Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Recording in progress. Good evening. I'd like to welcome you to the Tuesday, April 22nd, 2025 regular meeting of the Palm Springs Planning Commission. Can you call the roll, please? Chair. Warmack. Present. Vice chair. Alan. Present. Commissioner. Baker. Present. Commissioner. Miller. Present. Commissioner. Murphy. Present. Commissioner Rottman. Here. Commissioner Morrell. Here. I thought we were going to get all the way through it with presents. I thought I'd break the mold.

You did. You always do. Okay. Can I get a report in the posting of the agenda, please? Yes, Madam Chair. The agenda was available with public access at the City Hall exterior bulletin board and available online by 9 p.m. On Thursday, April 17th, 2025. In accordance with our policies and procedures. I. Okay. Can I get a motion to accept the agenda? So moved. Second. All in favor? I.

Okay. At this point, we have public comment. It's a time set aside for members of the public to address the Commission on Consent and Calendared items and items within our general subject matter. Note that we can't take any action if it's not agendized. Testimony on public hearing items may be offered at this time or at the time of the hearing. The major item on the agenda tonight. Two A is a public hearing item, so you can speak on either. Are there any members of the public who would like to address the commission? Are there any online?

Yes, Madam chair, there are a few members online if you would like to speak now on nonpublic hearing items, please raise your hand. Madam chair, no speakers at this time. Thank you. The first item on our agenda is the consent calendar. We have one item which is the minutes of April 8th, 2025. Do I have comments or a motion? Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second. Would you call the roll, please? Commissioner Brotman.

Yes. Commissioner Baker. Oh. Commissioner Miller. Yes. Chair. Warmack. Yes. Commissioner Allen. Yes. Commissioner. Baker. Yes. Commissioner Murphy. Yes. Commissioner Morrell. Yes.

Okay, moving right along. Our next item is two A. It's a public hearing, and it's a request by the Altman Group on behalf of Sun Community Federal Credit Union for a change of zone conditional use permit and major development permit for a new 2895 square foot bank and an auxiliary drive through facility on a 1.08 acre undeveloped site located on the southeast corner of East Ramone Road and South Calle Santa Cruz. Staff report please. Yes.

Good evening. As introduced, the project in front of you tonight is a development proposal for a new bank, Sun Community Federal Credit Union. The project site is approximately one acres, and it's located at the southeast corner of East Ramon Road and South Santa Cruz, as shown here in the image. The site is undeveloped right now. There are no really notable features that you observe. But this is just the site conditions as of today. The site's General Plan land use designation is office, which is. Oh, and the current zoning designation is, which is professional. And these are the general plan and the zoning maps. The applicant is proposing the construction of a new 2895 square foot bank at this site, at a minimum. Excuse me that the maximum building height of 21 and 21.08ft. The site design includes 19 parking spaces and accessory drives through ATM and a canopy structure, as well as trash enclosure and landscape. In order fors project to happen, multiple applications have to be approved and as shown here. The project requires a change of zone application approval to change the current professional zoning designation to M1, which is Service and Manufacturing conditional Use Permit application for accessory drive through facility, and the major development permit application for the construction of the new commercial building, parking and landscaping. In addition to these applications, the project requires the approval of Am application, which stands for

Administrative Minor. Modifications for a proposed reduced front yard setback to provide a 22.6ft setback instead of instead of. The code required 25ft. Along East Palm Canyon Road. And the last one is a major architectural review application for the architectural design of the proposed project. These applications are the change of zone, conditional use permit and major development permit. These are subject to Planning Commission reviews. Whereas the Am application is subject to a director's approval and the major architectural review requires review and approval by the Architectural Review Committee. So that being said, the applications that are under consideration tonight are Change of Zone, Conditional Use Permit and major development permit applications. So for the proposed change of zone application, the applicant is proposing to change the professional zone to M1 and under the current P professional zone designations, freestanding banks are not really allowed. And for that reason, the applicant is proposing to change the zone to M1, where freestanding banks are permitted by right and which also allows more diversified land uses and increases the viability of the site. And this is a proposed site plan. Once developed, the site is going to be accessible from South Korea's Santa Cruz as well as Calle de Ricardo. As you see here, two way traffic is proposed and the building was going to be building will be located towards the center of the lot, close to East Ramon Road and on the west side there will be a two rows of parking

spaces, and on the east side there will be a drive through facility which includes the two drive lanes and the single automated teller, and there will be a trash enclosure located close to the entrance to the Ricardo. And the proposed site design includes retention basin at its southwest corner. And these are the renderings of the proposed buildings. And as you can see here, the proposed building includes a different volumes and the design includes a large glazing area which faces East Ramon Road, as well as a glazing which faces the east of the. The site, which will be facing the drive through facility and other other elevations, are designed with limited glazing areas. Approaching in the coming from the main entrance, the building branches out to the west and east wings, which is going to be designed with office spaces, and this is a roof design as as you see on the next slide. The applicant is proposing the placement of a mechanical equipment on the roof, which is going to be hidden behind the parapet. And this is a design of the proposed canopy structure for the drive through. Just so that, you know, when you look at this drive through facility from the south elevation, there will be a screening and that the ATM will be somewhat screened from the view of the street from the Ricardo side and applicants proposing ample planting materials throughout the site

and proposing a strategic placement of a shade, trees and I level height 3 to 4 foot high shrubs and low to medium height planting materials for screening drive through areas. And as a part of the condition of excuse me as a part of this conditional use permit review, the project has to meet the certain design requirements, and the first one is that the safe on and off site pedestrian traffic circulation is provided, and the facility is designed with a seven vehicle queuing at a minimum and a screening of associated elements and a safe structure at Automated Teller, and the design compatibility of the structure with the rest of the site. Design. The. Based on the proposal, staff finds that the project meets all these requirements, and the applicants also provided this study of the proposed canopy structure. To see how the shade will be provided throughout the day. There's some issues or remarks that need to be noted. The first one is, as staff mentioned, this. This project involves the approval of multiple applications that are subject to review by different decision making bodies, and that the approval of the Cup development permit and Am applications are contingent upon the approval of the change of zone by the City Council and administrative minor modification application is excluded from this Planning Commission's review tonight because it is subject to review and approval by the director, and the outdoor lighting plan does not fully meet the zoning code requirement. However, this issue can be easily addressed through a condition of approval

without changing the character of the project. And in the findings, staff finds that the project meets the required findings for change of zone, Cup and major development permit approval as conditioned and as a part of this project, an environmental study was done and the initial study has been prepared. And in the report, as you probably read, the potential environmental impacts of the proposed project can be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures. And at the end of this presentation, staff actually has an addendum that is for the Planning Commission to consider adding the following conditions of approval, which reads the time limit for the commencement of construction under development permit approval shall be two years from the effective date of approval, unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to Palm Springs Zoning Code, section 94.12 .00. This is a standard language pertaining to the time limit for the commencement of construction in the zoning code, and it typically included as a standard condition in the for development projects. But for some reason this particular condition was not included. So staff requests that the Planning Commission consider including this specific language. And in conclusion, staff recommends that the Planning Commission approved the following. Adopt the mitigated negative declaration as an adequate environmental document for the proposed project and associated impacts, and approve the Conditional Use Permit and major development permit applications, subject to the conditions of approval that are recommended by staff and attached to the resolution and at the new condition which staff just read the time limit for the commencement of construction under development permit

approval shall be two years from the effective date of approval, unless an extension of time is granted pursuant to Palm Springs Zoning Code section 94.12 .00 and the recommend the following actions to the City Council subject to conditions. The first one is adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration as an adequate environmental document for the proposed project, and associated impacts, and approve the change of zone application to change the zone designation of the site from professional to M1, and this concludes the staff presentation, and the staff and the applicant are both available if you have any questions. Thank you.

