Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Scott is not attending. Are we okay? Should I start? Madam chair, the time is 530. We're going to hit record. And as soon as the robot is recording in progress, start the meeting. Good evening. I want to welcome you to the. Tuesday, April 28th, 2026 regular meeting of the Palm Springs Planning Commission. Can I have a roll call, please? Chair Warmack. Present. Vice chair. Lin. Present. Commissioner Baker here. Commissioner Miller is excused. Commissioner Murphy here. Commissioner

Rottman here. Commissioner Morrell here. And alternate. Hernandez is not here. Can I have a report on the posting of the agenda, please? Madam chair, the agenda was available for public access on the City Hall Exterior bulletin board and online by 9 p.m. on Thursday, April 23rd, 2026, in accordance with the city's policies and procedures. Thank you. The next item is public comment. Oh no. The acceptance of the agenda. Can I have a motion to accept the agenda? Motion. To have a second, second, second. All in favor? Aye. The next is public comment. This time has been set aside for members of the public to address the Planning Commission on Consent calendar and other agenda items and items in our general Subject Matter jurisdiction. Please note that we're prohibited from taking action on items that are not on our agenda. Meeker meet speakers will have three minutes each. Testimony for public hearings may be offered at this time. We don't have any public hearings tonight, and we have one item under new business. So if members of the public are here and they would like to testify under new business, we will take testimony then or now. So, Madam Chair, the only members in the audience are the applicant team. And we have one member online who is also associated with the applicant team. So if they wish, we can. And if you wish, Madam Chair, as you said, we'll take comments after the staff presentation. Are you fine with that? Okay, we will do that. Thank you. The next item is the consent calendar. It's the approval

of the minutes of March 24th, 2026. Can I have a motion, please? So moved. I'll second. Any comments? Seeing no comments. Will you call the roll, please? Commissioner Baker. Yes. Commissioner. Murphy. Yes. Commissioner. Morrell. Yes. Commissioner. Brotman. Yes. Vice chair. Elaine. Yes. And chair. Warmack. Yes. The next item is new business. It's a request by Legacy Built Investments and Development, LLC, applicant for a major development permit to construct a 92,400 square foot self-storage facility on a 4.2 acre vacant parcel located at 900 North Ferrell Drive, zone M, one P, before the staff report, there have been some questions about the previous project, and we will not have that presented to us tonight. This is a new applicant. It is an entirely new project and the previous project is in no way before us. We do have an image of the site plan for comparison, but we are limited in the information that we can share. Given that this is a new applicant and we don't have the permission of the previous architects to share that information, and if we can note that we've been joined by alternate Megan Hernandez, who if you'd like to join us on

the podium, is you're an alternate, you're a voting member tonight. Staff report please. Yes. Good evening, Chair and commissioners. Sorry. One second. Before I start, I'd like to give a little history on this project site. In 2024, the Planning Commission approved, reviewed and approved a major development permit for the construction of a 65,000 square foot self-storage facility with ancillary RV boat and parking, RV parking spaces. The images you see before you, the site plan and the rendering are part of that previously approved project. Today, we have a new applicant, a new project, a new property owner. And even though that's all new, a very similar scope of work. So the proposed project site is highlighted in yellow. It is south of the Palm Springs DMV, north of hot purple energy. The lot size is 4.2 acres. The zone is M1P. The general plan designation of this site is IND industrial. Existing uses surrounding the project site include industrial and commercial uses, along with the Palm Springs Airport on the east and residential uses all along along North. Farrell on the west. Here are some existing photos of the

street view looking north and south north. Sorry. Farrell. Drive. As mentioned, the proposed use is a self-storage facility. This is a permitted use by right. The proposed project is a two story building approximately 92,400ft in size. The average height is around 30ft. Does that me? 30ft. Okay. I keep going okay, 30ft tall, 35. At its highest point, there will be 52 ancillary RV parking spaces. Overall, the project requires six parking spaces total. The applicant is providing 128 standard spaces, two EV spaces and two Ada spaces. This project is unique in that it has three frontages Ferrell Drive, Research Drive and Computer Way. The front yard setback along Fraile Drive is 100ft from property line. The setbacks along Research Drive and Computer Way are 25ft from property line, and the interior setback is ten feet along the northern property line. There is a 25 foot landscape buffer along all three of these frontages, as required by code. The applicant is proposing a 49% floor area ratio, just under that 50% mark that is required in the General Plan along the north, south and west properties, there will be a six foot high block wall to screen the project. A traffic scoping letter has been provided by the applicant and reviewed by the city's engineer and plan checkers. It has been

