Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

to order. Madame clerk, can we have a roll call? Commissioner Baddard, here. Commissioner McFale, here. Commissioner me here. Vice Chair Lee, present. Chair Malikoff,

present. And now um we'll stand for the pledge of allegiance to our great country to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible and justice for all. Next item is the confirmation of the agenda. Do we have any changes to the agenda, madame clerk? We have none, chair.

Okay. So, if there's no changes, um we can move into public comments. The public is invited to address the planning commission on any matter not on the agenda. If if you wish to speak on the agenda item, please wait to be recognized under the item. Except for special circumstances, the Brown Act prohibits the planning commission or staff from responding or taking action on any items made by the public unless it pertains to an item that appears on the agenda. All speakers should give their name and city of residence. Please limit your remarks to three minutes. Did we receive any any requests?

Chair, I do not receive any request to speak forms, but if you're a member of the public and you wish to comment on items that are not on the agenda, please raise your hand. I see none chair. Okay. So then we can move on to the next item which is election the next two items which are the election of chair and vice chair. Um so we'll start with the vice chair. And are there any public comments for the vice chair election? We do not receive any requested forms but if you're a member of the public and you want to comment on either of the vice chair or chair elections please raise your hand. I see none chair.

Okay. Do we have any nominations for vice chair? Commissioner McFale. Um although the city council decided not to uh have commission chairs and vice chairs rotate on a seniority uh basis, that's how I'm going to proceed because I think every single one of us is capable of doing this. And uh accordingly because she has one meeting seniority in me, I'm going to nominate Danielle me as our vice chair. and I'd like to enthusiastically second that motion. Thanks.

Um, is there any discussion on the motion? If there's no discussion on the motion, um, then we can call the question. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner McFale and a second by Chair Melikoff to nominate Commissioner Daniel Me as vice chair. Please vote. And motion carries. All eyes. Congratulations, Commissioner, Vice Chair. Congratulations. Thank you. Um, now we have the elections for the chair. Um, is there anybody that wants public comments on the election of of our chair?

Chair, I did ask that with the first one. So, we we are good. We have none. Well, um, it's been my honor to be the chair for the past year. Um, and I want to thank everybody and thank our great staff and um, for all the support and help they've been um, and the information they provided. Um, with that, I would like to open the nominations and I'd like to make the nomination myself for commission vice chair Lee to become our next chair. Do we have a second? I will second. So, we have a a motion and a second. Um, is there any discussion?

Okay, it looks like we have a motion by Chair Malikoff and a second by Vice Chair Me to appoint Commissioner Danny Lee as the chair. Please vote. And motion carries. All eyes. Congratulations, Chair Lee. Congrat Chair Lee, not me. She said Chair Lee. Yes, I thought she said me. Okay, give us a a minute to um switch places. Uh Chair Malikov, I would request that we stay seated for the meeting if that's okay with staff and we can just pass the script on over to Chair Lee. It's not a problem. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you. And uh let me just thank um the outgoing chair for his service over the last uh 12 months. I can't really thank the vice the outgoing vice chair for his service. So um moving on to uh item three on our agenda, approval of minutes for June 4th, 2025. Are there any comments or discussion? Do we have any members of the public that wish to comment on the minutes? I see none, chair.

Um, any corrections or additions? Okay, then. Um, do I have a motion to approve? I'll motion to approve. Second on the approval.

Okay, we have a motion by Vice Chair Me and a second by Commissioner Malikoff. Is that correct? Please vote. And motion carries. All eyes. Moving on to item four on our agenda. Um, public hearing items. And, uh, the first item we have is item 4 A, conditional use permit number uh, 25001. Consider a revision to conditional use permit 17004 to remove cannabis cultivation, keep manufacturing, and establish cannabis distribution and dispensary non-stofront delivery uses on a developed site located in the CB CBP2 commercial business park zoning district here in referred to as the project. Do we have a um a staff report?

We do. All right. Good evening, commissioners. Uh, vice chair me, chair Lee. Uh, my name is Manuel Roachcha, assistant planner here at the city of Cathedral City. Uh, today I bring before you conditional use permit number 25001. The project site is located at 36650 Sunair Plaza. The site is own commercial business park with the general plan designation of business park. So in 2018, CUP70004 was approved for cannabis cultivation and manufacturing at this site. Um and on January 21st, 2025, Kevin Spring representing Distro Depot apply for a conditional use permit revision prior to the cannabis moratorium taking effect. Um this application proposes to remove cannabis cultivation, keep manufacturing, and establish cannabis distribution and dispensaries dispensary, which is a non-storyfront delivery. um uses on the developed site. Here's a street view of the project site along Sun Air Plaza. The elevations shown here are currently existing. The architectural features of the building will remain as currently constructed with no alterations to the building's color or design. Here you will see the site plan showing the existing property. The applicant does not propose any site changes aside from the minor modifications to the parking spaces. The first floor floor of building A will be used by the applicant for their dispensary and distribution operations which you see here. The second floor of building A will not be utilized by the applicant. Building B, which is seen here at the rear of the site, will also not be used by the applicant. The applicant has indicated that the manufacturing portion of the cup may be established in building B in the future, which would require additional review. The previous tenant made minor unapproved modifications to the parking lot, which are now being incorporated

into this project. The project was originally approved for 16 total parking spaces. Um, parking will continue to be provided within the interior of the property where the applicant is proposing 12 parking stalls including two ADA van accessible space standard spaces. Um, the proposed six parking stalls um do comply with the required parking standards. So, as mentioned, building A consists of two floors. The first floor is 3,47 ft. The applicant is proposing to only use the first floor of building A for the non-stormfront non-stormfront dispensary and distribution operations. The first floor plan will consist of 2392 ft of distribution area, 238 ft of dispensary, and 777 ft of ancillary space. The second floor was previously used for administrative purposes and consists of office space and ancillary space. As mentioned, the applicant will not be utilizing the second floor. So staff recommends that the planning commission find that the project is exempt from the from SQA pursuant to section number 15301 class number one and approve conditional use permit 25001 subject to the attached conditions of approval and based on the findings contained in the staff report. That does conclude my presentation. I'm available for questions and the applicant is also here in attendance.

Thank you. Um, so commissioner questions. Let me start with Commissioner Badard. Any questions? I'm Can you choose another commission? I have a few others that I can go to. Yes. So, the two empty spaces, if they if they were to use that for anything cannabis related, it would be an administrative cup approved by staff. That is correct. Okay. And then if it was some other use outside of cultiv outside of um cannabis then it would have to come back to us. Yes. Correct. Okay.

And I noticed you know I'm very careful about looking at the exhaust and the curtains and all of the things that cause odors based on the experiences we've had. But um so that the people watching at home, and I know there are people watching at home because they tell me they see me on TV all the time. Um tell us about the new condition that you're going to hire um they're going to be required to have an inspector for to control the odors. Why don't you explain that so people understand that we're taking an action on that? So, the city has been actively working on amending the the cannabis section in the code. Um, and one of one of those additions is to add an odor control plan. Uh, so basically what an odor control plan, and I I'll go ahead and I'll read it off here. Uh it is a written plan prepared by a licensed professional engineer or certified industrial hygienist that describes the odor emitting activities or process uh specific to the cannabis business together with a description of the methods used for order control to ensure that odors are not detected offsite. So basically they will have to hire um someone that's certified to create this plan for them to ensure that there is no odor um leaking yeah emitted from the building. is a really good proactive step to avoid um some of the pitfalls we've had in the past and I um commend all that were involved in drafting this command. Compliment all that came up with this condition because I think it's a good one. That's all I have.

Thank you. Moving to Commissioner McFale. Thanks. Um, as we all know, um, there will shortly be a new ordinance regarding the cannabis business, and I think that's coming to us maybe in the f, uh, future meeting. And I'm wondering by approving this today, this particular business would not be subject to any new rules that we have because it's happening before we apply new rules. For example, if the new ordinance has different odor standards than what we're doing here, they would not be sub subject to the new ordinance. Is that correct?

Let let me address that question. Uh first, the condition of approval that is in your agenda tonight. This is based on draft preliminary uh language from that ordinance. So, uh there is a consistency there. the ordinance that will be presented to the planning commission at a future meeting that is also intended to apply retroactively to existing businesses. So, uh anything that we didn't catch on the odor control plan with this condition of approval, uh that will be captured through uh that future ordinance and it would apply here as well. So, uh, really this cannabis business along with other cannabis businesses are intended to, uh, obtain, uh, these odor control plans in order to really demonstrate how they're controlling how they're mitigating the cannabis odors generated by the use.

That's really good to hear. I was hoping that that we'd be aligned with what might be coming down the road. That's that's really good. Um I think I think I might need some help with some of the the definitions in the previous cups and what the business was and what it's becoming with these changes. So you mentioned in the report that the CUP704 allowed cultivation and manufacturing and they were going to add on transportation and distribution but they they didn't do that one. So now this CUP adds distribution and dispensary removes culta cultivation but manufacturing remains. So there's no more cultivation going on at the site. That's correct.

Yeah. Is there a difference between distribution and transportation? Earlier on they were asking for transportation and this is distribution. What what do those terms mean in three sentences? Yeah. So, um, basically distribution is transportation. There is no Yeah. No longer do we recognize that there is a transportation license cuz that's just tied in with distribution.

So, they're manufacturing but not cultivating. So, that presumably means raw materials will be coming here to this location for um manufacturing as opposed to what they're presently doing now. Um, so there will be um traffic will is there going to be a traffic increase because there's going to be trucks coming in. Is that going is that perceived to be an issue or anything?

My understanding that it's just going to be delivery of of the product. Um, so I believe there's like an app where someone can order some of their product and it can be delivered to their home. Um, in terms of distribution to other cannabis businesses, I I I can ask we can ask the applicant to see if he can elaborate on his operations. Um yeah. Um what does non storefront dispensary mean? You know what what's what's being dispensed to whom if it's not to the general public? Yeah. Basically what that means is it's not open to the public. It's it's just delivery only.

Okay. And in regard to the um vacant buildings or vacated parts of buildings, you mentioned your second floor building A was admin space and now they will not be utilizing that space. If they were to subleasase it to another um cannabis industry or anything, would that come back or would that just be administrative as uh Commissioner Malikov mentioned?

Yeah, that that would depend on the use. Um for example, it is set up currently for office space. So office space is a permitted use in that zone. Um so say if someone just wanted to come in and use it for that purpose, they can always just apply for a business license. Um there'd be no further review. So it is it does kind of depend on the use. For example, building B in the back was previously used for I want to say it was manufacturing manufacturing cultivation by the previous tenant. So that is set up for that type of operation. Um and the applicant has mentioned that in the future they might look into moving in there for manufacturing. Um, so that would require additional review and then there'd need to be a CUP for manufacturing because we're removing it an administrative um review.

Yes. All right. Okay. Thank you, Vice Chair Eid. Um, my only question was similar to to his which was just if they could clarify the applicant can clarify how what the difference is between manufacturing versus cultivating and manufacturing. Um, that was my primary question. That's it.

Commissioner Bed, anything? All right. Um, just some clarification. Uh, and Commissioner McFale touched on this already. So, um, the definition dispensary, um, talks about storefront and non non-stofront. Um, and this application is for non-stofront. So, they will be delivering from the premises to customers. um what will happen if they decide they would like to be a storefront operation.

That would require additional review just because that might affect some of the requirements requirements specifically the odor control plan might need to change. Um it may require for additional parking spaces. Um so that would require additional review. And would that review be done here or ministerially? You know that is a a great question.

So if I if I may chairman, so what we would do is first review it to to see if it can fall within an administrative review. Uh because uh this the dispensary license won't change whether it's storefront or non- storefront. So we would just evaluate it from our perspective at a staff level and if we can approve it ministerially we will. Um if it requires further review then we would bring it back to the planning commission but until we have something in front of us to evaluate it's it's kind of speculative at this point. Okay. And is there anything specific in the conditions of approval that prohibit the storefront use? No, there is not.

So, should that be added as an additional um condition to say that this is only non-storefront use? Why? Well, it it makes clear what we're approving today. So, does that mean you would prefer that if it become a storefront dispensary that it come back to this body or that it it be approved administratively? Um, my preference would be for it to come back to us, but I mean that that's probably a legal question. Well, I I would

I can't speak for the attorney, but based on what Mr. Rosha said that if if the analysis provided that the parking would be different and that it would require changes to the site, I would assume that would be more than an administrative CUP. That would have to come back to us, but it may be it may be good since 5 years from now it could be a completely different group of people evaluating it. Um I hope not but could be um that maybe we should make that a condition that if it becomes a storefront cup that it would come back to this body. I I would agree with that.