Questions for staff. Yes, Commissioner Murphy.

In the engineering findings. I was a little confused by the inclusion of a 14 foot wide raised medium median rather, at the description said that it was running between Santa Cruz and Villa on remote roads. So can you just clarify what what that is and where it goes?

Yes. So the project site is located in the block between. I'm sorry, Santa Cruz and the Villa Road. If you look at this aerial view, the east end of the block is actually villa. And then Calle Santa Cruz is the west end of the site, and it is a Ramon. So part of the general plan circulation element. The city is required to implement landscaped median along Ramon Road between that two streets.

So this typically gets implemented and triggered at the time of development. So this is something standard that we do as development is occurring throughout the city, and that we require the developer to build out that portion of the median adjacent to their property in accordance with the general plan requirement. Okay. So it is a median on Ramon Road. It's not adjacent to the sidewalks. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Commissioner Rotman.

A couple questions on page five of the staff report. It mentioned that the handicapped parking was combined with the EV parking. And is that that seems sort of counterintuitive. Is there a is that allowed? Do you can you. I'm sorry, I have to ask. Yeah. So in the staff report, it says that the handicapped parking is combined with the EV parking. And it would seem to me that that's a little counterintuitive. It really restricts who can use the charger.

Yes. The handicapped parking space can be EV charger. But in this case, the applicant is proposing two handicapped parking spaces and one designated EV stall. This is just to show that project meets those requirements in the zoning code. Okay. Right. I think I may condition something, but yeah. Nariko, can you clarify? So they're providing two total 80 spaces. So there's three EV spaces, two of which will be Ada know.

So the project is proposing I'm not. Oh hold on a second. Let me just use this one. So there are two handicapped spaces I believe here it's a little bit hard to see. And there's one EV parking space here. Oh okay. So these are separate but. Got it. Just so that. Thank you for clarifying that. Yeah. Sorry.

And then I had some questioning about the screening. And I looked through the landscape plan because you mentioned the screening of the parking lot. And the drive through was done by landscape. And it looks like in my interpretation, I just want to clarify that that's your interpretation. Most of the screening is done by bougainvillea. Is that right? Because everything else seems to be pretty low.

Let me just pull up the staff report section about the landscaping analysis for that one. So they're proposing a pink Molly glass and a bougainvillea. These are just example. If you look at this landscaping plan there are these. Are these five six different types of materials being proposed. There are the staff mentioned these fronting materials specifically because they reach somewhere between 3 and 4ft. So the height of such material is adequate to screen the drive through elements. But since this project is a bank, so I would assume that the providing safety or providing some kind of visibility from the street and from the anywhere else will be pretty important. And for the reason to meet that, the design requirement for drive through staff thought that this landscaping treatment was adequate.

Okay, but doesn't the parking lot also need to be screened along Santa Cruz? These. You. The general plan may provide that information about the screening of a parking area. But again the same fronting materials are proposed pretty much throughout the site. So if we apply, you know, this concept of, you know, 3 to 4 height printing materials being along along this perimeter of the project site that will still meet the requirement. Okay.

All right. And then a little housekeeping under the engineering conditions, page 35 and 36 of the staff report Engineering conditions 12 and 19. They don't specify the feet the width of the driveways. They just say feet. So I was 12 and 19. Yes that's right.

Yeah. We have over the last year or two have not been putting in the specific widths of driveways because we refer to our standard drawings, 201 or 205, and they have a minimum width in the standard drawing already. Okay. Which gives I think it's 24ft for commercial, 12 foot for residential I believe. But we found that with commercial properties. In this case, like their site plan that you see right now on the screen, it's kind of showing the two driveway approaches, but they're showing like these radius kind of sweeping radiuses kind of coming into it. Right. But we're not actually calling out for that. That would be a 205 in our standard drawing, which has the radiuses versus the standard drawings at 201, which is just a standard approach. Okay. So we found over the years that while these are being constructed and what look good, what what looks good on paper, and then when you actually get out there in the real world and then you don't know where some utilities are going to get placed, we found that giving them a little bit of flexibility to either widen the driveway wider than 24ft, but not to narrow it or to move it a little bit. It seems to work better in the field with our inspectors, as well as the guys who are actually constructing it, rather than tying them, because in our conditions before, we would have a specific distance from the center line of an intersection and it pinpoints them to that location no matter what. And then later on, when you have to move it, it's like, okay, do we have to go back to planning commission just to move a driveway? Or should we just kind of leave it a little bit, some flexibility. So that's what we that's why it's reads that way.

Okay. Thank you. And then the other question which may be for both planning and engineering, is there any reason a second driveway would be required. I'm looking at the one on coyote Ricardo. Is there any reason that this project couldn't get by with one one driveway? That's really up to the developer, I guess. But I would imagine for circulation purposes for police and fire, they would want probably more than one access point.

Okay. And then for under the mitigated negative declaration, I was curious. They had a list of how they estimated the greenhouse gases. And I'm just curious how that's calculated. And I don't know if you have the answer to that, but I just. Madam chair, might we call up our environmental? Yeah. I thought what I'd like to do is go through the rest of the questions and then and then call up the environmental consultant. Okay, I'm. That's my the last question. Thanks. Commissioner Morrill, you had your hand raised earlier.

Yeah. I was just curious about the 25 foot setback and the 2.5ft, the encroachment on the front. Is there any plan to widen Ramon like we had in another project recently? Is that the reason why you need 25ft? Or as for widening of Ramon, I believe Ramon currently right now is at its widest point. Based on the circulation plan. That's why it's appropriate to ask them to put in the median island. Now. There is no more plans to move it wider. I think the setbacks just based on zone.