determined that a VMT is not required given the nature of this use. Significant traffic impacts are not anticipated. On March 12th, the Airport Land Use Commission found the project to be consistent with the 2005 Palm Springs Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, subject to conditions that are outlined in the attached draft resolution. Here are some renderings. The very top left was a view from Research Research Drive, and the bottom would be a view from Ferrell Drive and Computer Way. Overall, the. The elevations show the building height at roughly around 30ft. There are some architectural features that extend past that with a maximum height of 35ft. The maximum height of this zone is 40ft. So this building is developed and in compliance with the development standard of that zone. The project is proposing a flat roof design. All mechanical equipment, including solar, will be located on top of this roof. Behind parapet walls will not be visible from the public right of way. And lastly, a landscape plan was provided to show that there will be no light spillage off the project site. The project is categorically exempt from Sequa as a class 32 infill development project. This site is consistent with the general Plan and zoning designation. The project site is less than five acres in area. It is fully located within the city limits. It will not result in any significant effects relating to noise, air quality, water or traffic, and the site can adequately be served from all required utilities and public services. In conclusion, staff

recommends that Planning Commission approve case DP 2025 0018, subject to the conditions in the draft resolution. That concludes my report and the applicant is available for any questions. Yeah, I was curious. Typical RVs are between 10 and 18ft tall, and it was determined to do a six foot wall. I think the maximum height of the wall could be eight feet. And I was just curious why it was reduced from 8ft to 6ft. So per code, it the maximum height of the wall in this zone actually can only be six feet along front yard. Oh yeah. So because this is sits ard Ferrell and and computer way in research it can only be three feet tall six feet tall. Sorry. Okay. And I guess it's a question for the applicant, but I'd like to see a lot more vegetation and screening of the RVs. Because when you go up. Ferrell all you're going to see is a long row of RVs. You're not really even going to notice the building. So that would be a comment to the Architectural Review Committee to address when they do landscaping plan, because that's not really associated with the development permit. Right. And your conditions should come after public comment there. Commissioner Rottman yeah. Thank you. A couple of things. I communicated with staff about a couple of clarifications in the staff report, which I think needs to go into the record. So one is in the chart. On page four. It lists the parking provided it listed

as six, but I think it should be corrected to eight. And then there's some additional parking. So that'll get corrected. And then the same thing about the square footage. There were three locations where the square footage was different in the staff report under project description, it listed at 92,400ft in the Airport Land Use Commission comments. It was 91,400ft, and in the justification letter, it was 91,500ft. So staff responded to that to clarify what what the differences were. I don't know if you want to address that for the rest of the commission. Yeah. So overall, the building is 92,400ft. It's 91,004 two. I'm sorry. 90. This font is too small. One second. I clarified it here. So 91,400ft, excluding stairwell stairwells and elevators. And then the comment in the report is incorrect. Okay. And then I do have a couple questions for staff. So how it said the parking requirement is six for this project. So explain how that is calculated or figured. In our off street parking guidelines. We have a parking standard that addresses a warehouse facilities. And six is typically the max for these types of developments. Okay. And I think the idea there, Commissioner Rottman is for a self storage facility. You typically don't have a lot of on site staff, of course, and you have people coming and going throughout the day. The demand is different than it would be for a more employment

generating use. And so that is what the code addresses. Okay. And I had also asked about the zoning for the lots across the street. There was an empty triangular lot next to the single family. And then there's a much larger parcel to the north of that. And you responded as well about the setbacks. And I don't know if you want to mention that as well. Yeah. So that triangular lot is highlighted in blue. That's the area highlighted in blue is all part of single family residential zone. The red vacant undeveloped lot to the north is an M1P zone. And the setbacks for the single family residential are 25ft. Yeah. And so the 100 foot setback along Farrell that seems really extreme. What's the thought behind that per the code, because it is adjacent to residential it needs to be industrial. Uses need to be 100ft. Also because Farrell is a major thoroughfare. Okay. It's it's given that setback requirement, what I would say, and I think I sort of know where your mind is going. Our code is quite old. And I think when we wrote these standards, we, you know, wanted more separation between uses and we wanted more setbacks from our arterials. I don't know that it's our current thinking. I'm not saying we shouldn't have sufficient separation between residential and nonresidential uses, but I think it's something that we are and need to look at through the zoning code update, because I think if we had a lesser setback here, we might be able to have a more creative site plan than we are able to have as a result of the setback requirements. Yeah. My concern was that you've got all this RV parking, you've got to screen it, and if it was able to flip it, that would make a whole lot more sense and actually