Okay. Um when when we get to a motion I may add a a 3.33 condition. I think the city I think the attorney Yeah. If I if I may just chime in. So, we're looking at just um the condition 1.1 and I think that part of just maybe that clarification that you're looking for can be approval of a cannabis business non storefront dispensary and distribution site and that way

it would just be a simple, you know, and just to kind of ease everybody's mind to um the definition of a non-storefront retailer is by law. So, you know, it they would have to conform to what state law is. So, they are only exclusively by delivery. They wouldn't be allowed to have anybody just walk through the front door as a normal retailer. I think that addresses the concern. Yeah. So, uh and when we get to a point uh for a motion here, um we need to add that as a an amendment to the Yes. Correct. to um the condition of approval 1.1.

Okay. So, what um I'll be happy to add that, but I I need to know what I'm adding. Well, we're not at the point of having a motion yet, but but we will talk about that when we do get there. Um okay, I that's all the questions I had for you. Thank you. Anything further from commissioners for staff? um in which case um I'll move to open the public hearing and ask the applicant if they need have any points they'd like to address to us. Thank you very much. And uh first I'll congratulate you chairperson Lee and and vice chairperson me. Thank you

on your new position. Um my name is Kevin Spring. I'm the owner of this project. I have no partners and I'm coming from Palm Springs where I just in January will have fulfilled my seven-year lease that I signed there back in 2019 being a distributor. So, I needed a bigger place. I'm a resident here in Cathedral City. And I want to compliment some people uh including Andrew Firestein, Manuel Manuel Roachcha, and Patrick Bumstead. Those are three characters I've had the pleasure of dealing with and I look forward to whatever our uh dealings are in the future. But one thing I've really enjoyed about Cathedral City is the communication. Um and it was shown right here with your great questions and your great answers. Uh you really hit on some valid topics. And if if we are on TV, hi mom. But no, if we are on TV, I I know that my this project really fits the mood of Cathedral City. uh cultivation no longer being there as distributors. We're really the pencil pushers of the industry and we in our previous location in Palm Springs have never had an odor problem. We're familiar with odor control and I think that uh Mr. Roachcha would easily attest that our odor control plan was probably one of the most advanced they seen and that's for pencil pushers. Um, and uh, great questions about, you know, whether it was going to be a storefront dispensary ever. As you could see from the project, we only uh, accounted for 238 square ft of storage of product for that delivery service to operate. So, little to think about, but again, um, like the city attorney or assistant attorney said that it's an entirely different license with the state denoted by a C9 or a C10 will be a C9. We really could never be a storefront there and we have no intentions of it. I I just want to

introduce myself as the business owner. I'm I'm capable. I've shown 7 years of paying my rent on time and never being fined for odor control or anything. Um and I look forward to as a resident of Cathedral City doing business in my hometown. So, thank you all very much. Thank you. If you could just hold on a second question. Yes, we'll see if we have some questions for you. Uh, let me start with Commissioner Malikoff. No, no questions. Um, Vice Chair me, um, I was going to defer to Commissioner McFale. Uh, just if you could clarify the manufacturing and how that's going to work, where the stuff is going to the components are going to come from for the manufacturing and how that works.

There's a lot of different things in cannabis that could happen with manufacturing. Um, I don't know if it was clear, but we actually intend to get there as just distributors. Like I said, that's kind of the pencil pushers and the non-storefront delivery. We were told to get a distribution license. We also had to get a manufacturing license in the city. We don't intend to do manufacturing. And in fact, we even prerequisited that is it okay if we get the manufacturing license that's required with the city, but don't get the state one because we don't intend to do manufacturing. that back building that was shown uh has potential to do manufacturing and maybe as we move forward we would point at that building and say okay well let's consider it and in that case we would come right through this process again to do whatever form of manufacturing we decided that yeah

yeah I was just going to say could you just clarify let's say you were going to do manufacturing in the future in the other building what does that entail since you're not cultivating does that mean you're bringing in product or does that mean you're making gummies or things like that or

as a manufacturer. There's different levels of licensing you could get and one of them could be as simple as filling vape carts with oil and then it could be as complicated as making that oil. That room is actually it was once set up to make that oil. None of us really have that experience and um as far as what I know about the business, it's not something that we're looking to do. the most what would I do with a manufacturing license if I thought it penciled out would be pretty much filling vape carts and making uh pre-rolls. But you're right, manufacturing can go a whole lot further to volatile manufacturing. In fact, that room I believe was built cement sides and cement roof to be a great volatile manufacturing facility. We just don't have that talent. And again, we were told to have a distribution license in Cathedral City, you have to also get a manufacturing license. If it wasn't a rule, I wouldn't have gotten one.

Okay, great. Thank you for clarifying. Uh, Commissioner McFale. Yeah, just just to follow on. So, um, there is no manufacturing. The product that you have is already prepackaged, pre-sealed, and everything, and then you're distributing it. Yeah, that that will all be covered under the distribution license. We work with all the most popular brands you've ever heard of. It comes in from a vendor van usually and we sell to dispensaries and other like any visitor to our facility would be a license holder. So it's pure you're starting off purely distribution and you purely distribution with a small room that is stored for us to try doing a delivery service and that actually will be new to me.

Okay, great. Thank you. Uh Commissioner Bad almost off subject. I I'm big in not big but I'm involved in many different business chambers and I love that you're coming to our city. So um let's keep bringing responsible business like this. You seem to really know what you're doing. I love how you proposed. It seems to be very straightforward. Uh thank you for doing business in the place you live. Thank you for that comment. Thank you very much. And for me just to confirm um your answer to Commissioner McFale. So, um, the product you bring in is prepackaged and sealed, uh, according to the

Not entirely. Not entirely. Sometimes we buy bulk flour from farms. And so it'll be in what's called a turkey bag. That would be the bag you're familiar with for cooking turkeys in, but that's how it's stored. And then we could in essence, and under the distribution license and the rules of distribution, flour only, no oils, no edibles. But actually under distribution you are able to take that flower and put it in a jar or a bag and seal it and call it your own brand. That's how it's simply put. Okay. So the reason for the question or clarification is just that with prepackaged goods there is no possibility of odor

but with with flour there is. And you're right, uh, when you open that package, and so with our, uh, plan is there's a sampling area, not for sampling like you're thinking, but more to open the bag and let's say we had a laboratory come take a test. So, we have a bulk storage room. It was marked on that diagram. And there's extra odor control in that room. And again, like you said, the time for um, odor to get out would be the moment you open that bag. Again, it's an open bag of cannabis. It's doesn't compare to cultivation or manufacturing or a lounge. Um, those are your real odor producers.

And the times when the delivery door at the premises is open, then the the delivery will be sealed bags of the turkey bag. Of course, of course, 100%. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, one good question though. One one of the concerns we've had before is about um air curtains on those large doors that to create a negative pressure and right it doesn't sound like that's a real problem in your type of business.

You'll be happy to hear that from Palm Springs. We they've been handling odor control quite strongly for quite a while. There's a company 1500 LC or something like that I think is the name. But um they really have much less requirements for distributors. Uh it's really their main focus is on of course cultivation manufacturers and any kind of dispensary that might have a lounge where smoking is happening. But that's not us at all. None of those three things. Thank you. Yeah. Uh okay. Are there any members Thank you. Thank you. Yes. Are are there any members of the public wishing to speak on this item?

Chair Lee, I did not receive any request to speak forms. If you're a member of the public and you wish to comment on this item, please raise your hand. I see none, chair. Thank you. Um, which case I close the uh public comments. Um, and I'll bring this back to the commission uh for consideration of a motion. So, we want a motion and then we want to add a condition that requires the applicant to come back if there's to the planning commission if they decide to have a storefront dispensary. Okay. Is is that that's what we want to do?

It sounded to me like that wasn't necessary based on what the city attorney said that that wasn't necessary based on one of the conditions. I believe we're going to amend condition 1.1, correct? Right. Yeah. So, yes, sorry, we were trying to confirm what we were going to add as condition 1.1, but um the first sentence itself, it says approval of the cannabis business in parentheses. It'll just switch to non-stofront dispensary and distribution sites. So, add the words non-stofront to to 1.1. Mhm. So if 1.1 says that, then they can't do a storefront unless they modify the condition, which would require them to come back to us.

Correct. So then we don't need to add a condition. Um at least on that. No, but we have to add those words to 1.1 the non storefront. If you would like just the clarification, but we did mention that you know their license and the state law already regulates it. So, this really is for purposes of clarification internally of

just to make sure that everybody's on the same page. Then we'll um I'll make a motion that we approve conditional use permit 25-00001 subject to the conditions of approval in the staff report and the findings in the staff report with a modification to condition 1.1 that adds the words nontofront dispensary so that um it's very specific. Thank you. Um, we have a motion. Do we have a second? I'll second. Seconded by Commissioner Bard. Okay, please vote.

Motion carries. All eyes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Before you read the next item, um, I have I have a conflict of interest. um on this item. So I will recuse myself and go outside. Okay, enjoy your break.

And if I may say as a clarification for our legal team, uh I have an account at Sun Community. Is that a conflict that needs to be addressed? Yes. Then I have to recuse myself please. Thank you. In that case, this is going to make this decision very difficult because I also bank at some community. You do too. Do you really? I do. But we can't pass. How are we going to

My understanding was that that if it's if I'm not directly affecting the decision for my interest, it it wasn't going to be a conflict. No, it's just being brought up literally as the item is being presented. So, I didn't even have an opportunity to discuss this with you all. And normally the discussions happen internally for attorney client privilege. So that's why my default answer to you is you know if we would need to recuse ourselves but it looks like we do have yeah if we could just take a fivem minute recess. Yes. Five minute recess. We'll uh adjourn for five sec five minutes. Yeah.

Okay, we'll call the meeting um back into session and um we have advice from legal counsel.

Thank you, chair. Um so given just the last minute um disclosure that we have with the banking um we are just assuming that there is an economic interest just for clarification that we have not legally analyzed whether that is true. This is an assumption that we're making because we need to move forward with the item. Um being that that would be the case, we do have a exception. It's called the legally required exception where no item could be brought before the commission because unless we had a quorum, we wouldn't be able to hear it. Um given that Commissioner Malikov has an actual conflict of interest, we're left with two commissioners that have the same economic um interest, assuming that they do. And so given that we are going to just have chair Lee be a part of this to create the quorum um and then we'll move forward with the item.