And the 25ft, is the required setback along a major thoroughfare such as this in this zone. And so that is part of the reason why they've applied for the administrative minor modification, which is something I have the authority to approve in this case. The reason and you can see those red lines sort of in the middle of the site, there's an easement, as I understand it. Is that correct? Running through the middle of the site, which prevents them from going further south. And I think for the reason that you're asking the question, Commissioner Morrell, since we know that Ramon is mapped to its full width and there are no intentions of taking additional dedication, I feel comfortable granting that Am to reduce that setback, to allow the building to be built in this way.

But it's really I just wanted to clarify. It's really just the vestibule that's that sticks out the 2.5ft. The bulk of the building doesn't. And was that ever discussed? Or maybe the applicant can explain why the 2.5ft was necessary, because it looks like you could get by with without it and comply. That issue wasn't in front of us. Okay. Commissioner Miller, you had your hand raised. Yes.

And again, I've got at least one for Noriko and maybe one for the engineer as well. Noriko. The seven stacking spaces for the automated teller. Are those seven spaces the same as if this would have been a Starbucks drive through, for instance. So, in other words, the code doesn't specify different types of drive thrus, right? Correct. It just says that that's the requirement for drive through facility. And then does it also require that there's a full bypass lane around the entire seven spaces or. No, it's not.

Not necessarily required by the code. And the reason I bring that up is it looks like there's some excessive asphalt there in the drive through area. Clarification on the lighting issue. What is the deficiency in the lighting? Is it too much glare or is it not enough lighting? What? What is. It just not meeting the minimum footcandles. And it's just a very specific technical requirements, which are pretty common and can be easily addressed.

Okay. And then for the engineer, back to the 14 foot landscape meeting, I'm very happy to see that as a requirement. I want to make sure I didn't see any deferral language, which sometimes we see deferral language. So there's no deferral language. It's required to be built. Correct. Thank you. Vice Chair Lane. Oh she had her hand up first. Noriko, could I ask you to put the zoning map back up? Yes.

Okay. I have a question, and I apologize. I would have contacted you sooner and asked it, but I apparently was looking at a dated zoning map on the online. First of all, I understand that the parcels, the four parcels directly east of the proposed bank are city owned. Is that correct? Yes. Do we have any reason to know what the city plans to do with them?

We don't. As I understand it, they are under the management of the airport. And so I know that the airport has had various conversations with various parties on how to potentially activate that site to support airport operations as part of the ongoing airport master plan and different discussions there. So I think, well, I'll let you continue with your questions, but I think I know where you may be going.

Well, then, what I see here is essentially an island where the subject parcel is the only one is dissimilar to everything around it. Should we be concerned about spot zoning?

So I think that our interpretation was you have the M1 across the street. So it is a continuation of that zoning. We did consider whether to extend it across those city owned parcels. But I think given the sort of state of flux that the airport is in terms of their master planning and the various types of uses that they're looking at, potentially, generally in the area in terms of supporting the airport, we didn't have enough certainty about what they were looking to do to allow us to make that change at this point in time, without precluding perhaps some of those conversations that are underway. The other thing I would say that gave us some comfort to this is, as you know, we are in the middle of a comprehensive update to our zoning code, and we're having a lot of conversations about this particular area, which we see as kind of an area of transition to the residential areas to the south, some of those sort of light industrial, but also service uses. And so I think we are, through that exercise, likely going to make further changes to this area more broadly, that we didn't want to overly complicate this process for this particular applicant by bringing them into those conversations at this time and felt comfortable moving it forward.

Okay, then I would certainly think it's appropriate to revisit the city owned properties adjacent property so that we clean that up. I personally think that a bank not going in a profession not belonging in a professional zone is weird. So I don't object to the rezone of that parcel, but I am then concerned with what goes on in the adjacent parcel, where I wouldn't think an M-1 would make sense given what the city is talking about using it for. Anyway, I just want to clarify on that. One of the other things that you mentioned in the staff report was that we're adding as an addendum, a condition with a two years to commencement of development or of construction, which is something that typically we always have. And I just when you when you said that it caused me to stop and think or what what happens when somebody doesn't start their construction in two years, do they lose their entitlements completely? Is that something that's covered in the code? Okay, yes.

The addition of the condition is almost redundant because it is in the code. But in the interest of clarity and disclosure, we just felt it was good. That's something that the applicants need to be aware of. And that's their conditions about about extensions in the code as well. Okay.

What I, what I do want to add, if I might, is that that does not apply to the conditional use permit. And there is a disconnect in our current code, the way that it is written and that technically. And so we have not added a condition for the Cup specifically for this reason, the zoning code does also indicate that a cup lapses after two years. However, in the time since that was written into the zoning code decades ago, there have been various instances of case law indicating that as a higher order sort of land use related decision, more akin to a zone zoning change than a development entitlement. We do not have the ability to have that lapse, so the Cup does not lapse. It would need to be revoked by the Planning Commission through a fully noticed revocation hearing. Unlike the development permit, which can automatically lapse.

Okay. All right. That makes sense. And then just for framework purposes, we're looking at updating our zoning ordinance for many reasons. And I'm thinking that this might be one of the reasons. Noriko, can you tell me what the applicant has spent to date in fees assessed by the city to get through this? New, rather onerous process? Sure. Let me just pull out the email. Sorry, I did not print it out.

Okay. And then my other question was going to be. And how much time has gone into this or has lapsed as we go through? Processing the application?

So the application, the first one was submitted on the June 17th of 2024, and so far the applicant has submitted the application fees of $35,047 and the environmental document preparation fee was $22,223.75, which total is $57,270.75. Thank you. Mr. Baker. Questions. This is a follow up on the lighting question. Is the light different because of the a lock restrictions for aircraft landing? Is that why?

No. The zoning code provides specific standards for outdoor lightings. And sometimes because of the design of the lighting, it's difficult to meet all components and all aspects of those specification requirements. So what happens is when the applicant proposes outdoor lighting that does not fully conform to the outdoor lighting standards we usually addressed as as a part of the conditions of approval. Mr. Baker, a lot of it is related to the dark sky ordinance. So we have very technical and very specific lighting requirements as a result. Thank you.

At this point, I just I'm going to ask some questions. Most of them have been covered by very thoroughly by my commission members. One comment when we get into our zoning rewrite, I bank at drive thru banks, and I have never been in a situation where there were more than two cars in a drive thru bank. And I'm this. This looks to me like it might be something that we take a look at when we do the code. I would like to see the shading study on the drive through, and most of my questions will be about the kiosk. When I look at it. The fall shading, I'm not as concerned about the summer shading under the kiosk. Doesn't look like it is protective. Of the person that's underneath it. Am I correct in that?

I think we might have the applicant speak to it in more detail. It looks like there's a couple of perspectives here. So there's certainly portions that are shaded in the very bottom right. Summer solstice at 2 p.m. But the middle image it's hard to know how much of. And one of them shades. Would be. Some of them shade. It looks like they may. It's hard to know in perspective. Some of them look like they shade the side or the back of the kiosk.