create a building frontage on Farrell. So anyway. Absolutely. And let's see here. And then the last question I had asked staff was about the fence along the North property line and why it was set back the 25ft there when they could. It seems like they're creating a no man's zone there. Yeah. So I spoke to the applicant and that's actually a mistake on on their plans. The wall on the northern side will actually be located on property line. So there will be no no man land. And all that landscape will be located on the interior of the development. Okay. Thank you very much. Are there other questions? Yes. Commissioner Murphy, this in the justification letter, it makes a reference to 41 parking spots for RVs, boats and trailers and 52 in the staff report. Yes. So is that a discrepancy or so just counting differently? Yeah. No. Originally it was 41 I believe after they had reviewed the on site water retention they basin with engineering, they were able to make that area smaller. So fit more parking spaces. So 52 is the final count. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Commissioner Ryan, I have a couple of questions about the onsite circulation. I in the staff report and the exhibits presented by the applicant. I see that there's some discrepancies in the way that the entrances and exits are described, and I'm a little bit concerned about the

diagonal parking there. I notice a bullet point in your presentation tonight that says that there's one entrance and two exits. Can you point to which is the entrance? Yes. So which. Yeah, site plan. The site plan is a little rotated, but the north entry will have a one entry one exit. And then oh let me highlight. Sorry. Is it like. This portion right here is the northern entry. It will have an entry and an exit. This is the south and it will have exit only. And I confirmed that with the applicant. Okay. So that's why you say backup parking. As you enter from the north you pull through. You can back into those spaces. So all parking is going to be backup parking. It looks like I will defer that to the applicant. However, the at least as far as I know, on the south and the north, there would be backup parking stalls. Okay. And then my next question is I was on the applicant's letter. They said, and I get that people, the users or the customers who arrive are going to be driving vehicles because they're bringing stuff or picking up stuff. But I know that there is a I'm curious about how the pedestrian circulation is handled simply because the the people who work there could choose to take a bus. There's a bus stop right near there, or they could be riding a bicycle or something. Do you is that something you can address how pedestrians would circulate on site, or is that something I should ask the applicant? I will defer that to the applicant. Okay.

And then my last question, and you and I had a conversation about this and you explained to me why it was so when it makes sense and I think the public should hear it, which is the retention basin, which the design of it is required to work and to be integrated into the site. And it looks relatively. Featureless and, and without much landscaping. And can you explain why that is? Yes. Prof. Alex prefers them to, to be landscape less because they're trying to avoid birds from gathering and nesting and living there. Due to its location near the airport. I also know from prior conversations with our engineering department that they also prefer to limit the type of vegetation. I know we've had this conversation here before, and so while they do allow some vegetation in it, they're also sensitive to the kinds of vegetation we allow along retention basins so that they're doing their job. But here I think the bigger issue is the birds. Okay. Thank you. And those are all my questions. Any other questions? I have some can you explain what the airport conditions are? It didn't look like there was very much just a the equipment couldn't be higher than was identified, but there was no height identified in the airport letter. So what are the conditions? So in looking at them, I think and these are standard conditions that we get out of a lock on most of our projects. It's effectively if they go higher than what has been shown to them, which are these plans? They need to go back. If they install solar, they need to do a study to make sure that the glare isn't interacting with with airport

operations, they need to give an attached notice of airport and vicinity to all prospective purchasers and occupants of the building. You know, fairly standard stuff. They need to convey a navigation easement to the Palm Springs International Airport, which is effectively, you know, a warning on title that airport activities are happening in the area. And then they talk about the landscaping in and around the basins being limited to prevent wildlife. And effectively a certain construction noise attenuation measures to keep the noise within acceptable limits, per the airport plan. I mentioned the solar panels, and then they had some FAA conditions that were given to them, and they're all effectively the same sort of thing. They aren't required to have the types of flashing lights you would see on tall buildings to warn airplanes. There's a building there because it's short enough, but if they were to put lighting on, it needs to meet certain requirements. Again, they can't go up in height without going through a further review. And same even with temporary construction structures, they can't. They have to meet height requirements set by the airport and by FAA. That's it. So there weren't any requirements on landscape except in the retention basin from Alec. Correct. Yeah. With that, the public hearing is open. The applicant has ten minutes. And if there is, are there any members of the public. Chris, are there any. There are. I was just checking my phone and there is no one online except for the applicants team. So no other members of the public. You have ten minutes and then stay with