Thank you for the clarification. Um so we're going to move forward and um do we have a staff report? We do have a staff report. I'm just opening the PowerPoint. One moment, please. Okay. Good evening, Chair Lee, Vice Chair Me, and Planning Commission Member McFale. Um, my name is Dom Camps, associate planner with the city, and today I'll be presenting design review 25001 for your consideration proposing the construction of a new Sun Community Credit Union building and associate associated improvements. On April 3rd of 2024, the applicant uh Jason Patty with Level Five LLC submitted a design review application proposing the development of an approximately 2900 ft² Sun Community Credit Union building. The project is proposed for an approximately 0.59 vacant parcel in the Cathedral City Marketplace Shopping Center located immediately north of Victoria Drive and west of Day Palm Drive. The site is designated as general commercial in the general plan land use map and is zoned as planned community commercial or PCC. Banks and similar financial institutions such as credit unions are permitted uses in the PCC district. The Cathedral City Marketplace Shopping Center uh was originally approved in 1989 through conditional use permit 89127. The CUP contemplated the subject site for a building pad of up to 4,000 square ft. The project was presented to the

architectural review committee on July 2nd, 2025. And the committee voted in favor of recommending planning commission approval of the project with four votes in favor and one against. So, here's a closer look at the site in its current condition. Uh, note that the following several slides are oriented uh rotated 90° with north to the right. So, the site is comprised of approximately 12,000 square ft of turf landscaped area lined with palm trees as well as approximately 13,000 square ft of paved parking area. The project proposes the construction of the credit union building on the south side of the parcel in the area that is currently landscaped. The project also proposes to reconstruct and reconfigure the existing on-site parking area. The existing public sidewalk sidewalk along uh Day Palm Drive and Victoria Drive will be extended into the parking area um and will provide uh access to the front entrance of the building. The existing trash enclosure will be relocated um and replaced with a trash enclosure built to the city standard. The existing monument sign for the shopping center uh will remain on the date palm drive frontage and a new water retention basin will be provided in the landscaped area along Palm Drive. Overall, the project conforms with the applicable development standards for the PCC district, including minimum lot size, building height, and parking. In accordance with the city's parking requirements, the project must provide at least 12 parking spaces. The reconstructed parking lot will provide 15 standard parking stalls and two ADA compliant spaces which meets the standard or exceeds it. The project is also part of the reciprocal parking agreement for the shopping center. This is the proposed floor plan. The building will be approximately 2900 ft²

and will be oriented with the front entrance facing date. Uh within the front entryway there will be a walk up ATM and these are the proposed elevations. Um please note that um as pointed out to me by um Chair Lee um the orientation of the renderings were mislabeled in the attachments to the staff report but this slide shows them accurately. So the front elevation faces west towards date palm drive. The architecture will be a contemporary style featuring large windows, uh, a flat roof lines and articulation in both the facade and building height. The material pallet features glass, faux wood panels, and cladding in taupe along with yellow and blue accents. The proposed building will be 20 ft and 5 in at the tallest point, which is consistent with the 36 ft maximum in the PCC district. The project proposes to enhance the existing landscaping or to enhance the landscaping along the date palm drive frontage and along the entrance to the parking uh shopping center. The existing fan palms will be maintained where possible. Um however, some trees will need to be removed to accommodate the retention basin as well as the changes in the parking lot configuration. New fan palms will be provided along the western boundary of the property and Australian willows, African sumax and southern livea oaks will be provided as shade trees in the parking lot. Desert landscaping will be provided throughout the project site including plants plants such as agave, desert spoon, buganva, red yaka and lantana. Decomposed granite and brimstone is proposed as ground cover. The final landscape plan will be subject to review and approval by the uh Coachella Valley Water District to ensure compliance with water efficiency requirements. The city's design guides design guidelines require that 50% of parking

must be shaded by trees or by structures. The parking lot shade for this uh project was calculated based on square footage um of the parking stall area. However, the calculations um were based on there being 16 parking stalls when in fact the site plan shows 17 parking stalls. So based on the square footage of the 17 parking stalls, only 47% of the stall area is currently being shown as shaded. So to remedy this uh staff is recommending that uh the addition of a condition of approval. Currently condition 3.2 2 reads that prior to the issuance of building permits, a final landscape plan prepared by a licensed landscape architect and signed by the local water purveyor shall be submitted to the planning department for review and approval. Staff recommends adding item O under this condition, which would state that the final landscape plan shall demonstrate that 50% of all on-site parking will be shaded. This way, the parking lot shaded can be fixed through the plan check process. The proposed project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to the class 3 categorical categorical exemption set forth in section 15303 of the secret guidelines. This exemption for new construction or conversion of small structures applies to the construction of up to four commercial buildings not exceeding 10,000 square ft in urbanized areas. So this project um meets those uh conditions. The project was noticed in accordance with the Cathedral City Municipal Code prior to the public hearing. So with that, staff recommends that the planning commission find that the project is exempt from SQA pursuant to the class 3 categorical exemption and approve design review 25001 subject to the attached conditions of approval as modified for this presentation and based on the findings contained in the staff report. Uh that

concludes my presentation. I'd be happy to answer questions and the applicant is present as well. Thank you. Um I move to questions from commissioners for staff. Um start with Commissioner McFale. Just one tiny one. Um the current configuration has 19 spaces. We will have 17 after this. So there's a net loss of two, but that's not that doesn't cause any problems with any parking rags or anything. Yeah. So they they only would be for the the use proposed, they would only need to provide 12. And because they're part of the reciprocal access or parking agreement for the whole shopping center, there's ample parking available.

I I think it's a very impressive looking building, quite different from what's on date palam right now, and I think it will be a great improvement to that corridor. So thank you very much. Thank you,

Vashamid. Um, I wanted to say I'm very excited to see that it's fronting date palm and that it looks really nice because we don't have a lot of those buildings that are built on date palm like that and those shopping plazas are fronting in. So, I'm really excited about that. Um, question about the maintenance of the shade trees. I know this has come up before. It always looks great when they go up, but then sometimes those trees get left to die. Do we have anything I know we've talked about it before, but that sort of requires the maintenance to ensure that that 50% shade stays? I don't think the condition of approval points specifically to the shade trees, but there is a condition that requires general maintenance of the landscaping. Um, I can okay

find the exact wording, but there there is a requirement that that landscaping be generally maintained as was approved. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, cuz I know it's come up in the past that some of the grocery stores put in all the trees, but then they die and there is no shade. So, um, and then my only other question was you said it was approved at at, uh, architectural review committee 4 to one. Do we have any idea what the one objection was about?

The concern was about the aesthetic of the building um, as well as concerned that the aesthetic of the building is not consistent with the shopping center itself. Um, which the shopping center is quite old. that was approved in in '89. Um, and also the other pad sites that are along Date Palm Drive are mostly corporate architecture. There's a Pizza Hut and uh Dutch Bros was recently approved and those all have sort of distinct corporate architecture. So, this wouldn't be the first one that um diverges from that architectural theme.

Okay. Yeah. I mean, I had a feeling it was probably more of a subjective stylistic, but I just wanted to make sure it wasn't anything more substantial. Um, the only the only thing I noted is it does have a lot of windows and it is going to be facing where the sun comes up, rises in the east, sets in the west. So, where the sun comes up. So, by the time people get in there in the morning, it may be very hot. Um, it faces west. So, it'll face it faces west. No, it faces east. It faces east. Oh, you're right. My mist diagram is wrong.

Oh, I still mislabeled it. Oh my goodness. Okay. Um, I mean that would be my only obviously that's a question for the for the um the applicant, but that would be my only maybe it's not something that would really affect our approval, but just was a question about how they anticipate not using a ton of energy to keep that place cool during the morning hours. That's all for me. Thank you. Um, I I probably missed it on the diagram, but you said they were moving the the trash area. Um, yes. Where was it before and where is it going?

So, it's a it's a small change, but right now it's here and um it will basically that island will be rotated to be running. I don't want to get into directions, but in the other direction and it's it's an old trash enclosure, so it'll also just be updated. So, as shown here, it'll now be running vertically. So, I assume that's shared between several vendors or at least between Pizza Hut and them. Not to my knowledge. Um, but there's nothing on this lot right now. So, so perhaps it is shared. I might need to check the the reciprocal agreement. I'm not sure if how that's handled. Okay. Um,

all right. And and it sounds like something easily solved, so it's not a a deal breaker. Um at previous uh meetings we've tangentially touched on the management of marketplace and their maintenance of landscaping and so on. Do you have any updates on that? Are they picking up the they the owner came and told us that he was going to be doing a lot of work. I just wondered where they were with that. We don't have an update for the commission this evening, but certainly we can provide an update at a future meeting on

Okay, that would be good. I I think well, we've talked about it before, but one of the problems is how we keep on top of the the issues, particularly landscaping in in all these developments. So, um when somebody makes a commitment, I'd kind of like to hear later they did it. Uh okay. Um the other the other um the concern at the um architectural review was uh about I'm paraphrasing a mishmash of styles. So it said you know they've thrown everything at this building. I'm not an architect so that's not a problem for me. But I do note that the back of the building, that is the the west side of the building, is is very plain. So I wonder if that helps the marketplace in attracting customers. If if you go into a parking lot and all the buildings around you are very plain and uninteresting. Um so I don't know if any consideration was given to that. I can ask the developer.

Okay. Yeah. Uh okay. That that's all for me. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. No further questions from commissioners for staff. Um in that case uh we'll open the public hearing and um the developer is here. Applicant. Yeah.

Hello. My name is Jonathan. I represent Level 5 uh LLC construction, the developer. Um we're partnering with Sun Community to to build this. So uh first question was thermal, correct? Yes. Um and actually if you look at this image, this one's pretty helpful. And if I can toggle to the floor plan, uh the floor plan shows this wall for the the vestibial. The vestibule goes entirely up to help that thermal gain. So the the vestibule should catch most of that. And then the windows on the left um of this entrance have the uh kind of a canopy over it as well to help with that thermal gate.

So yes, it will gain some, but it's more so early morning than late afternoon. You incorporated some elements to reduce that, it sounds like. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. And the glass is high quality, double pane. Um should be rather good on the thermal side. Perfect. Uh, and then the other question was remind me. Um, remind me too. Uh, I have to look through back through my list. The trash enclosure. Oh, well. Oh, yeah. The trash. Yes,

the trash enclosure is uh now to be just some communities. So, it was originally, I believe, part of a an agreement and that agreement has since lapsed. Now it is just sun communities. Okay. Um my other question though was more of a design question that was about the the east side of the building being very plain. Was that by design? Um is there anything that could be be done to sort of brighten it up for the sure uh the passing traffic inside the marketplace?

Yeah. And a few things that this rendering doesn't show well is the landscape. So, a lot of that landscape covers up the back portion of that building as well. Um, it is on purpose though because most of that room is utility for the bank and we want it to be as secure as possible. Windows and other glazing features typically add a higher risk to it. So, we wanted to be more so utilitarian. But if we look at the I believe it was this way. Oh man, I'm sorry. Um, if we look along that back side, we'll see a lot of landscaping that should help kind of cover up that facade a bit.

Okay. Yeah. Uh, in terms of the the top of the building where uh there is equipment installed, do you have a parapited around the We do have a parapit around the building. Um, so none of the equipment will be visible from sto from road height. Thank you. No, it should not be visible. Um, and if it is, then it's screened. Okay. This section was included in the staff report, but I cut it out of the presentation, but it does show that the uh building has sort of a parapit design built in that screens the equipment. Okay. Yeah, thank you. And it has a ghost tree, too.

It does. It's a bit of a tall tree there. Yes. Um, okay. So uh the the last question and this actually does tell me a little bit that at the front as well as you know high efficiency glass double pained and so on. Um it looks like you have something of an eyebrow or something of a an overhang at the top of the building. There is a bit of an eyebrow at the very top of the building. We didn't want to protrude too far out. I believe this building is set pretty close up to the the front setback line. So protruding out too much further isn't too too helpful for us. Plus, it kind of detracts from the kind of logoing that has that sun community on the front face of that building.

And I believe you mentioned in your ARC presentation that this is actually a standard design that the the company is aiming for. It will become that. Yes. Okay. And um uh are they just in California or are they multi-state? I believe they're just in California. Um, I think they have three other locations. I could be wrong on that. I'm sorry. But I know they've got at least two others. Um, I believe they've got three total currently. All right. So, we can say that that look is actually intended to become part of their branding. Yes. All right. Good. Thank you. That's all questions I have. Awesome. Any further questions? No. Okay.

Awesome. Thank you. Um, any questions or any comments from the public? Chair Lee, I did not receive any requests to speak forms. If you're a member of the public and you wish to comment on this item, please raise your hand. And I see none.

Thank you. I'll close the um the public uh comments section and um entertain a motion or any discussion. Uh, I move that we um find the project is categorically categorically exempt from California Environment Quality Act pursuant to class 3 categorical exemption. uh new construction or conversion of small structures set forth in section 15303 of SIA guidance guidelines and that we approve design review number 25001 subject to the attached conditions of approval based on the findings and contained in the staff report including 3.2 20. Was that sufficient to say that?

Yes, you have a nod from legal. So, um, okay. Uh, I would I would second that. So, okay. We have a motion by Commissioner McFale and a second by Chair Lee. One second. Please vote. And motion carries. All eyes. Thank you. Thank you.

We'll just let the rest of the commissioners come back in. Except Well, that was exciting. Um, and in fact, um, I am about to move to item 4 C on the agenda.

Um, but I believe that you're recusing yourself from that item. What? Yeah. I don't have 4C on my screen. Is that one in my neighborhood? It's in my neighborhood. It's in your neighborhood. I don't remember why I would be that. That might have just been an error. And it's um Commissioner McFale. Oh, okay. I don't remember why I would be recused. Somebody lives in the cove. No, no, I do too. I don't have forcy either,

even though I remember looking at it. And the FP just trying to get rid of me. Weird. I'm sorry. Wasn't me. It was It was um staff that put it. All right. Even better. So I Commissioner McFale, are you recusing yourself? I'm fine.

Okay. All right. We're all staying. Good. Let's move on. Um item 4C variance 25-00005 grant a variance to construct a 5'8 in high block wall within the front yard setback of a single family home which limits the height of solid wall and fences to 42 in. Um a staff report please.