Right. And that may be a challenge of the orientation and of course, where the sun is. The other thing I would say that we had that Noriko had talked through with the applicant was I think there's a balance here in terms of how much shade, tree and landscaping you want to put around this, while also maintaining visibility and safety. So I think the applicant can speak to it more.

The other the other question would be the Washingtonia prolifera in front of it, obscuring the vision from the street. I know that they were working with the airport in terms of the placement, but one of those just looking at that, I think the I think that it's important, I think safety for people using that kiosk is really important because bank kiosks are most often are often used in off hours where there won't be pedestrians on the street. And it's important to have some visibility. So a lot of maybe those will go to the applicant and they'll go into directions to the Architectural Review. The other issue I just wanted to mention, and I know I always sound like the tree person on it, but the majority of the trees in blue are African sumacs and they are dying all over the desert and they're literally, literally dying. And the museum heritage Palo Verde, which luckily there's only one of us, has pests, has a pest issue, and it sometimes kills it. So just sorry to always raise those, but when I see them and I know the trees won't live, it's a concern. And I think that's it. When we come back, I will try and have questions and motions that go will go separately through the different permits that are in front of us. At this point, we would like our

environmental consultant to come up and advise us to answer the questions we've had regarding the negative deck, and also any information you think we need. Madam chair, members of the Commission. My name is Nicole Crist. I'm with Terra Nova Planning and we prepared the initial study for the city. The one question I heard was was from the commissioner regarding the GHG modeling.

The South Coast Air Quality Management District has a computer model that in into which a number of parameters are are plugged in, including the size of the building, the number of trips it will generate, the amount of energy it will use. And that's how. GHG are generated. The total number is generated. And as you'll see in table four, in the initial study, it lists all of the different types of GHG producing uses that are associated with the modeling.

So with the drive through, I was looking at them specifically the mobile, because that was the largest number. It was like 297 or something like that with a drive through. I mean, how do you anticipate how much, you know, usage, how many drive through cars there are to establish that number?

The part of part of the modeling includes the Institute for Transfer of Transportation Engineers, land use codes. And that document includes banks with and without drive thrus. Okay. And so in this case it was analyzed under banks with drive thrus, which assumes higher and different trip rate. And then the model the it's called Cali model is the air quality model that we use. The model adjusts based on the different land uses.

All right. Thank you. Are there other questions of Miss Christy? Yes. Vice chair.

Related to that, I was wondering how it was determined that there should be two entrances to the site. The Calle de Ricardo. One doesn't seem like a lot. It seems as though most the traffic would be coming off of Ramon and then coming into the first entrance. But does the I.T do those guidelines help you determine how many vehicles will be coming into a drive through versus the bank itself, or how did we come up with the two entrances?

That was a site plan decision by the applicant, ma'am. It would not impact the environmental review. Okay. Not on a project this size. Are you representing the applicant or is the applicant also going to speak? I'm applicant. So I am representing the city. So the applicant will speak. Thank you. Are there other questions? Thank you so much. At this point the public hearing is open. The applicant has ten minutes.

Good evening, planning Commission. My name is Rich Malakoff with the Altum Group. And we're representing level five and the Sun Community Credit Union. I'd like to thank staff Chris and Edward and Noriko for all their help. We appreciate all their support in the past year and getting this project up to this point. For the shading issue, I'm going to call up our team member, Jason Patty, and he can address that. But as for the entrances for the trash trucks in the fire trucks, they wouldn't be able to make the proper turning movements so they can go in one entrance and then come out the other. If they only had one entrance, they wouldn't be able to make the turns. So. And Jason, would you like to address the shading? Thank you very much.

I'm Jason Patty with level five with the developer, and we'll be the builder on the project as well. There was a question about EV versus handicap. Those are separate spaces. The EV is behind the building, separated from the handicap. We're not trying to combine those just to make sure we're clear there. The driveways, as Rick pointed out, we were looking for both fire truck access, but also we pay a lot of attention to try and segregate drive through traffic to keep it separate from anybody trying to park and walk into the branch. From a safety standpoint. Drive through stacking. I very much appreciate that question. I've had the conversation a hundred times that a bank drive through is not the same as a chick fil A, or an In-N-Out or a Starbucks. They're very differently utilized, and the same standards should not be applied. Thank you for that. The screening of the drive through, I don't remember who asked this question from the street. We tried to strike the balance between safety and the code for screening from the street. We got some feedback from the safety department. I believe that led us to pull back on some of that screening. And then obviously the code to put more screening. There were kind of tugging at each other a little bit. So we tried to strike that balance between the two. From a shading standpoint, there was a question about the solstice study. It's very difficult to get an ATM without a full drive through canopy, which is large and not very attractive in a lot of in a lot of senses, to get that ATM shaded properly without just going huge on the canopy and creating another massive

structure. So we look at that and try and orient it and build the canopy above it in such a way that we get as much shading as possible. You will have people in their cars. It's not a walk up ATM, it's a drive through. So people will be in the car, which will help with the shade. But there always are times when it's not shaded. What we're more concerned with there is the glare on the screen making the screen less usable. There are some products that the banking equipment companies are coming out with that help to shade the screen itself, so that you can still see the buttons when it's 2:00 in the afternoon, but hard to do in the desert. Were there any other questions that we didn't?

We? The way we handle this is you present the project, which I think you have, and then we'll open it to the public and then come back and ask you questions. Perfect. So that we keep them in the record. But we wanted to let the public have a chance to speak first before we take over the podium. Gotcha. So Sun Community is very excited to build and continue to invest in the community. And I think it'll be a great public addition. So I'll sit down and if you need me back, let me know.

We don't have any other speakers signed up in the room. If you do want to speak, come up now. If you are online and wish to speak, please raise your hand. Oh, is Madeline, do you know just for questions, I. That's it, Madam Speaker or Madam Chair?

Then if you'd come back up. Thank you so much for sitting down and coming back up. Since it was my question, I want to go into it a little bit more. The concern about the Washingtonian prolifera. Do you have room to move that in either direction, so that it looks like it directly impacts? If you were looking at the kiosk.

The middle one there, I, I have zero objection to moving it in either direction. I mean, I think that kind of provides a an angled view from either side, but I as long as it's allowable by code, I have no problem eliminating it. I think the question there becomes, is it properly screened from Ramone Road enough. And that would be a staff question in terms of. I wouldn't want to eliminate it all together, but I think we could give direction to explore offsetting it through the Arc landscape review to.

And that's. Provide better what I was thinking of the other question is, and I know going through bank drive thru lanes often the height of one is this. One of the reasons for the shading is that you could touch the buttons in the summertime, which sometimes it's so hot that you can burn your hands. So that's that's a question for you to think about. And the other, the other concern is that often it's the height of it is geared toward SUVs and not toward regular cars. So that you can you'll be in your car, you put your window down, and you have to get out of your car to be able to use the kiosk. How do you handle that and what sort of what is what what heights are you putting that and who is your what is your audience in terms of where you're putting those heights?