us to answer questions. Good evening, chair, Vice Chair and Commissioners and staff. Thank you for the report. And all the time that you've put in on this project to help us get to this point. The the the staff report was pretty thorough. So I don't I don't really want to repeat any of it, but I do want to take a few minutes and tell you about the applicant first, I apologize. My name is Eric Foss. I'm the senior vice president of Legacy Built Investments and Development, and I'm here representing the applicant, Tony Ardizzone, legacy built investments and development. Legacy built is a is a family owned company, as is the sister construction company Zoni construction. You know, zoning after the name, after zoning. I know that the cities have a significant interest in projects that get approved being built. And I know that over the past few years since Covid and the increase in construction costs and financing costs, there have been some projects that have been approved and not built. So I wanted to tell you that this is a company that has been in the self-storage business since 1979, when Tony's father started in self-storage. Tony took over the company about 25 years ago when he started his construction company. The construction company builds the self-storage facilities, and by the time this one was built, it'll be about 50 facilities that will have been completed. So I thought that might be reassuring to know that we are we are eager not to just get a project approved, but to have it built and operating soon. So I wanted to share that with you again. We think that what we know from our research, that there is demand for

additional climate controlled self storage in this area, and we think that the project we're presenting is a very thoughtful and practical way of meeting that demand. And for that, we're here requesting your approval of our major development permit. We're happy to answer any questions. I believe the applicant, Tony, our zoning is online, as is our our architect, Lance Hill and Nick source from Omega Engineering Consultants. He's our civil engineers here as well. So our team is ready to participate in the discussion and answer any questions. Vice chair, you had some questions. I'll start with the parking. As somebody who's really bad, even with cameras on back in parking, I'm curious why the circulation. It looks as though it could work either way so that all the parking is head in or it's all back in. Why did you choose the back end? So part of it is the circulation. We have a, you know, you know, coming in one entrance and out. Some of these vehicles will be quite large. It's actually easier for an RV to, to back into a parking stall and then to drive out. And so that's essentially why we designed it that way. And if you own an RV, you got to get good at backing. Okay. That's just, I hate to say it. And if they're not, they just, they, they need to bring someone along who is, which is not uncommon good. The public will be relieved to know I don't own an RV and I'm not planning on buying it. Okay, thanks. And then how about the pedestrian? How you know if if I work there, if I was one of the two

workers and I wanted to take the bus and walk on site, how would I do that? Yeah, that's a that's a really interesting. Or if I wanted to ride my bike, how would I would I like it if you ride your bike, we'll have bicycle parking on site. Where will that be? It's it's on the site plan near near the office entrance. Correct. Okay. Okay. Pedestrian. This is an interesting question. The the bus stop is is basically on Farrell next to the DMV. When the question came up, Nick did a study where he he mapped out the the number of feet. He did a time study he came up with basically. Okay. Which yeah, which is interesting because I walked it as soon as I got into town, I, I started about 60ft south of the, the DMV driveway, kind of where our north entrance would be near the office. And I walked around the sidewalk to near that, that blue bicycle stand at the, at the bus stop. And I did it twice. I, it was two minutes and 49 seconds the first time and two minutes and 53 seconds. So let's just call it less than three minutes to walk on the existing sidewalk around the DMV, which I think is the preferred pathway because, I mean, they could cut through the DMV, but we wouldn't I'd rather people be on a sidewalk than in a parking lot with traffic. I thought I thought there was a wall on the project on the north end between the site and the DMV, or is there just landscaping you walk through? Sorry if I wasn't clear that I'm talking about walking from the

office. Like our office, which is on research. So from our north driveway, just taking the existing sidewalk around the east or yeah, the east side and then the north side and then the west side of the DMV, not cutting through the DMV, just walking around the DMV on the existing sidewalk. Got it is less, it's less than three minutes, less than three minute walk. And then how do you get in through the gate? Because your entrances are gated. So the, the entrance to the office is not. The gate is going to be beyond the the office parking spaces. Okay. So the security will start. There's how many, how many? We've got six spots in front of the security gate at the office entrance. Okay. Okay, I feel better. Thank you, thank you. Other questions? Yes, Commissioner Rotman, can you give me the dimensions of this building? Just the length and width. I think the architect is here. Yeah. Lance, can you provide that? I'm sorry, I can't read this small print on the page that I neither. I don't think it was. It wasn't in our packet, so I'm just curious. So the overall width, I guess that would be north to south is 260ft. I'm sorry. From six to Farrell is 201ft. Okay. Thank you. And then I had