Yes. Uh thank you chairman Lee members of the planning commission. As indicated by um chairman, this is a public hearing item for variance. Um just uh for background, the the staff report did provide a number of attachments that the applicant provided. So there was um an existing and proposed site plan, design drawings, location and site views, and then also uh variance um finding justification letter. So there's quite a bit of information there. The applicant and the property owner are present this evening. So this application was submitted by the applicant named Ruben Caldwell representing the property owner Scott Dixon. The variance request pertains to an R1's own property containing a single family residence and detached garage at 68600 Sharpless Road. The property is about 10,500 ft in size. The R1 zone establishes a 20ft front yard setback for primary residential structure within um from the property line. And that's this area shown in red on the on the area onto the side here. The yellow are property lines and the front yard setbacks shown in red. So within the front yard setback um this first 20 ft um walls are limited to a height not to exceed 42 in if they are solid. Um if they have open fencing they are allowed to go up to 6 feet. Um the applicant is requesting to construct the wall at 5 foot 8 in within that front yard setback area and that would exceed the height by 26 in or the height limitation. Um the wall would enclose the an existing front concrete patio. You can kind of see the outline of it here on this aerial. And so the um the wall would create a courtyard right there at that area. The residence was constructed in 1967 and was built at the front yard setback line. So, right at that 20 foot um

dimension. The property owner purchased the property in 2023 and has begun upgrading it. Um the west side of the house, which is um over on this end on the left end um houses two bedrooms and a bathroom. Each bedroom has a sliding door leading to the front yard area and the street and and and is um the primary basis for the the rails request. So to give the um commission some more uh context, this is Sharpless Road on in red you can see the subject property and this is just to give the commission a a a snapshot of the development pattern um within that segment of the street. This is the proposed site plan provided by the applicant. It was in the packet, but here it's um more clearly done mentioned that from Sharpless Road, you have a dash line, which is the front parkway line. Um what Commissioner Lee did request clarification. Uh parkway is that area that's still city rideway, but is outside of the of the roadway. So, usually it's at the curb or an asphalt world curb, but from the curb to the property line, you'll sometimes see sidewalk, sidewalk, and landscaping or just landscaping. Here, it's just open area, landscape area since there's no sidewalk in the area. So, then the the this site plan does depict the property line and then it shows that um that setback, it shows the proposed courtyard area and it shows the dimensions of it, which is about 8 and 1/2 ft extending from the front of the home. This was also in the packet just to give you an historical um street view. So back in 2011, there was a a tall hedge that enclosed the front yard area. Sometime by 2022 in October, that hedge had been removed. And you can see that at that time the the house was in some state of um need for maintenance. And so when it was purchased, the property

owner has been um doing some upgrades. You can see it's been repainted. Um the door has been painted a a vibrant color and the front yard's been cleared right now of of landscaping but there is the um um they do propose to landscape that as well. This photograph was actually too put together. More of a perspective here is u from the application submitt. You can again see the front yard from the street. Um it gives you a better representation of from those sliding doors. You can see how close the roadway does appear to be. This is another perspective of the proposed block wall and the um type of material, the the height of the block wall that would provide a more modern look um or contemporary look um in keeping with the upgrades that have been done so far. So that's just a context of the site, what it's looked like, the conditions that are present. Um but really at the end of the day um applicants are able to apply for a variance. A variance allows them to deviate from what the standard is. It is subject to the planning commission's review and approval. But when we look at a variance, state law does include certain findings that need to be made. Um and the planning commission makes those as well. In the staff report, we do have the findings. We do make the findings to support the commission granting the um the variance. Um, and some of the findings include that it that granting that to allow the taller wall will not be detrimental to other properties in the area because the and I put six here just to generalize it wall enclosure will be 19 ft from the edge of the curb downs slope somewhat from the street and doesn't restrict the use of adjacent properties. There are exceptional circumstances in that the house is located right at the front setback line which makes it impractical to have to move it back to meet that setback for a six foot high wall. Um

when you look at the sharpless streetscape and drive I I drove that street up and down. There's only one house in that segment that had a um sliding uh door towards the street, but that particular property, which is on the corner of Dorne and Sharpless, it's set back about 35 ft. So, they're not having that same limitation of being right at that setback line. And another setback is that it's not a special privilege because the house was built with two front-facing bedrooms with sliders, which you don't typically see, but when you do see it, the home is usually designed further back so that there's at least some separation and some more privacy. And so, um, staff would suggest that and recommend that the planning commission u find the project exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act and grant the variance based on the findings contained in the report. Um, for reference, the applicant again did also include some justifications for granting the finding. So, with that, I'm available for any questions the commission may have.

Thank you. Um, questions from Commissioner Bard. Sure. Um, I just want to say I I like the findings. I like what's going on here. I like how the preciousness of the front yard setbacks is softening potentially a little bit, and there's good reason for it. Um I want to make just a clarification in the drawings. There is a a a gate that's in the wall. Correct. Yes. There's a gate um on the east side of the courtyard wall.

Great. So just as an egress if somebody did need to get out of the building quickly, they can get out of the courtyard as well. Correct. Okay. So that's great. Um Palm Springs is doing this a lot. I'm seeing a lot of really good stuff about that. It looks like one of your pictures is from the Okato Hotel, the old it's residence now, but so these um photographs were provided by the applicant and they would have the context of where they took them, right? Yep. Uh it works well in that community, which is why I bring it up. Um I would only my only concern would be if the front door was covered or somehow hidden and it's not,

right? But the privacy of the bedrooms is is with the wall preserved. I a lot of people like the house you used to have is the large hedges in the front because hedges are allowed to a degree and I think this is a very nice architectural way to provide a hedge. So I'm I don't see anything negative about it. Moving on. Thank you. Uh, Commissioner Malikov,

I I think front yards are really important in that you don't want a city of walls, but I I understand the unique uniqueness of this property, and I think you did a good job at pointing that out. Um, the parkway is really not much of an issue. It's no different than if you have 2 ft of rightway on Day Palm Drive that's not being used. Um, but it's more unlikely that Sharp that this street, Sharpless Road, would get widened than Daywood would. Um, I don't I don't think there's any plans for for them to widen any of the streets in the cove after they did all the sewer work 10 or 15 years ago. Um, but I think um you did a good job with the findings and defining the uniqueness of this cuz we we we want the city not to be closed off and just a city of walls and that would be my concern but I think that's not what this is. So, I I think that you did a good job in defining that. And I have one question for the applicant when they come up.

Thank you. Uh, Commissioner McFale. Just keeping you awake. Um, yeah, I I noticed we're talking about a 5'8 wall, but in the findings 2A, it mentions proposed 6ft high wall. It was a generalization. I mean, we could change it to better reflect or for the record that it is 5T 8 in.

Um, driving down from the cove this evening, I noticed that a common thing that you see in other properties and I'm assuming the walls that I was seeing as I drove down were at the approved height about 42 in was it? Um, that they they would have that height. Then they might have on top of that maybe vegetation or railings or some sort of fence so that they they're keeping at the standard block wall height but then they're adding a little bit of privacy not in a solid block wall. So when we're doing variances, you think, well, you know, I know you you have the unique reasons why, but I'm wondering if maybe there's an alternative to having that extra 2 ft of solid wall that was considered and maybe rejected and we can maybe find out why they want, you know, 2 ft of extra solid wall versus maybe some other way of achieving that privacy. So that was really my only question. So, um, we did speak about that. Um, our planning assistant, Skip Smith, did speak to them about, uh, those type of alternatives, but but the request for the security and privacy was to have the solid wall.

Uh, my question, I I I think the wall is okay. Um, I I share a bit of a concern that we don't want this to become standard where a ton of people are doing this. I know on this street there's not other houses, but that doesn't mean that citywide there aren't other issu instances where this now people can start asking to do this. Um, but I did have a question about the hedges because I know it's an outdated photo and I didn't get a chance to drive by the property. Um, but in the 2021 uh Google Maps, if you pan around to the other side of the street on the street view, the house across the street at that time had very tall hedges, like 12t tall. Um, you couldn't see the house at all. And I know that there are parts of Los Angeles where that started to become very popular because people weren't allowed to have walls. they started to just put up these really high hedges and every house has just a hedge right at basically the sidewalk. Um, which not only creates problems when those hedges are overgrown for people to use the sidewalks, but it still creates this sense of what he was saying is that you know that that we have a city of walls where everything is just walled off. And so my question was just why do we have I mean when a hedge is that big it has the same impact. So why do we have a rule that's the walls have to can only be a certain height but the hedges can be really tall and create the same effect.

So I will research this but I believe there might be something in our code that also addresses hedge height in the code and then we can report that back to the to the commission and it's something that you may want to look at through the code update. So

I I actually have a little something to share on that if I may. Go ahead. So, uh, the hedges are restricted on height. It's just not very enforced. And the reasoning, I mean, I love that we're talking we don't we don't want to create a walled city. The house isn't being walled in. It's just the bedrooms on that side, the front door, and accessibility is still there. The hedges are technically, I've heard, from what I read, it was a fire code. Um, technically the police department and fire department don't want you to have hedges in front of the houses because you can't see the house from the street, but it's not an active enforcement.

I think we'll let staff research the issue and they can get back to us with a definitive um answer. Okay. So, uh, hold up. Um, were there any significant changes to the floor plan of this property in the last two years? I'll have to defer that question to the applicant.

Okay. Um, the reason I ask is it appears from the pictures in the packet that there were always two sliding doors at the front and therefore presumably two bedrooms at the front. And that is also presumably why they had a hedge there for privacy. Um I I'm cautious about variances because you know um everyone can probably make a case for a variance for some design they would like which isn't necessarily fulfilling a defined function. Um what Commissioner McFale was describing just now is, you know, a wall with maybe uh a metal top or whatever. Still good for security, you know. Um uh the landscaping either side of of that smaller wall

can be taken up to give more privacy in the bedrooms. And of course, you know, there are other ways to to shield privacy. So um I need to see a a case that says this is required because there an exceptional circumstance here. The fact is it was built that way as a house. It did have a hedge which provided um uh both security and privacy and there are other design options that would do the same but stay within our standard. So my problem with this example is I'm not seeing the exceptional part of the findings.

Yeah. So I don't do you have further anything further?

Well, just that I I share your concern about variances. I mean it's something that we uh want to be deliberate about. Um and and and we are um yes, there could be um so so this situation with the uh sliding doors, right? It's it's probably not there wasn't a lot of this occurring on Sharpless. There may be other properties within the cove that also have the same condition with the sliding doors, but without going back and researching and looking at them, they may not all have the limitation as far as where the house is. the houses at the front yard set back. Um the one down the street is set further back. So they wouldn't have this issue if they wanted to have a six-foot enclosure. So in the sense that there is some uniqueness uh to the circumstances of this property just that it is limited by what's already constructed there. Similar to when we looked at the convenience store on Raone, it was already in place. It was already developed. We weren't going to be able to do anything to try to get more parking on on the property because it was restricted and limited by what was already there. And so um but it is a balance and I understand your concern. We we do look at those things closely as well.

Okay. Um I I think it would be instructive to have input at some future point not particularly for this issue but but um both police and fire have opinions based in their own experience and fact about what is appropriate in terms of security. for example, you know, um, police will often say you don't want anything in front of windows so that you can't people can't see someone breaking in. So, um, I think we should probably have that opinion or some reference from both the fire and police departments in order to consider this type of case. So, it might be something staff can look at.

Sure.

