really
appreciate
that,
and
it
was
really
nice
that
those
letters
actually
addressed
the
ordinance
itself
and
what
you
liked
or
disliked
about
the
ordinance.
So
I
want
to
thank
everyone
for
participating
in
that
discussion.
Okay,
moving
on
with
the
agenda,
we
have
Planning
Commission
reports,
requests
and
comments
any
comment
or
any
comments
from
the
Planning
Commission
Commissioner
vice-chair
Maruti.
N
Regarding
Tova
I,
you
wouldn't
be
happy
if
I
didn't
bring
it
up
and
I
always
will
bring
it
up.
I
submitted
my
comments
to
the
city,
attorney
and
I
have
since
spoken
with
our
attorney
who's
here,
mr.
priest,
and
he
is
going
to
forward
that
with
probably
a
big
gold
star
on
it,
so
that
I
can
get
a
response
to
my
very
detailed
points.
The
other
thing
is
regarding
bel-air
greens,
I
have
been
told
that
there's
new
activity,
there's
a
I,
was
confuses
or
a
general
plan.
Amendment
that's
recently
been
proposed.
D
We
went
to
our
environmental
consultants
to
get
proposals
on
the
environmental
review,
for
that
and
the
applicant
did
not
proceed
forward
with
it.
They
have
since
submitted
a
new
application.
I
haven't
seen
it
yet,
but
keep
in
mind
that
the
Golf
Course
conversion
ordinance
recently
passed
second
reading
at
City
Council
on
September
the
18th,
and
so
any
modifications
to
the
property
would
be
subject
to
the
new
conversion
ordinance.
So.
N
N
D
N
D
They
still
have
an
active
building
permit
and
apparently
there
are
still
workmen
there
on
the
site,
occasionally
I
hope
to
learn
more
about
that
tonight.
At
the
State
of
the
City
address,
I,
think
the
mayor
and
the
city
manager
may
have
more
information
than
we
do
at
our
level
in
terms
of
the
progress
on.
D
D
G
F
A
My
only
comment
is
to
my
fellow
commissioners:
I
want
to
thank
you
on
the
residential
project
review
tonight,
for
being
so
thorough
and
caring.
So
much
and
I
purposely
made
that
motion
to
get
it
going
and
move
it
along,
but
I
think
what
we
came
up
with
is
an
excellent
outcome.
So
I
just
really
wanted
to
say
that
to
my
fellow
commissioners.
D
Aye
mr.
chair
I
have
a
couple
of
things.
First,
I'd
like
to
turn
the
time
over
to
mr.
Roberts,
and
he
would
like
to
give
you
a
little
bit
of
an
advanced
discussion
of
an
project.
That's
going
to
be
coming
up
on
your
next
agenda.
It's
a
little
bit
unusual
so
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
mr.
Robertson
yeah.
G
Thank
You
director
Flynn
good
afternoon,
the
Planning
Commission
so
earlier
on
I
placed
a
copy
of
an
initial
study
on
your
diet
and,
although
this
item
is
not
on
the
agenda
today,
however,
director
mentioned
we
wanted
to
give
you
a
heads-up
on
this
item
that
will
be
coming
to
you
in
the
next
meeting
and
because
of
the
complexity
and
the
uniqueness
of
this
project.
We
wanted
to
give
you
a
heads
up
on
it,
so
I
will
be
watching
you
to
please
go
over
the
initial
study
on
the
MND.
G
If
you
have
any
questions
prior
to
the
meeting
date,
please
forward
those
to
me
so
that
we
can
address
them
and
the
reason
for
that
is
because
of
the
technical
nature
of
this
project.
It
would
be
first
of
its
kind
in
our
city.
It
is
a
an
energy
storage
facility,
unlike
what
we've
seen
with
wax
the
wind
energy
conversion
system.
G
This
is
a
battery
energy
storage
system,
so
it's
slightly
different
than
what
you've
seen
in
the
past,
and
so
that
is
the
reason
why
I
wanted
to
make
a
presentation
of
this
to
you
prior
to
the
meeting
date.