asked staff about this and you can I'd like you to address it. The location of the fence along the north property line. On the packet. It shows it set in 25ft. Yeah. That that was an error. Okay. That's that's supposed to be on the boundary. So there isn't supposed to be a no man's land between the the DMV and our property. Right. No, that that was a good catch. Good catch. Yeah. Thank you. And then on some of the trees that are specified, can you give me like the growth rate. And if there are canopy tree, how big a canopy they are. I mean this is all coming up. It's going to be some recommendations to ask, but I'm just curious in terms of screening, particularly all the RVs parking that you see along Farrell, that, you know, we're kind of in the right ballpark or not. Yeah. You know, Lance, if you have some of those, please chime in because this is an ongoing discussion. We're trying to balance canopy growth and root growth, right. Which which is a concern with, you know, the foundation of the walls and things like that. So, you know, we, we want to use the trees that, that are going to, you know, screen the best but not undermine, you know, the hardscape. So this is an ongoing discussion and we'll probably submit some amendments. Lance, do you have any additional detail? Yeah, like you said, it's ongoing, but we are showing some cypress trees, you know, lining the walls to try to screen the RVs. And then, yeah, we've got some shade trees for the sidewalk shading and, you know, minimum requirements and things like that. So the landscape plan is actually quite detailed and maybe a little overkill at

this point, but there's there's quite a few on there. So I don't know if you've got the latest or you've seen it yet, but. Yeah, I mean, we're trying to do our best to screen as much as the RV as we possibly can. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Commissioner Murphy, I have a question about the the area of loading and unloading for the people that are storing merchandise or their belongings in the facility, since we don't have a real rendering of it, just can you confirm that there's a some kind of canopy or covering over the areas that people would be pulling up to the building to load and unload? Yes, there's two. There's one on the the south end of the building, just past the security gate by the office. And then there's one on the opposite the north end of the building by the retention area. I think the rendering on. Okay. Is the the the last 10 or 12 pages of the staff report have our plans. I see page on our on our packet. It's page 90 and 91 have elevation drawings rendering on. If you look at the site plan, you'll be able to see where they pull in on the north and south for parking. And then that's covered by the second floor. So the loading and unloading zone are actually covered by the floor. The second level of the building and the landscape design that was

just up a minute ago shows that as well. Okay. The the 40 foot wide by 35 foot. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. This drawing, this drawing right here shows the canopy covers that whole area. There's like some cutouts in the the sides of the buildings. Those are the loading. Yeah. So just, just as you come in the entrance past that first pop out, there's a cutout into the building that that is a, a loading area. So that's the, the depiction of the first floor, right? So the second floor would be the canopy. Yeah. This is a general question about the traffic report. Well was there anything in the traffic report that concerned the applicant in any way? No. We we actually had no the the trips are are below the like the limit. And we actually had a self storage property manager provide a lot of data to us on some actual actual built Riverside County facilities. And the, we did an analysis of the count, you know, for the, the, the traffic was well below their, their limits and the trip limits. Okay. Thank you. Based on empirical data. I believe there's a letter in your package, Commissioner Murphy, our engineering department concurs. And given its location on an arterial and the type of use it is, you know, they didn't think any improvements would really be warranted. Yeah. There was a third party review in

addition to what we we submitted and they concurred. Other questions? I have a couple and it mainly goes to screening. And this is not our purview, but it's something that it looks fairly sparse for trees in terms of both sidewalk coverage and, and screening coverage. And you have it looks like you have a lot of palms, which aren't trees, and they don't provide screening coverage. So I'm just. Have you given more thought to what, how you're actually going to screen those walls? And are you using, are you using anything like hedges or a staple plant like, like vitex, which grows tall and thick and would screen the walls and would grow up to cover? Lance, can you, can you address all along that wall there? We're showing those ficus trees that grow, you know, ten, 12, 15ft tall. So you're showing ficus tree a ficus plant. Yes. So it's all ficus and and have you looked at issues like ficus getting killed in various heat waves. And there, there have been instances where all the ficus gets lost in the desert. Yeah. Well, talk to my landscape architect a little bit more about it, but I believe it was actually a request from someone on staff that we had more of the ficus trees along the walls, but I'll talk to him more about it and see if there's a better option or something that