Okay. All right. Thank you. Any other questions? No. Um, okay. Thank you. And, um, we're now move to the public hearing, um, portion and the applicant is, um, invited to present or talk. Okay. Well, uh, thank you, Chair Lee, and good evening, commissioners. Uh, I'm Ruben Caldwell, the applicant. Uh, my husband, Scott Dixon, and I have owned the property uh since August 2023, and it is our retirement home. Um, we'd like to thank the planning staff for preparing the thoughtful analysis and recommendation of the staff report. Um, in addition to its findings and justifications which carefully describe the unique circumstances affecting this site, we would like to further highlight that the request before you reflects months of deep consideration about the existing conditions of the site and the neighboring conditions. And we believe the 5'8 masonry wall as proposed maintains both the openness of the public realm along Sharpless Road while providing the muchneeded enclosure security and privacy for the bedrooms that take direct access from the front patio area. And furthermore, uh, we chose a simple and we believe elegant design approach that reinforces the horizontal lines of the 1967 mid-century Polynesian inspired ranchstyle house and will not draw unnecessary attention to the proposed wall feature, but rather uh will highlight the emerging desertscape we are trying to realize for the front yard. So in closing, so in closing, um we humbly ask the commission to approve the request as proposed. The patio enclosure is limited in scope and

important visual connections to the street from the house are maintained along the living room areas to the east. So thank you and I certainly um can answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Um Commissioner Malikov,

thank you, Chair Lee. Um, a couple things. Um, first, um, I want to compliment you on the quality of your plans. Um, cuz so often in this situation, we get things that are what I call cocktail napkin plans. And these are very detailed, you know, so that we really do understand what you're going to do with the wall and the size of the block and your site plan and everything. So I I do want to compliment you on the quality of your plans. Um I you know I take variances very seriously too because I don't want to start a precedent but I I I think the findings have been made um based on what our staff has done. But what I was curious about was so the the hedge row that we saw which does have a height requirement which is rarely enforced but you didn't take that out. A previous owner did.

Yes. Uh commissioner that is correct. uh when we um when we purchased the house two years ago, that hedge was was gone, was dead, and the uh the owner of the property um did decided to basically let the hedge die because um you know the watering of it was just um it was not feasible. Um and I think you know that that is um one of the reasons why we have chosen this approach primarily because we want to uh just use very drought tolerant plantings and just really kind of be aware of sustainability. So a hedge really for a lot of reasons and you're bringing up reasons I didn't really I mean I should have considered but didn't and so I understand now. So so in your opinion a hedge would just be very impractical. I I think so. I think our water bill would be exorbitant.

And so so basically you are trying to provide that privacy area in front of the sliding glass doors which lead to two bedrooms. And I do think that's a unique situation because sometimes architects um I don't know if there's any here or not, but they they sometimes they do make mistakes um and they provide orientations that later lead to things like this or they forget about the hot sun in the desert and provide that those exposures that roast people in the mid afternoon. So I I do think that's a unique situation here, but the So you're putting it 11 1/2 ft back and just I just want to ask theoretically and and just like vice I have it's new title vice I have to get it out. vice chair me um had said that in LA everybody was just building on the sidewalk and that created its own problem. So theoretically, you could have requested the same thing at the sidewalk and it would have been the same variance and you would have had a much larger private area and but you could have you could have theoretically asked for that but you set it back 11 1/2 ft so that you at least have some open space facing Sharpless Road to be consistent with the the remainder of Sharpless Road. Is is that a corre correct assumption in what you were thinking? Yes, absolutely. That is very that is correct.

Okay. Um well, I I I appreciate um your answers and um I I'll return it to Mr. Chair. Uh thank you, Vice Chair Me. I wasn't expecting to get um these two bedrooms that we're looking at, they're not the only bedrooms on the property, though, right? These are guest bedrooms. Those are guest bedrooms. Yes.

Okay. Um, yeah. I mean, I think, you know, it's a it's a small variance. I guess part of me says you're revamping the house. These are guest bedrooms. It's not your master bedroom. And if it's your retirement home, it means you want your guests to have a patio. You do have a huge area in the back with a pool, right? So, it's not like there's no place for people to go. Um, you know, we have sliding doors on our home. we wouldn't convert any of those rooms into bedrooms because then they'd be, you know, right out on the street. But, um, I I still have a concern about this establishing a precedent. But, um, you know, I I I don't think we have any information to know how many homes would be affected if everyone decided, oh, hey, well, they did it, so we want to do it as well. Um, which makes it a little tough. So, I guess I don't have any other questions. I'm just talking. Sorry.

Thank you, Commissioner McFale.

Um, I I think you're hearing a little bit of I don't know what you would say the word unease is probably a bit too strong, but just the idea, you know, variances are uh they could set a precedent. And I think that's something what we're we're grappling with with this one. I mean it the the drawings are great and I think it's I I live in the Cove so I I' I've driven by and I think it's going to look spectacular but I I I would just reiterate the question I asked staff about you know the standard is 42 in we're asking for a little bit two two foot and a bit more and an alternative that you do see in the cove is for that people do have a little bit more privacy while not having variances they might have as I said some sort of vegetation on top or some lattice or something that's not quite as solid but still gives privacy. Is that something that you investigated and you didn't want to go that way because

Yes. Um very much so, Commissioner. We did we did um look at all of those options. We reviewed them with staff as well and um it really just comes back to um you know plants that would not require so much um you know water intensive and I think just to to have that hedge grow along the top of any wall would would just would put us back to the hedge issue.

But I think you're what you're asking is they're not just hedges, right? So, I mean, if you have a 42-in wall, you can have a metal open metal design along the top that could have pointy spikes at the top, which would provide security. You do see that quite a lot in a lot of buildings on gates. I mean, there are other alternatives that don't require hedges.

Yes, Commissioner. I I I fully agree. Um, we just believe that in setting setting this back, we you know, we keep that that experience along Sherless open. um you know and we're also just really just wanting to reinforce the horizontal design of the house you know the um the e-line. So um so yeah I mean it there are certainly other options but this just seemed to be the most simple the most elegant kind of approach um without um you know too many bells and whistles if you will.

Okay. So I mean it sounds like then there are multiple reasons for this wall because initially it was presented as privacy and security but since there are other options for privacy and security it's also a design you have a certain design that you are also trying to achieve. Yes. Yes. That is correct. Um um you know we certainly want to to consider all all factors in in bringing this forward. As I say, we we really carefully considered this and this really just seemed to be the most straightforward, most elegant, um, most sustainable approach. Um, okay. Okay. Just a second. Um, Commissioner Boward,

so just as a point of clarification, the picture that we're referring to from 2011, that hedge that was on Google Maps, that was at the street, correct? Right. So, so that would create that walled in effect, right? Whereas what he's doing is not creating that walled in, closed off effect. The front door is still seen. It's a third of the house. It looks like to me, not maybe half, but less, I think. Um, so there's still the approachability, there's still the accessibility, there's still the purpose of the front yard and keeping it, you know, as an open type of space. It's just the hedro as it was was actually the opposite of what we were talking about.

No, I don't I don't think the concern is so much with his patio design because it is as uh Commissioner Malikov pointed out very narrow and there's still a lot of front space. But as he also pointed out, they could have asked for the same variance and brought that patio out to the street. And once we approve this, we then approve that for everybody else. Yeah. And I wouldn't want that back and forth. That's what the answer is. Just let no um let me just bring this back to where we are in this discussion which is questions for the the applicant. So do commissioners have any further comments directly to the applicant? No.

Okay. Good. So um thank you very much for that presentation. Uh any comments from the public? Chair Lee, I did not receive any request to speak forms, but if you're a member of the public and you wish to comment, please raise your hand. Looks like we do have one. Sir, if you'd please approach the lectern and state your name for the record, please.

Hi, congratulations on your new uh one appointments. I'm Sheldon Harrison. I live two doors from this establishment. Um I have several concerns. One of them is the construction of the wall. Um, every house on the street is extraordinary is a unconditional the way it is. Um, so to say this house is extraordinary or different or unusual, every house is unusual on that street. Um the as far as these sliding doors are making such a deal over it. They were not part of the original house. They have been added on later. They were actually windows that were in those bedrooms. They were not sliding doors. So I mean I need that to be cleared because that is not part of the original house design. So, this is all something that's added on later. Living two doors away, we had similar situation that we were told we could not do it. Um, we remodeled I we wanted to bring the eaves out over our patio on the front and it would have been totally open except we have a wall there now which is only 3 ft high. We were going to do the columns on the side. The wall when we moved in was 6 ft high with railings, rod iron railings in between the columns which we took out uh and took the rod iron out and left the wall and the the columns up to 3 ft high. We wanted to do the ease to come out and go to those columns and they would not let us do it. Uh we did not go afford the board or the

commission. They we were just told no you can't do it. It's against the the codes. Um I don't like the fenced in wall look um of the cement block. First of all, I want to know what kind of blocks you're using. Um and to go that high and not do something that is um decorative is concerning. Um, it's just that I don't think the wall I mean if you look at all the houses down there, there's a whole group of them that are all the same setback from the house. Yes, the garages are on some of them, but there are a number of our our houses that are the same setback. And is this going to set a precedent from if they do this, then I want to do it because my house is the same distance from the street as theirs. And so I mean with the the sliding doors seemed to be a big problem. They were not part of the house and that's is my concern and I don't think that the wall should be the the um 5'8 in high that they're wanting without any type of it just be a big old under out by the street. And again it's been brought up the same thing. Is this going to create a a big precedence for a city of Cathedral City? Because there are tons of houses that are that close to the street that could turn around and do the same thing. And that is is my concern of the whole project.

Thank you. And being a neighbor, I want to look out after my project. Thank you. Do we have any further comments? Are the any other members of the public that wish to comment? Yes, sir. Please make your way to the lectern and state your name for the record.

Hi. Um, my name is Scott Dixon and I'm Reuben's husband and um, we the two of us own own this house. So, I'm not sure, you know, that that was a little bit of a a misstatement. We we actually both um do own the house. I certainly respect, you know, all of the concerns that um that everyone has. What I would just sort of like to add is um that that this house is actually not the setback on this house is actually not typical of the setback along Sharpless. I mean our house and I believe one more a couple doors down. It may be this gentleman's. Um you know are our unique in that we are truly at um you the street level. All of the the others have garages that may protrude to that same level, but the house itself is set further back. So, again, I just wanted to point that out. Um, as to the um the sliding glass doors having been added, you know, we certainly didn't do that, but I realized that initially on the house that may have been a feature that those were windows and maybe there wasn't a patio. There was this kind of lattice pergola thing that I think was mentioned that had sort of had to be removed due to insurance and um you know concerns and and just concerns for the the people who were doing some of the the interior renovations on the house. So that that's a thing too. And I did just want to point out as well that we keep talking about the two bedrooms facing the front house, but between them there is a window that is the the the guest bathroom and the shower is actually right up against that as well. And we did have that window replaced. We could certainly put some sort of fog, you know, thing on that glass there. But, you know, this really the whole concept

of, you know, a 42-in wall really doesn't do much for, you know, security or privacy. If you add some things that you can see through, that may help with security, but it certainly doesn't do anything for privacy. um for for those two bedrooms as well as the bathroom specifically the the shower which is right you're looking out the window when you're taking a shower in that room. So anyway that's that's just kind of what I wanted to just clarify and you know reiterate and add. So um thank you very much for your consideration. Thank you.

Thank you. Uh any further comments? Just one comment on him. All the showers on that, all of our houses are built the same. All the showers are in the same spot. So, sorry, I apologize. We only have one three minute comment that you can make. So, I'm so sorry. Are there any other members of the public that wish to comment on this item? I see no others. Chair. Okay. So, I'll uh close public comments and um we can now move to discussion between commissioners. Um, Mr. uh, Commissioner Malikoff.

Well, a couple things. Um, so I I I think on a couple levels we have to consider a couple things. I agree with Vice Chair me that we don't want to set a precedent. And I I really do believe in having front yards and not having a walled off city. Um, if you look at what I hate to mention other cities by name, but it's really not their fault because they were part of the county before they got incorporated. If you drive down Sunnyme Boulevard or Paris Boulevard in Reno Valley, it it just all cement walls, all cement fences, and there's there's there's no green, no no nothing. and and and that's what always made me think and appreciate what the front yard setback was by knowing that that existed and the county let it happen. Um I think that a variance is for an exceptional circumstance. A zoning ordinance can't cover every situation that could come up. um you have to have a way if there is a special kind of situation to be able to address it and that's what a variance is for. Now some cities have a fee for a variance that it's probably high and

people pay it and they just grant the variances like candy. And I actually worked for a city that I won't name that did that. And when I came to the desert, I was like, "Oh, you know, variances, they're not a big deal." And it's like, "No, we we don't think that way." And if you look at the history, if Cathedral City, you know that they provided flexibility for a lot of things, but there's not a lot of history of variances being granted. And even the administrative variances are not that easy to get here. And I think that Ms. Molina, our our deputy director, did a very good job in securing this into a singular situation. Um, I drove around Sharpless and I really didn't see anything that was equivalent. And I think that, um, you're still getting a front yard. You're providing regardless of the reason that the front that the sliders were installed and the bedrooms were on the front, they're there now. And as a city, we need to kind of work with an applicant so that they can have um a reasonable use of their property. I think the fact that they did set it back 11 12 ft is is a major consideration and I don't think that it would be setting a precedent. I think people would have to have a very exact situation like this and I don't know that they would. Um, it's not just in the Cove. We'd have to think about it in the square mile. We'd have to think about it in Centennial Park, Centennial Park, um, Panorama, all those neighborhoods. And I just don't think that it would set a precedent like we're

scared of. And I don't want to set a precedent cuz I think that, you know, our wall requirements are reasonable, but I don't think that the request here I I think it is a unique situation. I don't think it has a negative effect on on other properties. Um, and I don't think we should be scared off by, you know, thinking that we're going to get all these requests for for um, you know, block walls at the property line or somewhere within the front yard. Um, I I don't think there's a lot of situations like this. So, I I think that's something to consider. And like I'll end that with Cathedral City is been very very conservative in granting variances and a lot of people just um don't apply for them once they know what the fee is and you know and they you know they want to say you know they'll say to you oh well okay if I pay this fee will it be granted and it's like I I can't say that um as a staff member I'm saying And I I I just I think that they've met the criteria. Um and um I don't think we should be scared of that.

Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Bernard. I knew you wanted to get in on this. I again I just reiterating I think it's a smart move. I think the wall is actually well done. I think adding these walls with metal tops and stuff like that are just not attractive. And this is clean. It fits the style of the house. It's the design of the house. It's I I I don't think it's establishing a precedent. It keeps the open space. I I would say yes to it. Um, Commissioner McFale,

um, I still feel, um, the concerns that have led to this law could be addressed in a different way while not requiring a variance, but um, I I think this might well in that particular area, we heard from an applicant uh, one of the members of the public tonight that maybe there are others. It won't be precisely unique, but everyone's going to find a unique angle to to do something. I've got a red door. I've got a window on the side. There will be unique things uh requested of us. Um having said that, I think it's a wonderful design and it's obviously needed. They do need privacy. Um but I expect that we will get applications. Uh maybe this person will reapply to the city to for their specific one and that will come back to us. So just with that caveat that's okay.

Ask Jade.

Um yeah I I I feel like I haven't been swayed although I probably will vote for it but I mean my feeling is if you buy a house and you know this is how the house is configured and you know it's not allowed to put up a wall but you buy the house anyway. Um, so you know, you knew and I mean that's totally fine. I understand people want to make changes. Um, but you know, knowing it is helpful to know that the house originally didn't have sliders there because that makes more sense, right? That there would have been windows. The bathroom window is very similar to what my house growing up was like. Admittedly, it was a second floor, but all of our bathrooms had a window at the top in the shower for ventilation, so that's not that uncommon. Um, you know, I am concerned about the precedent. I do appreciate that they've made this a very small patio and that it's not going to be out to the street, but I think we are setting a precedent that someone could request out to the street. And I will say in Panorama, we have a lot of yards and front yards that are walled in. They are short walls. Um, but people sit out there and they have no privacy because they're sitting behind a wall that's that's tall. And so what's to stop people now from saying, "Well, I have kids and I have pets and we need more privacy or whatever." Um, I think your point that people will try to come up with more reasons is probably true. Um, but I do think in terms of this particular project, it does make sense, the security and the privacy issue, and I do think the design makes sense. So, um, I just have a lingering concern about the president.

Thank you. I I think I I share a number of the concerns expressed um about this particular variance. Um I agree. I having a window in a shower, you know, you have you have um shading on the glass so you can't see through it or whatever that that occurs in all kinds of properties. If you go to an apartment building in New York, you'll be able to watch everybody in the shower except you won't be able to see anything because it's a small window. So, you know, there are solutions for all these things which don't require this variance. So, I understand the concerns of others on the commission here. Um, I'm also um curious about the the 5'8. It's kind of a precise measurement. um uh why why not 5'5 or 5'2 or whatever? Um and and that seems to be a design issue. It's not a security or a um privacy issue. Um the the thing that I disagree with with a number of people here is is I don't like the impression of of um concrete block walls. I one of the things we look at in the um zoning code um review is how to get rid of that view along our roads. We don't want to see rows and rows of of concrete blocks. Um so I actually would have appreciated some other kind of design element there that made this more interesting uh rather than simply a block wall. Um, so those are the concerns that that I'm going to be looking at as we evaluate. Um, anyone any final comments before I

ask for a motion? No. So, I will entertain a motion. I'll enter the motion. Okay. Right. So, I move. All right. I'm not good at reading these, so I need my council help. So I will move to grant of variance to construct the 5'8 high block wall within the front yard setback of a single family home which limits the height of solid wall and fence to 42 in. That's all I need to do. Correct. Perfect. I so move. Second. We have a motion seconded. Um

okay we're going to go ahead and do a roll call vote on this one as we were having technical issues with the item on the screens. Okay. Commissioner Baddard. I Commissioner Mal uh Commissioner McFale abstain. Commissioner Malikoff. Yes. Vice Chair Meade. God, I'm really torn. Um, no. Chair Lee, a no. Motion fails.

Thank you.

So, just to kind of chime in in terms of process here. So, that motion did fill. So, that means that there is no action on the variance. So, there's a couple of things we can do. Um, it seems that, you know, I was talking to our director here and I just wanted to point out a couple things, but you know, really, and Sandra, please like chime in, for legal purposes, I was more focused on the front setback line of the house and where that was located as being that unique issue that, you know, justified this variance that took it beyond the whole idea of just design or anything like that. However, I think that the biggest thing I'm hearing is that you have concerns of maybe possibly even just looking within that street, maybe a couple streets over to get an idea percentage-wise of how truly unique that setback would be and maybe have an idea of who else could possibly make the same argument. Um, if we get that information to you, if you think that that is what you need in order to make a decision, um, happy to do that, we can continue this item to the next meeting

or we can entertain another motion. Um, so there's there's a few options for you. Can I ask um staff a question? Yes. Um, okay. So since we have had no action 2 to two, the the part of the code that allows um how high can you go if you have an open six feet 6 feet.

So you can go up to 62 in if you have an open um area, but it's the definition of open isn't necessarily in the code. It's not like rot iron or something like that, but could it be one of those midcentury kind of metal fences that have a series of um decorative holes which are tiny but they're there and then it would still qualify as being open. So typically we do see more of the tubular fencing or rot iron fencing that has more definitive open. Um, but that's not to say we couldn't look at some alternative type of open view fencing or open fencing design p or you know pursue and review our code a little bit more uh closely to see where that flexibility lies to see that whether that's an option but we would look at that. I've seen I've seen um metal barrier metal. Metal sounds terrible, but I've seen mid-century kind of fences or acrylic fences that have tiny little openings in it that could still qualify as being an open fence, but that provide the privacy.

So, under the code above 3 ft in height, it would need to be 75% of

open. Yeah. So I guess just to say this to me comes back with an issue I had with earlier things where the say the carports right the the preciousness of the front yard. How is that serving the community the homeowners the family in this case the front yard was actually very preserved and yet we voted against it. So, um I don't know as a commissioner why we are holding on to this idea of front yards as being so important, especially in this case. It's disappointing because it was a very nice plan. It was well done. It was in alignment with the design. It fit the structural qualities. It didn't block off or create a walled experience. And yet we again held on to that preciousness. And I don't see why we keep doing this.

May I apologize. Go ahead. May I add that um

I think one of the biggest concerns I've heard from the commission is that the precedence of completely enclosing at the property line, right? And so that's not what's being proposed here. I understand that concern, but when you somebody could apply for that, but what I'm hearing from this commission is that that would be detrimental to have closed off at the property line 6T high walls. Part of the findings that you make for variance is that it's not going to be detrimental to surrounding properties to the area. And so if someone did want to move that forward, that finding potentially could not be made. could not be made if that's the concern of the commission. So again, remember that there are findings that need to be made to support any variance and um they are itemized on the first and second pages, but they do talk about not being materially detrimental to other properties in the area or permitted uses thereof. So presumably,

yes, but one of your findings is that it doesn't constitute a special privilege inconsistent with limitations of other properties because it was designed and built with two front-facing bedrooms, each with sliding doors. That appears to be false. So, it wasn't designed and built with two front-facing sliding doors. It the house was changed to have that even though whoever made that change knew that those sliding doors were going to open out onto the front yard. And I'm having a problem with this not constituting a special privilege because we don't know how many other properties could make not this particular argument but a similar argument about privacy and security. And so that's the thing that I ultimately got stuck on.

Okay. If it helps. And it wasn't about the preciousness of the front yard. I think we've all seen homes where or streets where the entire street is all hedges or all walls and it doesn't matter how close the homes are to the street that creates a completely in my opinion there's no eyes on the street. It's insecure. There's a fire risk to situations like that. There's a whole bunch of reasons that don't have to do with preserving a front lawn as an aesthetic idea or a planning idea that I have concerns about. So, do staff have what they need to proceed?

Yes. Yes. And it's my suggestion at this point that perhaps staff go back, work with the applicant and evaluate the findings, evaluate the spe special circumstances that may apply in this case and as well evaluate the design to see if there are any design alternatives that may lead to an introduction of new information for the planning commission to consider and that we could uh reschedu this for a a future meeting.

Yes, I think that would be appropriate. Thank you. I I would um I would add to that that maybe staff can work with the applicant to find some kind of combination wall that would be meet the code and then have landscaping that would be water efficient that could climb and provide the privacy along with the wall um and um not need to come back here because I I don't see if if they do come back, I I don't see much changing. Um but but I think if they come up with some kind of alternative design that meets the code that combines landscaping with a wall that would be allowed, I I think that might be the best option.

I appreciate the comment. Staff will evaluate that option and if it is the case that an option can be identified and selected that does not require the variance, um we can pursue that. So we'll evaluate all those options and should this still require a variance we'll bring this back to the commission. Thank you. That completes our public hearing items and at this point I propose a um 5 minute u break. Yes.

We're ready. Um, okay. I call the meeting back to order and we're moving to agenda item five, non-public hearing items. Item 5A is a plan time extension 250003 requesting one-year time extension for conditional use permit 21-014. Do we have a staff report?

We do. Thank you, Charlie. So, this pres Oh, it's not full screen. Pardon me. Okay. So, this presentation is a request for a one-year time extension for conditional use permit 2114. The project site is approximately 0.9 acres located west of Date Palm Drive and approximately 800 ft south of Vista Chino. Conditional use permit 211014 was approved by the planning commission on June 7th of 2023 to establish a 14,000q ft residential care facility for the elderly with 25 patient beds. Conditional use permits expire within 24 months of the original date of approval unless an active building permit is maintained or an extension of time is requested. The applicant submitted their application for a time extension on June 1st of 2025, which was ahead of the expiration date, which was June 7th of 2025. Approval of this time extension would establish a new expiration date of June 7th, 2026, and no additional time extensions can be granted from there. This is the site plan that was approved for the conditional use permit by the planning commission in 2023. And just to be clear, the current request is for the time extension only and the conditional use permit itself is not under review. The public hearing is not being reopened and the applicant is not requesting any modifications. So, with that, staff recommends that the planning commission approve uh time extension 25003 granting a one-year time extension for conditional use permit 2114 subject to the previously approved conditions of approval. Uh that concludes my presentation

and the applicant was here but he might have left. Um okay. Uh questions for staff. Uh m uh Commissioner Malikov. Um so this um just to reiterate, we're only looking at giving them a year's extension and regardless I I remember this project um very well. Um and we're only looking at giving them a year to develop the project. Um that's that's all. Um, Commissioner McFale,

um, I noticed in your, um, the heading of this report, you mentioned one of the parcels. So, you um, 6M51642, but the report also talks about a second parcel. So, we're this is to do with both parcels. It's just not mentioned.

Correct. That's an oversight on my part, but it applies to everything that was contemplated under the original conditional use permit. And I think in the the conditions letter of the pre of of this uh CUP, it mentioned that one of the requirements was that they would merge the two parcels together. Do we know if that's happened? It appears that both still exist on the community's website. So I'm guessing they haven't done that part yet, which was one of our conditions. I would need to double check that with the engineering. Um, from talking to the applicant, my understanding is that they've been working with some flood zone issues related to the project and I don't know if that would be holding up

Oh, he has returned, but so he can probably speak to that better, but um that might be holding up um some of the the engineering um things such as the merger. And I think you said it's you get a one-year extension and that's it. Just just a one- year extension. Yeah. after that they would need to reapply for a new conditional use permit

in granting an extension and your discussions with them to grant the extension. And maybe this is more for the applicant, but do does the applicant say we haven't gotten to that stage yet in in uh grading permits and so on, but we fully expect in this next year we will truly be able to do this. Is there any asurances they're giving you that they will indeed be able to do this a year from now? Are there any discussions around that? I wouldn't say concrete insuranceances, but um there was a clear discussion that this is for one year um and that there there isn't further extension beyond that. I think I'll just stop there.