Are you asking about the height. Of the screen or the height of the canopy? Well, I'm I'm going to live with the canopy. Okay, okay. I mean, the canopy, my main concern is that it shades, right. It cuts the glare and it and the buttons don't heat up. Right. But as a frequent user, what I find is often that the height of the machinery for the ATM is way up here. And I'm here. So you're reaching up and it's not it's not geared. It's sort of geared toward trucks or. Gotcha.

A higher a, a larger vehicle. And where do you choose to do that and what's your thinking?

We put them exactly where the manufacturer recommends. And I'm not trying to cop out of the answer there. What you may have experienced is somebody who put one up on a curb and didn't account for that curb in the height, because there's different models for whether it's going on a curb or whether it's going level with the wheels of the car. But we'll take the manufacturer's recommendation for I mean, they have one model for on a curb and one model for not on a curb. Okay. As far as heights of the canopy, I would love to lower them, but then they get hit. If they if you could lower them, they would. They'd provide a lot better shade. And sometimes we'll do two, one that's lower, one that's higher for SUVs in one lane and cars in the other, so that you get more shade on the lower one.

And Chris, do we have a height requirement on that? Can they put that at a height that does more shading? I think they would just be restricted by the overall height restrictions. But I think if the Commission wanted to allow us to explore this further with a condition that allows some variation in height and perhaps depth or width of the shading structure to maximize shade, I think that's something we could work with. Great. And so those are my questions are all functional for using them. I'm just going to say I think it's a great project. Thank you. So I'm looking at how I use it more than. I appreciate that.

Those are good questions. We spend a lot of time thinking about how people will use the building. And then other questions. Actually, if I may interject for one second, I think you technically didn't close the hearing. Or did. You do that. Close the hearing. Do we do it after? I'm sorry I had. To wait. I'm ask. I'm asking questions. But there are other members of the commission that had questions that want addressing. Commissioner Miller.

Yeah, I appreciate your comments about the seven stacking spaces. But the bypass lane, was that something that you thought was necessary for the entire sort of surround of the drive through, or is that something that you could trim down a little bit to save on some asphalt and some impervious area and. Yeah, yeah. There's a lot of excess asphalt there.

We could certainly slim it down on the left side. I'd be hesitant to slim it on the right, because the goal is to allow somebody that's in the line to get a call from their kids school, and they can't wait in line for another five minutes, and they got to be able to get out of there and escape. Escape. Right? Yeah. They got to be able to leave the line. But if you, you could make the left side. So after you exit, you could slim that down to where it went from 2 to 1. And that would cut a lane out of the left side. Yeah. I think that's something that would be beneficial from an esthetic standpoint and from a perviousness standpoint as well. Okay. Thanks.

Other questions, Commissioner Rotman. Yeah. Do you have other banks in the Valley currently? Other Sun Valley credit unions. Are there other ones in the valley? Yes, there. Are, there are. Yes, sir. And I'm sorry. It's in the report. Oh oh I'm sorry. Excuse me. There's one in Indio. There's one. I believe there's already one in Palm Springs. And brothers. Okay. All right. Further ones planned as well.

So my question was I was going to ask you how many members you have and, you know, here all this leading up to whether you actually need the drive through or not, and you know how much usage it actually gets in your at your other facilities.

So I work for the developer. I'm not going to be able to give you specific numbers. I can certainly find those numbers out and get back to you. My experience larger scale with developing credit unions and banks across the country is that the drive through ATMs get quite a bit of usage, particularly after hours. People feel safer to stay in the car and would prefer to stay in the car if they've got six screaming kids in the back. Most banking typical transaction banking is now done online, and so really you're going through the ATM. If you're depositing a check or withdrawing cash after hours.

Okay. All right. The you answer the question about the second driveway on Calle de Ricardo as it being as a fire means I just wonder, is your thinking that they would come in a fire truck, would come in on Santa Cruz and exit out onto Ricardo? I would think that'd be most likely, but they'd have the opportunity to go the other way. I believe that the hammerhead design on the left parking lot was also designed such that a truck could turn around if necessary. There were requirements from them about how close they had to be able to get to the to the building.

Yeah. When I first looked at the site plan, I thought actually coming in off of the location of the driveway, coming in off of Calle Ricardo, you're driving in from a from a user point of view, you're driving right into the trash. Yeah, yeah. And then it's kind of it kind of leads people to use the drive through, which I would prefer to mitigate or reduce some. And I was wondering whether the driveway could actually move more to the west and maybe flip the location of where the retention basin is, which is actually the lower part of the site?

I think that may work. I have to defer to the civil engineering group in order to figure that out. But you also need room in front of that dumpster for the trucks to load and unload. So you've got to have a little bit of lead time or where they can pull in straight load up and back out. Okay. And is the design of the building, is that a standard design for Sun Credit Union? I would love for it to be. It's not. The plan is for it to be. Yes. Okay. But the actual building elevations and the way the building looks is not a standard.

This is the first of this prototype. So the idea is that this is a prototype branch that they'll utilize in the future.

Okay. And we talked a little bit about the screening of the parking lot and drive through, as I recall, the zoning code, you had to screen parking lots and drive thrus. But maybe maybe there's some. Maybe it's changed. My memory is not correct. I just I think I'm going to talk about when we get into our comments about maybe looking at other a variety of materials, whether it's partial walls, maybe some planting, just to mix it up a little bit. I really I don't personally like the look of all bougainvillea as a screen, but that's. And then a comment on the drawings. When I went through the landscape plans, the some of the list of plants that were going to be used were there were no pictures of and vice versa. There were pictures of plants that weren't listed on the landscape plan. So I think there needs to be that needs to be cleaned up a little bit or no. And then a question about the kiosk for the ATM. It looks like there's a void in the structure. You've got this vertical slats. Is that is there a if you can pull that up you have the vertical slats that are facing the car side and then the back side. And it looks like there's just this void. Is that that's open. Is that correct. Am I looking at that correctly?

I that's where the ATM sits. The ATM sits in front of that. Yes sir. Yes. But behind that is this three dimensional trapezoidal structure. Not trapezoidal but poly poly. Yeah. It's a. Wonky structure. Yes. But but is it void in the middle. And it's open air. Is that what I'm reading correctly. No. The wood slats are have some open air element to them, but there's not a large void. Between the front and the back. No, sir. Which drawing are you looking at?

Well, if you look at the plan down in the lower right and you see the, the actual structure, it's in dark outlined and it looks like there's four posts. Yeah, yeah. So I'm just wondering because you've got wood slats on the front side, you've got wood slats on the back side. And it looks like that's just kind of open air in between. Oh so there's only slats on the back side. And then there's two kind of fins that come out like this. No you're not understanding. I'm not talking about the sides. I'm talking about the front and the back of the of the kiosk. And even if you look at the up the rendering on the upper right, it looks like you can see through it.

