Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mountain View Estates Pud Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Architectural committee reviews Mountain View Estates PUD amendment adding pool, clubhouse; pickleball courts removed
Summary
The Cathedral City Architectural Review Committee on Feb. 5, 2025 reviewed a planned unit development amendment for Mountain View Estates that would remove previously approved pickleball courts and add a swimming pool, clubhouse and fitness center to the community's common open-space areas.
Get email alerts on the Mountain View Estates Pud Amendment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Cathedral City Architectural Review Committee on Feb. 5, 2025 reviewed a planned unit development amendment for Mountain View Estates that would remove previously approved pickleball courts and add a swimming pool, clubhouse and fitness center to the community's common open-space areas.
Associate Planner Dom Camps presented the amendment, saying the change would revise architecture and landscape plans for the project’s two common open-space areas and would not change the configuration of the 110 single-family lots or the previously approved residential architecture. Camps said the original PUD approved a roughly 27-acre site with 110 homes and that the tentative tract map and PUD were originally approved by the Planning Commission on Sept. 16, 2020; he also cited a prior amendment (PUD19001A) approved July 19, 2023. Camps told the committee staff recommends the Architectural Review Committee review the revised plans and recommend Planning Commission approval.
The amendment would relocate the turf recreation area and dog park from the south open space to the north and would remove pickleball courts in part because of concerns about noise to nearby homes, Camps said. The south open-space area would change from a turf recreation area and dog park to a clubhouse, fitness center, swimming pool and spa, children’s play structure and shaded seating. Camps said the clubhouse would be about 5,000 square feet and the fitness building about 3,000 square feet and that the proposed amenity buildings would be about 19 feet high, which the presenter said meets the R-1 zoning height requirement (the transcript lists the height limit unclearly as “maximum 20 feet 26 feet”).
Camps showed elevations using a Spanish-style palette and said the amenity buildings would use one of the color and material palettes previously approved for the development. He said the change in active recreation amenities would also require minor lot-line adjustments for a water-retention lot and adjacent private streets; those adjustments will be processed through a tentative tract map revision before the Planning Commission. As a condition of approval, staff is asking the applicant to ensure 50% of the parking spaces for the two amenity areas are shaded by trees or trellis structures. Camps also noted proposed landscaping will use desert-appropriate species with limited turf areas.
Jim Osterling, identified in the record as an owner of the project, told the committee, “This change to the open space area is an enhancement from a more passive type of activity to a much more robust amenity package for our residents.” Osterling said the clubhouse, pool and fitness center were contemplated by the PUD’s conditions of approval and that the removal of the pickleball courts reflected unresolved noise concerns affecting adjacent homes, including those in the neighboring Campanile gated community.
Architect Alan Sanborn, who was present to answer design questions, said the applicant attempted to match a previously approved color scheme and architectural details while adapting them to single-story amenity buildings.
Staff reiterated that the PUD amendment would not change conformance with R-1 zoning or the approved PUD development standards for the 110 lots. Staff recommended the Architectural Review Committee recommend Planning Commission approval of the amendment; the transcript records a motion made by Committee Member Kiefer to move the item forward but does not record a second or a final vote in the meeting record.
Votes at the meeting: the transcript records that a motion to approve the December 4, 2024 minutes was made by Committee Member Rivera, seconded by Vice Chair Haas, and “Motion passes.” For the PUD amendment, a motion to recommend Planning Commission approval was made by Committee Member Kiefer; the transcript does not record a second or the committee’s final vote on that motion.
The project site is described in staff materials as located between Ramon Road and McCallum Way, east of Numa Drive and west of the Campanile gated community, with primary gated access from Ramon Road and a secondary entry at Santoro Drive. The applicant on the amendment application is identified as Hunter Simmons representing Desert Housing Ventures. Camps said the amendment application was submitted Jan. 9, 2025.
Next steps: the tentative tract map revision described by staff will go to the Planning Commission for review and approval; the Architectural Review Committee’s recommendation, if adopted and transmitted, will be part of that Planning Commission review.