can screen that a little better. Because I know we're showing, you know, a lot of fig trees. If we could make something work a little better there, that would be. So you're you're looking at ficus hedge and what are you putting in in terms of the size, the size and caliber of the trees when you install them? Most of them are 24 inch box that he's calling out. Okay, ficus would be a 15 gallon column shape, but they're spaced like three feet on center. So. Okay, this is, this is something we're actively looking at because we want to provide screening. Usually your trees, your trees, when you put in a 24 inch box, you're going to look at a five year growth period to get any kind of a nice canopy coming into that tree. Unfortunately, the width of the trees are sometimes the size of a silver dollar. So anyway, those, those are those, those, those are issues that the arc will probably look at. And are you open to putting in a slightly larger tree and plant to be able to do the coverage quickly? We're open to looking at the economics of that. They're they're significantly more expensive, but we we're committed to finding a solution and working through it with the arc. Okay. I think does anybody else have questions? The matter is before the commission. Thank you. Thank you. And I'm going to open this, and I'm going to open it with a recommendation of approval with conditions I don't.

And the the first condition that I would look at is comments to the A, R, C and the first comment to the a r c would be to look at the tree size, make sure that the. Especially along Farrell that there will be coverage, quick coverage and screening for the RVs and that there be adequate trees along Farrell to shade the sidewalk. I think those would be my my two conditions. I would recommend that the trees be at least 36 a 36 inch box, and that would be my recommendation. And the large. If they're going to be using ficus, the largest possible ficus, and to make sure that the irrigation is sufficient, that they'll grow. Just to add to that, I think the canopy or the screening needs to extend at probably a third or a quarter of the way up computer way from peril, as well as the North property line. Yeah. Because as you drive up and down Farrell, you're going to see that whole side exposed, right? I think it should extend as far as they have the RVs. Okay. And just in I didn't pick up that they had a ficus hedge along the fence. So I had some comments about the fence. But if the fence is completely covered by hedge, it doesn't really matter. But I might encourage or suggest to ask that they look at some additional layering of plant material in front of the hedge. Yes. Yeah, yeah. It's sparse. Yeah. The the

plant coverage is very sparse. And then on the architecture, I think it's a little underwhelming. And so I think it needs to be looked at, particularly the Farrell elevation looks like a billboard. And I know the signage is a different application. And I don't have any idea whether that self storage is actually would fall within the signage ordinance or whatever. But it it's a billboard. So and I just don't think it really speaks Palm Springs. You know, I think it looks like anywhere, Bill. And I think I think we could they could do a lot better in the design, the colors, the choice of materials. Corrugated metal is not a favorite of mine. And they're using that in some specific areas. So I think they should take a look at some different materials as well. And the single horizontal band, I think is just undistinguished. So. As the maker of the motion, I agree with all of those. Are you seconding the motion? Is there any are there any other comments? I have no oh, I'll second that emotion. I. I agree with the comments of both my colleagues. I would just like to indicate to the applicant, first of all, I've had the pleasure of sitting in an Architectural Review Committee meeting where they were reviewing a self storage building that had been proposed along a similarly high trafficked street. It was actually along Gene Autry. And I will tell you, be prepared

for some extensive constructive criticism and suggestions for it, because the what had been proposed there was similarly underwhelming as far as architecture goes. And and you should expect that there will be a very high standard required of you. So you're not hearing it now, because our job is not to review the architecture that will come and be prepared for that. And I'll also say that I think the reason you're hearing so much concern about the screening, the size of the trees and the amount of coverage is because not only do we want to not be looking at a wall of the back end of our RV's, which I understand will be backing into their parking spaces, but also the the building at this point doesn't offer any esthetic enhancement to the area. So you should are concerned about the appearance reflects both the architecture which you will need to address and the. Our concern about not looking at the RVs. Do you want to put that into language that we can add. What you're saying is that the building needs to look like Palm Springs. It needs enhancement. And how how do you want to frame that? I think we just sent it to the Architectural Review Commission and say that we trust in their professional recommendations will be holding this building to the same standard as any other commercial development in the city. And, Madam Chair, if I