Yes, you can see through that. But that's only one layer of slats, is what I'm saying. And then the ATM backs up to that layer of slats. Right. But then on the backside you have another layer of slats. Right. And it's just open air between them, between the front and the back. I never it's not a big deal. Yeah I. Think there's only one layer of slats and there's not a gap in between the two. I'm missing what you're saying. Yeah. Can I take your mic? Sure. Only on the backside. Only on the backside.

Right. This is the front side. Right. It. Well that's the backside slats. That's the other side of the backside slats. It's the front side of the backside. It's one layer of slats and then two fins that come off of it at an angle. I don't love that left rendering. I believe they're two by six. Two by six. Two by six. Yeah. All right. I just thank you. I'm done. Other questions? Yes, Commissioner. Mauro.

I had a question. It's really more for the architect if there's an architect here, but there's a canopy on the east side of the entrance. But there's no canopy going to where people actually park. And I'd prefer to see a canopy at least going towards the Ada spaces would be would be good. And did they look at that? And.

No, I don't think that was part of the conversation during design. It was a architectural element over on the left side, kind of a pergola, if you would. Right. The other canopy, is it solid or it's open slats because in the renderings it's hard to tell. Which which one, the one on. The canopy to the, to the right of the entranceway. I believe. That doesn't really go anywhere. It's right. Yeah. It's open, it's open. Open. Yes. It's open slats. Yeah. The view needs to be a little lower a little higher to be able to see that.

Right. And there's an ATM in the lobby. Correct. And that is correct. There'll be an ATM in the vestibule actually available after hours for. Customers after hours. Yeah. So you'll have to have a card to access the outer doors after hours. And then you can access the ATM inside if you prefer to walk up to it. Or. Other questions. I have one one more than going back to the kiosk. Do you have a light? If we require down lights? Yes, ma'am.

In the city. But do you have a light that will come on when somebody walks up to it? Or the car is below it so they can see at night? How do you light it? I believe that light will be on continuously. Yes, ma'am. Okay. Oh. Vice. Chair. I what is the exterior? What is the material used on the exterior? On the front face of the building. Can I see the rendering? It looks as if it's wood.

Yes. So it's a it's a product called longboard, actually. So it's a it's a metal that looks a lot like wood functions really well. It's very lightweight. We like it a lot. Until you're five feet away you can't tell it's not real wood. And then the rest of the building is, is stucco material okay. And then because we seem to be spending more time talking about the enclosure for the ATM. Is that genuine wood or is that more of the same metal. Same product? It's a metal. Yes, ma'am. Okay, good. And it cuts down on maintenance and warping.

And wood doesn't do well here anyway. You're in the middle of the desert. Exactly. Okay.

As I've been driving around town this week, I've been looking at a lot of banks and ones that have drive through ATMs. And I'm wondering if there was any consideration given towards a larger cantilever, making this more of a substantive architectural statement rather than people seem to take two approaches. One is make it de minimis. So it kind of goes away and then it looks odd. And there are some nice ones that have a more substantial structure that I think are more attractive. And I'm you look like you've this looks as if you've taken the approach of making it small and hoping people don't see it. And if so, then was there any consideration given towards making this a larger structure that would address some of our concerns about glare, especially on a larger.

In order to. In order to eliminate glare? What we found is you've got to go full canopy, you know, posts on all four sides and support, and it gets really large. Okay. Most jurisdictions would prefer to see something a little more sleek. We like to try and match the branding of the building. And so it becomes its own branding element. So you see the building, you see the sun, and then you see this and you see the sun, and you correlate the two between. It looks as though maybe it should have a menu there. With all my possible coffee choices. But okay. Thank you.

Any other questions? Commissioner Rotman, you have your light on, are you is that a question? Well, I could ask one, but so a comment I was going to make later and I'll ask you in advance. It seems to me when you look at the building, you have a lot of glass on the north side, and especially at the entry. I don't, I don't remember how tall that is. But, you know, we have a setting sun that sets to the northwest, and I'm afraid that you're going to get an awful lot of heat gain. And I think you might consider something else there. So we'll use. A combination of a high performance glass there that's shaded. Okay.

And also. Shades inside in order to mitigate that. And then we offset from an HVAC standpoint in that vestibule. It's part of the reason we do a vestibule in order to create an air buffer. So you're not catching that heat gain throughout the entirety of the building. Would you consider putting an intermediate canopy, you know, eyebrow, you know, sort of halfway down or, you know, just help with some of the shading? I'm not. Opposed to that. I think it takes away from the, the look of what you've got going on there. But if that was a requirement, I'm sure that the client would consider it.

And are you providing solar on the roof? We were not planning on providing solar on the roof. No. Okay. All right. Thank you. At this point, the public hearing is closed in. The matter is before the commission. Thank you so much. Thank you.

So when I look at this, the first item we have, I think it should be the first item is the certification of the negative declaration. Is there any concern regarding that. So just I think what I'd like to do is maybe take an interim vote on these so that we, we build and build our full motion. So just a hand a hand raise if people.

Madam chair, just out of curiosity, you might want to take a quick poll and see it might be that the Commission is interested in approving or denying the whole project.

I still want to go through different sections of this and some of it is novel. So I'm just I'm going to take the I won't need a vote. I'll just take that the second and thing in front of us, which is the change of zone. And the question is, does anybody have concerns about the change of zone in this situation? I think seeing none, I think we'll be able to go through that. The next is the cup, and that relates to the drive through. And I had a statement I just wanted to make on that. I don't know if we have concerns about it. So. I, I don't think that this kind of drive through is what we've been talking about when we've been talking about fast food drive thrus with very long lines and many people idling. This this to me, is a this I pharmacies and banks for different reasons. When they're in an appropriate location have there's some public urgencies that mitigate toward allowing drive thrus. For me it's the after the banks the this is really I think he's absolutely correct that this would be used as an after hour item. And the public, the public, I think the public wants and needs it, and it's a way of accessing the bank after hours. There's always a choice if you do it as a drive through or just a standalone in front of ATM in front of the bank in terms of in terms of safety. But this seems

to me like it's one a very busy road. And, you know, sort of an appropriate high, high use road to be adjacent to. And secondly, the after hours consideration and the public. So I think it's, I think it's appropriate and I think it's really very outside of the discussion we've been having on the appropriateness of fast food drive thrus. And I don't know if anybody else disagrees with that. Okay. So it looks like we are going to approve that. The next is the major development permit. And I think we had one, because the land use plan is our responsibility. I think, Commissioner Miller, you had a suggestion. You want us to look at in terms of the moving of or do you want to move?

