9 node percona xtradb cluster
PXC and Galera Cluster do not write scale very well.
I mentioned this in my answer to the old post Transaction speed benchmarks for mySQL v5.6 replication - seems very slow where I said the following:
Please keep in mind that Percona XtraDB Cluster does not write scale very well to begin with. Note what the Documentation says under its drawbacks (Second Drawback):

This can’t be used as an effective write scaling solution. There might be some improvements in write throughput when you run write traffic to 2 nodes vs all traffic to 1 node, but you can’t expect a lot. All writes still have to go on all nodes.

What this means for you is this: The more nodes in the Cluster, the more network communication between nodes is required to certify that all 9 nodes can commit together or rollback together. This increased communication, which makes n(n-1) calls between nodes (where n is the number of nodes), will definitely become the bottleneck for a single INSERT, UPDATE, or DELETE. It becomes worse with multi-statement transactions. This is why most examples of PXC/Galera stress using three nodes. You could probably get away with 5 nodes but you should expect worse write performance than 3 nodes.
You could probably setup 3 different 3-node clusters and use one node from each cluster in Circular Replication (See my post MySQL 5.5 Replication to Galera/Percona XtraDB Cluster). This could easily create split brain scenarios if MySQL Replication breaks between clusters.
EPILOGUE
Please stick with 3-node cluster. Should you go with 9 nodes, you must live with the network communication across zones. If so, try to make nodes reside on the East Coast in different zones, or on the West Coast in different zones.