might, what I heard as a condition added by Commissioner Rottman in his second, was to reconsider the architecture, particularly the feral frontage, to better represent Palm Springs, considering different choices in color materials, reconsider the use of corrugated metal metal and reconsider the single horizontal band. Does that sound like what you said? Yeah, I think that's echoing what Vice Chair is saying. Okay. Are there any other comments? And on the landscape it would be you would you want me to repeat the conditions as I have them so far? So it's a recommendation for approval, subject to conditions specifically that the Architectural Review Committee consider the following one to reconsider the landscaping, including the tree size. Considering the use of 36 inch box where appropriate, to ensure quick coverage and adequate screening and landscaping along feral that we ensure that they ensure sufficient irrigation to ensure the plant material survive, that they ensure the canopy of the screening extends along Computer Way and the North property line in a sufficient way to ensure the screening of the RVs that they consider additional layering of plant materials along the fence, and that they reconsider the architecture, particularly the feral frontage, to better represent Palm Springs, including different choices of color materials, reconsidering the use of the corrugated metal, and reconsidering the single horizontal band. I think that covers the motion. I think you have quite. I think you have quite a future in this planning stuff. Well spoken. Okay, so we have a motion. We have a second. We have no comment, no additional comments on the motion. We call the roll please. Chair Warmack. Yes, Commissioner.

Rottman. Yes. Vice chair. Alan. Yes. Commissioner. Murphy. Yes. Commissioner. Baker. Yes. Commissioner. Morrell. Yes. Alternate. Hernandez. Yes. Motion is approved. Okay. Moving right along to Planning Commission reports, requests and comments. Are there any. Commissioner Robin? So we've reviewed a lot of self storage projects and I know the zoning code is being updated. And I would like to suggest that perhaps there's a cap established for the number of self storage units that we do in the building. Or at this point, maybe outlaw them that they require a special review. So this this has come up, I think, when we reviewed the Gene Autry project that you recently approved, and I believe another one, and we are looking at it. I won't say too much to it, because I haven't seen what our consulting team is going to propose, but we asked them to specifically look at locational requirements. You know, do we want them along arterials, for example, versus elsewhere? Do we want to cap the number the size, or do we want some other level of approval to give us more discretion? So that is something that we're actively looking at. Absolutely. And so more to come on that. Okay. Thank you. Planning directors report. I don't have much. We have had some light agendas. There have been some major projects in the news. I'm sorry. Commissioner. Sorry. That's all right. I just wanted to add to Robert's thing. I had an issue with the definition of parking versus the definition of storage. And if there's storing vehicles, I'd like

to see that called out and not just mixed in with the rest of the parking, because I think storage vehicles would require more, you know, scrutiny, particularly outdoor storage. Right. I think the issue that's being raised is our definition of outdoor storage, which we've not considered to be the storing of vehicles. It's more if you think of sort of industrial sites that have pallets or other things, a granite, you know, we have that granite company on Gene Autry, for example. So we've never applied the requirements associated with outdoor storage to this type of use. And so Commissioner Morrell had raised that in questions before tonight. It is something that we'll look at and clarify in the new code. So back to me. It looks like May is going to be a light month. And this was a light month as well. But it's not to say there isn't a lot tracking. So I think we're probably we're likely to have a busy June and July before we go dark. The one major piece of news that has been out there is the Soho House. They've been sort of ramping up their PR and getting word out there that they are coming back. We are actively working with them. On addressing some technical issues, finalizing the application, and so I don't have a date yet for when that will be before you, but it will be at some point in the next couple of months. So look forward to that coming. There will be a revision to one of the large warehouse projects that you looked at previously north of I ten. I won't say too much on that yet, but they are finalizing their EIR addendum and looking at changes there. So that is coming. That will be a big item. And there's a few other things in the hopper. So we're just kind of in a weird lull. This tends to happen every spring. And I think it's just kind of associated with the holidays and just then stuff kind of, you know, takes us into summer. So we will get busy again. But May will be a light month. We are not having our next

meeting on May 11th, May 11th and TBD about the second meeting in May. And that is all that I have with that. Thank you. I'm going to adjourn the meeting until 5:30 p.m. This was Monday, May 11th, say May 11th, and we have to do a formal cancellation. So it will be June. No. You should adjourn until May 11th. And then we have to do a formal cancellation. Okay. So I'm adjourning till Monday and Monday May. Why was it a Monday? City Council took our meeting time because they had a conflict on their regular meeting time. So we got booted. Okay, until Monday, May 11th, 2026. Thank you. And.