Is that regarding the draft, the circulation around the drive thru? Yeah. And that would be in the land use plan. So. Right. And that would be just as a condition of approval. Right. That's commission approval. And you and you're going to propose a change there. I can propose that condition. Sure. Would you do that.

Sure. I would recommend that we add a condition that takes into consideration the need for the bypass lane at the stacking spaces, but that reduces that sort of exiting lane, the lanes down from 2 to 1 on the west side of that circulation, such that it narrows down to one exiting lane. I think that will also help with the concern about people sort of wandering the wrong way on the site. If there's if it's narrowed down, it's much easier to sign as a do not enter from that south. And that would increase the landscape area, reduce the amount of imperviousness to the site, which is a benefit.

And so your suggestion is not only to reduce it, but also to have that go into the landscape. Well, that's what it makes sense. It's got to be something. So it makes sense to turn it into landscaping unless it's needed for pedestrian circulation from the from the building out, which I don't think it is. Okay. So would we have that change in the landscape plan be subject to the planning director's approval? Yeah, we certainly don't need to see it. I don't think we need to see it. So I think the site plan, yes, the landscaping plan changes that would come along with that would be reviewed by RC.

Right. But you're but the idea is the site plan you would review and the additional area would be landscaped. Sure.

Yep. Okay. So now we also would be adding to the approval the condition that staff recommended regarding the two year, two year, two two year build out requirement. The last is we have the major architectural review and then we have recommendations. Oh actually are there. It would be recommendations to the Arc. And I think a few of us had comments I think Commissioner Rotman did, I think I might have and Commissioner Miller did. So Commissioner Rotman, do you want to.

Well, can I go back to the site plan issue? So, you know, a question to staff. I understand the code says stacking for seven at a drive through. And I wonder how much flexibility we have to reduce that. Because if we reduce that, it could potentially change that whole circulation and the amount of driveway and where the ATM is located. I don't like that. Look, Chris.

No, I'm just trying to think of the appropriate process. I mean, essentially that would constitute a variance, which is not part of the application before us. So I'm not really sure what authority you or I have to reduce the seven stacking spaces because it is a an affirmative requirement of the code. What I think we could do, since I might not be able to answer you tonight, is a condition that allows us to explore reducing the number of stacking spaces below what's required in the code through if, if allowable, something to that extent, if that would be something the commission is comfortable with. And then I could do that administratively. When we're looking at the overall changes to the circulation.

And, and could we see a revised site plan again if that is the case? If that is the case, well, so then I would think we would be into more of a continuance kind of discussion. Okay, okay. So that's kind of where I'm I'm at on this. Just to let you know. Let me if I could bring up a.

And this is a totally appropriate for comments. Commissioner Rotman, the gentleman mentioned that probably only 2 or 3 or maybe even Chair Wernick said that she's only seen 2 or 3 people at a at a drive through like this. What if we were to reduce that bypass lane for the first, say, 3 or 4 of those stacking spaces? Knowing pretty much that those, you know, stacking space number five, six and seven are never going to be used so that that lane essentially has a bypass lane isn't really needed. We could reduce the amount of asphalt on the south side of that loop, and to a certain extent on the east side of that loop, by understanding that probably only stacking spaces, the one being served, and maybe two and three are going to be used at any time, we could reduce essentially the amount of asphalt there. Would that sort of alleviate some of your concern? And that would still allow the seven spaces to, to, to exist. But in reality, spaces seven, six and five are really going to act as bypass and access to the stacking. Are you following?

You'd have to draw me a picture. Sorry. Let me see if I can. Yeah, sorry. I believe what Commissioner Miller is, is talking about is it's kind of a backwards way of granting the variance. Okay? So we would effectively eliminate the bypass lane from some point here around maybe to here. Okay. A little further. Up to the easement, perhaps, you know, such that, you know, effectively you would have one lane of travel, you would meet your seven spaces and queuing to meet the code, but you would eliminate the bypass lane because effectively you're never going to have seven cars queuing here. Okay.

Or at least that that's what I'm hearing. And so you would, you know, recapture some of this area potentially for additional landscaping and then potentially maintain the bypass lane, let's say from some point above here past the window and then narrow it back down again. So you would effectively just add the second bypass lane, you know, for this portion. Or quarter of. It of it. Yeah. And that probably eliminates the variance issue that we were. Discussing. Just as we're looking at this, the applicants indicated they might like to speak to this. And I think that would be appropriate.

For your point. Yes. It's the very top button. Oh man. The very top one.

Hold the top button. Yeah. Oh look at that. Alright, alright. So what I would do here guys, I think the simplest solution is to enlarge the center island and bring it over here. Straight over, this way and down. So you've got one lane exiting that eliminates, you know, a whole driveway full of full of asphalt here. And then I'd bring it south just to keep it clean and bring it in here. So you've got a one lane entrance that empties into two once you get here, allowing for that bypass, in the event that somebody gets in the line and decides it's too far. But you would just extend this south and west.

So that works. Okay. I think for all of us that works. Awesome. And that works for you. Works for you. Okay. Got it. And they still get seven cars. Yeah. And you. And so Chris doesn't have to go begging our city attorneys to see if we have any room for change. Okay. So did you have anything regarding the building itself? Because that I know you had comments. Do you have. Yes. Okay. The building and then the kiosk.

Yeah. So I would ask Ark to look at solar control particularly particularly on the north side. I would ask them to look at the building elevations on the south side as well. It's punctuated by some small slit windows, and I just think that it could be enhanced in some way. And on the landscaping, I would ask them to look at, in addition to the two trees that you pointed out, chair, that they look at a variety, more of a variety for the screening of the drive through, as well as the parking lot on the Calle Santa Cruz side.

Right? I mean, there are a number of other plants that work. A petite oleander would work. I mean, there are a number of things people could use. Yeah. I'm sorry, Commissioner Hartman, can you just clarify that? Last, you said provide more variety of the landscape materials to screen the parking and the drive through. Is that primarily along the Ramone frontage or also the west? Well, as I recall, the zoning code you needed to screen parking lots that face the street, right. So street signs.

Yes. Yeah. And then on the kiosk. And the reason I was going on and on about the slats is the way I'm interpreting the drawings is on the ATM side. And on the opposite side you have open slats, and I'm concerned with the amount of dust and dirt and bougainvillea flowers flying around that it becomes a maintenance issue and that if that is the case, that they provide some way, a gate or some way to open that void space to be able to access it, and that may be an arc thing. I don't know if it's us or them, but yeah.

Sorry, I'm not sure I understood that which which void area. So as I look at the eight, the kiosk, the ATM kiosk, as I'm reading the drawings, it looks like they have vertical slats on the ATM side as well as on the back side of that kiosk, which means that it's open air void in between stuff is going to get trash is going to get stuck in there. And if I'm misinterpreting it, then you know, fine. Okay. I think that that works. Yeah.