Okay. Commissioner Bard, um in these cases, my question is more like why wouldn't we? Is there a reason I know the staff is recommending to move forward. Is there a reason why we wouldn't because I haven't I haven't seen one like just give them more time. I don't understand. I just had a general question about granting. No, makes sense. like have you done anything to suggest we will do it if we get

I think I think state law says that you offer the extensions and it's it's almost you know there there's not much discretion in it unless the environmental situation has changed drastically which this hasn't and and I believe that that's where you could deny it but um that this this is it's this environmental situation is the same. Um, and we're kind of combining now into comments. I I I originally voted against this project, but I will vote to approve the new expiration date because the only thing in front of us is to give them more time to finish the conditions of approval. It's irregardless of what we thought before or what was going on before. and the environmental situation is is exactly the same.

Correct. We're not re uh litigating the cup. Um vice chair. Um I just am wondering why I mean I know this this agenda was very full. Um but we're approving this two months. Today is the 6th of August. So they now have 10 months. Why did we not put this on a meeting earlier? We're we're short changing them by two months.

Um, in an ideal world, I think we would have reminded the applicant sooner that their conditional use permit was close to expiring. I don't think staff is obliged to provide that notification, but it is something we try to do so that people who are trying to compete complete their projects can. Um in this instance um it was caught that this conditional use permit was close to that expiration date and so we did notify them and they promptly uh submitted that application. Um following that there were some cancellations of meetings um in in June or July.

Yeah. I mean I think that's what I'm asking is we could have put we could have had a meeting with this and one other thing from tonight's agenda. It's just distressing to me that even if we approved it, sounds like we're probably going to approve this tonight. But now they only have 10 months because they couldn't really move forward until we approve this. Correct. I don't think that they were stopped in any of their actions in that interim period. Um, but didn't it expire on June 7th? Because they had submitted a complete application. We consider that project is is I just wanted to make sure we weren't like short changing them two months cuz I was Okay. Great. Any further questions for staff? Yeah.

Yes. So, do we give them back two months? Again, if it if we the city doesn't want to take the land, another developer is not putting in another bid, nobody else is looking to do anything there, then why don't we just approve it and make it a motion to give them two months. Just a second. We can't do that. Okay. So, good clarification. the the uh assistant planner has has indicated that they were not stopped from doing any work for those two months. Correct. I understand. So, we're not giving them an extra two months. We're giving them a year because that's what we um can do. Thank you for the clarification.

Okay. All right. No further comments. Good. Okay. Well, I will move that we approve time extension number 25-00003 granting a one year of extension for conditional use permit number 21-015 approved by the plan commission on June 7th, 2023 subject to the previously approved conditions of approval and based on the findings contained in the staff report with the new expiration date of June 7, 2026. Chair Lee, before we take action on that motion, ask for public comments or if the applicant wants to speak, do we have any members? I apologize. Yes, absolutely.

Sir, if you would please state your name for the record.

Good evening. I'm Steve Wopian. I am the owner of that project. Uh maybe I shouldn't say anything now that you're about to approve not to mess up my chances but I would like to uh uh first of all congratulate on the appointment and thank you for your public service. Uh I also would like to take this opportunity to thank the wonderful uh staff of planning uh division specifically Sandra Molina uh Manuel is not here Manuel Rocha and Dominic Camps you amazing staff great team I've had a immense pleasure of working with them on past projects on this particular one uh would like to address two questions I saw one was regarding uh environment ment did not change. As a matter of fact, environment did change. Just to bring that information to you, one of the reasons this project is being prolonged almost to unbelievable level. Frankly, I I I never imagined this was going to happen because we've retained one of the most respected engineering firms in the area. It's for motor engineering. I don't know if you've heard of them. They're very very esteemed uh engineering firm. And from the very beginning back in 2023, we thought it was going to be a few months and we're going to be done. And then the hurricane Hillary happened and FEMA became very very strict, very concerned about some flood maps. Honestly, I'm not an engineer. About where the water is going to go. If you put this building, they ask for some walls. We did that calculation, then they came back, they said, "No, move the wall here." Anyway, we went back and forth for two years. The good news is though, I I'm hoping this is the last time they said that

yes, they've come to some kind of an agreement with our firm and they're in like final final stages. I was assured that within two to three months this should be done and once it is we can move to the next phase which is construction documents and permits etc. So thank you for trying to give me two months. Uh I think one year from the calendar date uh should be enough and Dominic is absolutely correct. uh it is not uh their responsibility to remind it should have been actually mine but I'm also doing a couple other apologize other couple other projects in the in the city so my head is like spinning uh but thank you for the reminder otherwise there was a close chance of me actually missing it and again it's their due diligence that allowed me to not lose this project and again thank you for your public service please ask me any questions I want to make myself available should you need any any more information.

Are there any questions for the applicant? Nope. Awesome. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other members of the public that wish to comment on this item? And I see none. Chair, thank you. Um then I will well I'll take it as read that I've restated my um my uh movement of uh a motion to approve. Any second? I'll second.

Okay, we have a motion by Chair Lee and a second by Vice Chair Me. Please vote. And motion carries. All eyes. Thank you. And uh moving on to our uh next item 5B, the master sign program uh MSP 25-00001. Um, a staff report, please.

Thank you. Good evening. All right. Good evening, Vice Chair, Chair Lee, members of the planning commission. Cynthia Schultz, associate planner here to present the item for your consideration this evening, master sign program 25001. Uh background on this is that the project site is located at the northeast corner of date pond drive and Vista Chino. The site consists of existing buildings which include the include the AMM convenience store which also houses Chilow's Burgers, the attached go-go car wash, also the Arco Fueling Canopy, a new Starbucks which is going into the former Dairy Queen space and the Subway restaurant. The site is comprised of four lots that are all held by the Chandi group. Master sign program is subject to planning commission review and approval. The site includes four existing freestanding signs. Three are shown here. Two of the monument signs are at the corner of Date Palm and Vista Chino and serve currently serve the Arco and AM. An additional sign faces Vista Chino which serves the subway and the former Dairy Queen. One freeway oriented sign, which you see in this image, serves the Arco gas station. Fuel price readers are governed by the California Business and Professions Code. The freeway oriented sign is reviewed under the city's sign code. So, we have jurisdiction over the review height, size, all that sort of thing, placement of that sign. But CALR may also review these types of of signs based on their review authority. So here what we see proposed a Starbucks as I mentioned will assume the Dairy Queen space and the associated signage new directional signage will be placed to guide drive-through traffic and are proposed on that site along with new

panel in the monument sign that faces uh date palm drive. A new sign panel is also proposed for one excuse me for the um in the monument sign on Vistino. A new panel is also proposed for one of the Arco Monument signs, and that's the one that faces State Date Palm Drive. A freeway sign box is planned for 100 square foot Starbucks panel that will go below the existing Arco and AM sign that's on that uh pole sign now. And for reference, the map marks items 3, 4, 7, and 8, which are the primary new signage locations warranting the master sign program. So number three you see is the freeway sign. Four is the offsite sign where the uh Starbucks will go on the Arco sign. And then seven and eight are directional. Seven both seven and eight are the directional signage for Starbucks. So here you see the placement and the dimensions of the Starbucks wall signage being proposed. Proposed signage is within the allowances that are specified and allowed in the sign code. This image shows additional Starbucks signs. These are proposed signs that require planning commission approval as the Starbucks is con the Starbucks on the monument sign here is considered an off-site sign. The freeway is an additional pole sign. Let me rephrase that. The this is an additional box going on the existing pole sign, but the original sign was never presented before planning commission for their approval. So normally these are approved by planning commission as a se as a separate permit and it was not. This is adding adding a separate box to that poll. New signage is also being propo proposed

for the go-go car wash on the north and south elevations of that building. As the sign code sign code currently allows one square footage, one square foot of signage for each linear foot of building facade. The sign code actually does allow more signage than what is being proposed here. The proposal total comes to 735.52 square ft. The sign code does grant authority approval authority to planning commission to promote the intent of the sign plan. assigned plan provisions which are to facilitate site circulation, identification, safety, and aesthetics. And aesthetics means things like uh limiting the proliferation of signs and what we call sign visual sign clutter. The additional cabinet on the freeway sign is allowed and as I mentioned, the freeway sign was not previously reviewed by the planning commission. The project is exempt from SQA pursuant to section 15301 of the SQA guidelines exempting for certain existing facilities. Uh that does conclude my report. I'm available for comments or questions and a representative for the applicant is here as well.

Thank you. Excuse me. Um, Commissioner Badard, any questions on the sign program? Um, are we taking in the extreme wind and sand situation over there with these signs? This particular program doesn't have a plan for mitigating that. I know that there is an issue with the extreme wind and the blow sand that accumulates on this particular site. So, you know, we don't have a a way to analyze where that that sand is actually coming from, but it does accumulate on this site.

May I just add also that um the entitlement that approved the gas station in that center does have requirements for blow sand maintenance. Um and um if that needs to be looked at, we'll go ahead and address that through our code compliance. You want to keep that separate from our conversation from the sign program? Yes. Okay. Um then I'm fine. Thank you. Commission Malikov, was it explored that um Can you go back to the pole sign, freeway pole sign?

Was it ever explored that they could fabric refabricate the gas station sign and have the Starbucks sign and the Arco sign kind of in the same, you know, together rather than have a gap like that? Did was that ever considered? because a lot of times you see them in the same cabinet when they're freeway signs. That's true. I would defer the sign planning and design decision to the applicant. Okay. I'll ask that I'll ask them when they come up. Anything else? No. Vice chair.

Um did I understand to you correctly and that you that the poll sign would never came before planning commission? According to our records, it would did not come before planning commission. It was approved at a staff level. I don't know what the requirements were at that time, but it currently what it says in our code is that anything over, don't quote me on the height. I think it's 20 feet. Anything over a certain threshold is required to come before planning commission.

Are we allowed to talk about that sign in this conversation since it wasn't approved or no? I don't think so. I think what the question is before you now is it's a if it's if it was unapproved or if it was should not have been approved, it would would be considered a nonconforming sign. Okay. And so this is potentially furthering a non-conformance. Is that accurate?

Yes. So, so for this particular thing, I think that staff is just wanting to point out that that's how that we arrive to this Arco Freeway sign. But yes, it's not exactly part of the consideration really before you is the master sign program that's being presented with what is already existing on the site. Okay. Um I know this the sign code is part of the development code update, is it not? That's correct. If if what we approve today ends up being non-conforming to what ends up being and I have no idea what changes might be made to the sign code in the update. Do these get grandfathered in as non-conforming?

Yeah, they would be they would be considered grandfathered in or in the future they might be non-conforming. I don't anticipate that we'll have much to change in the way of signage and reducing signage. I can speak to some other things, but that's not what you're asking. I just Yeah, basically just wanted to make sure we weren't essentially approving something that in a year is going to be we didn't want this kind of sign. I mean, I don't know what's going to be.

I've looked at the sign code. I don't think that the sign code is particularly ownorous. I will make a note just for reference that one of the things that uh is not that the code is the sign code is silent on are those internal directional signs the subway signs um we see those frequently. A lot of development codes or sign codes will actually speak to them and call them exempt if they are for certain purposes they're within a certain size. This is a reasonable size and and placement of those that they would un under some codes they would fall under an exempt sign provision. We don't have anything in our code to allow that. So that came as part of this package forward to you all. Okay. Thank you,

Commissioner McFale. I actually had a similar question to uh Vice Chair me regarding the whether things have been approved in the past or not and that's already been answered. So thank you. Okay. Thank you. I have no questions for staff. Um so we can move to public comments and uh if the applicant is present and would like to comment, please come up. Please state your name for the record.