Essentially,
what
a
battery
energy
storage
system
consists
of
is
lithium
ion
battery,
that
creates
energy
that
will
be
stored
in
those
facilities
and
then
in
turn
they
will
be
transmitted
to
a
local,
Southern,
California
Edison
line.
So
that's
what
it's
all
about,
that's
just
gist
of
it.
G
This
will
be
located
in
in
an
appropriate
unit
area
at
the
south,
along
the
south
of
Dinah
Shore
Drive
between
gene
autry
and
cross
the
roads,
if
they
can't
property
I,
have
an
area
photo
of
the
location.
At
the
back
of
the
memo
that
I
gave
you
so
again,
I
just
want
to
audio
to
go
over
these
or
the
MMD,
and
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
forward
those
to
staff,
so
the
we
can
get
you
the
appropriate
responses
on
those.
Thank
you.
N
G
J
N
G
D
N
O
D
C
G
G
N
D
Mr.
chair
one
more
item,
the
City
Council
considered
the
contract
with
the
consultant
that
was
selected
to
conduct
our
limited
General
Plan
Update
on
September
the
18th.
What
I
would
like
to
do
I'm
going
to
pass
out
a
copy
of
that
staff
report
and
then
also
the
proposed
schedule
for
the
General
Plan
Update
to
you
all.
So
you
have
an
opportunity
to
look
at
that
and
then
on
our
next
Planning
Commission
agenda,
I'd
like
to
discuss
the
schedule
and
a
little
bit
more
detail.
So
I'll
actually
do
that
as
an
agenda
item.
D
The
Planning
Commission
is
tasked
as
the
body
that
is
responsible
for
the
adoption
of
the
general
plan
and
the
implementation
of
the
general
plan,
and
so
you
all
will
be
playing
a
key
role
in
this
update.
One
of
the
things
I
would
like
to
do
is
I
would
also
like
to
appoint
a
steering
committee,
a
general
plan
steering
committee
and
we'll
talk
about
that
on
the
10th
in
terms
of
how
that
committee
should
be
made
up,
but
just
to
give
you
kind
of
an
idea
of
what
I'm
looking
for
is
I'm.
D
Looking
for
a
steering
committee
that
will
be
representative
of
the
city
and
by
that
I
mean
having
a
representative
from
each
of
the
city
council
districts
serve
on
that
committee.
The
steering
committee
would
report
to
the
Planning
Commission
and
act
under
the
direction
of
the
Planning
Commission,
but
again
I'll
go
into
some
of
the
specifics
of
that
at
our
next
meeting
and
I'll
pass
this
information
out,
but
again
we're
very
excited
to
get
started
on
this.
D
C
You're
waiting
for
the
steering
committee
to
be
approved
from
Planning
Commission
and
representing
the
legislative
districts,
you
may
have
to
wait
for
a
while,
because
we
likely
could
lose
two
more
people
and
then
we've
got
an
opening
as
it
already
exists.
So
City
Council
will
have
to
be
doing
some
major
fill
in
for
us
I.
Don't.
C
N
What
one
point
I
wanted
to
make
up
I
was
in
attendance
for
that
council
meeting.
There
were
some
comments
from
I
think
some
of
the
council
members
about
wanting
to
enhance
the
part
of
this
are
part
of
this
agreement
about
zone
recommendations
for
zoning,
because
part
of
it
they're
allowed
to
give
us
their
thoughts
on
how
the
zoning
code
should
change
to
implement
the
changes
of
the
cement.
D
D
D
Element
be
addressed,
the
housing
element
is
going
to
be
addressed
later
on
in
the
process.
It's
part
of
the
regional
housing
needs
assessment
process
that
scag
or
the
Southern
California
Association
of
Governments
is
going
through
right
now,
so
it
won't
be
until
October
of
2020
that
we
will
begin
that
process.
Wow.
N
D
Not
necessarily
not
necessarily
we're
going
to
tie
this
into
the
entire
process,
we'll
get
started
on
it
now,
but
we'll
go
through
once
we
have
the
arena
numbers
in
October
of
2020.
That's
when
we
really
get
serious
about
it.
Thank
you,
okay.
So
with
that
mr.
chair,
that
ends
my
presentation
to
you
great.