The other one was the slightly altering the placement of the Washingtonian Pilulifera in front of the kiosk so that there's a clear view of the kiosk from the street for safety, or for them to look at the that placement for safety purposes. And can you also repeat the earlier you, the species that you were concerned.

About, the African sumac is dying across the valley and the heritage Palo Verde has a blight that is causing the trees to die. It needs consistent treatment. So either treatment plan for that or or substituting another varietal that doesn't have that problem right now.

Sharon, the other comment I made was about the disparity between the landscape plan, the list of materials versus the photos. Yeah. And I think that does that cover everybody's comments. So we have a motion or we do. Do we need to make this as more than one motion. No. No okay. So we have a motion I'm is somebody with somebody like to be the maker of this motion.

I would I would be fine. But I want to make sure we're also recommending pieces of this. Go on to the city council. So yes, we've we've built that in for those that we have authority on versus the rezoning of course is going to go on. The rezoning is the piece that goes to City council unless there's an appeal. So you're adopting the staff recommendation with the addition of the conditions as, as just discussed. That's correct. Yes. I'll make that motion. Is there a second. I will second. Can you call the roll please. Commissioner Miller? Yes. Vice chair. Elaine. Yes. Chair. Wernick. Yes. Commissioner. Baker. Yes.

Commissioner. Murphy. Yes. Commissioner. Brotman. Yes. Commissioner. Morrell. Yes. And I just want to say good luck to you. We are really pleased that you're doing this. And when you have your opening, remember to invite us. Moving right along to unfinished business. We have none. We have no new business. We have planning Commission reports, requests and comments are there.

I'd like to. I would like to make a comment. First of all, I want to congratulate the applicant and to me, this project has really exemplified why we need to change change our zoning ordinance. And the good news is that we are the processes that you have gone through, the amount of time, the number of applications for what really is a an innocuous use, compatible with the neighborhood and an amenity to the community. You shouldn't have to fight so hard. It shouldn't be so complicated with so many different applications. And I know that staff certainly is in favor of streamlining things and not standing in the way of development. And this has been the amount of time that you've put in, and I'm sure the amount of time that staff has put in to making findings for what, five different applications is really extraordinary, and the cost associated with that reflect that. So I would encourage you, if you have learned things, you as the applicant, if you've learned things going through this process that you think we could do to improve our process, please participate in our zoning ordinance update. There's plenty of opportunities to offer suggestions, and we are all ears because we don't want to be an obstacle. We're trying to remove barriers to development. And that also goes to our that message holds to our multitude of viewers. Anybody involved in development who has an idea of what we can do to do things better and to make it easier, please speak up. Now is the time. It's a perfect opportunity and we would love to hear from all of you. But thank you for your tenacity. You have to

really want this project to have gone through this process. So thank you. Other comments requests. Seeing none, it's time for our Planning Directors report.

Well, first of all, thank you. Vice Chair Elaine and I completely agree with the comments that you just shared. And it really does highlight why we are going through the process and investing the time and money and, and even, you know, the community engagement that we're going through to shake some of this out and really move the needle. The zoning code is very old. I know we all know that. We've been talking about it publicly. And this, you know, really does highlight the kinds of issues we run into. I think this professional zone was developed at a time when we had a very different idea of what office parks would look like, that just really aren't our current thinking. And this is a good example of why. So thank you for those comments. On that note, we have an online version of the open houses that we completed a couple of weeks ago. For those who weren't able to attend in person this Thursday night, beginning at 5:30 p.m, where we'll share the same information that we shared in the in-person meetings, and allow feedback from people who are able to attend by zoom. You can get that information by reaching out to our to the planning department or through the Engage Palm Springs website at Engage Palm Springs Comm. So anyone that's listening encourage you to engage in that process, and we'll carry on with all of that work to update the zoning code. I did want to just share with you. I'm not sure if I did at our last meeting, but we did receive an appeal of the development permit decision that was reached on the Sherwin-Williams paint store on Palm Canyon Drive that will be going to the City council. I believe the date is May 14th, so they will be hearing it as a de novo hearing, which means, you know, we'll be going through it all again. And they can reach whichever decision they they wish to make. So we will keep you updated on how that proceeds. At the last City Council meeting, they voted to expand the Planning Commission by one alternate non-voting

member. And this relates to the prior recruitment process that we went through with the middle of last year, where there were a couple of candidates that the council was interested in appointing, who lacked some of the technical experience or background that really is relevant and, you know, tangential to the work that you all do. And so the question was asked, well, how do we get people who might be good community advocates, good represent representatives of their community to learn those skills? And so the result is that we're looking at appointing an additional non-voting member who would participate in the meetings at the chair's discretion, could participate in the discussion and ask questions, but ultimately wouldn't vote on the items before them. The intention is that it would be an appointment for one three year term, with the idea that they would ultimately be promoted to a full member at such time that a vacancy opens up. So that has to go back for second reading of council, and then we'll take 30 days to take effect. But we would expect somebody maybe appointed around the summer time for that position.

One question is when we are when we have members absent, will they be a voting member? No. So they they declined. Unlike the Arc, which does operate that way. The Planning Commission. Sorry, I'm sorry. The city Council opted not to make them a voting member, just given again that this is kind of an educational or learning mentorship opportunity. They want them to get a little experience under their belt before they become a voting member. Because that would be something I would like to see is that they have the process, and there may be times, especially over the summer, where we need where we have quorum issues.

Right. And they were also clear in the ordinance that that member didn't count towards quorum. So we would still need four of you in attendance, regardless of the additional member. And where would they sit? Yeah, that was a question I also asked, and I don't have an answer for you that yet, but I imagine that we will put them here in this seat next to me, unless we have a different suggestion, but we already are running out of microphones on this end of the dais. So I was thinking, here. It will be an interesting experiment.

It will be. And you know, for some additional context, there was a specific member who had also been sitting on the General Plans Steering committee when that was seated, who was a representative of district one. And I think as, as most of you know, it's often difficult to recruit representation from district one. Yeah. So I mean, this also I think encourages us to get more representation and diversity on the Commission as well. We are. For those of you that recall, we had the joint session of all of the city's boards and commissions and the city council at the convention center last year with a dinner and appreciation dinner, and also an update from the various boards and commissions. We will be doing that again this year on June 17th. I believe you've all received an email asking you to RSVP to that event by June 8th. And just as we did last year, we'll be thinking about a very brief presentation on all of our accomplishments over the last year that I'll be working on in coordination with probably the chair and vice chair. And we may be pulling from each of you to give some inputs into that, but it's meant to just be brief and really just kind of celebratory of all that we've done in the last year. So we'll be working on that in the next few weeks, but hold that date and encourage you all to attend. And that is it for my updates.

Thank you so much. Any questions of the director there being none, we're we are adjourned until 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, May 13th, 2025. Thank you. Are we planning?