Thank you. Uh good evening. My name is Tony Mary Hugh. Um I am the CFO for Chandi Group USA. And uh I just want to commend you all on your patience for a very long evening. Um thank you for your service. Uh, as mentioned before, the um Arco has been there for a long time, a really long time, although it was um reconfigured several years ago um to its current configuration, a complete raise and remodel. Uh the Dairy Queen and Subway have been there seven or eight years. Uh I've been with the company for 10 years. That freeway pylon sign was there before that. I've lived in Cathedral City or had lived in Cathedral City for 25 years. It wasn't there that long. If I had to guess, I'd say maybe about 12 years. Uh, and I want to point out that while it may not have gone to a planning commission, and I have no idea why that would have or wouldn't have, it was mentioned that it was approved at a staff level. So, for whatever reason, it was an approved sign. Um, one of the commissioners, and I'm not sure if it was uh, Commissioner Malikoff, asked about uh, the design components, and I'll just be fully transparent with you. There was no intention to change that sign to put Starbucks on it. Um, there's a lot of costs involved on changing it out. It is what it is. But Starbucks wants to be on a freeway sign. It's very very important to them and it's one of the reasons that um they like the location. Personally, having lived in the Panorama area for 25 years, I think it's going to be a great location. Even though there's they're all over town, it's a very convenient getting on and off the freeway. Um so they asked to be

on the pylon sign and we said, "Well, let's check structurally and see if it's doable first." So the engineers did their thing and came out and said yes. and they actually came up with this design. So, I'm not sure. I can't speak to the design components of it. I'm the CFO for a reason. I do not have any artistic ability at all and I don't speak engineering and I don't speak science. Um, but that is the reason we have it is very important to them and I do hope that the council will um the commission will consider allowing that because it is very important along with the other signage. The reason we were changing the pricing sign along date palm is because they wanted to make sure that they had date palm visibility. Um, if you're all familiar, it's that culde-sac is a dead end. And it's one of the reasons why the Dairy Queen was not very successful and it is a very um uh very slow subway because they they set back. There's not a lot of visibility. So, I think it's important. I think having the Starbucks there will help the um subway actually um and the Arco, the traffic, and they're going to be a very harmonious um businesses together. So, um I'm here for any other questions that I can't answer, and I thank you for your time tonight.

Any questions from commissioners? No. Thank you. Thank you. Um any further public comments? We have none. Chair,

thank you. In which case I close public comments and move to a motion. Oh, you have you have a comment? Yes. Well, I I think part of what we do is it's not enough to vote no, but I think part of what we do is to have things not look have things look as best as possible. And I I understand, you know, I want Starbucks there. I I love Starbucks. Um I like the Arco. Um, it would have looked better if it was a compact panel that had a Starbucks panel and an narco panel um rather than um having such a large space between them. Um, and that that's my only comment is is that that could have been achieved um artistically and engineering wise, but um it's not enough to make a big deal out of um we are where we are and um that's it.

Okay. Any other comments? In which case, I'll entertain a motion. Move approval. Read it. I think you have to read it. I have to read the whole thing. Okay. As written in there. All right. We I move that we find that the master sign program number 25001 is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act SQUA pursuant to state SQA guidelines section 15301 existing facilities and approve master sign program number 25-00001 based on the findings contained in the staff report. I have a second.

I'll second. Thank you. Okay, we have a motion by Commissioner McFale and a second by Commissioner Beddard. Please vote. And motion carries. All eyes. Thank you. I neglected to say thank you staff. I'm sorry. Cynthia and Sandra were very helpful. Thank you. Have a great evening. U moving on to it. Yes,

if I can. I just wanted to possibly offer an off-ramp to the planning commission given the late hour of the meeting and the number of agenda items that you have scheduled. Um, it's your prerogative, but uh, the commission could consider moving item 5C, the discussion of cottage food operations and microenterprise home kitchens to the September 3rd planning commission meeting. Yes. Yeah. This is for information only and there's no action required. Correct. So, um, yes, I I would move that, um, we continue that item to a a date uncertain. What is it? I would enthusiastically second that. Okay. Um, all right. Discussion. Okay.

All right. I was just bringing up that this is on the desk right here. So, I didn't I'm assuming this is maybe left over then from something else or it could be and it's something I can address in staff comments as well. Okay. Um, can uh can I get a vote on this? Um, so I move that we reschedu item 5C to the next planning commission meeting whenever that shall be scheduled. I thought I already and I would suggest September 3rd only because we're planning on bringing the cannabis ordinance to the commission on August 20.

I didn't read that. I thought that was the next one. So that's why to the September 3rd meeting. I second it again enthusiastically. Even more enthusiastic. Okay. A vote, please. Okay. We're going to do a roll call vote on this one to keep the minutes clean. Okay. Can we have uh Commissioner McFale? Hi. Commissioner Bedard. Hi. Commissioner Melikoff enthusiastically. Yes. Vice Chair me. Yes. Chair Lee. I. Motion carries. All eyes. Uh just to let the clerk know that um items 5, D, and D do not also appear in our screen. We're not voting on them, but they're just not there. Just like 4C.

Okay. I do apologize. We'll just direct your attention to the screens and hopefully we can see everything there. I wait with baited breath to find out what the next item is. Commissioner's report. No, there there are things missing on our digital copy. Item 5D is a discussion of the 2025 American Planning Association annual conference.

So, we'll make this quick. I know it's late. Um um as in staff report, the uh APA conference is in September. It's in Monteray. We made an offer to because we have some budget uh this year, we made an offer to the two commission members that are on the steering committee to attend and um Commissioner Malikoff is unable to attend and so um because we do have some budget, we wanted to send another um commissioner um in addition to uh Commissioner Me who is who will be attending. And so really it's a discussion amongst the the commission.

I would recommend that our chair go um I think it he would get the most from it and um I make a motion that Danny Lee go to the if he wants to what we haven't asked him. I will I I am free those dates. So yeah, I would go if if you um ask me to um I make a motion that we send our chair comma conference in Monterey. I was going to ask does anyone else want to throw their hat into the ring as well if somebody wants to?

Yes, by all means do that. I mean if somebody else is interested or you want to propose somebody else and in which case No, I mean I was going to actually suggest I'm absolutely fine with you going. It's no problem. What I was going to suggest was that, you know, we we talked about putting the task force people on. You and I being the RFP. The only person who hadn't had their fingers in this was Commissioner. Well, that's true. Yeah. Unfortunately, I'm doing a big fundraiser that I'm putting on that weekend. So, I can't go anywhere. Unfortunately, so it turns out I was the only one available. So, we will reach out to you, uh, chair, and, um, thank you. Get that get that scheduled. I don't think we voted. He's the only one available.

I'm the only one that's actually available. Okay, great. So, by by acclamation, um I am chosen. All right. Um thank you. Uh all right. Request. Did we have another one or is that it? Request E. Commissioner com. No, it's um code. Oh yes, discussion of development kind of digital one. So we're and chair Lee, just so the public is aware, we have no members of the public present for public comments on any of the remaining items.

Okay, thank you. So we are discussion of the development code updates. Who is doing that? And I have an update for you this evening

and I apologize it's going to be long. the tag the technical advisory group has been very busy and you all have not met much but I'll try to keep it as brief as I can or read as fast as I can. So the technical advisory group just completed a review of the land use matrix uh that was drafted by Mirier Harish. This was a big job technical advisory committee spent a lot of time Sandra was on that committee as well. We spent a lot of time the reason that this is so important is that this is sort of the go-to. This is kind of the crux of the entire uh zoning code. So when people come in and ask questions, they're looking at the land use matrix. I want to do this. Where can I do it? Those are the two key questions that they ask. So this is what this is going to do is streamline that and make it a visible table rather than in narrative format. So it'll make that much simpler, but it also we were looking at it from the perspective of what uses we're starting to look at what uses will go where and how do we have those uses defined. With that said, we were also looking at and I think uh uh associate planner camps was was part of this as well. We all had a discussion around some of the uses in trying to simplify this. Some of the uses were d nested. The best way I can put this is that uh things like a grocery a corner market. So this is a good example. Corner market might be a a 2,000 square footprint whereas a neighborhood grocery store might be a 15,000 square footprint whereas a supermarket might be a 40,000 square footprint. They're all grocery stores, but it's the level of impact and they should be nested within one another. And so where they go and the level of review is going to be different depending on where they're located. So that was one thing that we noted. We wanted to make sure that MTER Harish takes special attention to that. Um let's see the next section. Uh so the next section to review will be the administrative provisions. The tag will review these provisions. Uh, and this

topic will become the topic for the September steering committee meeting. So, steering committee members, put your put your radars up because it will be in September. I will be sending out uh like a doodle poll to make sure that we get a date that will work for as many people as possible. That will be a virtual meeting. Uh the administrative provisions will then go as the topic for the October 15th uh planning commission work session to discuss that that uh the the administrative pro provisions. Originally we had scheduled the zoning district to come uh to you for that session but we're shifting these things. We're switching these swapping these things around so that staff has more time to review those zoning provisions. So we're swi switching that with the administrative provisions to come to you first. You'll see the zoning provisions then in at the December meeting. Um so that means December 7th uh 17th planning commission will focus on the zoning district provisions. And then what this does is it paves the way for the general and specific development standards to come to the planning commission at their work session that will be in January or February. Um so future sub future meetings that will happen will see subdivisions probably in March. uh the objective design standards we anticipate to see in April. We'll have a public review draft workshop hopefully in May and then public review and environmental review in the summer and this lines us up for a successful fingers crossed fall 2026 adoption.

Thank you. Um can I ask because it is late and there was a lot of information there. If you could summarize an email for us that would be very helpful. Absolutely. But I did want to have it have your attention. So, thank you for your attention at such a late hour. Thank you. Any questions on that? I was going to ask exactly the same thing, which which kind of why I wanted it as an agenda item that would remind us every two weeks to bring this up, but that's apparently not happening. So, keep asking. So, I'll keep asking. It was an agenda. Okay, I'm moving on to agenda item six. Commissioner reports. Commissioner McFale, nothing.

Vice Chair, nothing. Commissioner Moff, um, real short, I wanted to compliment staff on the quality of the findings that you've been using um, in all of the staff reports on this packet. is it's it's been an immense change from two years ago and it's important to have strong findings and um I just wanted to compliment everybody on the strong findings and regardless of the results of the variance the findings were very strong in that too. I just wanted to say that

youard. Okay. Thank you. I I I would second that actually. Of course, I've been on a long learning curve and I now actually just started my third uh my second term. Um constitutionally I can't have more than two terms. Um, so, uh, I, um, I've learned a lot in the first three years, but I've also seen a lot of changes in what you're doing for us in that time. And I just, I think it's chalk and cheese from how it was. So, thank you for all the hard work from staff on all these items and thank you for answering the phone before 8:00 in the morning.

So, okay. Um, Secret's comments. No, he didn't have any comments. Um, okay. Uh, staff comments. Keep my comments brief. So, you will have a meeting on August 20th, and I already uh tipped my hat on that. You will have a cannabis ordinance discussion that night. Uh, so we'll get the material to you. uh to the extent that we can get you a draft ordinance before the packet goes out, we'll attempt to do that as well to give you as much lead time as possible to review that. Um beyond that, uh I know Commissioner Bard has a folder in front of him. Do you all have folders in front of you or is he the only lucky one?

So, we will ensure that you get copies of that folder. No, I think Well, you know what? I think of them for some reason. So, those may have been holdovers from the architectural review committee meeting, but nonetheless, you should all have those. Um, those, I believe, are the Centennial or the Cathedral City Ignite program

and this is our new economic development program that we have just launched. You've heard about our partnership with the Coachella Valley Women's Business Center and with Riverside County Office of Economic Development. We have branded that under the umbrella Cathedral City Ignite. Uh so this is active. Uh there is a great article in uh the discover cathedral city uh dated July 31st. I encourage all of you to read it. It gives you all of the highlights, all of the information on what this program entails. It is live. Um business owners, um residents, those that are interested in uh business in in the city and economic development in the city can register for uh business counseling sessions, can register for some of the programs and activities. it is live uh on the city's website under the economic development page. So, I'll I'll take the lead from others and send an email with all of this information so that you have it, you have these links. Uh but uh we are excited to to launch this program. Uh we do have the takeaways. We are getting this out in the community. Uh we are getting media coverage of this as well. Uh we're looking to generate some excitement, generate some momentum in local economic development and these programs. This is meant to provide service to our community. Uh so we want you to be a part of that and uh to at least have the awareness that this program is out there. Um I know our economic development manager was just here in June to provide you an update and so much has changed already. Uh we'll look to bring him back uh in short order to continue to provide updates to the commission.

Thank you. And with he did a great presentation at the ARC. So I think even though some of it might be dated um or have happened already, it'd be good to hear from him. Thank you. And with that, I adjourn this meeting.